|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
truthfulchat
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: I think that people should look more at what I wrote |
 |
|
| Read what I wrote and others wrote then make a decision. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:20 pm Post subject: Re: Justin this is where you made a mistake |
|
|
Obviously, not ever species will evolve exactly the same. This is why all animals don't look the same.
Then again, maybe your space-god planned this all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I read what you wrote. It's the same creationist nonsense we've had around here for sometime.
Not for your consideration but for anyone else interested
on new species http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html
Truthfulshat also posted links to scientists who don't support evolution. Not a surprise. Here is project Steve a parody of the Discovery Insittute's list of 100 scientist who doubt evolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Steve
A list of scientists called Steve who support the following statement
| Quote: |
| Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools. |
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp[/url] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why feel so threatened and the need to belittle the beliefs of others? Whhy not just let people believe what they want to? Why try and force those who differ, using a panoply of schoolyard tactics to think as you tell them to? Why does it matter to you? usually such defensiveness coupled with such aggressive bully-tactics is a clear sign of insecurity. You are reacting like a typical liar when cornered. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Back at ya Jr. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Einstein had the best comeback -- when presented with a list of a few hundred scientists who doubted general relativity, he asked, "Why the list? It only takes one."
This is what critics of evolution just don't seem to get. If you disagree with a theory, publish. If your critique is good enough, it will revolutionize biology and your name will live forever.
Or, you could just hide behind childish assertions that the big bad mean "scientific establishment" won't give you a fair hearing, and ignore centuries of scientific revolutions, to make yourself feel better. Your choice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stillnotking wrote: |
| Einstein had the best comeback -- |
He was also forced by the logic of all his research to conclude that there is a Creator God.
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists...In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views."
| Quote: |
| This is what critics of evolution just don't seem to get. |
What evolutionists just don't seem to get is that the actual top scientists in history believed in God, and their theories make no sense if there wasn't one.
| Quote: |
| ignore centuries of scientific revolutions |
-spurred on by scientists who happened to be christian.
The atheism of the modern era is a social factor, a bias that has entered into the west as a cultural influence long after the great scientific discoveries happened. The modern lie is to think that a scientist must necesarilly be an atheist and this is backed up by an institution which has hijacked the scene and linked it to the empty philosophy of evolutionism- which is a pseudo-science of guesswork and supposition, motivated by atheism rather than a devout search for truth.
It begins with an initial assumption that was not held by any of the great scientists: that God does not exist. From there it embarked on its cclosed-minded journey to trying to prove what cannot be demonstrated out of a rigid dogmatism overseen by popular culture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stillnotking
Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Location: Oregon, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Junior, this is exactly where you're wrong. Scientists don't have to be atheists. The majority of them are not atheists. The majority of evolutionary biologists are not atheists. Science is not about what God you do or don't believe in. It's about theory and evidence.
You are drawing a false dichotomy based on how you see the world, and you don't understand that it's not how other people see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:27 pm Post subject: Re: Justin this is where you made a mistake |
|
|
| Justin Hale wrote: |
| I will not give the time of day to anything put forth by a TEFL teacher |
Then why should i do the same for you?
It does not take a PhD or even a bachelors degree to be able to see with your own 2 eyes that nothing has changed. This is the trade secret of evolutionism- that it never actually happened.
Salamander, N.China, 150 M years ago. vertually identical salamanders were found still living in the same area of fossil collection.
"Immediately apparent is the fact that salamanders at that time�the Jurassic period�differed very little from their modern equivalents."
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/03/0328_salamander.html
�The new cryptobranchid shows extraordinary morphological similarity to its living relatives,� noted the study authors. �Indeed, extant cryptobranchid salamanders can be regarded as living fossils whose structures have remained little changed for more than 160 million years.�
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/030403/salamanders.shtml
Now its amusing to keep seeing the evolutionists confronted with unchanged organisms and how they embroider their patter around it to try and cling onto the most tenuous suggestions of evolution. or casually push back the dates by even more multimillions of years (breaking all their own 'rules" of dating rocks in the process). They talk of living fossils as if they were a surprise, a "rarity" while at the same time not being able to find anything that actually has changed   . Its just stupid. Hilarious, in fact. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:48 pm Post subject: Re: Justin this is where you made a mistake |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Of course, a world with T-rex and Spinosaurus is wholly compatible with human flourishing. |
Dinosaurs is a loose term referring to a whole range of creatures that massively differed in size. If you've been watching too many Fred flintstone cartoons I can't help you, but its entirely possible for large and even aggressive land animals to live closely alongside man. Ever seen fishing canoes casually plying their way through rivers of 18 feet crococodiles? or people checking their crops while a herd of Elephant, each weighing up to 6 tons grazes nearby?
I'm sorry to disturb your playpen fantasies, but only a tiny fraction of dinosaurs were at all possibly of the bloodthirtsy "lets kill people" type- and even then, humans with their superior brain size, organisation and intelligence were easilly a match for them.
Yes, a few of the larger forms probably clung to an existence in remote areas away from people or human-altered landscapes- in much the same way threatened species do today in the himalayas or the depths of amazonia. Occasionally encountered and then existing in folklore which describes them with striking similarity in cultures worldwide.
| Quote: |
| every assertion just all the more affirms what utter poison religion is. |
You mean all the christian charities that build hospitals and scools and donate food the world over? Or sponsor research to defeat disease? silly me I forgot.
| Quote: |
| because to deny evolution as fact is akin to denying the round Earth fact or denying the dinosaurs. |
I'm afraid you are little more than a ridiculous simpleton, brainwashed by modern trendy culture. The first historical mention of dinosaurs and a round earth is actually...in the bible.
But don't go anywhere. I'm enjoying this too much |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
truthfulchat
Joined: 30 Sep 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:23 am Post subject: Hey stillnotking look at the people for evolution |
|
|
| The people for evolution in this forum are clearly against any kind of god or creator. Read some of the posts and you can see that. So at least in this room it is a bunch of athiest evolutionists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I don't believe in god (not in the way the bible portrays him) and I am not going to bash anyone who does, but come on! The idea that modern humans actually co-existed with dinosaurs!? Give me a break!
Obviously one is not going to be able to produce scientific evidence that god does or doesn't exist but if you are going to contend that humans co-existed with dinosaurs then you have to have some kind of evidence to back that claim up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yawarakaijin wrote: |
| come on! The idea that modern humans actually co-existed with dinosaurs!? Give me a break! |
What then are crocodiles? Their fossils stretch back to the time of the dinosaurs and beyond. Because it still exists, does that make it not a dinosaur?
Alligators live in peoples swimming pools in Florida.Would you call that co-existence? Bear also in mind the majority of dinosaurs were that size and smaller. Granted some huge ones existed and are dramatised in the media, but they were few.
| Quote: |
| if you are going to contend that humans co-existed with dinosaurs then you have to have some kind of evidence to back that claim up. |
We've been through this and there is plenty. They didn't have cameras a thousand years ago,sorry. But what we do see is a rich folklore common to cultures worldwide, written accounts: artworks, often closely and explicitly describing what we now label dinosaurs. Back then, dragon was the common term. There is overwhelming evidence...just read the evolution thread. Not to mention they have found preserved dinosaurs with soft tissue, blood cells. Do blood cells last 65 million years???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:04 am Post subject: Re: Justin this is where you made a mistake |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| Obviously, not ever species will evolve exactly the same. |
But there is nothing to say any of them evolved at all.
Sorry to embarrass anyone...but umm...how can I put it? nothing has changed, since time immemorial. It may have become smaller yet remain anatomically identical (as is the case with many insects), or there may be localised manifestations of inbreeding which express a portion of the diversity inherent within a species (...eg some folks got blue eyes)...but evolution into anatomiically new and novel forms? hahaha...not at all.
| Quote: |
| This is why all animals don't look the same. |
God created the different creatures to fill, and function in their different environments. Even a split-second glance at the mind-boggling complexity of genetics shows us the overwhelming probability that things were deliberately designed and created rather than evolved by chance.
| Quote: |
| Then again, maybe your space-god planned this all. |
I believe he allowed species an inherent genetic range, a toolbox if you will, to bring forth as and when needed in a fallen world of change. Thus a finch may indeed grow a slightly longer beak over a few generations to exploit a new food source. But this is simply utilising genetic information already present. Its an example of an organisms self-regulation- not by chance but exactly as and when required.
From the original created forms, their descendants "devolved' to a slight extent by losing and stripping away excess genetic information not required in their new isolated environments. They didn't acquire new arms, wings and fins. they lost former information due to eg DNA damage, faults in replication in a now fallen and imperfect world. But thats not what the theory of evolution claims, neither can they show any process by which species radically acquire new information and morph into ever more complex organisms. Instead, they diverged by becoming simplified. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:31 am Post subject: Re: Mindme I hate to give bad news |
|
|
| truthfulchat wrote: |
| An ecological niche has nothing to do with one species evolving into another. The ecological niche first termed by zoologist George Evelyn Hutchinson was how an organism or population responds to the distribution of resources and competitors. Examples would be changes in the species not turning into another species. Simply put modifications in the body structure but still being the same species (adaptation). No way when Hutchinson explained this was he referring to a transformation to another species. |
Ummm. A niche has everything to do with evolution.
Ecological Niche
Is all of the physical, chemical and biological conditions required by a species for survival, growth and reproduction.
http://www.physicalgeography.net/physgeoglos/e.html
Species evolve to deal with new survival pressures or when mutations allow them to radiate into new niches (as defined above). Do you have another definition from an evolutionist? What are we missing here? Your whole premise is it's impossible for a species in one niche to evolve into another species and therefore evolution is logically impossible. Yes? I keep asking you for one evolutionary biologist that claims evolution works this way. I can define god as a ham sandwich and then claim this is illogical. Oh well.
Modifications in in body structure are only one of a myriad ways one species evolves into another. While there are some grey areas, the generally accepted definition of species is the inability to produce fertile off spring. Nature of course doesn't always conform to human categorization.
You've also steadfastly avoided setting your goal post. You claimed there are no examples of speciation since Darwin. You've been demonstrated wrong. So what are you arguing about?
| Quote: |
| The people for evolution in this forum are clearly against any kind of god or creator. Read some of the posts and you can see that. So at least in this room it is a bunch of athiest evolutionists. |
And then explain why Francis Collins, human genome head and a born again, believes in evolution from the genetic evidence alone?
Evolution makes it difficult to believe in a literal interpretation of genesis, as Junior keeps demonstrating with his hand waving and making up facts. But evolution is doesn't not preclude a god, the catholic church gets along famously. Evolution does, however, remove a major source of god of the gaps faith. Oh well. You should celebrate that. People coming to your god not out of ignorance but out of amazement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
