View Full Version: evolution

Ancient Legion > The Debate Room > evolution


Title: evolution


lordblack656 - April 20, 2009 12:37 PM (GMT)
im honestly not sure whether i should make this a topic or not but ill try it out, plz dont get into huge arguments about it, were stating our opinions not facts

so i dont really have any opinions, i just try to live life to the fullest, and not htink about the past unless needed, but i can believe we came from monkeys, but i cant believe it lol.
QUOTE
i came from mars like all men
monight said that in clan chat once and i believe he is right, about himself and himself only, and maybe a couple kids from my school. other than that i dont really have anything to say about this, i not a real religious guy

starwolf_ftw - April 20, 2009 12:46 PM (GMT)
Well, let's get this debate started. I personally don't belive in "creationism" and I have to go with Darwinism (belief of human evolution). I just have to say that religion is not as old as human history itself and we can't just ignore what lies below us (meaning our ancestors).

I have a friend here at college who wants to be a religious politician (if that makes sense :blink: ) and he says the earth is only 10,000 years old, humans came to be on this earth in the image we are today, and that there was no Big Bang, and that the Earth is in the center of the universe and the first thing God created. This is think is complete poppycock, and if he said this if he was a senator, he would immedietly be removed because of his deep devotion to his faith.

I'll be sure to add more if others continue to post here.

Golden arm42 - April 20, 2009 03:54 PM (GMT)
I find the constant assault on evolution by fundamentalists and literalists to be one of the most stunning displays of backward thinking in our country. The fossil, embryological, behavioral, genetic and other records proving evolution are not in dispute AT ALL among the scientific community. Yet, we find ourselves in a situation where less than 40% of Americans believe in evolution, and as a wanna-be scientist, I find that extremely concerning because other countries, including a lot of Asian countries like China, Korea, etc., will eat our lunches in terms of science while we're still going on about how this rock isn't 4.2 billlion years old, it's 9,000 years old. Makes me more than a bit upset. <_<

Deasthana - April 22, 2009 01:54 PM (GMT)
I find difficulty in believing to Darwinist theories. It seems to me that the evolution has been proved wrong by science too. Darwin wrote that all genetic mutations were basically due to chance, and that, by the process of "natural selection", only the beings with useful mutations would be allowed to survive, taking on the others by their advantageous mutation, and therefore making the others of their kind die, from starving or simply by killing them.

This means, only beings with useful mutation were able to survive. The problem is, with the 4.2billion years old of the Earth, and then with the 150-200 million years old of life on Earth, this argument is wronged by probability. M. Denton wrote about that in his book "Evolution, a Theory in Crisis". I will not quote him, because I have a french translation of the book, but I'll try to summarize his argument:

Words of twelve letters as "construction" or "unreasonnable"are so rare that we can only find one by chance in a chain of 10^14 letters. There are also approximatively 10^14 minutes in 200 million years. We can imagine what time it would take to a typing ape to accidentally type a twelve-letters word.
Sentences, even short ones, are even rarer. Linguists think that the number of possible english sentences of one hundred letters is about 10^25; but since there is a total of 26^100 or 10^130 possible sequences of 100 letters, about less than 1/100 is an english sentence. We cannot even imagine how big 10^100 is, and to give a vague idea of how big it is, it is enough to remind that there are only about 10^70 atoms in the whole observable universe...

I tried to summarize and translate from french to english a text which was already translated from english to french... But I think we can get the main idea of it. Chance can hardly be a source of evolution, simply because it would have needed a lot more time to develop.

We can also add to this that archaeologists only found what is called "stages of evolution", for example: monkey --> Man. But a lot of life forms supposed to stand inbetween are missing, and that by dating both possible forms, it becomes difficult (relatively to time, again) to imagine that the evolution could have been accomplished in so few time.

Therefore, I do not trust in Darwin's theories. My only answer is that there must be a First Being, a "Great Architect", how they called it in the French's 16th Century. Gods of the modern religions are not acceptable to me either, but this is another story. The Great Architect's task would only have been to organise the universe by setting physical laws, which would make it go in a way it could "live" for long...

DookPlunkIdiot - April 22, 2009 08:10 PM (GMT)
Lol, I believe in evolution.

QUOTE (starwolf)
I have a friend here at college who wants to be a religious politician (if that makes sense  ) and he says the earth is only 10,000 years old, humans came to be on this earth in the image we are today, and that there was no Big Bang, and that the Earth is in the center of the universe and the first thing God created. This is think is complete poppycock, and if he said this if he was a senator, he would immedietly be removed because of his deep devotion to his faith.


i'm sorry but I find this comment extremely hilarious

Fivey Is Pwnage - April 22, 2009 09:16 PM (GMT)
Sorta weird that I saw this topic on the night were talking about Creation vs. Evolution at church :blink:


I believe in creationism. I think that God created us and is guiding everyone. I think that He helps us make choices and helps all the leaders of the world make correct decisions. In response to the "we evolved from monkeys" theory, I think God liked our design and when He made monkeys he decided to make them like our design.


I know science does have a few good points, but to anyone who thinks that, so we gained the ability to talk as we were evolving from monkeys? And also see this website for more reasons why I believe in creationism.

As you can see im quite religious, but I'm not really scientist material :lol:

Rawr. I'm not that good at debating lol.
:king: Fiveh :king:

starwolf_ftw - April 22, 2009 09:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (DookPlunkIdiot @ Apr 22 2009, 03:10 PM)
Lol, I believe in evolution.

QUOTE (starwolf)
I have a friend here at college who wants to be a religious politician (if that makes sense  ) and he says the earth is only 10,000 years old, humans came to be on this earth in the image we are today, and that there was no Big Bang, and that the Earth is in the center of the universe and the first thing God created. This is think is complete poppycock, and if he said this if he was a senator, he would immedietly be removed because of his deep devotion to his faith.


i'm sorry but I find this comment extremely hilarious

Oh yeah, I have something to add to this that he told me earlier..

"I also belive god put fossil feuls in the earth below us so that we may have a power source for when we were technologically advanced to use it."

Seriously... WTF!!! :lol:

Don't worry Fiveh, main part of a debate is actually participating.

Wolfclaw104 - April 22, 2009 10:21 PM (GMT)
I completly disagre with evolution. Their are a couple main points to my conclusion. First of all, I heard scientists beleive humans evolved from mud, whats the possibility of that? I think it would be hard to go down and pick up some mud and think thats were you came from....Even science doesn't support that, the substances of mud could not form a human body. Science doesn't explain everything, it is a matter of faith. If your a christian you will not agree with evolution. I think it is impossible that something could form a human body over the course of years. It is all faith...

-Wolf

Golden arm42 - April 22, 2009 10:35 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wolfclaw104 @ Apr 22 2009, 10:21 PM)
I completly disagre with evolution. Their are a couple main points to my conclusion. First of all, I heard scientists beleive humans evolved from mud, whats the possibility of that? I think it would be hard to go down and pick up some mud and think thats were you came from....Even science doesn't support that, the substances of mud could not form a human body.

I don't know where you heard that, as mud isn't living, but for the record, the same CHNOPS (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulfur) molecules that make up almost all living things can be found in mud as well. :)

lordblack656 - April 23, 2009 01:34 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wolfclaw104 @ Apr 22 2009, 05:21 PM)
I completly disagre with evolution. Their are a couple main points to my conclusion. First of all, I heard scientists beleive humans evolved from mud, whats the possibility of that? I think it would be hard to go down and pick up some mud and think thats were you came from....Even science doesn't support that, the substances of mud could not form a human body. Science doesn't explain everything, it is a matter of faith. If your a christian you will not agree with evolution. I think it is impossible that something could form a human body over the course of years. It is all faith...

-Wolf

lol we coulda came from mud, u know if it hardens? lol but ur right prolly not, ive never heard of the mud thing though so idk wtf ur comin from
oh and what do you guys think about them not teaching it in school? do u think they should be able to?

emad - April 23, 2009 02:50 AM (GMT)
mmmkay let me sum this up kiddos.. god didn't create us we evolved from monkeys. Gf god.

lordblack656 - April 23, 2009 12:23 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (emad @ Apr 22 2009, 09:50 PM)
mmmkay let me sum this up kiddos.. god didn't create us we evolved from moneys. Gf god.

:o lol if we evolved from "moneys" that would explain why almost every1 depends on money when they're older lol =)

dflame58 - April 23, 2009 07:04 PM (GMT)
i believe in survival of the fittest.

poor not fit
rich are fit

Wolfclaw104 - April 23, 2009 08:08 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (emad @ Apr 22 2009, 09:50 PM)
mmmkay let me sum this up kiddos.. god didn't create us we evolved from moneys. Gf god.

yes, but who made the monkeys?

emad - April 23, 2009 11:52 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wolfclaw104 @ Apr 23 2009, 03:08 PM)
QUOTE (emad @ Apr 22 2009, 09:50 PM)
mmmkay let me sum this up kiddos.. god didn't create us we evolved from moneys. Gf god.

yes, but who made the monkeys?

If you belive god made us then what made him?

lordblack656 - April 23, 2009 11:59 PM (GMT)
im not very religious so i couldnt tell ya, but honestly, its all about ur faith, or thats wha ti think anyway.

emad - April 24, 2009 12:00 AM (GMT)
I honestley have no faith whatsoever. :king:

Golden arm42 - April 24, 2009 12:28 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wolfclaw104 @ Apr 23 2009, 08:08 PM)
QUOTE (emad @ Apr 22 2009, 09:50 PM)
mmmkay let me sum this up kiddos.. god didn't create us we evolved from moneys. Gf god.

yes, but who made the monkeys?

Monkeys evolved just as we have. :)

animal magik - April 24, 2009 12:38 PM (GMT)
I'm no good at debating, but my two cents: I believe we did evolve from previous things, but I also believe that people shouldn't make such a big issue about it, it's really no big deal. ^^
(Not talking about anyone here, just some certain people in the world who are basically crazy about it.)

scarthur68 - April 24, 2009 07:52 PM (GMT)
oh boy my favorite thing to debate about :wub:

first let me start by saying that i think any religion is absolute nonsense, but i respect your views and opinions as long as you don't think negatively about me for my opinion or try to influence me based upon your human beliefs.

Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.
- Albert Einstein


Let me ask you this, Native Americans believe that everything in the sky and earth larger than them was a spirit. (Different Gods)

The Land was a Turtle. Yes, they thought they lived on an oversized turtles back.
The Sun
The Clouds
The Wind
Animals

there are tons of other stuff, but this is an example.

Does any of that make sense to you? that we live on a turtle?
Obviously not.
IF IT DOES, CLICK HERE

Respectively, Old World people created different reasons for why it rained, flooded, why the sun rises and sets, hurricanes, solar eclipses.

Today we know that the gravitational pull of the moon effects the oceans. Try explaining that in the 1600's. you would be burned because you were mentally ill.

Since civilazation is not as advanced 1000 years ago as today. Hell, not even 150 years ago did people know much about science. Technology and modern science really just has started to boom.

This might seem off topic, but why do people have phobias of spiders, the dark, small rooms? It is because they don't know what is in the dark, or when the air will run out in the small room they are in. It is scientifically proven that a lack of knowledge is the greatest fear.

People created stories to set examples.
  • Jesus creates water from wine
  • Jesus feeds thousands from one fish and loaf of bread
  • David kills Goliath with a rock and slingshot. (pwned nub)
  • Ask a pastor about any story in the bible and he will tell you the lesson from it.
People create Myths to explain natural occurences in the world.
  • Princeton University Defines Mythology as: "...stories that a particular culture believes to be true and that use the supernatural to interpret natural events and to explain the nature of the universe and humanity.
  • http://www.princeton.edu/csr/
Finally people create Legends
  • Story + Myth = Legend
  • A virgin gives birth + Man survives 3 hours on cross = Jesus Christ
let me explain how that cross comment is a myth. When you hold your arms up for a long time, your body produces extra saliva. The saliva gland is located at the entrance to the wind pipe oxygen travels in. as u breath in, saliva travels into ur lungs and u drown.


Now, lets talk about human Evolution

Why are black people black? and only in countries near the equator?
as we know, black keeps heat in. BUT black also helps reflect solar ultra violet rays. keeping the heat out.

Why do people in the Himalayan mountains have large noses?
When you live 100's of feet above sea level, there is less oxygen, a larger nose allows more intake of oxygen.

Why do asians have narrowed eyes?
NOT all Asian people have narrow eyes. Generally, only those of the far east (such as Chinese and Japanese and Korean). You will find Indians, Malaysians, Middle Eastern people do not have narrow eyes.
But this has to do with the rotation of the earth. Eastern Asia receives more sunlight than anywhere else in the world. So their eyes let in less light.

Why do Eskimos have the highest body fat %
Its so dam cold that's why. Oh yeah and they also have narrowed eyes as the arctic can receive sunlight for 6 months at a time.


thats all i am posting for now to give you a chance to argue against me. i have a very strong knowledge about this stuff so bring it on.


The reason that there is so much controversy over these theories is because the back bone of humans is religion. The entire human race can't be expected to change and accept different views in a matter of 100 years.

Science is like a book, it is comprised of multiple chapters. Each chapter written is a new religion.
- Albert Einstein

scarthur68 - April 24, 2009 08:07 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wolfclaw104 @ Apr 22 2009, 05:21 PM)
I completly disagre with evolution. Their are a couple main points to my conclusion. First of all, I heard scientists beleive humans evolved from mud, whats the possibility of that? I think it would be hard to go down and pick up some mud and think thats were you came from....Even science doesn't support that, the substances of mud could not form a human body. Science doesn't explain everything, it is a matter of faith. If your a christian you will not agree with evolution. I think it is impossible that something could form a human body over the course of years. It is all faith...

-Wolf

im sorry for the double post. but i got error trying to edit and extend my previous post. i went back and read this post and i want to say this as kindly as possible.

LOLOLOLOLLLOLLLOOOLLOL you couldn't be anymore wrong.

everyone knows about the big boom theory. i think i learned about that sooner in my christian public school when i was 10 before god.

But the big boom is believed to be caused by electric molecules which was called a large lightning storm also.

ORIGIN OF LIFE - in the strong electric and magnetic fields of prebiotic lightning


QUOTE (dflame58 @ Apr 23 2009, 02:04 PM)
i believe in survival of the fittest.

you couldnt have said it any better. There are more than one species of humans.


The story of how humans evolved, migrated and adapted to new environments is told largely by discoveries of fossils, most importantly in Africa.

There are multiple species of Humans. saying humans were monkeys is 100% incorrect. it is like saying that giraffes are in fact elephants. Just like your house hold dog has multiple species, so do humans.
* Homo sapiens
* Homo erectus
* Homo ergaster
* Homo rudolfensis
* Homo habilis

All species are now extinct because Humans were small, weak and stupid. We are all that is left of the race of humans. The only reason Homo Sapiens survived was because of their slightly larger forehead which allowed for evolution and development of the brain. No other animal species has ever had a forehead which continues to grow as the brain grows. Otherwise we would be their bitches (as previously said, Humans compared to other animals are weak.)

Tree of life. :woot:
Life on earth is categorized very specifically, here i will show you how Humans are categorized. And we will therefore be able to look at the evolution and similarities of Humans.


Tree of Life
CLICK HERE

Kerkennah - April 24, 2009 08:33 PM (GMT)
I have hard proof evidence but there is no point posting it, because obviously you will all disagree.

I'm not gonna say anything more

scarthur68 - April 24, 2009 09:33 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Kerkennah @ Apr 24 2009, 03:33 PM)
I have hard proof evidence but there is no point posting it, because obviously you will all disagree.

I'm not gonna say anything more

please post it, i would love to expand my knowledge of both sides. if it makes you feel comfortable i wont criticize or reference it in future arguements. or you can pm the link if you dont want to post it here.

dflame58 - April 24, 2009 10:24 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (animal magik @ Apr 24 2009, 07:38 AM)
I'm no good at debating, but my two cents: I believe we did evolve from previous things, but I also believe that people shouldn't make such a big issue about it, it's really no big deal. ^^
(Not talking about anyone here, just some certain people in the world who are basically crazy about it.)

i agree animal.

its not like if we found out how we were created we could time travel or fly or teleport :P

Dylan - April 25, 2009 12:53 AM (GMT)
not really part of the debate but

QUOTE
* Homo erectus


lol who named that? :lol: :lol: :lol:

scarthur68 - April 25, 2009 01:37 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Dylan @ Apr 24 2009, 07:53 PM)
not really part of the debate but

QUOTE
* Homo erectus


lol who named that? :lol: :lol: :lol:

LOL :o

Golden arm42 - April 25, 2009 01:44 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Deasthana @ Apr 22 2009, 01:54 PM)
The problem is, with the 4.2billion years old of the Earth, and then with the 150-200 million years old of life on Earth, this argument is wronged by probability.

What? There has been life for 3 billion years, not 150-200 million.

Also, most scientists now agree that it is not mutations of the DNA itself, but mutations within epigenetics, resulting in certain inert tendencies to appear. Which is much more statistically probable.

emad - April 25, 2009 03:25 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (animal magik @ Apr 24 2009, 07:38 AM)
I'm no good at debating, but my two cents: I believe we did evolve from previous things, but I also believe that people shouldn't make such a big issue about it, it's really no big deal. ^^
(Not talking about anyone here, just some certain people in the world who are basically crazy about it.)

Finding out how we were made is a pretty big deal.

Deasthana - April 28, 2009 04:05 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Golden arm42 @ Apr 24 2009, 08:44 PM)
What?  There has been life for 3 billion years, not 150-200 million.

Also, most scientists now agree that it is not mutations of the DNA itself, but mutations within epigenetics, resulting in certain inert tendencies to appear.  Which is much more statistically probable.

How?

A mutation takes some time only to take place, there's no way to say that it is sudden. According to Darwin's theory, mutations are "blind", which basically means that they take place by chance and not because they are useful. Useful ones are only saved by what Darwin called "natural selection", meaningly the strongest species (the one with useful mutation) ineluctably make the weak one (the one with no mutation) disappear. That takes a lot of time too.

If we want to enter the statistics with an acceptable degree of probability, in my opinion, we have to say that there is a creator guiding human mutations. Otherwise mutations will remain very close to the level zero in terms of probabilities.

I do not believe in any religion, for the simple reason that it seems to me that a God in a Christian/Jewish/Muslim acceptation is as improbable as evolution (for some reasons that do not fit here). But I must say there must be "something" in the beginning. The version that convinces me the most is Aristotle's vision of a creator, which would only be capable of creating and nothing else. The way he explains it also supports the idea that this creator would be eternal, with no beginning and no end, but again, only capable of creating. I do not think it is a sufficient explanation, but it might be a part of the answer.

I can admit that I like Plato's idea too, but it does not explain the eternity of what he calls "the god".

3monightmar3 - May 2, 2009 12:22 PM (GMT)
i am god and i made u all...get ova it >.<

Golden arm42 - May 2, 2009 01:42 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Deasthana @ Apr 28 2009, 04:05 PM)
QUOTE (Golden arm42 @ Apr 24 2009, 08:44 PM)
What?  There has been life for 3 billion years, not 150-200 million.

Also, most scientists now agree that it is not mutations of the DNA itself, but mutations within epigenetics, resulting in certain inert tendencies to appear.  Which is much more statistically probable.

How?

A mutation takes some time only to take place, there's no way to say that it is sudden. According to Darwin's theory, mutations are "blind", which basically means that they take place by chance and not because they are useful. Useful ones are only saved by what Darwin called "natural selection", meaningly the strongest species (the one with useful mutation) ineluctably make the weak one (the one with no mutation) disappear. That takes a lot of time too.

I disagree with you here. Take the example of a drug-resistant bacteria. It doesn't take a lot of time for a bacterium to acquire drug resistance genes, nor does it take a long time for those drug-resistant bacteria to "make the weak one disappear." I'm not sure how familiar you are with the background science, but this year, I did a bacterial genetics experiment involving plasmid transfer. Plasmids are circular self-replicating loops of DNA that often contain drug resistance genes. Bacteria transfer these plasmids (containing genes for drug resistance) at will. Drug-resistance genes, then, are spread rapidly among the bacterial population of a given ecosystem. Not all evolution is brought about by single mutations, and it's important to recognize the value of larger-scale changes such as plasmid transfer that have a significant impact as well.

3monightmar3 - May 3, 2009 01:24 AM (GMT)
now thats getting a little bit complicated... XD

Soldify - May 24, 2009 07:16 PM (GMT)

QUOTE
How?

A mutation takes some time only to take place, there's no way to say that it is sudden. According to Darwin's theory, mutations are "blind", which basically means that they take place by chance and not because they are useful. Useful ones are only saved by what Darwin called "natural selection", meaningly the strongest species (the one with useful mutation) ineluctably make the weak one (the one with no mutation) disappear. That takes a lot of time too.


I don't understand what you mean by a mutation taking time. It doesn't take very long for a cell to mutate, lose Apoptosis and thereby becoming cancerous. While, yes it may take sometime for a useful mutation to take place in a select species but there would certainly enough time to provide the number of mutations required to take us from single celled organisms to what we are today.

A useful mutation doesn't always make the other species disappear else we'd only have one species on the earth today.




Hosted for free by zIFBoards