Evolution: Fact Or Fiction

Whats your religion?

Atheist	39.3%	[ 1138 ]
Protestant	16.9%	[ 489 ]
Catholic	14.1%	[ 407 ]
Hindu	1.3%	[ 37 ]
Muslim	1.8%	[ 53 ]
Jew	2.3%	[ 67 ]
Buddhist	5.1%	[ 149 ]
Greek Orthodox	0.7%	[ 21 ]
Pagan	14.2%	[ 412 ]
Egyptian	4.2%	[ 122 ]
Total Votes:			[ 2895 ]

[Alt_Jack]

The Great Ninja Yuffie

That's actually a fairly decent theory, given that there are shitloads of reasons as to why Europe and the Middle East got a leg up in the development stakes. I mean, they used religion to justify wiping out races, so the people in power certainly wouldn't be above manipulating clueless people like that. I tip my hat to you good sir.

Thanks. It's good to know I'm not spouting nonsense. The thing is, some religions persent an option: convert them, or kill the non-believers. The pope said a while back that converting non-christians was a priority. I suppose conversion is better than annihilation, but many people will fight to the death for what they believe in, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

Also, I think we shouldn't use that link for a scholarly source. It's a very...ill-concieved article.

[dragonmatt5]

Alt_Jack

The Great Ninja Yuffie

That's actually a fairly decent theory, given that there are shitloads of reasons as to why Europe and the Middle East got a leg up in the development stakes. I mean, they used religion to justify wiping out races, so the people in power certainly wouldn't be above manipulating clueless people like that. I tip my hat to you good sir.

Thanks. It's good to know I'm not spouting nonsense. The thing is, some religions persent an option: convert them, or kill the non-believers. The pope said a while back that converting non-christians was a priority. I suppose conversion is better than annihilation, but many people will fight to the death for what they believe in, regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

Also, I think we shouldn't use that link for a scholarly source. It's a very...ill-concieved article.

hmm if i may add to this, there is irony in religious persecution and the denial of evolution by some religious communities. As was the case with religious persecution, those that were different, thought differently or questioned authority were the first to be wiped out. That being done, some went as far as to associated relatives to that same oddness and target them too. This in turn disrupted those traits from being continued in the next generation. This is sort of a guiding of the evolution of the human race to more docile and accepting of a small group of leaders over a collective rule. It is also quite possible for the racist and even sexist nature still potent today though that may be more social evolution, but the idea is still there.

[Ashley the Bee]

Patella

Ashley the Bee

absolutretarded

For all we know, God's seven days could be a few billion years of earth time?

Genesis 1 does not use the word "day" in Hebrew, but uses a word that could mean day, year or even "time", as in, "Back in the time of Hammurabi..."

I was reading through Jack's thing about dinosaurs, and this is what I found:

Quote:

Although the Bible does not tell us exactly how long ago it was that God made the world and its creatures, we can make a good estimate of the date of creation by reading through the Bible and noting some interesting passages:
God made everything in six days. He did this, by the way, to set a pattern for mankind, which has become our seven day week (as described in Exodus 20:11). God worked for six days and rested for one, as a model for us. Furthermore, Bible scholars will tell you that the Hebrew word for day used in Genesis 1, can only mean an ordinary day in this context.

It's from a cheap source, but it brings the arguement in another direction. Then again, the entire article is moronic.

And wrong. Again, Genesis does not say "day", as in 24 hours of time, in Hebrew. I would hope the Jews knew how to write their own creation story.

[Golden Dysprosium]

dragonmatt5

hmm if i may add to this, there is irony in religious persecution and the denial of evolution by some religious communities. As was the case with religious persecution, those that were different, thought differently or questioned authority were the first to be wiped out. That being done, some went as far as to associated relatives to that same oddness and target them too. This in turn disrupted those traits from being continued in the next generation. This is sort of a guiding of the evolution of the human race to more docile and accepting of a small group of leaders over a collective rule. It is also quite possible for the racist and even sexist nature still potent today though that may be more social evolution, but the idea is still there.

I doubt they knew about the evolutionary nature of their actions. Scientific methods didn't come about until probably 500 yrs ago. Plus, this was after humanity was already fairly established and I doubt they'd be keeping track over the years of any changes, especially with the creationist ideals being the prevalent thought at the time.

[iXenu]

Gosh... just check this out and tell me what you think. Note, it does not prove/disprove the existence of any deity.

This is it. Watch. Think. Learn.

[Golden Dysprosium]

iXenu

Gosh... just check this out and tell me what you think. Note, it does not prove/disprove the existence of any deity.

Well, it does seem quite plausible (plus, I've seen that video before). The thing is, it would have to occur in 2 or more apes (still possible with one, though they'd have to have a very active sex life), and it would work better if it were a homozygous dominatant pair of chromosomes, and have the two drawn together, which is also quite possible (but this is like measuring air speed velocity with wind resistance, a.k.a the ideal scenario). If you know what a Punnett square is, you can throw one together and see if it works. Assume that ape pairs can produce 3 offspring with these pairs, and that the chromosome is homozygous Dominant. It could also potentially work as a carrier, though sex-linked is a little much to wish for. sweatdrop
Actually, to simplify: Jack has green eyes from his mother, while his father has brown eyes. Both of my parents have brown eyes, so I do too. If we...procreate, there's a greater chance of having a brown-eyed child. BUT if his mother and my father had green eyes, there's a better chance of green eyes. Get it?

[iXenu]

Patella

iXenu

Gosh... just check this out and tell me what you think. Note, it does not prove/disprove the existence of any deity.

Well, it does seem quite plausible (plus, I've seen that video before). The thing is, it would have to occur in 2 or more apes (still possible with one, though they'd have to have a very active sex life), and it would work better if it were a homozygous dominatant pair of chromosomes, and have the two drawn together, which is also quite possible (but this is like measuring air speed velocity with wind resistance, a.k.a the ideal scenario). If you know what a Punnett square is, you can throw one together and see if it works. Assume that ape pairs can produce 3 offspring with these pairs, and that the chromosome is homozygous Dominant. It could also potentially work as a carrier, though sex-linked is a little much to wish for. sweatdrop
Actually, to simplify: Jack has green eyes from his mother, while his father has brown eyes. Both of my parents have brown eyes, so I do too. If we...procreate, there's a greater chance of having a brown-eyed child. BUT if his mother and my father had green eyes, there's a better chance of green eyes. Get it?

I haven't gotten to research about it as much as I'd like. I just thought it would be a different perspective. What would be more plausible? I have a hard time believe we were the clay people of an artsy God... I'm more of a panspermia person, and I've recently been studying how bacteria can evolve. ^^;; Still on the learning path, I am.

[Alt_Jack]

Patella

Actually, to simplify: Jack has green eyes from his mother, while his father has brown eyes. Both of my parents have brown eyes, so I do too. If we...procreate, there's a greater chance of having a brown-eyed child. BUT if his mother and my father had green eyes, there's a better chance of green eyes. Get it?

(Not if I can help it...)

The problem with her hypothesis is that it is, like she said, ideal conditions. Then again, we know how that story ends. It's quite a solid scientific theory; I'm impressed that they managed to come up with something that fit so well. In the end, it comes down to either god-guided evolution (theistic) or randomized evolution (atheist/agnostic). One of the most important rules in the universe is that you can't make something out of nothing. Energy gets converted, cells divide...it's not the magic trick creationists "reasonably assume".

[Hunger Destruction]

evolution is a proven fact

evolution is the ability to change over time
and everyone changes over time....

and i dont think "egyptian" is a religion

[Gho the Girl]

hijaber

evolution is a proven fact

No, it's a well tested theory that is generally accepted to be true.

Quote:

evolution is the ability to change over time

I think you're referring to teh wrong evolution.

Quote:

and everyone changes over time....

Which doesn't prove the theory of evolution, just as me being able to make clay doll doesn't prove creationism.

[absolutretarded]

Gho the Girl

hijaber

evolution is a proven fact

No, it's a well tested theory that is generally accepted to be true.

Quote:

evolution is the ability to change over time

I think you're referring to teh wrong evolution.

Quote:

and everyone changes over time....

Which doesn't prove the theory of evolution, just as me being able to make clay doll doesn't prove creationism.

just adding on...

evolution happens over a few million years due to the accumulated effects of genetic mutations which are selected for or selected against (by the environment), changing the genetic frequencies of specific genes. I mean, look how long it took to evolve an simple eye from a small pit of photosensitive cells.

[Vryko Lakas]

Actually, a series of computer simulations with very pessimistic assumptions shows fish-type eyes evolving from relatively simple photosensitive patches in less than 1/3 million generations.

[Symos]

Well, I dont see why christians can't beleive in evolution.
Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

and Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

So the very thing anti-evolutionists found their arguements suggest at a process like evolution. Just engineered. So again I don't see why they need to be agressive about it some of these people.

[Golden Dysprosium]

Symos

Well, I dont see why christians can't beleive in evolution.
Genesis 1:20 "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven" .and Genesis 1:24 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so". So the very thing anti-evolutionists found their arguements suggest at a process like evolution. Just engineered. So again I don't see why they need to be agressive about it some of these people.

That's a bit weak, even by creationist standards. It says that the animals come from earth, sea, and air; it's still more *POOF!* than proof.

[Alt_Jack]

dragonmatt5

hmm if i may add to this, there is irony in religious persecution and the denial of evolution by some religious communities. As was the case with religious persecution, those that were different, thought differently or questioned authority were the first to be wiped out. That being done, some went as far as to associated relatives to that same oddness and target them too. This in turn disrupted those traits from being continued in the next generation. This is sort of a guiding of the evolution of the human race to more docile and accepting of a small group of leaders over a collective rule. It is also quite possible for the racist and even sexist nature still potent today though that may be more social evolution, but the idea is still there.

If by guiding evolution you mean genocide and "racial cleansing". Humans fear what is different. "When in doubt,throw it out" seems to be humanity's unofficial slogan. It's just strange that we have people killing other people for stupid reasons.

"What?! You don't believe that an invisible sky giant created a guilible man and a rib woman who were tricked by a talking snake into eating an apple that gave them unparalleled intellect?! You must be evil! KILL THE NON-BELIEVER!!"