Evolution [Debate Proposal]

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by Muslim, Apr 5, 2006.

  1. Pi-Sudoku Slightly extreme Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    526
    I would like to clarify one thing.

    I have no personal gain from evolution being proven or disproven and if it was disproven i would be happy that science had advanced, what i am fighting for is for it not to be replaced by some half baked idea of dinosours not existing and orange juice appearing in baccardi bottles
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. jax0509 The non-believer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    111
    he was just trying to look hard 'innit dawg' lol that one will stay with me for a long time
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Buckaroo Banzai Mentat Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    333
    The fact that is not fully known how life started doesn´t make evolution impossible, neither disproves all the evidence of biological relatedness between all organisms in a phylogenetic tree (That would otherwise be just a giant coincidence, since organisms forms would be RANDOM with respect to biological relatedness).

    Also, none of the proposals of how metabolism work, or about origin of life state that it´s all random. Non-intelligent process is not a synonym of randomness.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. jax0509 The non-believer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    111
    most agree that life started as bacteria
     
  8. Pi-Sudoku Slightly extreme Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    526
    Whatever life atarted as it is surely more likely that it was a single celled organism.
    In which case evolution seems a very likely way of humans and other animals developing
     
  9. Buckaroo Banzai Mentat Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    333
  10. Pi-Sudoku Slightly extreme Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    526
    In the abcense of Muslim i will take a break
     
  11. Muslim Immortal Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,523
    Firstly I suggest you learn to spell. Secondly I suggest you learn to read, what you have posted is irrelevant it doesn’t address what I said in the least bit. Well evolution has actually been disproved, as an instance, if the theory of evolution were factual, then the fossil records would ALWAYS be evidence for a smooth changeover from one life form to another, such that it would be complex to tell where invertebrates ended, and vertebrates began. This is NOT constantly the case. Instead, completely formed life forms have been revealed to abruptly jump into the fossil evidence ostensibly from nowhere, with irrational gaps before them where their ancestors should be. Numerous evolutionists do not dispute this fact, while others look the other way.

    I don’t see why you had to post something totally irrelevant as to what I said. Its funny you should say changing soundings, the first Homo sapiens appeared in and around Africa. And the surrounding was the same for everyone, so the argument of surrounding doesn’t even wash.

    How does life constitute to being “chemical reactions” you’re suggesting everything is a “chemical reaction” also suppose we take this argument to be factual could you explain to be in the next post whether “chemical reactions” are random or processes.

    Carbon dating is not accurate, when you go by “evolutionary” and even so If there is several copies of the bone it could be bones of former mammoths undiscovered spices of animal. Or reptile now could I call a snake with legs a dinoursour? Would a sneak with legs still be a sneak? Take a look at this image:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    now what do you suggest we call that? a sneak dinoursor?

    Well this is a debate with me and you, if others are going to help you then what are the point with me debating you I might aswell be debating them.
     
  12. Athelwulf Rest in peace Kurt... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,060
    Okay, I think I know how Muslim works. Everyone who disagrees with him is an Atheist. Somehow Muslims know better than Atheists, and he proudly declares that by means of ad hominem attacks. And he does a poor job of it too.

    He makes me laugh.
     
  13. Lemming3k Insanity Gone Mad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,180
    Im going to give you an educational story, the first dinosaur skeleton found was an iguanadon in the 1800's, they found a large sharp tooth like object which they presumed belonged to a giant jaw of said creature, when they found the skull and the majority of other bones, they started to piece them together like a jigsaw and realise they didnt have a tooth at all, they had a thumb-spike, this is where the piece fitted on the skeleton, you do not need a complete skeleton to see what you are looking at, if they find a human skull or ribcage etc, they can be fairly sure they have a human, they need not have a full skeleton. Think of it as a jigsaw, you do not need every single piece to see what the picture is about, you could fill in the blanks yourself.
    Muslim you're in no position to criticise spelling, as usual. Perhaps you both merely make typos? Or hadnt you considered that?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    From what i can tell you have a basic misunderstanding of evolution, and perhaps fossilization.
    Fossils only form under the right conditions, most things, sometimes due to carbon dating or other methods(see below) are given a rough estimate of where they formed, hence there will be crossover, there will also be crossover as one form of life slowly dies out and another becomes dominant, it is not an instant process, and its not necessarily smooth, have you ever seen the development tree for homo sapiens from our ancestors?

    Can you provide backup for this to support your claims? Im quite aware it isnt 100%, and is not able to pinpoint a precise date, hence usually multiple readings are taken and they have a margin of error in a way, any carbon date will have a +/- of a certain number of years to give a range where the date comes from.
    They also use potassium argon dating.
     
  14. Lemming3k Insanity Gone Mad Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,180
    He does have high entertainment value i'll give him that.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. Muslim Immortal Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,523
    Am dyslexic, so what if I spell a few words wrong.
     
  16. Athelwulf Rest in peace Kurt... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,060
    So what? Well, it sorta renders you unable to tell people to learn how to spell, especially people who make fewer and more minor mistakes than you.
     
  17. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    Muslim:
    Who has ever claimed that the evolution of DNA was a random process? Natural Selection is not random. Nor are the chemical and physical laws which govern DNA synthesis.
     
  18. Athelwulf Rest in peace Kurt... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,060
    And you say you're not a creationist.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Pi-Sudoku Slightly extreme Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    526
    I could t ake you on 1v1 any time you like, i just don't see any purpose on ignoring all of these educated minds and their valuable contributions
     
  20. jax0509 The non-believer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    111
    Pi get off the internet now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! where are using the internet from??
     
  21. Pi-Sudoku Slightly extreme Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    526
    Jax, I am in Room 49
     
  22. Muslim Immortal Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,523

    So a chemical reaction is not a proses?
     
  23. mountainhare Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,287
    Muslim:
    *sigh*
    Why do I even bother?
    Since when did I dispute that a chemical reaction is not process?
    I disputed your claim that scientists assert that the diversity of DNA is due to a random process. Because it's bullshit. Once again...

    1. Evolution is not random. Natural selection is a non-random process.

    2. Chemical reactions are not random. They are governed by chemical and physical laws.
     

Share This Page