19-12-2002 03:24									#151
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Aeson My point is, what is proper searching for him? If God were an idol in South America, then proper searching for him would probably entail traveling there. Why should anyone undertake this journey before there is ample evidence given to do so?

Proper searching for him depends on the person. It may be that Buddhism brings you closest to him, or perhaps hinduism, or perhaps Christianity. Discover whatever religion brings you closest to God. Although a lot of religions claim to have a monopoly on God, the truth of the matter is God wants you to persue whatever religion brings you closest to him. I have chosen Christianity, but perhaps you have an alternative choice. However, the basics of searching involve a basic semblance of the religious scriptures, prayer, and meditation. From there things will become easy.
As for evidence, the evidence will become self-apparent in time. If you are looking purely for evidence that is scientifically quantifable, then the best I can do is present some various pieces of evidence that seems to point toward God's existence in the universe. I trust that they will mean little to you. So why should anyone undertake such a journey then? Because it is the ultimate purpose of man in life, the ultimate expression of the Descartesian "I think therefore I am. You may laugh at such an explanation, but one day you will find yourself in the same situation I am. It may be far in the future, but it will happen.

	19-12-2002 03:25									#152
	Tired of ads?

Loin - Communsim is the *only* economic philosophy reconcilable with Christianity actually.

	19-12-2002 03:26									#153
	Put an end to popups!

No offense Monkspider but you are starting to sound like a Evangelical Preacher...

What do you have to say about an atheist existentialist as myself? On second thought, I donīt think I wanna hear it.

	19-12-2002 03:27									#154
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Religion can be used to force peope to tow the line, as it commonly is in this world. But it also can be the greatest liberator. Jesus once said "I come to this world not to bring peace, but a sword". Meaning he was not going to accept the decadent status quo of the world, but turn it on it's ear.

	19-12-2002 03:28									#155
	Increase Your PM Length

Fez, you have a long way to come. You must learn to give yourself in willing service to others. That is your greatest fault.

	19-12-2002 03:29									#156
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

*yawns* this thread is still going full steam.

I believe in Creation. I believe Satan created this hellhole we call Earth. He did it in 6 days not 7. The 7th day he spent whacking off.

That is my contribution to this thread.

OK that is going to piss people off. maybe I should be serious.

*thinking*. I really don't have much to add on this thread. Evolution does happen. Sure it is improbable, but it happened seeing as we are here. Because of the improbablility of evolution I find it difficult to believe there is any intelligent life form as us anywhere in our solar system (maybe in the universe- but not in our solar system).

	19-12-2002 03:34									#157
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Was just interested in why you feel the way you do, thanks Monkspider. For what it's worth, I spent the better part of my life actively searching for God, but have no answers. Either God has his favorites, which I'm not part of, or he's not there IMO.

	19-12-2002 03:52									#158
	Tired of ads?

I'm very sorry to hear that Aeson. Don't give up. I can assure you, God has no favorites, and he will one day make himself abundantly clear. Perhaps he chose to make himself difficult to see so that you would gain knowledge that you wouldn't have otherwise if you followed one of the various religions? But as I said, one day he will be made more than clear.

	19-12-2002 04:03									#159
	Support Apolyton

It doesn't ring true. Religion is a faith and communism (marxist communism if it makes certain pedants happy ) is a sociopolitical model. It is also very clear that man holds the power, and that he is in control of his own destiny, hence he has to take that power and use it for the wellbeing of society. There is no place, and certainly no desire, for a deity in this.

	19-12-2002 04:26									#160
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by loinburger quote: Originally posted by CyberShy I disagree with it, thus it's not a valid theory Quiet a simplistic view you hold friend Boris! Glorious irony, I've found you at last!

Whatever does that mean?

	19-12-2002 04:27									#161
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by CyberShy that you don't understand the bible doesn't mean it has contradictions.

That you don't understand how evolution works doesn't mean it didn't happen. See?

quote: which is mutation / degeneration with profits.

Nonsensical doublespeak! Mutation with profits?!

quote: you were there?

Huh? Who needed to be there...it's in the text, silly.

quote: If it's questoined by a creationist, the person who asks is a fool thus his question is not valid.

The difference is that Creationists have yet to scientifically debunk evolution or provide a scientifically alternative model that supports Creationism. So why should their objections be valid, when there's nothing to support them?

quote: evolution is unquestionable in they eyes of most of you guys here. Again: you're not different, you're all fanatics!

The mechanics of evolution are questioned/debated all the time by scientists. Again you fail to see the difference in that science is open to experimentation and change, while Creationism is not. If any credible evidence were presented to bring evolution into serious question, it would be seriously considered. That has yet to happen.

quote: I disagree with it, thus it's not a valid theory Quiet a simplistic view you hold friend Boris!

you left out the word "scientifically" deliberately I see. You yourself don't think Creationism should be taught as science, so you obviously don't think it's scientifically valid either. Duh.

quote: There are several scientific creationists who do scientific research and have a scientific grade.

Yes, the most prominent of whom have dubious credentials and have produced work that is rife with error, unreasonable assumption and/or flat our falsehoods:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html

And none of them have produced a shred of evidence to contradict evolution or prove Creationism.

quote: reasoning, - evolution needs much time - the universe must be veeeeeeeery old - fossils we found must be veeeeery old as well - these old fossils we found show that evolution took muuuuuuuch time

Nice way to twist facts around.

We know evolution takes a lot of time, based on observance of microevolution. We know the universe is very old, based on astronomical calculations, infrared readings, etc. We know the fossils are very old, thanks to carbon dating, their placement in the geological layers (something Creaitonism has yet to explain, among many other things), etc. The fossils clearly show evolutionary ancestors of modern species. But nice try.

quote: some scientists play with time as a child plays with water.

quote: Time gives opportunities indeed. But time comes with problems as well. Many problems! BUt those problems are underestimated.

Given the massive potential due to the size of the earth, the problems are not so monumental. In fact, ambiogenesis and evolution are not as remotely improbable as Creationists like to pretend. Another example where they make up odds out of their butt.

quote: Do you know what disasters can happen in a billion years?

Which means what? I could become president of the united states someday. Doesn't mean it will happen. There could be a billion earth-like planets where life was cut short by such disasters. We happened to make it. Ain't we lucky?

But as you demonstrated in your anthrocentrism, you're exactly the kind of person who if there were 99,999,999 empty universes and one with life (yours) would sit there, gawk in amazement and say "Gee, what a coincidence!"

quote: I'm not sure if I'm a creatoinist, but I think it should not be teached as science.

Quoted this for good measure.

quote: there are two ways to temp. temp people by pressure (do they still follow God during pressure) and temping people to sin. God does not do the latter.

Temping is a sin?! Oh ****! I'd better tell my temp friends to get a permanent job or they are damned!!!

	19-12-2002 04:32									#162
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Nonsensical doublespeak! Mutation with profits?!

Mutation can be either beneficial, harmful or neither.

	19-12-2002 04:34									#163
	Increase Your PM Length

Yes, Calc, but he's trying to assert that mutation is harmful and using a nonsensical phrase to define mutations that don't do harm without defining mutation as a non-qualitative term. It's part of the Dance of the Creationists.

	19-12-2002 04:37									#164
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Whatever does that mean?

One of the definitions for "irony" is "CyberShy accusing anybody of holding a simplistic view on a subject."

	19-12-2002 05:02									#165
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Temping is a sin?! Oh ****! I'd better tell my temp friends to get a permanent job or they are damned!!!

Oh crap, that's me off to hell then

So is 'The Last Temptation Of Christ' now 'The Last Minimum Wage Paperpushing Tea Making Insecure Job Of Christ'?

	19-12-2002 09:26									#166
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You cannot deny that mutations happen. We see them all the time. When a creature has a mutation that helps them, they survive and pass it on. When it's a b mutation, they die and don't get a chance to pass it on. Given the amount of time between the first organisms and now, it is definitely possible to have a product as complex as humans. You can't deny that evolution is possible. And then by looking at the fossil record it is proven. I'll tell you a true story.

A certain type of crab in Japan gets a mutation that makes the shell on its back look like the face of a samurai. The fisherman there think that the crab are ghosts, and they throw those ones back in the water. So the crabs with the samurai backs survive and pass on their offspring. The ones without that trait are more heavily fished.

Also, tell me again about all the hominids and the dinosaurs? I forgot your explanation of those.

	19-12-2002 13:00									#167
	Inflate your Upload Space

It's pointless debating CyberShy on evolution. My impression is he has never gone through the trouble of finding out what evolution is, instead he relies on the caricature found in Creationist books and on Creationist websites. So he really is just attacking a strawman - one that he doesn't understand.

If you want evidence, examine some of the older evolution threads. CyberShy keeps saying the same thing over and over again, regardless how many times his "arguments" have been refuted.

	19-12-2002 14:55									#168
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

FNBrown:

quote: For all you random probablility fanatics out there, do some research on Biblical prophecy and tell me what you think. Biblical record of God's creation is evidence enough.

I have. The Bible has a very poor record on prophecies. All the failed prophecies indicate that the Bible is useless for this purpose. The "successful prophecies" are mostly either written AFTER the events they "predict" (e.g. Daniel), or are non-prophecies ripped out of context by later authors (e.g. Matthew).

quote: The phenomenon of gravitational attraction can be demonstrated in a laboratory environment. Name one scientific experiment that reproduces an evolutionary event.

The Ames Test. Look it up.

quote: The fossil record doesn't prove evolution. There has been no scientific recording of one species evolving into another. Until then, it remains a theory - consult the scientific method if you disagree.

False. Speciation has been observed. TalkOrigins has details.

quote: Name one contradiction.

Here are 962 contradictions. Have fun.

quote: Antibiotic resistance isn't evolution.

Yes it is.

quote: So, you're saying that over a process of millions (billions?) of years, said bacterium, given the proper environmental stimulus, will eventually evolve into an intelligent bipedal life form?

Yes.

Can you show that this will NOT happen?

No.

quote: So why haven't years of scientific laboratory experiments produced anything but stronger bacteria? I'm not over-simplifying anything - I'm just asking a straightforward question.

They've produced new species of fruit flies also.

	19-12-2002 15:12									#169
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Won't you feel a bit silly if there is no god when you die and you've spent your life trying to work him out?

Might as well spend your life having as much fun as possible and repent on your death bed if you really feel it necessary.

	19-12-2002 15:48									#170
	Suffering from ads?

I think there is another idea that both sides have missed. It has been shown (although not 'proved' yet IIRC) that mutations are not random. While they are chaotic, and unpredictable, there seem to be 'attractors', certain patterns of molecules that create something, that are far more prevalent than randomness would provide. Eyes for instance, have evolved separately and independently many times. If this is true, it takes apart the Creationist:

quote: It makes no sence. All this beauty on this earth appeared by random change?... Nah.

I believe we evolved by Complexity Theory, in that we have attracts, and mutations are not completely random, and that natural selection chooses what we keep, by what is useful. It is almost like Smith's 'Invisible Hand' in economics. If you want to believe in a God, then you could argue that he created the attractors, and put them in specific places, however I believe there is enough beauty in Chaos, and in randomness, that to me, the idea of a God in evolution seems superfluous.

	19-12-2002 17:25									#171
	Tired of ads?

quote: Won't you feel a bit silly if there is no god when you die and you've spent your life trying to work him out? Might as well spend your life having as much fun as possible

I'm a happy person who has much fun, and much serious things in it's life. I don't want another life. thanks for caring though.

	19-12-2002 18:46									#172
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by monkspider Fez, you have a long way to come. You must learn to give yourself in willing service to others. That is your greatest fault.

Oh it is a fault that I am a right-wing and that means I don't give me self in service to others? You are almost a southern baptist... geez... give it a break. I do not believe god exists because it doesn't make any sense for him to be there. But this thread is about evolution, nothing else.

	19-12-2002 18:46									#173
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by johncmcleod You cannot deny that mutations happen. We see them all the time. When a creature has a mutation that helps them, they survive and pass it on. When it's a b mutation, they die and don't get a chance to pass it on.

That only happens if there is selective pressure

quote: And then by looking at the fossil record it is proven.

Unfortunately, the fossil record is so full of holes and dispersed by time that it 'proves' nothing.

quote: A certain type of crab in Japan gets a mutation that makes the shell on its back look like the face of a samurai. The fisherman there think that the crab are ghosts, and they throw those ones back in the water. So the crabs with the samurai backs survive and pass on their offspring. The ones without that trait are more heavily fished.

An example of adaptation and selection, not evolution. The crab is still the same organism, it just looks different. If the crab had grown a new appendage (for example) that gave it a selective advantage, that would be evolution.

	19-12-2002 19:12									#174
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Unfortunately, the fossil record is so full of holes and dispersed by time that it 'proves' nothing.

Nope, the sequence of the fossils we DO have proves common descent. Fossils are never found in the "wrong order". There aren't any mammoths or cavemen down among the dinosaurs.

This is sufficient to prove "evolution" in the broadest sense: gradual development of new organisms from existing ones. No modern organism simply "appears from nowhere": they all have ancestors in the fossil record.

quote: An example of adaptation and selection, not evolution. The crab is still the same organism, it just looks different. If the crab had grown a new appendage (for example) that gave it a selective advantage, that would be evolution.

Nope, this IS evolution. The shell gives the crab an advantage. Any advantage that helps survival involves evolution.

Another example: a certain percentage of elephants are born without tusks due to mutations. Such elephants have difficulty attracting mates (tusks are a form of display) and the trait does not become widespread.

...Until now. Ivory poachers don't kill tuskless elephants. This single factor has caused a rapid increase in the prevalence of the tuskless mutation (now about 50% in some African reserves). Pretty soon, unless measures are taken to oppose this trend, elephants with tusks face extinction.

This is evolution.

	19-12-2002 19:34									#175
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Jack the Bodiless Nope, the sequence of the fossils we DO have proves common descent. Fossils are never found in the "wrong order". There aren't any mammoths or cavemen down among the dinosaurs. This is sufficient to prove "evolution" in the broadest sense: gradual development of new organisms from existing ones. No modern organism simply "appears from nowhere": they all have ancestors in the fossil record.

The fossil record 'proves' nothing. It is evidence that is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution. Thats all.

quote: Nope, this IS evolution. The shell gives the crab an advantage. Any advantage that helps survival involves evolution. Another example: a certain percentage of elephants are born without tusks due to mutations. Such elephants have difficulty attracting mates (tusks are a form of display) and the trait does not become widespread. ...Until now. Ivory poachers don't kill tuskless elephants. This single factor has caused a rapid increase in the prevalence of the tuskless mutation (now about 50% in some African reserves). Pretty soon, unless measures are taken to oppose this trend, elephants with tusks face extinction. This is evolution.

In the simplist sense, even single gene mutations (that are passed on to progeny) can be considered evolution if they give a selective advantage. But by this definition, though, people with the sickle cell mutation have evolved relative to those without the mutation. Evolution within the context of this thread involves speciation (and there is no evidence that I'm aware of for that involving eukaryotic organisms).

	19-12-2002 20:21									#176
	Tired of ads?

quote: This is sufficient to prove "evolution" in the broadest sense: gradual development of new organisms from existing ones. No modern organism simply "appears from nowhere": they all have ancestors in the fossil record. The fossil record 'proves' nothing. It is evidence that is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution. Thats all.

Scientists are reluctant to use words like "proof". No scientist has ever proved that the Earth is round, for instance.

But the fossil record is so perfectly consistent with common decent that it "proves" this beyond all reasonable doubt. It is a fact that modern complex organisms have developed from simpler precursosrs in a step-by-step process spanning millions of years. While biologists mean something more specific when they use the word "evolution", this is consistent with the common English usage of the word: gradual development.

As the mechanisms of biological evolution (random mutation and natural selection) have also been observed, it is simply incorrect to imply that evolution is "just theoretical" as creationists do.

quote: In the simplist sense, even single gene mutations (that are passed on to progeny) can be considered evolution if they give a selective advantage. But by this definition, though, people with the sickle cell mutation have evolved relative to those without the mutation. Evolution within the context of this thread involves speciation (and there is no evidence that I'm aware of for that involving eukaryotic organisms).

There are numerous examples of speciation that have been observed in eukaryotic organisms. TalkOrigins has examples.

	19-12-2002 20:31									#177
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Drogue I believe we evolved by Complexity Theory, in that we have attracts, and mutations are not completely random, and that natural selection chooses what we keep, by what is useful.

That certainly is possible, and it is a very intriguing idea.

	19-12-2002 20:39									#178
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH That only happens if there is selective pressure

Only half true. Harmful mutations do not necessarily need selective prressure to be selected against.

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Unfortunately, the fossil record is so full of holes and dispersed by time that it 'proves' nothing.

Full of holes in what sense? It is extraordinary that we were able to recover as many fossils as we did. Ssome of the fossils are tremendous discoveries - the one found in China recently is a clear transitional form between birds and dinosaurs.

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH An example of adaptation and selection, not evolution. The crab is still the same organism, it just looks different. If the crab had grown a new appendage (for example) that gave it a selective advantage, that would be evolution.

Adaptation and selection is evolution. In fact, the scientific definition of evolution is "change in the frequencies of alleles." Alleles are different forms of the same gene. If you say the frequencies of alleles haven't changed, there is no selective pressure (on those genes).

	19-12-2002 20:43									#179
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH The fossil record 'proves' nothing. It is evidence that is not inconsistent with the theory of evolution. Thats all.

No, nothing in science is ever proved like in math.

However, the fossil record strongly supports evolution. For example, scientists could prefict what sort of characteristics could be expected to be found in certain transitional forms, and these predictions fit with the actual specimens quite well.

You also need to realise that the fossil record is only part of the evidence. There is also evidence from genetics, paleotology, etc., etc. A famous biologist whose name escapes me right now once said, "Modern biology does not make sense without evolution."

	19-12-2002 21:09									#180
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger "Modern biology does not make sense without evolution."

Modern creationism doesn't make sense without the Bible.