|
|
|
evolution is a joke. no missing links found. Newton and many prominent scientists never believed it. It's the theory of one finite fallible man who had major doubts about it himself! The theory is not compatible with modern molecular biology either. God is so good! The Bible is the only book that satisfactorily explains the world and the mess it is in. He came to save your soul. God bless You
|
|
|
|
Actually the theory of evolution was arrived at separately by three independent researchers all looking at the evidence at the same time; Charles Darwin, Alfred Russel Wallace, who published at the same time but graciously allowed Darwin to take the credit (1st July 1858) and Patrick Mahw who had in fact already published in 1831 but whose theory had been buried in the appendices to a book on tree growing. The theory has since been accepted by the overwhelming majority of scientists.
|
|
|
|
With reference to "Missing links" Numerous fossil species have been discovered that seem to be ancestors of modern forms, fossil horses with toes rather than hooves for example. There are also numerous fossils of several different ancient hominid (humanoid) species.I have myself worked in Molecular Biology and am aware of no conflict with evolutionary theory. All organisms on earth have DNA which encodes protiens in the same way. This is consistent with a common origin for all life forms.
|
|
|
|
Point taken Adrian.
APC: When Darwin put forth the theory it was thought that the single cell was quite simple. With the advent of molecular biology it was soon discovered that the single cell was very complex, effectively making the theory absurd. Isn't it true that a single cell is more complex than many man made machines and yet people say that it had no creator?
|
|
|
|
The current theory is that the earliest cells were relatively simple (like very basic bacteria) but that the greater complexity of the modern Eukaryotic cell arose as a result of symbiosis whereby different simple cells cohabited inside a larger one. This explains why mitochondria and other cell organelles have their own DNA; they are once-independent organisms that have become part of a whole. Further, that a cell has no creator is less absurd than the idea that a creator exists with no cause.
|
|
|
|
What I am saying is that until the advent of powerful microscopes the 'bits and pieces' of even basic bacteria were kept hidden. When people were able to finally view them years after Darwin the amazing truth of their complexity was revealed.
|
|
|
|
So scientific theory had to update to take account of new discoveries made by the scientific method. That's how it's supposed to go.
|
|
|
|
Yeah they was scratching their head boy 'cause they sure as hell were havin' a hard time reeconcilling what they got. Ya Know!
|
|
|
|
All scientific theories are updated to take account of new evidence. Newton has had to be re-evaluated in light of Einstein, for instance. Theology, too regularly updates, from the God who walked in Eden in the cool of the evening, physically wrestled with Jacob, showed his behind to Moses etc. to the God who "Lives outside space and time" as preached by many modern believers.
|
|
|
|
Dammit Rupert you're stupid. Just because comething is complex doesnt mean it needs to have a creator. By that logic, God the creator would also have to be infinitely complex and great, so he ALSO requires a creator, and his creator also requires one, etc etc. IF YOU SAY THIS IS NOT THE CASE, then there is no reason the cells can't use by the same logic (no creator). If you say god required no creator there's no reason the cells require one.
|
|
|
Great site! It not only pokes fun at the Creationism scam, but at all instant experts who get on TV. Remember a few years ago there a "retired lieutenant colonel" expert on military affairs appearing on FOX news. It turned out the guy washed out of Army basic training as a kid! Back to basics, the Creationism scam relies on people not being able to tell a hypothesis from a theory from a law. I had an 8th-grade science teacher who explained the difference. 
|
|
|
|
Great point Boba. I really believe that there is so much resistence to science from the religious because of fear. It is terrifying to grow up learning and believing something that has been proven false. Perhaps Christianity will adjust to the real world truths such as evolution, much as it did when the world was proven not to be flat. Oh and one more thing, I don't know about you Rupert, but I am glad the medical community "believes" in evolution!
|
|
|
|
test
|
|
|
|
God gave the evolution theory to man... but man judged the theory and made it questionable... Whit this deed man also judged themselves and their belief to God... If someone says there is no evolution - he/she is one to say that God doesn't exist. God and evolution are one and thatfor should be threated as equal.
|
|
|
|
Religious people are always referring to machines (comparing them to cells ect.) in their need to prove the existence of a designer. If we take a look at the modern automobiles today, it's quite true. The vehicle has had it's designer, but nontheless it has also evolved from plain forms. Cars are collections of old and new inventions made by not one, but several designers. Does anyone know how old is the wheel as an invention?
|
|
|
|
its perfectly logical to believe that a universe always existed than to claim a "divine being beyond comprehension" designed a world and that there never were cavemen, mastodon, etc.
|
|
|
|
Hilarious. Hits the nail right on the head!
|
