Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / NewStats: 3,200,295 members, 7,974,316 topics. Date: Sunday, 13 October 2024 at 08:31 PM |
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? (28947 Views)
Poll: Evolution or Creation? vote!Evolution: 23% (27 votes)Creation: 66% (75 votes) Something Else: 9% (11 votes) This poll has ended |
Evolution Or Creationism,which Sounds More Logical? / Evolution Or Intelligent Design / Did Anyone (DEAD/LIVING) Witnessed Evolution Or The Big B@ng? (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (22) (Reply) (Go Down)
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by simmy(m): 2:14pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
@dark Please stop posting references of all these books like i havnt read them all!(at least ive read the selfish gene) @kag Atheism has a lot to do with evolution. the theory initself was an attempt by leading intellectuals o fthose times to find something to refute the bible's story of creation with. I hope you're familiar circumstances surrounding the publishing of darwin's book. The book was named origin of species wasn't it? Im glad u agree it does nothng of the sort. All darwin succeded in doing was to notice that all organisms are graded in levels of complexity and that has been known for thousands of years. Pray tell me what predictions evolutins make and how isit testable? Please do not refer to all the fossils that have been unearthed by scientists . These same scientists keep quiet when they unearth fossils which totally differ from their expectations. And please because most people believe something (or have been browbeated into believing something) does not make it true. Evolution is simply a theory (or a hypothesis, it does not matter) drawn up by people who do not fully appreciate or refuse to appreciate the complexities involved in life. I fail to see how even a simple unicellular organism could have evolved from some amno acids. Saying just because a couple of amino acids can be fused together in the lab or( even viruses) is evolution is like saying reciting a,b.c-z is poetry. Its a leap in logic and until scientists can prove exactly how this leap into complexity took place,then I'm at a loss as to what scienceis really about. Most people fail to realise that the planet earth in itself had to be prefectly located for evoluiton to take place. it moves at just the right speed and wobbles in exactly the right way. It's mass is even perfectly balanced by jupiter to stop it from spriralling towards the sun (or away) and facts like these does not even remotely suggest a design which in turn suggests a designer which in turn suggests intelligence which "might" suggets a personality? PLEASE!! These facts are not even the tip of the iceberg! The codes that contain the info. that makes u would fill all the volumes that exist in the world and way more. your body has "evolved ' a way of checking itself for accuracy (proofreading) and even purposely allows for mutation when it deems fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I dont mean to be rude but honestly you have to be crazy to even remotely consider evolution or just very ignorant Ps: I'm not tryng to sound like a Mr. know-all but if you knew eeven half of how complex life really is you would realise that creation is infinitely more likely a possibility than evoluiton |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by dakmanzero(m): 2:16pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
lol! return of the Eddy! okay, master Eddy vs Darth Nferyn , lightsabers ignited! FIGHT! |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by lioness(f): 2:17pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
I don't think there's a definite end to evolution. I think its a process and whether years or ages, it still goes on. My question now is if humans came by evolution, why have we stopped evolving?? Its been ages since the last evolvement. Why havent we been able to evolve in flying humans, like having wings now. Has the evolution process stopped? What stopped it?? Is this the final stage of human evolution Oya scientist, make una answer |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by dakmanzero(m): 2:20pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Hasn't stopped Just gradual brain density is increasing, upper body strength is reducing, kids are maturing earlier ( m sure u noticed ) |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by lioness(f): 2:21pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
*** Lioness pulls up a chair, eating her chips, ready to watch a match *** dakmanzero: |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by simmy(m): 2:29pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
@nferyn Proponents of gene drift, sexual and natural selection refuse to answer the most important question.its another form of the use and disuse hypothesis, which doesnt make sense! Whatever physical adaptations i might have will NOT be passed down to my kids. And i still maintain that its too simple an explanation. Human organs like the heart or th kidney are just too complex tobe expalined away thus. Seual recombinations dont produce new or a different specie it just produces a more adapted version of the same thing Mutations are a more likely cause, but telling me that the fish turned int o a tadpole and then a dog or cat through mutation is insulting my intelligence |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by simmy(m): 2:31pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
dakmanzero: |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 2:31pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
dakmanzero: So now I represent the Dark Side of The Force This little interjection by our Ever Telling Eddy shows how futile any attempts at reason with him are. Those empty oneliners are very telling Maybe Eddy's insistence on not having evolved made him realise that he was perfectly fit in his environment of amoeba, I certainly wouldn't know. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by xkape(m): 2:34pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
@darkmanzero u cant do better than reffer me to someone elses book? @KAG all u can throw is invective? fine explain to me how the lesser genetic complexitym of a virus would not act as a compressed time study the evolution that would occur in say early hominids given the difference in orders of magnitude of the permutations of genes that would be involed in the mutation of a single trait. translation - if a virus is 1000 times less complex than an ape, a change based on genetic combinations in an ape that took 100,000 year in an ape would take 100,1000/ 1000! years in a virus if we assume simple permutations of genes. even if we assumed environmental and sexual bias as pushed by evolutionists, the effect will still be bottom heavy in favour of the virus, shortening the time evem futher. Hence studying mutation in a virus for a 10 years will be more than equivalent to studying mutation in a hominid for a hundred thousand. but of course i dont know any biology so all this is bollox.also known as math @nferyn i dont know what ia m talking about??. oblige us with ur superior knowledge then and explain how your natural selection can explain away the earliest formation of DNA from early organic matter. let us even ignore the fact that the cantenation of carborn molecules necessary for any type of organic matter has not been observed in any non-life scenario, here or in space. this is the foundation of life itself, once life appears u can draw all sorts of conjecture and nobody will be the wiser. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 2:41pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
simmy:You mean 99% of the scientific community working in Biology? simmy:How so, I don't see how Lamarck is relevant here. Can you explain? simmy:Random mutations under non-random selective pressure in large enough populations within long enough timespans will do. It's not because you do not see how it is possible that it isn't possible. Personal incredulity is a very weak form of argumenation. simmy:No they aren't too complex. The eye is far more complex than the heart or kidneys, yet it is easy to propose a probable evolutionary mechanism. simmy:Correct, they don't do that by themselves. If you add random mutations and reproductive isolation to the mix they do lead to speciation; simmy:Why? Just think about what compound interests can do to your savings, even within a human lifespan. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by EddyTells(m): 2:45pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
What! Was that english u just spoke or is your tongue evolving to that of a spirogira You certainly dont expect one created by the Almighty God to reason the same way with a specie from your world. And If the oneliners werent so telling, you wouldnt be cracking up at the sight of them nferyn: |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 2:46pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape:1. Evolution theory does not equal abiogenesis. 2. Have you ever thought of the time it took for life to start on earth? How vain would it be to think we would observe it in a mere 300 years since the scientific revolution? How old exactly is abiogenesic as a scientific field? |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 2:46pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Eddy, I just love our ping pong games |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by KAG: 2:49pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
simmy: No it doesn't, and the many theists that accept evolution would disagree with you. the theory initself was an attempt by leading intellectuals o fthose times to find something to refute the bible's story of creation with. No it wasn't, hell Darwin was a christian when he formulated and published the Origin. I hope you're familiar circumstances surrounding the publishing of darwin's book. The book was named origin of species wasn't it? I'm glad u agree it does nothng of the sort. All darwin succeded in doing was to notice that all organisms are graded in levels of complexity and that has been known for thousands of years. Woah, someone hasn't read the origin of species, can't say I'm surprised. Pray tell me what predictions evolutins make and how isit testable? Please do not refer to all the fossils that have been unearthed by scientists. What do you have against fossils? Anyway some predictions, the ToE stated that humans and other apes share a common ancestor, the fossil records gave some evidence of that, the obvious prediction with the advent of genetics was then, evidence of common ancestry would also be found genetically. Prediction fufilled, not only are we extremely similar to Apes genetically, endogeneous retroviral insertions further "proved" that we share a common ancestor. Another prediction was the evolution of naked mole rats. These same scientists keep quiet when they unearth fossils which totally differ from their expectations. Like what? And please because most people believe something (or have been browbeated into believing something) does not make it true. True, and that's why creationism isn't true. Evolution is simply a theory (or a hypothesis, it does not matter) drawn up by people who do not fully appreciate or refuse to appreciate the complexities involved in life. No, Evolution is a scientific theory, and everybody appreciates and acknowledges the "complexity" of life, but that life didn't and doesn't evolve. I fail to see how even a simple unicellular organism could have evolved from some amno acids. Erm, abiogenesis =\= evolution. Most people fail to realise that the planet earth in itself had to be prefectly located for evoluiton to take place. it moves at just the right speed and wobbles in exactly the right way. It's mass is even perfectly balanced by jupiter to stop it from spriralling towards the sun (or away) and facts like these does not even remotely suggest a design which in turn suggests a designer which in turn suggests intelligence which "might" suggets a personality? PLEASE!! no, it suggests that you've strayed away from science, into the world of argument from incredulity, and philosophy. The simple answer to your argument is, if not the Earth, then some other planet. By the way, any evidence for the Earth's mass being perfectly balanced by Jupiter? These facts are not even the tip of the iceberg! The codes that contain the info. that makes u would fill all the volumes that exist in the world and way more. your body has "evolved ' a way of checking itself for accuracy (proofreading) and even purposely allows for mutation when it deems fit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a load of fecal matter. "The body allows mutation when it deems fit"? Please, tell that to those with leaukemia (sp?), and other diseases caused by mutations, tell that to the many who were born with disadvantageous mutations. Ps: I'm not tryng to sound like a Mr. know-all but if you knew eeven half of how complex life really is you would realise that creation is infinitely more likely a possibility than evoluiton You are not sounding anything like a Mr. know it all, I know how complex life is, and I realise evolution is more likely than creation, especially that described in the Genesis account. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by xkape(m): 3:04pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
nferyn:99% percent of scientists in Galileos time belived the earth was flat. nferyn:operative words, large enough, long enough always streches of the imagination reason and mathematical reasoning. where are the fossils of the de-selected specimens a scheme of random mutations would generate a plethora, a continuum of traits. fossil records show a quantisized speciation over time. one form leads to another in alogical progression of traits, where are the fossils of those mutations too outlandish to survive. many of the "ancestors of animals today" exist up till know in almost unchanged condition. if natural selection gives rise to better organisms, why are some of the rejects still around. where is the evidence of the destruction of the greater majority of the rejects. nferyn, wake up and smell the angels nferyn:random mutation? again the unaswered question, where is the two headed ape, the horse with wing (or wouldnt that give a horse a edge over his mates) we agree the beasts of greek mythology cannot exist but still we believe, the scalles on a reptile would differentiate into feathers and in the process this freak lizard will survive long enough to turn into a bird. whereas the know example of a flying mammal we know is still alive and well!!! not to talk of the mamall that came from the sea only to return as a whale- evolution in reverse. no conclusive fossil records of intermidiate forms exist. there is always a missing link. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by KAG: 3:04pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape: Yes, I was the one calling about 99% of all biologists fools, *rolls eyes* fine explain to me how the lesser genetic complexitym of a virus would not act as a compressed time study the evolution that would occur in say early hominids given the difference in orders of magnitude of the permutations of genes that would be involed in the mutation of a single trait. The evolution of virii are used in the study of evolution (e.g. infectons and resistance of virii like the AIDS virus), but it's nonsensical to suggest that modern virii would follow the evolution path that lead to humans, ther's absolutely no reason for that to happen. translation - if a virus is 1000 times less complex than an ape, a change based on genetic combinations in an ape that took 100,000 year in an ape would take 100,1000/ 1000! years in a virus if we assume simple permutations of genes. even if we assumed environmental and sexual bias as pushed by evolutionists, the effect will still be bottom heavy in favour of the virus, shortening the time evem futher. Hence studying mutation in a virus for a 10 years will be more than equivalent to studying mutation in a hominid for a hundred thousand. but of course i don't know any biology so all this is bollox.also known as math What makes a virus 1000 times less complex than an ape? What's your criteria for complexity? By the way, what you've proposed makes absolutely no sense, at least to me, as virii are as evolved as apes. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by xkape(m): 3:13pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
nferyn:nferyn i have always considered u one of the more intelligent people on this forum but this is weak that is all u can come up with. splitting hairs on evolution not beign abiogenesis. so u see it is vain to draw conclusion on the origin or development of life in only 300 yrs and yet u have been touting how evolution has been scientifically proven with observations withing the same 300 years!! how old exactly is evolution as a scientific field To clarify, evolution suggests that living organisms evoled from simple to more complex over time. are u sayin that the foundation was somehow imported to earth and afterwards evolved pls educate me |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by KAG: 3:17pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape: No they didn't! What in God's name are you going on about? operative words, large enough, long enough always streches of the imagination reason and mathematical reasoning. where are the fossils of the de-selected specimens a scheme of random mutations would generate a plethora, a continuum of traits. fossil records show a quantisized speciation over time. one form leads to another in alogical progression of traits, where are the fossils of those mutations too outlandish to survive. many of the "ancestors of animals today" exist up till know in almost unchanged condition. if natural selection gives rise to better organisms, why are some of the rejects still around. where is the evidence of the destruction of the greater majority of the rejects. nferyn, wake up and smell the angels Once again, what in God's name are you babbling on about? I agree with Nferyn, you have no idea what you are talking about (a trait often observed in creationists, I bet you are a creationist). Here's a question in regards to time, no one observed Everest being formed, does that mean it was dropped from the sky by space bandits, or was it formed over a long time? The fossil record: Fossilisation is rare in the grand scheme of things, so it would be disingineous, nay foolish, to ask for fossils of every single speciation, and mutation. However, we do have many fossils, that actually show/give us an idea of the evolution path of maost of the existing species/families etc. xkape: Evolution and abiogenesis are two different things though. so u see it is vain to draw conclusion on the origin or development of life in only 300 years and yet u have been touting how evolution has been scientifically proven with observations withing the same 300 years!! Just a little over a century. Abiogenesis on the other hand is not even up to half a century, IIRC. To clarify, evolution suggests that living organisms evoled from simple to more complex over time. are u sayin that the foundation was somehow imported to earth and afterwards evolved please educate me Close, but not quite. /the theory of evolution suggests that living organisms evolved over time. No simple and complex. Now, the important aspect of the ToE is, all it needs is life and an unperfect replicator, how the life appeared is immaterial when discussing the ToE. It could have been started by aliens, the Tetragrammaton, Zeus, Brahma, the IPU, anything. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by Fluffy(f): 3:20pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Hello Remember me, I'm Fluffy, the one who started all this may I say something? |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by xkape(m): 3:29pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
KAG: has the aids virus evolved into a more COMPLEX life form? Let me explain complex. has it developed the capacity to manufacture its own nucleic material or its own biochemical pathway for manufacturing food? has it developed any sexual characteristics? the "evolution u have mentioned is change strictly confined to the limits of what we know to be a retrovirus, it hasnt elevated itself even to the level of another type of virus like say a mimivirus. how is an ape 1000 times more complex than a virus please calculate the number of base pairs of material in a virus, the number in an ape, make a simple permutation of traits there from and see that 1000 is an overconservative estimate. and i used this means of measurment cos the argument following was based on a simple mathematical calcullation relating random combinations of nuclear material to time. which seems to be lost on u anybody else thinks my calculation is illogical another little tidbit- frozen samples of flue found in victims of the 1918 pandemic in greenland were found not to have differentiated significantly from those found today. significant beign measured on assumed differentiation of viruses in the pleistocene. any explanations |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by TV01(m): 3:32pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Fluffy: Hi Fluffy, I think this thing has gotten bigger than just you now. I'm greatly enjoying the discourse. I suggest you do the same. Unless of course you have something pertinent that will elevate this discussion. Simmy, Xkape, May the good Lord strengthen your arms. May God "The Uncreated Creator" richly bless you. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by lioness(f): 3:33pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
AMEN! |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 3:38pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape:Evolution theory does not deal with abiogenesis. Only in the eyes of creationists it does. It's like asking why sociology doesn't explain cellular regeneration? xkape:Please get your semblance of familiarity with the scientific jargon straight. Nothing in the natural world can be scientifically proven. We're talking about observation, if I'm not mistaken? When one interjects probabilities of abiogenesis over geological timeframes, talk about direct observations in the span of a mere few hundred years is silly. xkape:That's news to me. I didn't know that Evolution Theory implies increased complexity. Complexity is only one of the many possible outcomes of selective pressure. xkape:That's not very likely, but not impossible. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 3:40pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape:Yes, limited selective pressure. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by jagunlabi(m): 3:43pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
According to the jewish creationist myth,the human race is about 6000 years old.That was the accepted fact till a few centuries ago,but nobody believes that anymore these days,except the usual uninformed.Even the Vatican has quietly turned it's back on it. Since then,the age of mankind has been continually pushed back further and futher into prehistoricity.Thanks to the scientists. But the concept of a supreme deity being the power behind the creation still remains undisproved. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by KAG: 3:43pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Fluffy: Yes, please do, it's your thread, we are merely participants in your thread. TV01: I know you haven't said anything of the sort, but I feel I should point out agai, that evolution =\= atheism, and far more christiians than atheists accept the ToE. That is all. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by nferyn(m): 3:44pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape:Complexity is ony one of the possible outcomes of evolution. xkape:What selective environment would lead to that kind of retained adaptations? xkape:Why would it? xkape:And how is that relevant? Complexity is only necessary in your strawman of evolution. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by xkape(m): 3:54pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
KAG anytime someone says something that opposes u and u dont have an aswer to u say the person doesnt know what he is saying. thats cool. about galileo, maybe i meant before that, columbus. besides at the time the earth was supposed to be the center of the universe(an equally erroneous suppositon) so becos 99% of biologists support evolution now doesnt really mean anything if it is untrue. human beigns have an infinite capacity for mass deception. why do u think religion is such a big issue. fossillation is rare right yet it so conveniently documents a long direct line from the fruit to the root of a big tree without any sign of the many boughs and branches and shoots that exists on that tree. so u can conveniently brush away this argument by "u dont know what u r talkin about" and "fossil evidence is rare" Evolution 100yrs, Abiogenesis 40yrs!!! oh golly what a big non-hair-splitting difference. Give me a break KAG: So now u admit the origin of life must have been brought to earth by something and for ur information i am not a creationist (in the sense that u are thinking) |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by KAG: 3:57pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape:Using your criteria, no tyhe AIDS virus hasn't become "complex", but why should it? I get the impression taht you think evolution is like a cognitive force that is in cahoots with organisms who are intentionally picking and choosing what traits they want. That's not what evolution is. There's no reason for viruses to evolve any of the traits you think they should, in much the same way a monkey doesn't have to spout wings. Also, a mutation in a/the population would have to occur and be selected for the virus to evolve those traits. Something I wrote, that I feel is still pertinent, "it's nonsensical to suggest that modern virii would follow the evolution path that lead to humans, there's absolutely no reason for that to happen." the "evolution u have mentioned is change strictly confined to the limits of what we know to be a retrovirus, it hasnt elevated itself even to the level of another type of virus like say a mimivirus. how is an ape 1000 times more complex than a virus please calculate the number of base pairs of material in a virus, the number in an ape, make a simple permutation of traits there from and see that 1000 is an overconservative estimate. and i used this means of measurment because the argument following was based on a simple mathematical calcullation relating random combinations of nuclear material to time. So your new criteria for complexity is the number of base pairs of "material" (what material?)? anybody else thinks my calculation is illogical Source? |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by dakmanzero(m): 3:59pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
xkape, nferyn is right, your argument against evolution is a strawman. Misrepresenting it by stating blatant nonsense that you pull right out of your own arse and then knocking your own misrepresentations down to confuse the observing layman. And if you inexplicably think it is insufficient for me to refer you to 'other people's' books, I am really sorry for anybody who thinks your arguments make any sense. This is because they obviously originated from your imagination, if you have such a distaste for accredited sources. |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by Fluffy(f): 4:10pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
Hey dakmanzero no need to get nasty, please if you must argue do it in a nicer way |
Re: Evolution Or Creation: Which Do You Believe? by dakmanzero(m): 4:13pm On Apr 26, 2006 |
[Quote]So now I represent the Dark Side of The Force[/Quote] naaaaah, Darth Nferyn just sounded cooler than Darth Eddy! besides, the sith usually kick the Jedi's asses anyway! Go sidious! w000t!!!! |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (22) (Reply)
A Killer Marriage Is A Nonsense Marriage - Paul Enenche (Throwback Video) / Top Nigerian Gospel Praise & Worship Songs Released In November 2019 / Pastor Obinim ‘Delivers’ Small Boy Who Says He Gets Sexual Feelings For Women
(Go Up)
Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 134 |