Expert
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
|
In any case, regardless of who went off-topic, I do think the issue has some relevance to what we are discussing... But anyway, Irish's main post has many, many points, and it's diffcult to address them all at once. I'll look at some more of them though: Quote:
How could sex possibly have evolved?
The fact is, this is null question, becuase it proceeds from the standpoint that sexual reproduction is the only way for organisms to reproduce. Clearly it's not, as many orgaims reproduce asexually, and many plants can do it both ways.
There is no reason that an organism couldn't have developed sexual reproduction while still being able to reproduce asexaully.
As far the advantages of sexual reproduction, the answer is clear: mixig the genes of two parents creates more genetically diverse organisms, and mitigates most genetic diseases, while still allowing for mutaion to create new variations.
Therefore a better question would be: how could sexual reproduction have NOT evolved?
Quote:
Evolution is the only real 'god of the gaps.' In fact, the entire theory is based on gaps. Animals appear with no ancestor, and then disappear.
This is simply not factual. The fossil record is full of ancestral or transitional forms, although you CHOOSE not to accept them (just not believing somehting doesnt prove it wrong). Look at Homo Erectus for example.. while clearly a different species from Homo Sapiens, the relationship is too striking to be coincidence. If gaps exist it's because we havent filled them in with new fossil evidence, not because it doesnt exist.
Clearly, evolution does not proceed according to a set timetable, and there are are indeed quick jumps fomr form to form, for whatever reason. And since the chances of any one individual being fossilized is very slim, if a species evolves past a certain form quickly, there are proportionally fewer chances of one being preserved.
This "gap" kind of arguement is among the weakest that can be brought.
Quote:
Biogenesis. Where's the evidence? Speculation is fun. I'd love to know what its like to be superman...but I don't think I'm going to abuse science to convince everyone that I could be superman.
I dont understand this one at all...what does biogenesis have to do with superman?
The fact is biogenesis has two distinct meanings. One is the simple definition of creating life from life, as occurs in the reproduction of an organism. The other is th more abstract; the theory that life can ONLY arise from other life--the contrary theory being abiogenesis; the theory that life can someitmes arise fomr non-life.
Most modern scientists believe that abiogenesis is possible. But it has little to do with the origin of the species through natural selection. This is a quesition that may or may not be ultimately resolved, and it is of philosophical or academic interest, but may play little part in our understanding of the processes of evolutiojn of already living organisms.
Quote:
Creative mutations. I've shown you that every known mutation is utterly useless to the theory of evolution. Why haven't we seen an information-increasing mutation yet? Speculation on the possibility of information increasing mutations is great, but should be called speculation. Not science.
In fact you have shown no such thing. While you may delude yourself into beliveing it, most of us are not se easliy fooled. While there are indee insertions and adiitions in the genetic code, there dont even need to be for evlotuoin to proceed. This is because even a deletion or a rearranging of the sequance can have effects on the evetual outcome... therefore any change is novel, and can have evolutionary impact.
Quote:
Evolutionists only believe in evolution because they cannot believe in God. God has performed bigger miracles than evolution before, so it really isn't that hard to believe that God used evolution to create if need be.
While MANY poeple who accept evolution also believe in god, this has no bearing on wether evolution is true or not, and is clearly a pedestrian arguement that should have been left at home.
Quote:
Our moon is escaping and our sun is shrinking. Both give much younger ages for the universe.
uhh... not sure how to respond here. What astronomy textbook have you been reading?
Quote:
Lizards to mammals. When did non-breasts turn into breasts,
Lizards didnt turn into mammals. Please please learn some of the BASIC science here before attempting to argue against the theory.
Perhaps there is no reason for me to take this seriously, when you dont put any effort into actually learning the facts.
However, this is an old trick question, "what came first: the chicken or the egg?".
The answer is your word for chicken has not been defined, so there is no answer. This applies to many of your points, like the probblem of haert evolution, eye evolution, sex, etc, etc. ad infinitum. It comes from a basic lack of understanding of how logic, language, and abstract thinking deal with concrete things in the real world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, or to destroy your sense of self or well-being. Evolutionary theory--and science in general--is really about liberating man from ignorance, superstition, and fear of the dark unknown, based on the only tools we have; the ability to observe the world, and draw conclusions from that.
you may have been LED to believe that evolution disproves the existence of god, but the fact is it doesnt. While Darwin himself lost his faith in a god, at least a benevolent god, he didnt intend to destroy that faith for others.
You are still young, and obviously bright and curious. But I must tell you there comes a time when you simply cannot answer all questions with "common-sense" logic, or "common knoweledge" that your parents or church leader may teach you.
You are best advised to seek to the opinions of experts who have actually studied these things at length. Learn the facts, dont just recycle factoids from propaganda, or rehash ancient arguements that have long since been been dealt with.
I am no expert, but I have read a great deal on the natural sciences and have observed ecosystems in many parts of the world, including tropical forests, coral reefs, mountains, deserts, etc. There is a lot out there in the world that is far more interesting than worrying about whether God kept your family together, or what happens to you after you die. Darwin didnt reach his conclusions simply by sitting around in his dreary home brooding, he went out and saw things as they are, not as you want them to be, or as you have heard they are supposed to be.
|
