Evolution [Debate Proposal]
- Thread starter Muslim
- Start date
Muslim said:
That is pretty true, which contradicts your previous statement about evolution and chemicle reactions being different.
Biology is just applied chemistry, there is chemistry behind everything that is alive.
BTW i was abent for a while waiting for a debate to start.
And why go to another forum. Are you affraid of the intelligence of the people here like S Monkey?
If you want a debate then like minded people will support me and like mindeed peopl (if there were any) will support you.
spuriousmonkey said:
You have undoubtedly heard of DNA, chromosome and genes. DNA guide the cell in its construction of new enzymes.
The DNA in a cell is actually just a blueprint made up of four diverse parts, called nucleotides or bases. Envisage a set of blocks that has only four diverse shapes, or an alphabet that has only four diverse lettering. DNA is a long string of blocks or lettering. In an E. coli cell, the DNA blueprint is about 4 million blocks lengthy. If you were to extend out this solitary stand of DNA, it would be 1.36 mm long -- pretty extensive taking into account the bacteria itself is 1,000 times smaller. In micro organisms, the DNA strand is like a wadded up ball of twine. Visualize taking 1,000 feet of extremely thin thread and wadding it up - you could easily hold it in your hand. [A human's DNA is about 3 billion blocks long, or almost 1,000 times longer than an E. coil’s. Human DNA is so long that the wadded up approach does not work. as a substitute, human DNA is securely wrapped into 23 or 24 structures although am not sure I think its 23. Anyway it’s called chromosomes to pack it more firmly and fit it inside a cell.
The amazing thing about DNA is this: DNA is zilch more than a guide that tells the cell how to make its proteins! That is all that DNA does. The 4 million bases in an E. coli cell's DNA advice the cell how to make the 1,000 or so enzymes that an E. coli cell needs to live its life. A gene is merely a section of DNA that acts as a guide to form an enzyme.
Anyone that suggests that all this happens randomly and not in a process is crazy. That is the problem; something had to create all this intelligently designed mapping and instruction.
The topic is set up: http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=53904
Muslim said:
For fucks sake, we are having a debate HERE IN THIS FORUM. why are you constantly running away. Is it because your posts are being discredited or because you want to get away from the people you refer to as "Intelectual Wannabies".
NewsFlash: These people ARE intellectuals and some other people, like you are not even coming close.
Delete your other thread and debate with me here, amongst the sciforums intelectuals who are all redy for a good healthy debate on evolution.
Pi-Sudoku said:
So you can get all your Atheist buddies to back your lies up and make you feel good about yourself?
Post in the other topic, I don't see what the big deal is this is the proposal topic. Its not even meant for debating. If you don't post in that thread, in 3 days then I win by no show! those are the rules you agreed on.
Pi and everyone else you are wasting your time with this narrow-minded idiot, he will never believe anything that comes from the qu'ran yet breaks the rules when it suits him, like in the baccardi incident. what an idiot, and a complete waste of time
muslim said:
correct, a theory is not a fact unless it is proven (evolution hasn't been)
However it has not been disproven and usually a theory stands untill a better theory is suggestd (not one)
muslim said:
I don't think there is much evidence that race has helped or hindered humans much so far but it is very possible that wiuth changing surroundings one race may prove to have an advantage.
muslim said:
Evolution is linked to life Life = chemicle reactions
Biology is just chemistry
muslim said:
Ok, i'll leave out god but if we are leaving out god then what opposition is there to evolution. You need an alternative theory muslim
muslim said:
In that case how come we have several copies of the same bones.
Dinosour bones have been carbon dated to over 200 million years ago and there are no human bones from that long ago. The exact form of dinosours is probablyt not totally accurate but go to the natural history museum and tell them that the dinousour bones are fakes, see how far that gets you
muslim said:
Wow!
I have never claimed to be an expert on evolution and i value the input of other members, that is what a forum is all about.
I will defend the theory and have sufficient knowledge to compete with who,who clearly has no knowledge of anything.
”
Since when a full skeleton is a requirement for saying that there was an entire animal? If someone finds a head of a felid, all we can say is that there was this head, but we can´t state that there was a body for that since none was found attached to it?
lol
No.
Have you ever actually seen the bones of mammoths and of a dinosaur?
You could, but no one would believe, except idiots. You would made yourself a fool.
How come scientists themselves claim and prove that a certain fossil specimen were not legitimate, but in fact a mixture of other species? Why this is done in only some cases, not in all of them, or in none of them, or only by creationists?