Evolution is a False Religion not Proven Science.

[Zmrzlina]

There are far too many examples of macro-evolutions to even list and more are discovered everyday.

demonstrate one......preferrably, demonstrate the simplest....a single celled organism evolving into a multicelled organism.....if you can't do that, certainly you can't demonstrate a single celled organism evolving into a human being......

Triassic origin and early radiation of multicellular volvocine algae

Abstract
Evolutionary transitions in individuality (ETIs) underlie the watershed events in the history of life on Earth, including the origins of cells, eukaryotes, plants, animals, and fungi. Each of these events constitutes an increase in the level of complexity, as groups of individuals become individuals in their own right. Among the best-studied ETIs is the origin of multicellularity in the green alga Volvox, a model system for the evolution of multicellularity and cellular differentiation. Since its divergence from unicellular ancestors, Volvox has evolved into a highly integrated multicellular organism with cellular specialization, a complex developmental program, and a high degree of coordination among cells. Remarkably, all of these changes were previously thought to have occurred in the last 50–75 million years. Here we estimate divergence times using a multigene data set with multiple fossil calibrations and use these estimates to infer the times of developmental changes relevant to the evolution of multicellularity. Our results show that Volvox diverged from unicellular ancestors at least 200 million years ago. Two key innovations resulting from an early cycle of cooperation, conflict and conflict mediation led to a rapid integration and radiation of multicellular forms in this group. This is the only ETI for which a detailed timeline has been established, but multilevel selection theory predicts that similar changes must have occurred during other ETIs.

Source Triassic origin and early radiation of multicellular volvocine algae

 

[PostmodernProph]

There are far too many examples of macro-evolutions to even list and more are discovered everyday.

demonstrate one......preferrably, demonstrate the simplest....a single celled organism evolving into a multicelled organism.....if you can't do that, certainly you can't demonstrate a single celled organism evolving into a human being......

Triassic origin and early radiation of multicellular volvocine algae

Abstract
Evolutionary transitions in individuality (ETIs) underlie the watershed events in the history of life on Earth, including the origins of cells, eukaryotes, plants, animals, and fungi. Each of these events constitutes an increase in the level of complexity, as groups of individuals become individuals in their own right. Among the best-studied ETIs is the origin of multicellularity in the green alga Volvox, a model system for the evolution of multicellularity and cellular differentiation. Since its divergence from unicellular ancestors, Volvox has evolved into a highly integrated multicellular organism with cellular specialization, a complex developmental program, and a high degree of coordination among cells. Remarkably, all of these changes were previously thought to have occurred in the last 50–75 million years. Here we estimate divergence times using a multigene data set with multiple fossil calibrations and use these estimates to infer the times of developmental changes relevant to the evolution of multicellularity. Our results show that Volvox diverged from unicellular ancestors at least 200 million years ago. Two key innovations resulting from an early cycle of cooperation, conflict and conflict mediation led to a rapid integration and radiation of multicellular forms in this group. This is the only ETI for which a detailed timeline has been established, but multilevel selection theory predicts that similar changes must have occurred during other ETIs.

Source Triassic origin and early radiation of multicellular volvocine algae

can you link me to the results of an experiment which replicated this confirming the idea?.....this is just a statement of an hypothesis.....

 

[Zmrzlina]

Remember geometry in 9th grade? You might have been exposed to the formula for circumference of a circle. C=2πr

Turns out that math in the Bible is slightly different. Seems Solomon was building some stuff for God's Temple, including big bowl thing. The Bible very clearly says the diameter of this bowl thing was "ten cubits from the one brim to the other" but the circumference of this big bowl thing was "and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about." (1 Kings 7:23)

If the diameter is 10 cubits, that means the radius is 5 cubits (because 1 diameter is equal to 2 radii. 10/2=5). So using our formula, we can plug in the values we have. So

C=2*π*5
So our answer is 31.416 cubits

Wait a minute. Our answer is 31.416 cubits, but the Bible answer is 30.0 cubits exactly.

What gives? Is the Bible wrong or is math? If it's the literal truth, is rounding down consistent with every word being the Inherent and Ineffable Word of God?

So maybe a talking ass is wiser than me, but at least I can still do junior high math.

A cubit was the length from a person's elbow to their fingertips, so it was a subjective unit of measurement to begin with.

Well, since it doesn't say that bowl was 10 Bob cubits in diameter and 30 Joe cubits in circumference, the only logical conclusion is that the unit of measurement when describing that bowl was used throughout the entire process.

The mental gymnastics some people use to defend the indefensible is astonishing. Maybe, just maybe, the Bible is inaccurate in describing that bowl.

This is a weak argument and I am saying that as an Atheist. It seems obvious to me that a unit of measurement that involves laying down your arm and measuring the circumference of a bowl is not going to result in an accurate enough measurement to account for Pi.

 

[Nosmo King]

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

Hardly. I am a Christian and I believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. But I am not a literalist nor an absolutist.

I know that the Bible is a book of great inspiration and spirituality. It is also a book of parable. It is also a chronicle of God's actions and interactions with mankind. The Bible is also filled with stories of sex, war, violence, comedy, drama, poetry and love. But the Bible is not a textbook for scientific understanding. It is not a geology text nor an astronomy text, nor a Biology text. Those scientific pursuits are not driven by the writings in the Bible.

I don't understand that absolutist attitude among Creationists. It's as ridiculous as "you're either with us or against us". Evolution does not refute the existence of God. It only refutes the mythology set forth in Genesis.

If you don't believe genesis, you're not a Christian, it's that simple.

Believe literally? That, to you under your judgment, is what it takes to be a Christian? Literal belief in Scripture? Do you live by every Biblical tenet?

If not, how do you reconcile the Amish with snake handling Pentacostals with Roman Catholics with Seventh Day Adventists with Presbyterians? Are all of the above Christians too?

 

[PratchettFan]

You mean by " Creationists", those who know that "God" created the whole universe. So non-creationists are -by def- agnostics or atheists ?!

Hardly. I am a Christian and I believe in God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. But I am not a literalist nor an absolutist.

I know that the Bible is a book of great inspiration and spirituality. It is also a book of parable. It is also a chronicle of God's actions and interactions with mankind. The Bible is also filled with stories of sex, war, violence, comedy, drama, poetry and love. But the Bible is not a textbook for scientific understanding. It is not a geology text nor an astronomy text, nor a Biology text. Those scientific pursuits are not driven by the writings in the Bible.

I don't understand that absolutist attitude among Creationists. It's as ridiculous as "you're either with us or against us". Evolution does not refute the existence of God. It only refutes the mythology set forth in Genesis.

If you don't believe genesis, you're not a Christian, it's that simple.

And another fundie is heard from.

 

[Ronin]

Wyatt Archaeological Research - Official Site of Ron Wyatt's Discoveries

Unfortunately, it's a theory - not a fact - It's the Theory of Evolution - untill someonme invents a Time Machine it will remain a theory. It's a theory that I somewhat agree with - however it has alot of holes in it .

One primary hole being the absense of intermediate species or transitional fossils with the geological evidence.


And your comment re:Gravity - uh sorry to burst your bubble - but Gravity is a fact , and uh yes but I'm sorry they do understand how it works......You must be a Liberal - Right ?

Your citing two cases of fraud and stating there is no evidence of transitional fossils? Wow. You state you somewhat agree with it, how? Which part?

Bohlinia, Pezosiren portelli, proboscideans, Dimetrodon, Archaeopteryx, Sinornis, Tiktaalik, Gerobatrachus hottorni, Odontochelys semistestacea, a few of those transitional fossils. What is your classification of geological evidence? If the foundation has "having been there in person" for factual agreement then religion will be your only comfort. (Your weren't there during that either though) Keep in mind people like the op see carbon dating either as inaccurate or a ploy of Satan.

Any kind of conversation will only go so far when the debate is comparing even the investigative methods of science to what they consider REALITY based on:

If your imagination of the Bible comes from a children's story book I guess I can see why you think of it the way you do.

No I'm a former Christian. In fact the first aspect of my life. My conclusions were not formed over night. After years of research, history, science, other religions, basic observation of society, and traveling to the Holy Land several times, some with this manWyatt Archaeological Research - Official Site of Ron Wyatt's Discoveries have shaped my perspective. The yearning to know more will always be there.

I was more content when I thought the Bible was reality. I also remember being pissed at the person who told me Santa was fake. He forced me to process the fact they were at every mall, that deer don't fly, and everything else associated.

I wonder how many have investigated the history of the Bible outside the Bible itself. The more you investigate the more you begin to see lies everywhere.

The Bible especially Genesis reads like a children's book. When you say imagination. . . I find it astonishing that excellent piece of literature has actually convinced people. . .adults that it is reality. I would say each to their own, however is there any other source which has caused war, suffering, and divide than religion?

 

[PratchettFan]

Wyatt Archaeological Research - Official Site of Ron Wyatt's Discoveries

Your citing two cases of fraud and stating there is no evidence of transitional fossils? Wow. You state you somewhat agree with it, how? Which part?

Bohlinia, Pezosiren portelli, proboscideans, Dimetrodon, Archaeopteryx, Sinornis, Tiktaalik, Gerobatrachus hottorni, Odontochelys semistestacea, a few of those transitional fossils. What is your classification of geological evidence? If the foundation has "having been there in person" for factual agreement then religion will be your only comfort. (Your weren't there during that either though) Keep in mind people like the op see carbon dating either as inaccurate or a ploy of Satan.

Any kind of conversation will only go so far when the debate is comparing even the investigative methods of science to what they consider REALITY based on:

If your imagination of the Bible comes from a children's story book I guess I can see why you think of it the way you do.

No I'm a former Christian. In fact the first aspect of my life. My conclusions were not formed over night. After years of research, history, science, other religions, basic observation of society, and traveling to the Holy Land several times, some with this manWyatt Archaeological Research - Official Site of Ron Wyatt's Discoveries have shaped my perspective. The yearning to know more will always be there.

I was more content when I thought the Bible was reality. I also remember being pissed at the person who told me Santa was fake. He forced me to process the fact they were at every mall, that deer don't fly, and everything else associated.

I wonder how many have investigated the history of the Bible outside the Bible itself. The more you investigate the more you begin to see lies everywhere.

The Bible especially Genesis reads like a children's book. When you say imagination. . . I find it astonishing that excellent piece of literature has actually convinced people. . .adults that it is reality. I would say each to their own, however is there any other source which has caused war, suffering, and divide than religion?

To that last question.... yes. Greed and the willingness of most human beings to follow orders.

 

[Nosmo King]

That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I would say you have that right....did you figure it out all by yourself?.....

That is the reason for the arrogance about mankind. Creationists think that the forces of evolution are not applicable to man because man was 'created'' separately. The record of human development is a false record because some Bronze Age philosopher told you so.

 

[PostmodernProph]

That mankind was 'created in the image of God' and therefore uniquely immune to the vagaries of evolution.

I would say you have that right....did you figure it out all by yourself?.....

That is the reason for the arrogance about mankind. Creationists think that the forces of evolution are not applicable to man because man was 'created'' separately. The record of human development is a false record because some Bronze Age philosopher told you so.

lol.....and yet to you there is a "record" of human evolution, even though no one has ever documented a single stage of it......can you even convince someone a single celled organism ever evolved into a multicelled organism?......

if it happened fifty million years ago, why didn't it happen again a million years ago, a thousand years ago.......last week Thursday?.......

 

[PostmodernProph]

@Nosmo

more questions about the "record of human development"......I'm curious....when humans moved through some of the earlier stages of development, were we more like earthworms or like those sea slug thingies.....

 

[Nosmo King]

@Nosmo

more questions about the "record of human development"......I'm curious....when humans moved through some of the earlier stages of development, were we more like earthworms or like those sea slug thingies.....

I don't see any worms.

 

[PratchettFan]

I would say you have that right....did you figure it out all by yourself?.....

That is the reason for the arrogance about mankind. Creationists think that the forces of evolution are not applicable to man because man was 'created'' separately. The record of human development is a false record because some Bronze Age philosopher told you so.

lol.....and yet to you there is a "record" of human evolution, even though no one has ever documented a single stage of it......can you even convince someone a single celled organism ever evolved into a multicelled organism?......

if it happened fifty million years ago, why didn't it happen again a million years ago, a thousand years ago.......last week Thursday?.......

That record has been documented, and quite well. But presenting that to you would be pointless and it is certainly easy enough to obtain with a simple web search. You just would not accept it. But that is ok, because the people who do this professionally do accept it and I have seen no reason to dispute them. Whether you accept it or not changes nothing.

As to the last, it did happen last week Thursday. It happens all the time. But each change is miniscule. Like water dripping in a cave, you don't see stalagmites and stalactites with the first drop, even though each drop does add its tiny bit. This really is not that complicated a process and you are not unintelligent, so I don't buy that you can't understand it.

 

[Derideo_Te]

as I recall, the shrubbery eaten by dinosaurs went extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did.....when did the shrubs and trees of the dry savannas that giraffes eat evolve?.....

Please provide credible substantiation that the "shrubbery eaten by dinosaurs went extinct at the same time the dinosaurs did".

well, no......because I really don't give a fuck whether it did or not......I'm simply thinking back about the earliest trees and recalling that they weren't birches and ash and honeysuckle.....

Tree species from the time of the dinosaurs can still be found because the K-T extinction only wiped out about 50% of plant species. The advantage seeds have is that they can survive catastrophic events where animals can't. Certainly the mix of trees changed but that is normal evolutionary behavior following environmental changes.

 

[Derideo_Te]

I would say you have that right....did you figure it out all by yourself?.....

That is the reason for the arrogance about mankind. Creationists think that the forces of evolution are not applicable to man because man was 'created'' separately. The record of human development is a false record because some Bronze Age philosopher told you so.

lol.....and yet to you there is a "record" of human evolution, even though no one has ever documented a single stage of it......can you even convince someone a single celled organism ever evolved into a multicelled organism?......

if it happened fifty million years ago, why didn't it happen again a million years ago, a thousand years ago.......last week Thursday?.......

Too bad for you that there is plenty of documented evidence of human evolution!

List of human evolution fossils - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following charts give a brief overview of several notable hominin fossil finds relating to human evolution beginning with the formation of the Hominini tribe in the late Miocene (roughly 6 million years ago).

As there are thousands of fossils, mostly fragmentary, often consisting of single bones or isolated teeth with complete skulls and skeletons rare,[1] this overview is not meant to be complete, but does show some of the most important finds

 

[PostmodernProph]

@Nosmo

more questions about the "record of human development"......I'm curious....when humans moved through some of the earlier stages of development, were we more like earthworms or like those sea slug thingies.....

I don't see any worms.

so you think the evolutionary development of humans began with the figure on the left?......interesting......

 

[PostmodernProph]

As to the last, it did happen last week Thursday. It happens all the time. But each change is miniscule.

sorry, but changing from a single celled organism to a multicelled organism is NOT miniscule.....now, make up your mind....did it happen last Thursday or not.....has it ever happened again since it first happened and if so, which creatures out there are NOT related to all the other creatures and how do we identify them?.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

Too bad for you that there is plenty of documented evidence of human evolution!

worms or sea slugs?.....

 

[Derideo_Te]

As to the last, it did happen last week Thursday. It happens all the time. But each change is miniscule.

sorry, but changing from a single celled organism to a multicelled organism is NOT miniscule.....now, make up your mind....did it happen last Thursday or not.....has it ever happened again since it first happened and if so, which creatures out there are NOT related to all the other creatures and how do we identify them?.....

Haven't I already explained that to you?

Oh right, you blew it off because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Nevermind!

 

[Derideo_Te]

Too bad for you that there is plenty of documented evidence of human evolution!

worms or sea slugs?.....

Non sequitur!

 

[PostmodernProph]

Too bad for you that there is plenty of documented evidence of human evolution!

worms or sea slugs?.....

Non sequitur!

so that makes two posters who think that the precursor to humans dropped out of the sky without evolving from some earlier creature.....