StarGateWars Forums

Here is my problem with the evolution theory: if man supposedly evolved from the apes, why are their still apes around but none of the other evolutions (Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal, etc.). And, if anybody mentions those Geico commercials or the TV series based on them, I will mass you If these "evolutions" from the apes were "better" than the apes, shouldn't they still be around today?

populations of apes living in different areas of the global fitness landscape. if fitness landscape changes (and it constantly chaoticaly does) some populations find themselves in the valleys and stert evolving, some still are somewhere around peaks so don't change much. some never get out of the valleys and go extinct.
(if ya want i can draw it for ya)

halamander wrote: If your really looking to prove God is there, i believe it will be in the atomic and sub atomic.

so you've got some news bout the strings theory?

Mojo Rising wrote:Here is my problem with the evolution theory: if man supposedly evolved from the apes, why are their still apes around but none of the other evolutions (Cro-Magnon, Neanderthal, etc.). And, if anybody mentions those Geico commercials or the TV series based on them, I will mass you If these "evolutions" from the apes were "better" than the apes, shouldn't they still be around today?

The answer is simple, the fact is that we did not evolve from apes but a common ancestor. So modern primates and humans are both branches from that common ancestor.

Corran Horn wrote:populations of apes living in different areas of the global fitness landscape. if fitness landscape changes (and it constantly chaoticaly does) some populations find themselves in the valleys and stert evolving, some still are somewhere around peaks so don't change much. some never get out of the valleys and go extinct.
(if ya want i can draw it for ya)

halamander wrote: If your really looking to prove God is there, i believe it will be in the atomic and sub atomic.

so you've got some news bout the strings theory?

i don't think they want to go down that rabbit hole lol

and on apes,recently they have seen primates using tools, only a stick with to pull out grubs, but tools none the less. This is new to apes, and it a behavior hat has never been seen before. evolution, don't know about that, maybe social evolution.

guess what! just was given a book. i'm posting here but it actually belongs in a few more threads here at the back of the book it reads:

all life on earth, human included, had been scientifically created in laboratories by the elohim, people from space, who had developed a perfect mastery of genetic engineering and dna synthesis. traces of their work can be found in the bible, which is the oldest atheist book in the world, since the word "elohim", which appears in the original hebrew version, means "those who came from the sky"

so now i think any further discussion on the topic makes no sense as the thruth has been revealed unto us.

(here we call the elohim "asgard").

No one has even attempted to address the questions put ofrward in my original post, Please if there are evolutionist out there either admit you cant or at least give it try

WeaponZero wrote:
The origin of life
The origin of protein…the odds against a simple protein forming by chance are 100 to the 160th power to 1. The simplest organism requires at least 100 different kinds of protein molecules to live and reproduce!

So what lol, just because it is improbable does not mean that it can't happen. Given a great amount of time the impossible becomes possible.

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy): universal tendency towards greater randomness. (disorder) This law has never been violated.

That only applies to a closed system

The origin of one celled organisms. (Protozoa) There are over 30,000 types with vastly different structures and systems. Common ancestry even of these is impossible.

Why?

The gap between protozoa and metazoa (many celled animals) is huge, and no transitional forms exist. The simplest metazoa have thousands of cells.

It is because it is difficult for them to fossilize

No intermediate or "transitional" forms exist. (No "missing links") The oldest bat is a fully formed bat, etc.etc.

Unbridged gaps between body structures. (Reptiles-amphibians, invertabrates-vertabrates, mammal-cetacean, etc.)

For a creationist there can be no missing link, it is as Shermer says if you give a creationist a missing link he will see it as creating two more gaps.

Sudden appearance of fossils. Pre-Cambrian fossils are non-existent, while the Cambrian period has a host of complex fossils!

Like I said it is hard for these organisms to fossilize, and it happened during a short period of time due to an increase in oxygen

Sudden appearance of flowering plants.

Evolution can work quick under the right circumstances

Origin of birds & the origin of flight. (Insects fly, birds fly, and bats fly!)

The necessity of perfection in both plants and animals for cross-pollination. (Survival of either impossible without perfection)

The necessity of complete and perfect instincts. (Job 38 & 39)

Reproduction: the sex mechanics had to be completely functional and accompanied by contact/desire!

Read the stuff I wrote about a small advantage being favored by natural selection, if did not have to be efficient the first time. Evolution has been attacked for decades, there are complex explanations if you want to look them up describing how everything evolved by using small advantages.

1. ORIGINS -the chance of life originating from inorganic chemical elements by natural means is beyond the realm of possibility (Hoyle )

What is life? We are still made up of mainly five elements. There is some interesting stuff out there how life could have evolved from crystals in clay.

4. GEOLOGIC COLUMN -out-of-place artifacts have been found in earth's sedimentary layers which disrupt the supposed evolutionary order (Corliss )

Even Answers In Genesis tries to explain why the fossil record goes from simple to complex. The fact is that everytime the record is screwed up it is because of an earthquake or something similar.

5. DESIGN -irreducible complexity within the structure of the cell requires design (Denton, Behe ).

That idea has been torn up so many times, read something by Miller.

(DNA REPAIR: The genome is reproduced very faithfully and there are enzymes

which repair the DNA, where errors have been made or when the DNA is

damaged. - D.H.R. Barton, Professor of Chemistry, Texas A&M University,

Nobel Prize for Chemistry )

Most dna is crap and does nothing, that is what you would expect from a senseless world.

(CHANGE WITHIN GENETIC BOUNDARIES: Microevolution does not lead beyond the confines of the species, and the typical products of microevolution,

the geographic races, are not incipient species. There is no such category as

incipient species. Richard B. Goldschmidt )

There is no such thing as mircoevolution it is just macro with less time.

(MUTATION ACCUMULATIONS RELENTLESSLY FATAL: Any random change

in a complex, specific, functioning system wrecks that system. And living things

are the most complex functioning systems in the universe.Science has now

quantitated that a genetic mutation of as little as 1 billionth (0.0000001%) of an

animal's genome is relentlessly fatal.The genetic difference between human and

his nearest relative, the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6% Calculated out that is a

gap of at least 48 million nucleotide differences that must be bridged by random

changes. And a random change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal.

Please tell a virus how impossible it is to mutate.

How would you prove creationism? You cannot prove your theory by bashing evolution, notice evolutionists do not depend on creationism to exist. The best I can come up with is "This is so complex I have no idea how it got here" for every "complex" example evolutionist scientists have given rational answers. Dawkins is the man to read on the "too complex" issue. Remember, just because something appears designed does not make it so, and with a lot of time some crazy stuff can happen

digression:
regarding pre-cambrian fossils. the earth crust is being constantly "recycled" within the mantle. so any fossils older than xxx yrs (can't remember now how many yrs exactly) are now melted. the thing is the older fossils known are about xxx yrs old so the life might have started much earlier than we think.

Unfortunatley I don't have much to add here scientifically, but I can say why I am an evolutionist. It is because I lack faith, and asking me to believe that God created everything is like asking me to believe everything appeared out of thin air. I just can't do it. Evolution, while imperfect, at least tries to create a logical sense of how things came to be. That I can get behind.

Beyond this, I can only say I agree with one of the points Come_Forth made: unlikelihood does not equal impossibility. Just because the odds are against life happening by chance from chemical reactions does not mean that it could not have happened. That would be like me saying the lack of evidence for the existence of God proves there is no God.

MGZ wrote: It is because I lack faith, and asking me to believe that God created everything is like asking me to believe everything appeared out of thin air.

it's just scientificaly, cosmologicaly it was even worse. everything appeared not out of thin air but most probably out of thin NOTHING.

Beyond this, I can only say I agree with one of the points Come_Forth made: unlikelihood does not equal impossibility. That would be like me saying the lack of evidence for the existence of God proves there is no God.

ye're reasonable fella

MGZ wrote:Unfortunatley I don't have much to add here scientifically, but I can say why I am an evolutionist. It is because I lack faith, and asking me to believe that God created everything is like asking me to believe everything appeared out of thin air. I just can't do it. Evolution, while imperfect, at least tries to create a logical sense of how things came to be. That I can get behind.

Beyond this, I can only say I agree with one of the points Come_Forth made: unlikelihood does not equal impossibility. Just because the odds are against life happening by chance from chemical reactions does not mean that it could not have happened. That would be like me saying the lack of evidence for the existence of God proves there is no God.

So you don't believe that God created the universe but you do believe that the universe was created by a force heretofore unknown by science. Matter (and energy) can be neither created nor destroyed. This is a fundamental scientific principle. Therefore some force outside the bounds of normal science had to create the first whatever it was that started this whole universe. So whatever it was that created the universe was not natural but supernatural. I believe that supernatural power to be God. You obviously believe it to be something else. May I ask what that is?

Also, it confuses (and saddens) me that it is easier for people to believe in an almost impossible combination of circumstances to explain the creation of life on Earth than to believe that there is a God who created it all.

Mojo Rising wrote:Also, it confuses (and saddens) me that it is easier for people to believe in an almost impossible combination of circumstances to explain the creation of life on Earth than to believe that there is a God who created it all.

Not everyone who believes in Evolution rejects the idea of god. In the United States 60% of Americans believe in evolution, while the other 40% believe in creationism. If we break down the 60% who believe in evolution we find that 10% of Americans believe in godless evolution while 50% of Americans believe in theistic evolution. I just want to make it clear that most Americans believe that god guided evolution.

Mojo Rising wrote:So you don't believe that God created the universe but you do believe that the universe was created by a force heretofore unknown by science.

whatever/whoever created the universe is unknow by science. it's a fact. todays science keeps slamming it's head into the planck wall. nobody knows what lies on the other side of the wall, but rumour has it there be monsters.

Matter (and energy) can be neither created nor destroyed. This is a fundamental scientific principle.

within the planck boundary...

Therefore some force outside the bounds of normal science had to create the first whatever it was that started this whole universe.

aye.

So whatever it was that created the universe was not natural but supernatural.

deffinition of the "supernatural" would be handy here...

Also, it confuses (and saddens) me that it is easier for people to believe in an almost impossible combination of circumstances to explain the creation of life on Earth than to believe that there is a God who created it all.

ppl are gamblers. they play lotto and go to the bookies, where the chance of winning is tiny, but loosing is almost guaranteed.


1. there's some organization in the universe
2. in order to organize something one needs some kinda manual, set of instructions, some information

hence

3. there had to be an information at the very beginning of the universe.
4. strangely the Bible reads:
"in the beginning was the Word", that is the information.

Mojo Rising wrote:Also, it confuses (and saddens) me that it is easier for people to believe in an almost impossible combination of circumstances to explain the creation of life on Earth than to believe that there is a God who created it all.

I can only speak for myself on this, but I think it has to do with the confliction between the idea of what god is and what reality is. People such as I have always been told that god is all powerful, all knowing, and benevolent; yet there is untold evil and suffering in the world and god hasn't done a thing to put a stop to it. so we would rather believe in a random convergence of 'supernatural' powers than the creation of everything by a supernatural god.

also, it may be that we feel our free will is threatened by the presence of an all powerful 'god' in the equation. though I think that discussion needs it's own thread....