Baka Sama

I recently read about this and thought it was interesting so I'd like to share. Please dont turn this into something its not. Yeah i just called you black, kettle.

Full article can be found here: http://www.kfrp.com/media/index.htm

MikeisNissan

"Your not a fish, your a man. You walk around both legs.. homo erectus.. did i say homo? I didnt mean that! Thurgood!"

__________________

因果関係の流れ

Future240

so i'm not the descendant of a retarded fish frog that had butt sex with a squirrel?

MikeisNissan

In the butt!

__________________

因果関係の流れ

TheTimanator

Meh, The whole evolutionary therory is plauged with problems that don't seem to add up.

__________________
89 S13 hatch/////98 Subaru 2.5RS

Helghast

as opposed to we coming from 1 man and 1 woman.

__________________

SILEIGHTY_DET

. . . on myspace . ha ha

womenbeshoppin

in a nuttshell = 2 homo's lived in africa for along time
So that explains AIDS

drift freaq

can we say in poor taste? Plus actual real misunderstanding of AID's in Africa? Which is pretty much spread amongst the heterosexual population not homosexual.

__________________
"Having a lot of tracks on a song is like putting stickers on a car to get more horsepower"

New Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uebV1OnbRsw
Buy my mounts!
#/f/sale-items/51531...ns-mounts.html
#/f/tech-talk/317539...e-mouts-6.html

Agamemnon

This report doesnt really challenge the theory of evolution, but rather offers another view on its principles.

ManoNegra

Doesn't debunk the theory of evolution imo - it's not just about humans but applies to all living organisms after all. Says to me me that there is more to our ancestry than previously believed.

WanganRunner

This challenges nothing, it merely means that there was another offshoot sub-species that eventually disappeared, just like the Neanderthals, which co-existed with other humans and then just died off.

Saying something did or did not happen due to the presence of a carbon date on a single sample is retarded. Aren't the creationists always shooting holes in the credibility of carbon dating anyway?

The bottom line is, on the whole, across all species and time periods, there exists an ENORMOUS and INARGUABLE body of evidence that species do indeed evolve over time from other species.

Whether or not we have found and properly dated the specific samples that say whether WE did or not is irrelevant. Animals evolve, humans are animals that walk and talk and drive cars.

So yes, your great grand-o-saurus had ass-sex with a squirrel, a fish-monkey, a mastadon, and quite possibly Wilt Chamberlain.

__________________
SELL ME CLEAR ZENKI CORNERS:
#/f/wanted-buy/40034...rs-junyan.html

just1pepsi

wilt the stilt laid alot of pipe.

IStop4NoMan

sorry, just had to

powersteeringless180sx

yea really it doesn't disprove anything about evolution. It just means there's more to us then meets the eye...

__________________

eastcoastS14

this find in no way challanges evolution


god obviously burried dinosaur bones to test our faith...duh

just1pepsi

lol.
No, satan buried them. If you believe dinosaurs existed you are going to Hell.

eli_eli

this in no way challenges evolution, it actually supports it

__________________
Do you need a s14 sr maf 69f01?...pm me
I need s13 hatch shocks...thx

MikeisNissan

Wwwwhhhat?!?!?!

__________________

因果関係の流れ

Baka Sama

Take it as you will. But I thought the whole article was an good read. I never said the article disproves evolution, i said it challenges it. Challenges it in the fact that what was commonly believed in evolution was just proved wrong by the very scientist that try to prove evolution right. Yet they teach it in school to little kids as though its fact. I believe in dinosaurs. I believe in God. You can believe in whatever you want to.

JeremyR

survival of the fittest son!

womenbeshoppin

didn't mean to offend your sexuality, srry

a_ahmed

Evolution is rubbish on so many levels. Charles Darwin himself stated that his theory would plummet if there was any proof of complex organisms. He used his naked eye to observe things. Eg; there was no electron microscopes and microbiology at his time, no one knew a cell had a whole factory within itself doing ever so many things... they used to think those were lil blobs haha.

In the end it's either you believe in God or you believe in chance/accidence/coincidence/evolution happening for millions of millions of millions of millions of millions of years aka can never REALLY prove evolution, you just have to believe in it. Giving examples of 'possibilities' through some meager examples still doesn't prove evolution hence evolution 'theory'.

I believe in order, purpose, connections, functions, schedule, things of this nature. If you take the theory of probability, the theory of evolution becomes even more meager in itself.

This is an endless debate that will spur many arguments on both sides, those who believe in God/a creator and those who believe in evolution/chance/coincidence/etc...

The very fact that we speak, reason, think, discuss to me is a disprovable of evolution. That we ponder, that we have a conscious existence, intellect, reason.

Why do I say that? Because apparently someone observed with their less than intelligent mind that we would have 'evolved' (anthromorphism art) through thousands of years then eventually because no evidence was found millions of years from one thing to another and that the earliest was a 'cell' of some sort, without actually knowing the cell itself has its own complexities, further going that the cell which has ever so many vital functions SOMEHOW came about by itself from accidental and coincidental chemical processes.

Just look at the human body the organs, the lungs, the brain, the heart, the kidney, the eyes, the sexual reproductive organs, the muscle groups, the vessels, the nerves, the skeletal system, the list goes on. We are a perfect machine.

I remember once mentioning to some evolutionist how the eyes (typical example) are a proof of how evolution fails, the very fact that our body is SYMMETRICALLY MIRRORED, further more to the example of the eyes, that we see three dimensionally what are the odds of that. We are born with good eyesight, otherwise imagine being cross eyed even. He instead showed me some 'famous evolutionist' proposing the 'proof' of how the eye formed. So I watched it... it was 'revolutionary'... I honestly was like....w....t....h... all the guy had was a series of anthropomorphic DRAWINGS... I said this is your great proof? What a sad sad joke... Who is deceiving who...

Then most importantly the sexual reproductive system a male and a female, the way we reproduce. How would this happen? What were we asexual? Then all of a sudden we developed perfectly functioning sexual organs? Again... it's all a grand deception and illusion, people have intellect and reason to see beyond it but chose not to as they chose to disbelieve in God and think they are self-sufficient in every which way just because we have more tools and technology. But doesn't every generation think this way? Even 1000s+ years ago those at the time that disbelieved in God used to really think they were top, modern, advanced, but we think of them as savages often times, uncivilized etc...

In the end today people still believe or disbelieve in God. Just that those who disbelieve in God have another deception/explanation for themselves and others as to why they don't believe in God. All that changes are the means.

Look at how great we humans are, one storm, one earthquake in a few seconds and all the great technology and human pride is reduced to meagerness and desire for mercy. All the great technology and power is rendered powerless and useless and we are just flesh bound weak creatures.

Quail

One of my favourite episodes! Good quote

__________________

eastcoastS14

yeah welcome to education....text books and classes are constantly changing as more information is discovered, have you ever opened a text book from the 1950s or 60s? lots of different info than what is our books now, especially in the field of science....and last time I checked schools teach the "theory of evolution" I was never once told that it was absolute fact ever....so whats the alternative? Dont teach it for the next thousand years until all the facts are in? Or do it like kentucky and print a disclaimer on it that says that its still a theory (idk if they actually do that, no offense kentucky)

drftmark

Evolution has so many holes in its theory its not even funny.

Heres just one example of many about spontaneous generation. Read "the odds" excerpt.

http://www.truenews.org/creation/origin.html

Pretty much disproves spontaneous generation with math/science.

I forgot to add that I think some of you are confusing micro-evolution, with macro-evolution.

kingkilburn

a_ahmed, if you study a little biology and have a little understanding of cosmology you will find that most of what you have said is wrong. The only thing missing from the evolutionary theory is our own missing link.

There is science that proves how cells came to be so complex. Look at complex amoebas and algae. They have different parts off their body that do very different things. Amoebas in particular have "organs" that operate very much like a single bacteria. Science is learning how life came to be but there are holes, holes that are constantly being filled in by new knowledge.

How on earth does our body's symmetry disprove evolution? You have to explain that. And we have binocular vision because our eyes face forward, that is no wonder of science it just proves that our ancestors at one point found it beneficial to have depth perception. The only strange thing I see about our eyes is that for their size we tend to have poor vision compared to animals with the same sized eyes. It sounds to me like you take your own lack of knowledge ans say that god must have just made it that way rather than putting thought into it.





Yes I believe in god.
Yes I believe in evolution.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Is it just a coincidence that the order of events in the Genesis creation are right, I think not. Does that mean god, satan or who ever buried dinosaurs to test our faith? HELL NO. It would have been easier to just poof them into existence and let them die.

The only major thing I think science has yet to explain(and possibly never will) is the original spark of life that took chemical reactions and gave them life. There is God. God said let there be life and set into motion the creation of man.


EDIT
Astronomical odds does not mean impossible. Lightning does strike twice. The odds that there would be any life on earth let alone intelligent life are astronomical in their own right. Science acknowledges and accept this. Just having a planet with the general makeup of ours is incredible, life or no. Odds plays no role in the proof or disproof of what has already happened. Period.

__________________
G O L D E N B E A R R E P U B L I C

eastcoastS14

Just took the time to read this.....and your argument really isnt much of one at all. If you believe and god thats cool, I would never try to disprove that, I just take the stand that I have no clue if there is or not....I hope there is...I really do, but im not positive.

That being said the problem with your argument is one that a lot of creationists have and a lot of people in general do...and that is the concept of time. We as humans which only live for about 100 years give or take, have no concept of real time....that is to say time on a grand scale in which things like planets and galaxies and species can form. Given the amount of time that this planet has been in existence evolution becomes more and more likely and less and less suprising...still amazing none the less. However the concept of millions or billions of years is completely unfathomable to the human mind...we have nothing to comparable size, think about how long the last 10years of your life seemed now imagine if that was 100 times longer and that is only 1000 years...which brings you back to 1000AD, now Imagine that time being 1000times longer than that and thats only 1,000,000 years ago...so the fact that something existed 65million years ago is an inconcievable amount of time..thats enough time for the tectonic plates to shift and mountains to be created and oceans to form....go stand in the bottom of the grand canyon and realise that it used to be under water and think about how much time that would take...thats the kind of time we are talking, completely unimaginable.

So given this huge expanse of time species continue to grow and adapt, charles darwin didnt prove evolution...but he did observe specialization within species, birds of the same species with different shaped beaks specialized for the types of flowers they ate....given certain conditions for millions of years a species will adapt through survival of the fittest...a giraffe with a short neck will not be able to eat off of tall trees so it will die and its genes wont be passed on, once again no one is arguing that one week an organism swam in the water and then the next week it started sprouting legs....this is over an incredible amount of time that certain physical features and such began to develop. You point out our eyes and organs etc....but remember that these things obviously arent specific to humans, if anything I would imagine that the fact that most organisms on this planet share somewhat of a similar anatomy as far as mammals compared to other mammals or lizards to lizards would suggest a common ancestor.

Another problem I believe creationists have, is they just dont give nature enough credit...they see human thought and think that there is no way that anything less than some supreme being could have created us. But once again the power of nature and evolution is unimaginable to us so we refuse to believe that our intelligence could come out of evolution especially since we seemingly surrounded by creatures that cant speak or dont appear to reason as intelligently as we do. Once again this seems incredibly amazing and unlikely until you think about the scale of things and realize that the probablility of at least one very intelligent species out of billions in existence seems more likely given all the variables, but more over that given the fact that their are as many stars in the universe as there are grains of sand on all the worlds beaches and many with planets the fact that somewhere in something that big there is at least one planet that had the right variables to sustain life and on that world there are semi intelligent creatures like ourselves...the possibility of that becomes less hard to believe. Once again we think too highly of ourselves and believe that we are so great that god made us in his own image, I think its the other way around, that in ancient times to explain the unexplainable man made god and made him in his own image. Evolution still remains a theory because it is not 100% accurate yet as this story shows, however its a pretty good one as far as theorys go, I can take you to a museum or to an anthropologist and show you physical evidence that you can observe and hold....show you skulls from the same species over time and how they changed or show you the DNA of dinosaurs and modern birds and show you how similar they are and I can show you rocks and fossils from millions of years ago, yet if I ask you for physical evidence of god what would you show me? I hate to say it but I think god is more of a theory than evolution but hey Id love for someone to prove me wrong, Id worry about death a lot less

a_ahmed

kingkilburn -

That is ridiculous. I find it beneficial to fly, why can't I decide to grow some wings.

It's like every other argument, followed by "you don't REALLY understand evolution".

I never mentioned the bible by the way. I am a muslim. I believe the Bible is not the complete word of God. It is a mixture of human words, God's words, prophet's words, historian's words, church's words, etc... a mixture of things.

Muslims don't deny dinosaurs or other creation. The only reason hardcore Christians/evangelicals who believe in the Creation as opposed to Evolution deny it is because they take the whole bible for the word of God which it is unfortunately not. The word bible in itself is not found in the bible. It is a latin word for book from biblios.

You can deceive yourself into believing in God and evolution but that's a sort of Deism. As that therefore puts God out of the picture. God is the creator and maintainer in Muslims' view and well technically in Christian view so you are viewing it from a Deism perspective of sorts.

Back on topic. "My lack of knowledge" is a typical refutal of every evolutionist. If you don't accept evolution you automatically don't understand evolution. Just like as a convert to Islam, I apparently don't understand Christianity anymore, while in fact I studied christianity, went to christian schools, have protestant, catholic and orthodox/coptic christian background as well.

Furthermore the assumption that I know nothing about chemistry and biology is just another defensive response to rejection of evolution. I have been thought about evolution from elementary school up to college/university... not once was 'creationism' thought in school, aside from religion and philosophy classes -- but that was an open house, believe what you want.

Furthermore a friend of mine has a PhD in biochemistry, he does not believe in evolution. How is that possible despite all the brainwashing of universities and the work he does? Does he also suddenly not have knowledge of biology or chemistry?

Science is merely a TOOL, not THE truth. The purpose of science is to ascertain to the truth but it is not always the truth.

For example, earth being flat, the earth being center of the universe, spontaneous generation, A HUMAN BEING FULLY FORMED IN THE SPERM, all of these things were once considered SCIENCE. Just for your information western science believed in a human being fully formed in the sperm in the last what was it 200 or 100 years....

Likewise just because charles darwin was a popular alternative, did not mean suddenly it is absolute truth. Otherwise if it was, it wouldn't be a theory it would be a fact of life.

The reason it persists is because of it being an 'alternate belief'. Due to the attack on religion in general (be it whatever it may be) it has flourished as a popular teaching in schools and the idea of teaching 'creation' or that God created in schools became foul and sacrilege to the secular or should I say atheist system.

---

eastcoastS14 - The thing that's eternal is the absolute truth. Falsehood always perishes. In time truth always replaces falsehood, and human history is a witness to that. There are some beliefs that come and go but some remain. Whether we live a thousand years or a hundred years, what we see in our lives or do not see, the truth itself is independent of our own mistakes.

However, us not being able to live millions of years and evolution theory taking 'millions' of years to take place, with very meager 'evidence' to even describe it, is nothing but a tactic in order not to ever be able to disprove that which can not be proven. An irony since that is the ad hominem thrown at people who believe in God.

All Charles Darwin did was with no real knowledge of even his limited science of his time (eg; no microbiology) was observe with his naked eye creatures. Utilizing imagination and creativity came up with vivid explanations and descriptions of anthropomorphism and speculation.

yudalicious

the article's title states new finding challenges established views on evolution, the thread's title states new finding challenges evolution, very different things imo.

I find it funny that a_ahmed's post TRIES to use logical reasoning and scientific method to debunk evolution, but fails miserably in the process, showing a complete lack of understanding of science and physiology, not to mention a lack of ability to argue without logical fallacies. If there are a few incongruencies in the evidence in support of evolution, then that MUST mean the Bible is right, right guys? Go logical reasoning!