Evolution is complete BULLSHIT!!!!

[sortie]

Well, at least the "monkey to man" part is bullshit.

I took this quote from another thread because that thread was nasty.

but the idea of intelligence not being partly inherited would go against evolution itself.

Too bad that evolution will eventually turn out to be the "fad" science of the times.

I no longer accept the silly notion that humans evolved from apes.

The real science will ultimately show that life on earth was formed in a pool of genetic material where nucleic acid formed DNA fragments that randomly joined with other fragments to form "sets" of more complicated material that could no longer pick up new fragments unless it matched with something that was equally complex. This would be the separation of species at this stage as the complex fragments could no longer conjoin with dissimilar fragments. This finally became the DNA sequences that formed life as we know it.
The final DNA sequence for humans was formed and completed in that pool
and it never evolved from that point on.

This still leaves room for the human to "grow" in stages of form. However, each growth stage would still have the full human DNA and primates don't have that, so even if humans evolved in form, the primate is still excluded.
The "missing link" is missing because it never existed.

The reason that primates are similar to humans is because they were in the same pool but had a slightly different random gathering of genetic material.

It is noteworthy that the single cell organism known as the Amoeba has 200 times the complexity in it's genetic structure than humans. Yet no one would claim that it "out evolved us". This would tend to refute any assumption that the complexity of ones genetic structure could determine superiority.
Being able to run on two feet while carrying a weapon to bash other life forms in the head would determine that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genes

One of the largest known genomes belongs to the single-celled amoeba

Humans want to believe in evolution because that provides the reasoning for us to claim that we are the highest life form to ever exist. We would never accept that previous humans were as smart as us but had less time to develop the tools the we claim prove our supremacy. If Neanderthal man had a life expectancy of 200,000 years then he too would have eventually created a computer. But almost no one will accept that because it is damaging to our ego.

It is noteworthy that the Neanderthal had a larger brain than "modern humans". Yet evolution claims that the brain should have evolved to become larger in modern humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal
(notice how the author of the wiki has a hard time accepting that as he exclaims that the data was not "adjusted" for the large frame. Since when did bigger people get known for having bigger brains? )
That ego of supremacy is hard to shed.

The earth is round! The earth is round! The earth is round!
But no one heard me until someone else who is worshiped by all agreed that it was true.

If you believe that bullshit ape story about humans then your earth is still flat.


Darwin proclaimed it to be a theory, he never claimed it to be a fact.

[who]

If course evolution theory is false.

[DEA - banned for life]

so is religion ;)

[rvincent]

And nobody from the Nobel comitee to give you some award... What a shame....

[Zuss]

Everyone knows we are alien-ape hybrids..stupid.

[sortie]

And nobody from the Nobel comitee to give you some award... What a shame....

"comitee"??? Is that what Russians use when playing golf?

[buzzy]

Science is changing all the time, the evolution theory will still have it's believers but probally will be fully debunked with in due time. I find it hard to believe this whole world, everything in it, our consience, our brains, everything happened by accident. Good post.

[D]

I don't think anyone (but the ignorant) are saying we evolved from apes... evolutionary theory claims that we share a common ancestor with other primates, not that we're a more evolved form of any extant species.

If you look at the genetic record, you begin to notice patterns... patterns that suggest all life on this planet shares a common ancestor... you can track the progress of evolutionary development... single cell organisms, then single cell organisms working together (a modern-day example of this is the found in any plant as chloroplasts have different genetic sequences than the material in each cells nucleus), and multicellular life was born. Cells begin to specialize, and reproduce with the whole organism... nervous systems get more complex... notochords come into existence, and vertebrates slowly make their way out of the water. I could probably make this one paragraph about 50 pages long, but I won't do that to you. Maybe if you're ever in L.A. and want to buy me a beer...

Instead, I'll just say that I'm not sure what "real science" you're referring to as backing up your fantasy of spontaneous generation... as someone who pays attention to such things, you sound like someone who doesn't have a grasp of the actual science involved.

There's tons of evidence - genetic, and that of the fossil record, that supports the theory of macroevolution. Don't forget that we've been here a very very very long time. Longer than some minds can grasp.

I also don't think that the actual science would claim that we're the most evolved species on the planet... in fact, peer-reviewed papers in Journals such as Nature refute that idea all the time. Hell, just a couple of months ago, the idea that chimps are more evolved that humans was discussed in this very forum, and supported by the idea that they have an extra pair of chromosomes, which allow them greater opportunity at mutation.

The fossil record seems to support the idea of evolution. I don't think you have any real idea of the science involved with evolutionary biology, as you're making a lot of statements that any first-year Premed student could point out as blatantly false:

The scientific idea that "we came from monkeys" (no scientist thinks that - it's a creationists' slant), we're the most evolved species in the planet (no one's saying that, either... just maybe we're the most fortunate), "We would never accept that previous humans were as smart as" (a blantant false statement - in fact, we feel that they were very intelligent, and recent (as in like 2 weeks ago 'recent') evidence shows that they had spoken language)... and then there's the "theory vs. fact" statement you made.

I'm pretty sure I've said this before, but RE: "theory vs. fact": any scientist knows that _everything_ is a theory. That's how science has worked since the dawn of man. What's considered "truth" is found in philosophy, and, in that regard, we're still busy trying to figure out if we're even capable of perceiving "reality" at all. Everything we perceive is a "theory"... we move forward through a process of falsification... we examine the facts, and come up with a theory that accounts for all the facts, and is able to make predictions. Then we keep that theory as the generally accepted theory until observations undeniably contradict the predictions of the theory, or another theory comes along that makes all the predictions the old theory did, but is also able to make predictions that the first theory wasn't able to.

That is science. That is how we learn. We're a species that observes patterns.

You seem like a thinker, man... but you also seem to have a lot of misconceptions driving your thoughts. Try and correct for those.

[cykoe6]

Well, at least the "monkey to man" part is bullshit.

I took this quote from another thread because that thread was nasty.



Too bad that evolution will eventually turn out to be the "fad" science of the times.

I no longer accept the silly notion that humans evolved from apes.

The real science will ultimately show that life on earth was formed in a pool of genetic material where nucleic acid formed DNA fragments that randomly joined with other fragments to form "sets" of more complicated material that could no longer pick up new fragments unless it matched with something that was equally complex. This would be the separation of species at this stage as the complex fragments could no longer conjoin with dissimilar fragments. This finally became the DNA sequences that formed life as we know it.
The final DNA sequence for humans was formed and completed in that pool
and it never evolved from that point on.

This still leaves room for the human to "grow" in stages of form. However, each growth stage would still have the full human DNA and primates don't have that, so even if humans evolved in form, the primate is still excluded.
The "missing link" is missing because it never existed.

The reason that primates are similar to humans is because they were in the same pool but had a slightly different random gathering of genetic material.

It is noteworthy that the single cell organism known as the Amoeba has 200 times the complexity in it's genetic structure than humans. Yet no one would claim that it "out evolved us". This would tend to refute any assumption that the complexity of ones genetic structure could determine superiority.
Being able to run on two feet while carrying a weapon to bash other life forms in the head would determine that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genes



Humans want to believe in evolution because that provides the reasoning for us to claim that we are the highest life form to ever exist. We would never accept that previous humans were as smart as us but had less time to develop the tools the we claim prove our supremacy. If Neanderthal man had a life expectancy of 200,000 years then he too would have eventually created a computer. But almost no one will accept that because it is damaging to our ego.

It is noteworthy that the Neanderthal had a larger brain than "modern humans". Yet evolution claims that the brain should have evolved to become larger in modern humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal
(notice how the author of the wiki has a hard time accepting that as he exclaims that the data was not "adjusted" for the large frame. Since when did bigger people get known for having bigger brains? )
That ego of supremacy is hard to shed.

The earth is round! The earth is round! The earth is round!
But no one heard me until someone else who is worshiped by all agreed that it was true.

If you believe that bullshit ape story about humans then your earth is still flat.


Darwin proclaimed it to be a theory, he never claimed it to be a fact.

Congrats on the stupidest post ever in the long and sordid history of GFY.

[MediumPimpin]

I believe we all come from the great spaghetti monster in the sky!

[minusonebit]

Yeah, creationism just has so many facts on its side. Hell, its irrefutable.

































Not.

[SilentKnight]

Evolution - shot to hell in six simple paragraphs.

Who'd have thunk it, huh?

GFY: home to cerebral thinkers.

[TMM_John]

I believe we all come from the great spaghetti monster in the sky!

And lets get to bringing pirates back so that damn global warming stuff goes away.

[Dirty Dane]

This thread needs evolution.

[MediumPimpin]

And lets get to bringing pirates back so that damn global warming stuff goes away.

LOL, Harrrrr!

Evolution, why can't people see it, they just expect things to "Poof" into existence.

Darwin was right!

[GrouchyAdmin]

If there's any proof that evolution is arbitrary, it's GFY that proves it.

[natkejs]

It's interesting...

We put tremendous effort into experimenting with things like artificial inteligence where the concept is built on processing possibilities.

Yet we find it so hard to believe that nature itself in which we live and breathe would have the same kind of function that we're searching for, the power to learn about it's own process while processing it and improving it in the process.

Nope, that's too hard to believe, just thinking about it gives me a headache ... must have been god that just put us here, yeah man, yeah that makes more sense.

Damn hippies and your evolution

[polle54]

you fucking imbecile

Darwin never said we evolved from the Apes, get your facts straight.

[Kenko]

"Fad science of the times?"

C'mon, its not even debateable among intelligent people.

You can see evolution in action in just a few generations..

2 recent news stories:

Russian scientists breeding crazy killer rats over 40 years:
nytimes.com/2006/07/25/health/25rats.html

Peppered moth studies verified -
Moths adapting to survive in polluted areas:
news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article2893896.ece

What about hospital bugs evolving to survive disinfectants..
Mosquitos resistant to pesticides..
There's proof all around us and thats just in a few generations..

Anyone denying evolution has the right to their opinion - but to anyone with some common sense, it gets about as much respect as some chick droning on about healing crystals ..

[GreyWolf]

That's what is nice about GFY - it may be an adult webmaster board, but has answers to every aspect of human existance and is the font of all knowledge











PS It's also fun to "people watch" - beats all stand up comedy

[borked]

The real science will ultimately show that life on earth was formed in a pool of genetic material where nucleic acid formed DNA fragments that randomly joined with other fragments to form "sets" of more complicated material that could no longer pick up new fragments unless it matched with something that was equally complex. This would be the separation of species at this stage as the complex fragments could no longer conjoin with dissimilar fragments. This finally became the DNA sequences that formed life as we know it.
The final DNA sequence for humans was formed and completed in that pool
and it never evolved from that point on.

Nope, I think you misunderstand evolution. Our bases mutate every second of every day. The cell mostly corrects these mutations, but quite a lot get through, because they are silent (ie they are silent mutations) or they are in a mutation hotspot (a region of DNA where the repair machinery is less eficient than others). This mutation can have advantageous effects (+ve personal gain), deleterious effects (lifespan shortening/inherited nastiness), or neither gain, nor advantage (single nucleotide polymorphisms - SNPs). SNPs account for the vast majority. +ve personal gain is extremely rare, but does exist, for example a particular mutation in the p53 gene which somehow make you more immune from cancer that ?normal? people ? a feature of knockin gene therapy that is hotly researched. The vast majority of evolutionary advantageas are a build-up of SNPs, which eventually create a protein with de novo function.

This takes many thousands of years and it is subtle in its phenotype. As such, you can?t ?see? evolution happening.

This still leaves room for the human to "grow" in stages of form. However, each growth stage would still have the full human DNA and primates don't have that, so even if humans evolved in form, the primate is still excluded.
The "missing link" is missing because it never existed.

No ? absolutely not. The missing link can quite clearly be see in analyzing the genetic material, and it can be seen how the genetic material ?evolved? ? you have clearly never looked into developmental genetics.

The reason that primates are similar to humans is because they were in the same pool but had a slightly different random gathering of genetic material.

Random gathering? Gene clusters exist for a reason ? because gene clustering is essential. Take the classic example of the Hox genes ? those that say your head is your head and not in your ass. They specify body pattern plan, and are clustered according to their expression profile ? those at the ?head? of the geome are expressed in the head, those in the ?tail? are expressed in your feet. Per chance??

It is noteworthy that the single cell organism known as the Amoeba has 200 times the complexity in it's genetic structure than humans. Yet no one would claim that it "out evolved us". This would tend to refute any assumption that the complexity of ones genetic structure could determine superiority.

Noooooope ? having 200x more genetic material than us does not make an amoeba 200x more complex than us. Expression my dear friend is what it?s all about. And of course non-encoding expression. Ever heard of ?junk DNA? ? look it up in wikipedia ;)
Humans are ?more complex? than a fruit fly in your estimation, yet when it comes down to it, we are very very scarily similar. Yet we run, and they fly. We run porn sites, and they lay eggs in bananas. And so what?s your point? Genetic ?complexity? isn?t what dictates ?superiority? ? it?s how your cells use that information ? the entire raison d?etre of the proteome.

If Neanderthal man had a life expectancy of 200,000 years then he too would have eventually created a computer. But almost no one will accept that because it is damaging to our ego.

Nah ? that?s outside the realm of evolutionary biology and more into the mathematics of monkeys? With enough monkeys, anything is possible.

[Jai]

evoution is so true..better concept than a guy that paid for all our sins

[pocketkangaroo]

It is noteworthy that the Neanderthal had a larger brain than "modern humans". Yet evolution claims that the brain should have evolved to become larger in modern humans.

We didn't come from Neanderthals, we came from Cro-Magnoms. I fail to see how the size of their brain would have anything to do with us. Neanderthals went extinct.

[sacX]

Look at the huge variation in dogs, they all come from a common ancestor yet over a couple thousands years through selective breeding by humans there's HUGE variety, that in some cases they could almost be considered different species (because they're unable to breed with one another).

Now imagine the potential selection pressure an ever changing environment could produce over millions of years.

[tony286]

this is my favorite one the earth is only 6000 yrs old.

[Papillon]

Nope, I think you misunderstand evolution. Our bases mutate every second of every day. The cell mostly corrects these mutations, but quite a lot get through, because they are silent (ie they are silent mutations) or they are in a mutation hotspot (a region of DNA where the repair machinery is less eficient than others). This mutation can have advantageous effects (+ve personal gain), deleterious effects (lifespan shortening/inherited nastiness), or neither gain, nor advantage (single nucleotide polymorphisms - SNPs). SNPs account for the vast majority. +ve personal gain is extremely rare, but does exist, for example a particular mutation in the p53 gene which somehow make you more immune from cancer that ?normal? people ? a feature of knockin gene therapy that is hotly researched. The vast majority of evolutionary advantageas are a build-up of SNPs, which eventually create a protein with de novo function.

This takes many thousands of years and it is subtle in its phenotype. As such, you can?t ?see? evolution happening.



No ? absolutely not. The missing link can quite clearly be see in analyzing the genetic material, and it can be seen how the genetic material ?evolved? ? you have clearly never looked into developmental genetics.



Random gathering? Gene clusters exist for a reason ? because gene clustering is essential. Take the classic example of the Hox genes ? those that say your head is your head and not in your ass. They specify body pattern plan, and are clustered according to their expression profile ? those at the ?head? of the geome are expressed in the head, those in the ?tail? are expressed in your feet. Per chance??


Noooooope ? having 200x more genetic material than us does not make an amoeba 200x more complex than us. Expression my dear friend is what it?s all about. And of course non-encoding expression. Ever heard of ?junk DNA? ? look it up in wikipedia ;)
Humans are ?more complex? than a fruit fly in your estimation, yet when it comes down to it, we are very very scarily similar. Yet we run, and they fly. We run porn sites, and they lay eggs in bananas. And so what?s your point? Genetic ?complexity? isn?t what dictates ?superiority? ? it?s how your cells use that information ? the entire raison d?etre of the proteome.



Nah ? that?s outside the realm of evolutionary biology and more into the mathematics of monkeys? With enough monkeys, anything is possible.

great post man

Its nice when someone with obvious intelligence dominates some hyped up fool madly copying and pasting without really understanding what they are talking about.

[Drake]

I also don't think that the actual science would claim that we're the most evolved species on the planet... in fact, peer-reviewed papers in Journals such as Nature refute that idea all the time. Hell, just a couple of months ago, the idea that chimps are more evolved that humans was discussed in this very forum, and supported by the idea that they have an extra pair of chromosomes, which allow them greater opportunity at mutation.

Chimps are more evolved than humans?

Perhaps they have a "chromosomal" advantage, but dare I say we have a cerebral advantage? It's all subjective I suppose.

[minusonebit]

this is my favorite one the earth is only 6000 yrs old.

Yeah, thats always a goody. Was just watching something on History channel about how they have revised the age of the earth to be even older than they thought based on some discovery in some rocks or something.

[sortie]

I hereby declare "evolution" as the "Monkey Religion".

Just as I expected, I inflamed the nerves of the monkey religion fanatics.
It was like I said something bad about Allah.

Evolution has evolved into a religion with it's believers ready to aim and fire on any alternate theory.

The tone of the responses says it all. If I'm just discussing something meaningless then there is no anger in the response, but I have insulted their belief, their god!!

Darwin is your Jesus.

[Dirty Dane]

Evolution is supposed to drive the species forward. If we origin from the sea, howcome we drown in water?

[Will Black]

Evolution is supposed to drive the species forward. If we origin from the sea, howcome we drown in water?

So much mis-information. I hope what you said above was a joke and you don't really think it disproves the premordial mud theory.

Evolution doesn't mean progress or move toward complexity, it means

*******DECENT WITH MODIFICATION...ITS A CHANGE OF GENE FREQUENCIES OVER TIME. THE MOST POPULAR GENES SURVIVE AND ARE PASS DOWN. THAT IS ALL.

Plenty of species get less complex, look at virus and bacterial, very simple and very popular and sometimes very deadly (although deadliness for a virus btw is not a good thing, symbiosis is, as it guarantees that the virus or bacterial will survive and reproduce!).

If you all knew all the available data on evolution, you'd be stupid to ignore it as fact.

[minusonebit]

I hereby declare "evolution" as the "Monkey Religion".

Just as I expected, I inflamed the nerves of the monkey religion fanatics.
It was like I said something bad about Allah.

Evolution has evolved into a religion with it's believers ready to aim and fire on any alternate theory.

The tone of the responses says it all. If I'm just discussing something meaningless then there is no anger in the response, but I have insulted their belief, their god!!

Darwin is your Jesus.

Eh, not quite. In order for it to be a religion, it would have to have a code of conduct and shit like that. And churches and people to tell us how to run every aspect of our lives and lobby the government to imprison us who dare to rebel against the established codes. Its just a theory. There are some competiting theroies, the leading one being that some guy in the sky made us and will save us from ourselves when he is ready.

[Will Black]

you fucking imbecile

Darwin never said we evolved from the Apes, get your facts straight.

Quoted for TRUTH....he said we ARE apes. We are a form of Ape and we have a distant common ancestor, that is why we exist at the same time. At some point in our evolutionary past, we diverged and became separate animals, likely due to a divergence in space, habitat and ultimately food sources. Because certain traits were more favourable over time, the gene frequencies of each diverged further increased the differences.

[sortie]

So much mis-information. I hope what you said above was a joke and you don't really think it disproves the premordial mud theory.

Evolution doesn't mean progress or move toward complexity, it means

*******DECENT WITH MODIFICATION...ITS A CHANGE OF GENE FREQUENCIES OVER TIME. THE MOST POPULAR GENES SURVIVE AND ARE PASS DOWN. THAT IS ALL.

Plenty of species get less complex, look at virus and bacterial, very simple and very popular and sometimes very deadly (although deadliness for a virus btw is not a good thing, symbiosis is, as it guarantees that the virus or bacterial will survive and reproduce!).

If you all knew all the available data on evolution, you'd be stupid to ignore it as fact.

Ok, then why don't you explain:

Cross species evolution

The process by which a new species emerged from another.

Keeping in mind the following scientific facts:

- A species is one group that can breed within itself and produce fertile offspring. (You know, the reason why you can't breed two mules to get another and you have to breed a horse with a donkey to get another mule.)

- DNA does not undergo metamorphosis during the life of the being so it must be born as the new species.(if you can prove this to not be true then I will certainly admit that evolution is probably true as expressed by the "darwinist")


That's enough for now. I have more if you can come up with any science to refute that.

[sortie]

Eh, not quite. In order for it to be a religion, it would have to have a code of conduct and shit like that. And churches and people to tell us how to run every aspect of our lives and lobby the government to imprison us who dare to rebel against the established codes. Its just a theory. There are some competiting theroies, the leading one being that some guy in the sky made us and will save us from ourselves when he is ready.

I define religion as an "impervious belief".

No matter what evidence is put to the believer the belief will not waiver.
That is why Darwinism is a religion. It is an opinionated science at it's best whereby the opinion of the researcher becomes the fact even though there is no absolute proof of that opinion.

So we have millions of people arguing opinions but the Darwinist are the only ones who claim their opinion is a fact. Like God is a fact to the religious believer.


Never believe in anything, because when you start believing you stop thinking.

[Dirty Dane]

Quoted for TRUTH....he said we ARE apes. We are a form of Ape and we have a distant common ancestor, that is why we exist at the same time. At some point in our evolutionary past, we diverged and became separate animals, likely due to a divergence in space, habitat and ultimately food sources. Because certain traits were more favourable over time, the gene frequencies of each diverged further increased the differences.

Actually we are pigs. Our genes are more common to pigs than apes. So, before we talk about the ancestor of apes, we have to talk about the ancestor of pigs.

[minusonebit]

I define religion as an "impervious belief".

No matter what evidence is put to the believer the belief will not waiver.
That is why Darwinism is a religion. It is an opinionated science at it's best whereby the opinion of the researcher becomes the fact even though there is no absolute proof of that opinion.

So we have millions of people arguing opinions but the Darwinist are the only ones who claim their opinion is a fact. Like God is a fact to the religious believer.


Never believe in anything, because when you start believing you stop thinking.

But where is the scientific proof that evolution is a bunch of horse shit? As far as I can see, no one has put any such thing forth here that hasn't already been discredited. I agree with your definition of religion, I am just saying that no one has put forth any proof yet and thus it doesn't qualify as a religion.

[sortie]

But where is the scientific proof that evolution is a bunch of horse shit? As far as I can see, no one has put any such thing forth here that hasn't already been discredited. I agree with your definition of religion, I am just saying that no one has put forth any proof yet and thus it doesn't qualify as a religion.

There is plenty of contradictory scientific evidence but it is like contradicting god to the darwinist.

Like the question I asked above: Explain cross species evolution.

All science suggest that this is not possible but it is a major element of the theory of evolution.

This post is really just to see what people really know because I actually do believe that evolution is the most likely explanation for the current state of life. I however do not adopt it blindly as a religion.
I want hard proof, not someones opinion based on the shape of a bone he dug up.

[sortie]

Actually we are pigs. Our genes are more common to pigs than apes. So, before we talk about the ancestor of apes, we have to talk about the ancestor of pigs.

Nobody will discuss pigs because that's a blow to our ego.
We think pigs are nasty so no way could we actually be related.

You really summed up the entire jest for my post in that one phrase.
It's our ego that is controling the science.

[fatfoo]

[CurrentlySober]

i like poo so I guess I'm de-evolving...

[Will Black]

Actually we are pigs. Our genes are more common to pigs than apes. So, before we talk about the ancestor of apes, we have to talk about the ancestor of pigs.

WE ARE APES...its a fact. We aren't pigs.

[Will Black]

Ok, then why don't you explain:

Cross species evolution

The process by which a new species emerged from another.

Keeping in mind the following scientific facts:

- A species is one group that can breed within itself and produce fertile offspring. (You know, the reason why you can't breed two mules to get another and you have to breed a horse with a donkey to get another mule.)

- DNA does not undergo metamorphosis during the life of the being so it must be born as the new species.(if you can prove this to not be true then I will certainly admit that evolution is probably true as expressed by the "darwinist")


That's enough for now. I have more if you can come up with any science to refute that.

"A species is one group that can breed within itself and produce fertile offspring." DId you mean interbred outside of its species? Because what you are saying is retarded. A species the breeds within itself is perfectly normal.

IF You mean one species interbreeding with a member of another species it makes infertile offspring. A species is a definition. It is all members that can interbred to create viable and fertile offspring. If we debate definitions, we wont get anywhere.

"DNA does not undergo metamorphosis during the life of the being so it must be born as the new species.(if you can prove this to not be true then I will certainly admit that evolution is probably true as expressed by the "darwinist")"

Not true, radiation can change the make-up of a DNA. It normally makes you sterile though, but it can also fuck up your DNA. It's assumed as well that some fuck-ups can be a good thing and make something beneficial to an offspring. But anyway, species are changed over time. Small changes in the frequencies of genes (as I mentioned before). Look at the evolution of dogs by example. They can all still interbred and are therefore still dogs = canines, but over time and with enough change (isolation) the difference could become so significant that the offspring become sterile and the variations in the dogs become permanent and the mixing of genes no longer occurs because the offspring can't reproduce. Now you have two different species. Problem solved? It doesn't happen over the lifetime of an animal, evolution is a change of the frequencies of genes over time.

[Will Black]

It blows my mind about how much information is free and available out there, that no one bothers to know. Read more and realize how little you actually know.

[After Shock Media]

If Neanderthal man had a life expectancy of 200,000 years then he too would have eventually created a computer. But almost no one will accept that because it is damaging to our ego.

Aside from that Cro-Magnons man came after Neanderthal, both in each of their own times were on this planet way longer than we (today's humans) ever were. Neanderthal had reign over this planet for some 200,000 plus years alone. They barely got down fire, basic tools, and minimal culture in that time. Cro ended up with more culture (art/decorations) and a little more advanced tools yet again free reign for unfathomable years compared to our own race today.

So no if given 200,000 years they would still of ended up where they were. They had that and then some.

As for the rest of your or well some others arguments who would rather say god created it all (creationism) I am not about to even delve into as they are not only absurd, yet nearly always disproved or dismissed by real science. Unless and a big unless it falls into one of the missing link categories. Since not every single gawd damn step happened to get fossilized unfortunately.

[sortie]

It blows my mind about how much information is free and available out there, that no one bothers to know. Read more and realize how little you actually know.

You can't even read the shit I just wrote as you stupidly began to repeat the definition of a species as cleary defined by me already. You were arguing my exact point.

You went around you ass to reach your elbow to say exaclty what I said.
That stuff I put there about the mule was for idiots like you who couldn't grasp the concept without an example.

[halfpint]

Actually we are pigs. Our genes are more common to pigs than apes. So, before we talk about the ancestor of apes, we have to talk about the ancestor of pigs.

If we are pigs people that eat bacon are cannibals, maybe the Jews know something we dont

[Will Black]

You can't even read the shit I just wrote as you stupidly began to repeat the definition of a species as cleary defined by me already. You were arguing my exact point.

You went around you ass to reach your elbow to say exaclty what I said.
That stuff I put there about the mule was for idiots like you who couldn't grasp the concept without an example.

You're just arguing semantics anyway.

I just showed you how you can get mutations in the lifetime of a specific animal = radiation. An animal can also be born with mutations via birth defects, other random mutations, odd mixes in genes and so forth. So there you go, evolution happens. Evolution by Natural Selection happens, we can do it with quick replicating organisms like flies (proven = it happens now during our lifetimes, we can watch it happen and measure it). We can use solar radiation to make genes mutate. You are looking for a method or means of genetic variation, there it is. Mutations are what evolution feeds off of.

[sortie]

Not true, radiation can change the make-up of a DNA. It normally makes you sterile though, but it can also fuck up your DNA.

OHHH!! Now radiation is the cause of evolution!! BWAHHAHA!

You got one part right...it fucks up the DNA and fucked up DNA is not part of theory of evolution.

It's assumed as well that some fuck-ups can be a good thing and make something beneficial to an offspring.

You got the assumed part right since there isn't one shred of fucking proof.
We've had billions of birth defects for altered DNA but not a single
"Birth Effect". Expose some embryo to radiation and create 10 Michael Jordans and You would have something similar to proof.

Look at the evolution of dogs by example. They can all still interbred and are therefore still dogs = canines, but over time and with enough change (isolation) the difference could become so significant that the offspring become sterile and the variations in the dogs become permanent and the mixing of genes no longer occurs because the offspring can't reproduce. Now you have two different species.

That is the dumb-shit down-fall of the entire theory of evolution.

PROVE THAT!!!

FUCKING PROVE THAT!!

Breed some dogs until a fucking rat comes out!!
Or breed some monkeys until a human comes out!

DO IT!! Fucking DO it!!

[Jim_Gunn]

Sortie, sorry man, I don't know if this is all just some sort of dry joke or goof that you are posting on the forum, or if you really believe what you are typing but what you are saying is ludicrous. There is not one single thing you said nor one conclusion that you made about evolution that has any basis in logic or science.

When I read the conspiracy theories and so-called scientific discussion here on GFY I often wonder if I am just missing the inside joke and it's all nonsense from a board "character", or if some people really are that uneducated and ignorant.