Evolution question of the day (quote, God, Christian, believer)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The big bang thoery sounds like a fraud to my understanding,
How much do you understand about it, exactly? How about you list 3 independent lines of evidence that cosmologists use to support the big bang theory and then explain to us why that evidence doesn't apply.
Here's a great chance to demonstrate why we should care about your opinion on the matter.
The point in case you are missing it is food chain. Beeg whales do not eat other critters like seals.
Thus if all creatures were herbivores then all sea animals must have been seaweed eaters too.
Seeing your American bald eagles cluck clucked with the chickens in the ground using their talons to scrape away for seeds - oh wait..
Chickens are omnivores.[7] In the wild, they often scratch at the soil to search for seeds, insects and even larger animals such as lizards or young mice.[8]
Now I wonder what other birdies that eat primarily worms ate back then? Seeing Noah only took two on the ark. After all one need only a pair "kind" of worms never mind the vast amount of species that exist.
A worm is a common name given to a diverse group of invertebrate animals that have a long, soft body and no legs. There are hundreds of thousands (we probably do not know the exact amount but we are still counting) of species of worms, 2,700 of these are earthworms.
I guess the tapeworm went in da belly of one of da crew?
Ever notice what earth worms do when it really rains a lot?
Maybe the excrement of the other animal ark farers was sustinence for the two worms to process into compost.
Did worms always eat crap or did they also eat herbs and spices before the fall?
How about our faithful lil' dung beetle, was he and his wife part of the janitorial staff of the ark?
Dung beetles are beetles that feed partly or exclusively on feces. All of these species belong to the superfamily Scarabaeoidea; most of them to the subfamilies Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae of the family Scarabaeidae. This beetle can also be referred to as the scarab beetle. As most species of Scarabaeinae feed exclusively on feces, that subfamily is often dubbed true dung beetles. There are dung-feeding beetles which belong to other families, such as the Geotrupidae (the earth-boring dung beetle). The Scarabaeinae alone comprises more than 5,000 species.
Bats eat what exactly?
Bats are mammals in the order Chiroptera (pronounced /kaɪˈrɔːptərə/). The forelimbs of all bats are developed as wings, making them the only mammals naturally capable of sustained flight (other mammals, such as flying squirrels, gliding possums and colugos, can only glide for limited distances). The word Chiroptera comes from the Greek words cheir (χειρ) "hand" and pteron (πτερον) "wing," as the structure of the open wing is very similar to an outspread human hand with a membrane (patagium) between the fingers that also stretches between hand and body.
A measure of the success of bats is their estimated total of about 1,100species worldwide, accounting for about 20 percent of all mammal species. About 70 percent of bats are insectivores. Most of the rest are frugivores, with a few species being carnivorous. Bats are present throughout most of the world. Bats perform a vital ecological role by pollinatingflowers, and also serve an important role in seed dispersal. Many tropical plants are entirely dependent on bats.
I could go on and on with the small critters but I think I have made my point.
If we look to the fossil reccord the Platypus is found consistently throughout, but show no signs of change other than size. So, it appears to be wonderfully made to fit into its environment. It functuion perfectly. It's bill is well suited for the type of food it eats. It appears to be well designed. Or in other words it is an example of another perfect creation by God, fully functioning the way it was created to be.
Okay, so what about something like candiru? Are they a "perfect creation"? How about a tapeworm? Or the ebola virus?
Some recent discussion on an archeology forum, completely secular, no fake antiquities involved. Read and understand:
(This is an edited segment from an on-line chat thread; I only deleted the various posters' names and posting date. It all happened within the past two weeks) My highlights in blue.
Q: I have heard you can fool carbon dating techniques for ceramics by the following method:
1. crush old broken ceramics from the desired time period.
2. Mix with water and new clay.
3. Use that material when sculpting new forgery.
4. Fire in a kiln with forgery touching old dirt and pottery sherds from that time period.
5. Bury forgery underground with other broken ceramics from that time period, and at a strata matching that time period.
6. exhume after a year.
I have heard this transfers the approprate radio isotopes to the forgery, which tricks the c-14 dating process. Is it true?
Wouldn't there be "modern" C-14 in the mix, to disrupt the forgery?
A: Carbon dating measures the amount of carbon-14 in an object. It really looks for the time at which the carbon-14 entered the object.
Carbon dating is almost always used for biological materials e.g. wood, cloth bones etc. The carbon dates tells when the carbon-14 was taken into the organism which gives us a rough date for the object.
Ceramics don't contain a lot of carbon and the process of creating them does not trap a lot of carbon from the air. So, you wouldn't use carbon dating on ceramics. If you did, you find out the age of the clay itself (which would probably be to old and all the carbon-14 would have decayed.) Archeologists date pottery by carbon dating something found with the pottery such as wood, ash, food remain etc."
________________________________
So... I rest my case. Your oh-so-reliable scientists (not those ones you usually despise I presume) picked the wrong technique. Perhaps you missed that I've done some of this work. I know, there's "experts" everywhere, eh? Even here on C-D. Be careful who you trust!
Since there are some VERY reliable and accurate techniques now available that would clearly date these artifacts, not the soil they were buried in, or something smeared on their outsides, why then can't we get a tiny shard?
You arrange it, I'll have it checked five ways from Sunday. Why not? How hard can it be to obtain a tiny shard from 33,000 figurines? I'll even promise to send it back, just nice and cleaned-up!
I'll repeat that: why not? I'm easy! Let's do it!
(Oh, PS; my other pet technique, X-Ray fluorescence, will also easily detect the mixing of finely ground up old shard particles into a new clay mix before it is formed and fired. That would be an interesting finding, eh guys? An incontrovertible Proof of Hoax!)
This is exactly the same technology that NASA used to determine exactmineralcontent on the moon without landing, and has also now been flown over the supposed Turkish Ark site, which proved it was made of basalt and limestone. No petrified wood, no "cages", no old boat.
Another one bites the dust. Of course, there's also just plain old common sense, but no-one said we had to use THAT....
Oooppsss... despite the best efforts of the Turkish Government to keep the ugly little truth about this basalt rock-Ark a secret, truth always "outs".
Some simple info, easily found on-line by any interested and curious person:
"The X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer Experiment measured the composition of the lunar surface.
The Apollo moon landings returned samples for study on Earth from only six locations on the Moon. In order to better understand the Moon's overall chemical composition, the X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer and the Gamma-ray Spectrometer studied the composition of the Moon's surface from lunar orbit. These experiments were flown on both Apollo 15 and Apollo 16.
When X-rays from the Sun strike the lunar surface, they can cause some elements to emit additional X-rays, a process known as fluorescence. The elements that emit the X-rays can be identified based on the energy of the X-rays that are emitted. The abundances of these elements can be determined from the intensity of the emitted x-rays (the greater the intensity of the X-rays, the greater the abundance of the element). The X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer measured the abundances of the elements magnesium, aluminum, and silicon.
In all, about 9% of the Moon's surface was studied by this experiment. Features as small as 30 kilometers across can sometimes be detected in this data. In addition to studying the Moon, the X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometer was also used on the return voyage to Earth to study astronomical objects that emit X-rays. In particular, the objects Cygnus X-1 and Scorpius X-1 were both intensively studied."
__________________________________
Of course, this was in what? 1971? Things are far more accurate, with significantly higher resolution, now.
Ooopsss... there's that truth thing again! Step on it's neck, would'jah?
Last edited by rifleman; 04-01-2009 at 11:44 AM..
Reason: typos
Some recent discussion on an archeology forum, completely secular, no fake antiquities involved. Read and understand:
(This is an edited segment from an on-line chat thread; I only deleted the various posters' names and posting date. It all happened within the past two weeks) My highlights in blue.
Q: I have heard you can fool Carbon Dating [/color]techniques for ceramics[/color] by the following method:
A: Carbon Dating measures the amount of carbon-14 in an object. It really looks for the time at which the carbon-14 entered the object.
Carbon Dating is almost always [color=Blue]used for biological materials e.g. wood, cloth bones etc.
Hmmmmmmmm
Speaking of Carbon Dating, I found these on in the "Senior Singles" section of an AARP.ORG website.
Okay Okay, just kidding. We need to lighten up here a little.
You obviously never read the link on radiometric dating so I think we are wasting our time with a youth here.
Wish your dad well and we shall wait for him to resume this debate.
I told you that I would not respond to silly posts anymore.
As for your eltoro mountain crap, that did not even come up on their radar screen so thee is no slam dunk for YEC there. You keep recycling that over and over . Take a hint, we are not interested in discussing it anymore.
Get some new material we can debunk and there are many questions you have not bothered answering.
Till then we shall be waiting.
I believe the figurines of El Toro Mountain are recycled here, because it shows us the kind of junk science being embraced here. You say you can debunk any new material. Yet, what kind of science can debunk material without a scientific study, or a review of that material?
IT IS THE SCIENCE OF THE CLOSED MINDS.
Of course your not intrested in the figurines of El Toro Mountain anymore. When you have no SCIENTIFIC REVIEW to back up your statements, why would you try to defend your position? So I guess you just ignore the evidence and move on. Without any doubt, you are a TRUE BELIEVER IN EVOLUTION.
Because only a true believer in the Theory of Evolution, could ignore the other obvious evidence this way. Just wave your magic wand and proclaim. "My science God tells me it's all false, let us now move on." LOL
Wait, Wait, what about the scientific review?
"Did you not hear me, the God of science has proclaimed the evidence to be false, we need no review. We are nolonger interested."
WOW, I think I just heard the door slam. Well, so much for the scientific review.
With nowhere to hide, one attacks the system, even though it justly asks some reasonable questions.
I particularly like the one about why dating methods, which are regularly denounced and rejected by Creationists, are now, in this one case, both excused for bad application and simultaneously believed without question.
I suppose when the evidence for your side of the argument is real scarce, you defend anything, even bunko.
Like I said, this argument was over a long time ago. But it is educational for some.
I can suggest an alternate explanation. When cornered and facing required a concession speech, the debator will often do what little kids do in a similar situation. And I quote:
"So I guess you just ignore the evidence and move on. Without any doubt, you are a TRUE BELIEVER IN EVOLUTION.
WOW, I think I just heard the door slam. Well, so much for the scientific review."
What happened to just answering the questions? Remember, such responses will only serve to make dis-believers out of folks in your future, like my son. You'll generate legions of atheists by those tactics. Hope that works out for you!
A "soul" is a term in metaphysiology that describes a metaphysical life-force inside of a human-being that enters into the theorized metaphysical realm of "heaven". There is no fact or proof in modern science to support this theory.
Humans are no different than any other animal on the Earth. We have just had the right conditions and presets to evolve greatly. We are part of the Hominidae family. The base form of the modern homid was the Homo Habilis. Then, Homo Rudolfensis, then, Homo ergaster, and homo georgicus, and homo erectus, and homo cepranensis, and so on until homo neanderthalis and the homo sapiens.(Humans are homo sapiens sapiens) We have unexhaustable proof for the theory of evolution, and even if you're religious you can believe in evolution. If you want to deny it, then fine, but if you want to believe the facts and the proof, then you can be considered smart. I can't even begin to conceive how someone cannot believe in evolution? Jeez, Reality check please.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We need to lighten up here a little. 
