Creation or Evolution? (Maybe both)

[exoticdanceweardealer]

Originally Posted by bojulay

"Such revision of evolutionary theory has not been necessary except
in obscure details for a very long time"

What planet is this guy from. Excuse me, nearly ever new fossil find
is toted as being a missing link later to be declared not to be.

If he is talking about the basic tenets of the THEORY of evolution
then I can see his point. No, hardcore EVs haven't changed their mind
about it, never will, like I said it is a religion like any other with
very zealous members of the church.

One of the most striking things to me is not any evidences that
they point to but what they avoid or leave out.

Example--Here we have these little fossils that indicates that it
was a distant relative to this other creature that it eventually
became-- " Where did one celled organisms originate from with
all of their complexity already in place and fully functional
with nothing below them to evolve from?"--Don't ask such silly
questions--Ok if you really must know, lightening struck some
muckey slimey water and formed the little complex fully functional
creature out of the muck, it happens all the time--" How come scientist
can't do the same thing in a lab?"--Ugh, another silly question--Ok
if you really must know, evolution is much smarter than all of the
scientist put together--" You mean evolution is an intelligent being
with designing capabilities "-- Shut the fuck up you unscientific bitch!

Your statement--" Evolution is not the anti God "

But that is exactly what it is presented as being.
The answer to where did we all come from,
not only how did everything develop and progress,
but where did we actually come from as well.

Not just the ax but the hand that wielded
it as well.

Good morning,

Well the details about lineages are often under heavy scrutiny in the scientific community. Debate after debate with lists of evidence coming from both ends will typically decide if a linking species is an ancestor of the one that came later. This is normal scientific process, evolution has a very large scope as we are talking about every living thing that has ever existed on our planet period.

As for the primordial ooze story, the world was around about 2 billion years if I remember correctly and our entire atmosphere/ecosystem was different. A smaller sun, different dominant gasses, a number of different factors but apparently it was ideal to form just one single non complex celled living organism when the right conditions were met. It is highly doubtful that scientists would merely give it a shot in the dark in a lab and make it happen without trying for a very very long time. It took Billions of years, which keep in mind what a Billion years is. One thing I know, you and I can't fathom it.

At least one condition was right in that time that made that occur. These things reproduce asexually.

It doesn't disprove God, it could have been God's design entirely.

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by exoticdanceweardealer

Good morning,

Well the details about lineages are often under heavy scrutiny in the scientific community. Debate after debate with lists of evidence coming from both ends will typically decide if a linking species is an ancestor of the one that came later. This is normal scientific process, evolution has a very large scope as we are talking about every living thing that has ever existed on our planet period.

As for the primordial ooze story, the world was around about 2 billion years if I remember correctly and our entire atmosphere/ecosystem was different. A smaller sun, different dominant gasses, a number of different factors but apparently it was ideal to form just one single non complex celled living organism when the right conditions were met. It is highly doubtful that scientists would merely give it a shot in the dark in a lab and make it happen without trying for a very very long time. It took Billions of years, which keep in mind what a Billion years is. One thing I know, you and I can't fathom it.

At least one condition was right in that time that made that occur. These things reproduce asexually.

It doesn't disprove God, it could have been God's design entirely.

It would have been one single event though, taking place in what
a matter of seconds. You can't use the length of time that the
earth has been here to explain that, ether the process is possible
or not, some vague it must have happened because look how
long ago it was isn't good enough.

Some have calculated that the random chance of some event
like that occurring is so great as to be in the realm of impossible.

One example is to lay the parts of a machine out on the ground
and come back a few billion years later to find a fully assembled
and working machine, with no intelligent involvement added to
the process what so ever, just the element of time.

The materialist hijacked science a while back.
(those that believe that there is only material nothing more)
But quantum physics is now pushing them to the side
with the possibility of other dimensions, and invisible
forces, the bending of space and time. Although doing
it in a very polite way.

And once again, the materialist do eliminate the possibility
of the involvement of any higher power from the equation.

[davo1]

.

[exoticdanceweardealer]

Originally Posted by bojulay

It would have been one single event though, taking place in what
a matter of seconds. You can't use the length of time that the
earth has been here to explain that, ether the process is possible
or not, some vague it must have happened because look how
long ago it was isn't good enough.

Some have calculated that the random chance of some event
like that occurring is so great as to be in the realm of impossible.

One example is to lay the parts of a machine out on the ground
and come back a few billion years later to find a fully assembled
and working machine, with no intelligent involvement added to
the process what so ever, just the element of time.

The materialist hijacked science a while back.
(those that believe that there is only material nothing more)
But quantum physics is now pushing them to the side
with the possibility of other dimensions, and invisible
forces, the bending of space and time. Although doing
it in a very polite way.

And once again, the materialist do eliminate the possibility
of the involvement of any higher power from the equation.

It is just like flicking a lighter a bunch of times until it lights, except it was random lightening strikes, different pools of ooze, eventually the right one over billions of years. Yes the time makes perfect sense.

I posted a video a few posts back explaining the theory of evolution and still you don't get it. A single cell is not a very complex machine in primitive single celled organisms, especially the earliest form there was of a single celled organism. The machine took another hundred million years of mitosis, trial and error, it wasn't complex at all.

[bojulay]

Ok, you've convinced me wheeler dealer. Spontaneous Generation
was true why did they ever give up on the idea, makes perfect sense.

Oh Shit! I lied, here's another link.
http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr...ils.php/id/840

Irreducible Complexity, can't get around it, it's science after all.
Blame the scientist, not me.

[exoticdanceweardealer]

Originally Posted by bojulay

Ok, you've convinced me wheeler dealer. Spontaneous Generation
was true why did they ever give up on the idea, makes perfect sense.

Oh Shit! I lied, here's another link.
www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/840

Irreducible Complexity, can't get around it, it's science after all.
Blame the scientist, not me.

Nothing Spontaneously generated except for initially actually. I like the wheeler dealer name :P

Irreducible complexity would be a great argument if we were removing functions rather than altering them slightly, after all that was why the recurrent laryngeal nerve was several feet long in a giraffe's neck and simply inches in fish. This is why we share eyes, brains, tongues and mouths. Not Dr. Seuss like parts, Cats with zipzingers and birds with whipwillers, dogs with rumruffers and bats with chimchillers. No, we have eyes, teeth, noses, mouths, all of these passed down organs and in the DNA we even have a very elaborate story of our origin that biologists see first hand. This is why they believe in evolution. In some cases the improvements or lack of further use of vestigial organs did end in species dying out, but it was again a very slow process over trillions of generations of all sort living things to get where we are now.

Unfortunately, we must again label that argument, although put together with a lot of careful planning, a straw man as it holds no real logical value to the actual implied theory.

It really is too easy to explain this, no matter how many "But but but... what about this..." kind of arguments the anti-evolution arguers bring up. It has been tested to death, perhaps more than just about any known theory other than Gravity itself.

Resistance is futile ape descendant!

[wellendowed1911]

Exoticdancer-can you please give me an answer of why only the cheetah evolved with Bigger nostrils to take in more air, bigger lung capacity, longest and biggest tail in the feline family over sized lungs-claws that don't fully retract- all of those advantages enables the cheetah to run faster and catch prey- in your opinion it was evolved- I say it was designed- so can you please tell me WHEN the cheetah designed those attributes and why the Lion, Tiger, cougar, jaguar, and Leopard didn't "evolve" those characteristics?

[exoticdanceweardealer]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Exoticdancer-can you please give me an answer of why only the cheetah evolved with Bigger nostrils to take in more air, bigger lung capacity, longest and biggest tail in the feline family over sized lungs-claws that don't fully retract- all of those advantages enables the cheetah to run faster and catch prey- in your opinion it was evolved- I say it was designed- so can you please tell me WHEN the cheetah designed those attributes and why the Lion, Tiger, cougar, jaguar, and Leopard didn't "evolve" those characteristics?

But...but...but...Anteaters have long snouts,...

You answered your own question. Why? Because the many many species that led up to the Cheetah had to survive in a location where their game had to be chased very quickly, and if you look at what and where a cheetah hunts it is clear to understand why. Why do they look so similar to lions, tigers, lynx, jaguars, and why do they have nostrils, lungs, eyes, ears, claws, paws, pads on the paws. Why didn't God make 1 dog species, 1 cat species, 1 ape species, 1 human species, 3-4 avian species but completely different in most ways like a bat, a bird, a butterfly, and a wasp?

The reason is that way back when our early shared ancestors developed many of these features, very very primitive versions.

Look at single celled, then multi celled organisms, then fish, amphibians, reptiles, then mammals and avian creatures and all of those little branches of bugs and things that fall into those categories. It tells a beautiful story because the missing link is still right in front of us. The descendents of each phase of our evolution is right there, clear as day and only deniable by those clearly in denial.

[bojulay]

Ok dancing dealer, you really have convinced me this time, for real.

Oh Shit! I lied again, here's another link.
http://www.darwins-god.blogspot.com/...bugs-that.html

Irreducible Complexity dose apply, because it is the fact that all of the components
of a cell must be in place and functioning for the cell to exist.

Therefore if life came from dead matter through some sort of spontaneous
generation event, all of the components would have to be in place and
fully functioning. In other words a miracle would have to occur, and
one even greater than lazarus being raised from the dead, lazarus
had all of his components already in place.

No one has been able to reproduce the event in a lab, and no one can
explain how it could have happened. The only thing that they can come up
with is the same thing that you have, to say that it must have happened
so just accept it and leave it at that.

And they say science doesn't believe in miracles. Another grand bit of irony.


For the raising of lazarus to rival that miracle he not only would have had
to of been dead but also cut up into tiny pieces that were strune about
on the floor.

(Evolution proven to be the origin of all life) Please.

[bojulay]

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Exoticdancer-can you please give me an answer of why only the cheetah evolved with Bigger nostrils to take in more air, bigger lung capacity, longest and biggest tail in the feline family over sized lungs-claws that don't fully retract- all of those advantages enables the cheetah to run faster and catch prey- in your opinion it was evolved- I say it was designed- so can you please tell me WHEN the cheetah designed those attributes and why the Lion, Tiger, cougar, jaguar, and Leopard didn't "evolve" those characteristics?

That's just another example of micro evolution, which there are many
examples of in all the different species. A built in adaptability mechanism
that helps a species adapt to it's environment.

Sadly it is also used as proof of macro evolution, which it is not.

Once again, many examples of micro evolution in current present day
organisms and the fossil record, but no evidence of macro evolution ether presently or in the fossil record.

Just a lot of gaps that would need to be filled in by some kind of
transitional creature that never existed.

One thing there is though, a lot of illustrations of what the creatures
were suppose to look like.

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by exoticdanceweardealer

But...but...but...Anteaters have long snouts,...

You answered your own question. Why? Because the many many species that led up to the Cheetah had to survive in a location where their game had to be chased very quickly, and if you look at what and where a cheetah hunts it is clear to understand why. Why do they look so similar to lions, tigers, lynx, jaguars, and why do they have nostrils, lungs, eyes, ears, claws, paws, pads on the paws. Why didn't God make 1 dog species, 1 cat species, 1 ape species, 1 human species, 3-4 avian species but completely different in most ways like a bat, a bird, a butterfly, and a wasp?

The reason is that way back when our early shared ancestors developed many of these features, very very primitive versions.

Look at single celled, then multi celled organisms, then fish, amphibians, reptiles, then mammals and avian creatures and all of those little branches of bugs and things that fall into those categories. It tells a beautiful story because the missing link is still right in front of us. The descendents of each phase of our evolution is right there, clear as day and only deniable by those clearly in denial.

Exoticdancer you avoided my question- cheetahs hunt in the same general area as lions, leopards and hyenas- All of them generally hunt the same food: Cape buffalo, Gazelle, zebra and Wilderbeast- except usually Lions tend to hunt Cape Buffalo because the other cats are not big enough to bring a full grown Cape Buffalo down.
So how come the cheetah was the only one to develop super speed- the lion, leopard and hyenas still have to chase theses prey- but are you telling me that the cheetah some how evolved all those attributes and the Lion, tiger, leopard and every other species in the feline family didn't think it was important to out run the prey?

If you don't have a logical answer or response just say you don't know- if you have an answer just tell me what time period did the cheetah develop this super speed- that's all I want to know is was the cheetah born or created with these attributes or did they slowly evolve into super fast runners?

[exoticdanceweardealer]

Originally Posted by bojulay

Ok dancing dealer, you really have convinced me this time, for real.

Oh Shit! I lied again, here's another link.
www.darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011/07/new-scientist-not-so-simplebugs-that.html

Irreducible Complexity dose apply, because it is the fact that all of the components
of a cell must be in place and functioning for the cell to exist.

Therefore if life came from dead matter through some sort of spontaneous
generation event, all of the components would have to be in place and
fully functioning. In other words a miracle would have to occur, and
one even greater than lazarus being raised from the dead, lazarus
had all of his components already in place.

No one has been able to reproduce the event in a lab, and no one can
explain how it could have happened. The only thing that they can come up
with is the same thing that you have, to say that it must have happened
so just accept it and leave it at that.

And they say science doesn't believe in miracles. Another grand bit of irony.


For the raising of lazarus to rival that miracle he not only would have had
to of been dead but also cut up into tiny pieces that were strune about
on the floor.

(Evolution proven to be the origin of all life) Please.

Ah, we are back to the primordial single celled organism that started it all? It simply needed the right elements and the right charge. We aren't talking about the same sort of single celled organism as a diatom which has evolved a skeleton and the contain chlorophyll. We are talking about the most basic possible unicellular organism with no need for a defense mechanism as no predators yet existed. There wasn't much needed initially. As time went on, things were added, the problem with your irreducible complexity idea is this:

A fish without a fin can live, maybe not without a heart but if a species has 3 hearts it may be able to live without the original. The concept just doesn't apply here, nor am I too sure it is a valid concept at all except in specific circumstances.

Again, evolution is simply a means to an end for the development of life and not a debunking of the seemingly miraculous. However if you dig deep enough even into the so called supernatural, it is likely natural, as are all things, even God. Why would God be unnatural? That's kind of insulting. Just because you have a gap in our discovery does not make something magical.

@wellendowed I do not have an answer to every single question about every single animal or species that has ever existed. There are a lot of answers including the hypothetical reasoning for the evolutionary lines all over the place written by experts in the field. The difference between us is that you are willing to discount the expert opinions after a lifetime of study of virtually any scientist respected in their communities for at least 100 years or so or whenever Darwinian theory finally became excepted over theocratic ideals.

Common sense would easily dictate the answer and it is logical. I gave you that answer, they might have had to outrun something, I couldn't give you details on each species but that doesn't disprove my overall assertion that in the general means was evolution. It simply is me having enough humility to admit I am not an expert on a specific species and its history.

So keep that in mind when choosing to use that against my general point of debate with all due respect because it is an unfair expectation.

[wellendowed1911]

Bottom line ExoticDance- the Cheetah is able to run at 70 mph because of how it was designed- large nostrils to take in Oxygen- a curve spine that is extremely flexible- a Large tail that acts as a Rudder, claws that don't retract in order to improve traction- over sized lungs- again to carry oxygen when it runs at max speed- so if you want to live in a world where you think this evolved than go ahead- I on the other think the Cheetah was a magnificent design by a unique creator- i's amazing that the cheetah has everything it needs physically to maintain it's speed-tell me how that is evolved?

[davo1]

For those who may be interested, here is some interesting info about the evolution of dogs:
(for one thing, all dogs are descendents of gray wolves)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/li.../l_015_02.html


I don't watch Nova often, but happened to catch this one:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/nature/dogs-decoded.html

Unfortunately it can't be streamed........but ya gotta luv teh youtubes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JM1JsGr76Ro

[exoticdanceweardealer]

We were the reason dogs were domesticated and formed as a subspecies of wolves.

Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Bottom line ExoticDance- the Cheetah is able to run at 70 mph because of how it was designed- large nostrils to take in Oxygen- a curve spine that is extremely flexible- a Large tail that acts as a Rudder, claws that don't retract in order to improve traction- over sized lungs- again to carry oxygen when it runs at max speed- so if you want to live in a world where you think this evolved than go ahead- I on the other think the Cheetah was a magnificent design by a unique creator- i's amazing that the cheetah has everything it needs physically to maintain it's speed-tell me how that is evolved?

http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/m...ionofspeed.htm

"
Evolution of Speed
The reason the cheetah evolved for speed in the first place is because it needed to be fast enough to catch its prey, the gazelle. Both the cheetah and the gazelle have constantly evoled to be faster and faster in order to survive. The cheetahs that are not fast enough to catch their prey will starve and the fast cheetahs will pass their genes on.The gazelles that are not fast enough will get eaten and the fast ones will pass their genes on. This is a constant race and the faster the gazelle gets, the faster the cheetah gets as well. Once again, because the cheetah evolves to get faster and faster, it chooses the open plains habitat to fit its function of sprinting."


Using Google I found a wealth of knowledge by typing "Evolution of the Cheetah" but I must wonder why the National Institute of Health has this information, that's odd...


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2626734/




An exert regarding the ancestor species of cheetah which may contain information about their evolution to answer your questions better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheetah#Etymology


The cheetah likely evolved in Africa during the Miocene epoch (26 million to 7.5 million years ago), before migrating to Asia. Recent research has placed the last common ancestor of all existing populations as living in Asia 11 million years ago, which may lead to revision and refinement of existing ideas about cheetah evolution.[10]


The now-extinct species include: Acinonyx pardinensis (Pliocene epoch), much larger than the modern cheetah and found in Europe, India, and China; Acinonyx intermedius (mid-Pleistocene period), found over the same range. The extinct genus Miracinonyx was extremely cheetah-like, but recent DNA analysis has shown that Miracinonyx inexpectatus, Miracinonyx studeri, and Miracinonyx trumani (early to late Pleistocene epoch), found in North America and called the "North American cheetah" are not true cheetahs, instead being close relatives to the cougar.[11]
''

The best answer is that they have gaps. Did the Cheetah randomly get created by God with a 1-2-3-POOF! or did it happen like every other pattern of evolution we have discovered? In other words, this isn't a valid argument. The cheetah still evolved, God may have designed how it was going to happen before the universe even existed, but the cheetah still evolved.


Not trying to be rude here, but honestly evolution isn't up for debate guys, Gonorrhea just evolved to handle most all of our antibiotics, why? It adapted, the surviving bacteria adapted. Oh I know someone will chime in with "Micro evolution" but it is only micro for several million years when the combined micro changes become macro so again not a valid argument.