Originally posted by dj2beckerSo because you're of limited imagination you must be right?
I don't dispute the fact that microevolution takes place.
I don't see how you can get all of life evolving from a single ancestor.
EDIT: Don't bother answering, it was intended to be rehtorical.
Originally posted by dj2beckerThe full explanation of how it can is called The Theory of Evolution. Just because you dont understand it doesnt make it invalid. It remains a solid scientific theory untill someone provides solid evidence to the contrary.
I don't dispute the fact that microevolution takes place.
I don't see how you can get all of life evolving from a single ancestor.
Originally posted by dj2beckerWhy would I call imagination wishful think or science? Oh, yes... I forgot, you find changing the definition of words quite acceptable.
Nope. Imagination can do a lot for you...
Just don't call "imagination" "Science".
Call it "wishful thinking".
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by twhiteheadJust because you dont understand it doesnt make it invalid.
The full explanation of how it can is called The Theory of Evolution. Just because you dont understand it doesnt make it invalid. It remains a solid scientific theory untill someone provides solid evidence to the contrary.
Typical cop-out.
It remains a solid scientific theory untill someone provides solid evidence to the contrary.
In the minds of some it will always remain a solid scientific theory, no matter how much evidence is provided to the contrary.
I can't follow dj2becker's claims at all. In this thread, he appears to be arguing that even micro-evolution is impossible; after all, if a species goes through evolutionary changes at some point members will diverge into a separate species. I thought even the YEC's conceded this; thus, a "cat thing" on the ark evolved into lions, tigers, domestic cats, etc. Now, he appears to be denying that any species can evolve into a distinct one. Curious.
Another one of his many problems is his apparent belief that there is some clear dividing line between "life" and "non-life". There is not; these are labels put on various things in nature, some quite similar, by men. To wit:
Today, there is still no agreement among biologists as to a clear definition of life. Several factors are generally reckoned to be involved, including the ability to self-replicate, actively to maintain a boundary between the inner environment of the organism and the outside world (see cell membrane), and to carry out metabolism. To these, some might add the ability to mutate and evolve, or to be part of a community capable of Darwinian evolution. If all of these factors are required to be satisfied for something to be considered alive, then it is questionable, for example, whether viruses are alive. Viruses replicate not by themselves but by hijacking the cellular machinery of some host. Moreover, when dormant, they enter an inert, crystalline, non-metabolizing state.
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/L/lifenature.html
Thus, the idea that a group of chemicals having certain characteristics could develop other characteristics that we now define as "life" is no more extraordinary than that a "cat thing" could develop the characteristics of a lion. These are differences of degree, not of kind.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo, no, no. Not at all. Micro-evolution can happen all it wants, but God is bound to not break the species boundaries (that we have defined)because, as we so well know, God is not allowed to act outside the sandbox that we build for him.
I can't follow dj2becker's claims at all. In this thread, he appears to be arguing that even micro-evolution is impossible; after all, if a species goes through evolutionary changes at some point members will diverge into a separate species.
Originally posted by amannionYou want me to shut. You got it.
Firstly, let's just clarify one major issue. The theory of evolution makes no claims about the origin of life, nor in fact does it need to.
Evolution simply posits that when you have a replicating entity, with inherited properties, and the possibility of errors from generation to generation - then evolution will occur. That is, changes will occur in the re ...[text shortened]... e no idea what science is actually about.
Will you please shut up, or start making sense ...
DF