esnem

Evolution isn't fact, its a theory, therefore not proven.

There is room for debate in this thread regarding evolution, not gravity.

rett11

that last post was b.s. sorry. one cell organism in water...fish. one cell organism on rock...climbing lizard. etc. etc. bottom line is there is NO evidence for creationism...and SOME eveidence for evolution. plus...taking over the world and breeding dogs is FORCED evolution...we're talking natural evolution. supposing that us taking over the world has something to do with this tells me you are religious...it's the only way forced evolution makes sense.

Drake

That's correct.

Evolution thus far relies on a myriad of aggregate evidence that will support it if one interprets that evidence as such and assumes that the many assumptions underlying that evidence is correct (for instance that the world as it exists today existed in relatively similar way millions of years ago seeing that it takes such an environment to support fragile life).

Many will say that the overwhelming evidence supports it. I disagree. I do believe that their is a kernel of evidence that suggests it may be true, but should be demonstrated (if possible).

Probono

This gets tiresome since it is a recurring debate.

The best evidence for evolution is genome research.

When I studied embryology years ago we were taught ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. If you watch the development of any vertibrate embryo you see the common evolution in the state of development.

Today with genome research they have confirmed common genes among species, with some very minor differences in the genome causing major differences in phenotype (appearence). Man is lot closer to frogs than we would want to admit.

Does this prove evolution, no but it has more and more evidence behind it. Could there have been some devine intervention, seeding of the planet by aliens who were god like, yes of course. We may never know unless them come back to check on their work.

I like the Grecoroman concept of the gods procreating with common humans, sounds good to me. Bring back the god of wine.

Drake

Breeding dogs as we've seen is not an example of evolution, much less forced evolution. Look, if you started messing around with human genes and implanted them into a woman, you might come out with a child with 3 legs. I wouldn't call that evolution. I would call that a mutant. Similarly I wouldn't call a dog that finds it difficult to breath and can hardly breed on it's own, a natural animal that could or would have evolved. Thus it's not evolution.

Taking over the world is not evolution. You missed the point. I gave an example of how their are some out their that will use the theory for their own agenda. People like you claim that those who don't believe in evolution are "religious". Couldn't be further from the truth. I don't need a magical friend in the sky.

esnem

i haven't stated my opinion one way or the other, i just like watching people yell about what came first the chicken or the egg.

i do know however that the theory of evolution is based off scientific fact, whereas creationism is based off of man made documents. Unicorns and leprechauns are also based off of man made documents.

Drake

I agree. The bible is a book of fiction written by men in the dark ages to provide him with comfort by providing explanations of the unknown. It even has a "chosen people". I guess the rest of us just don't cut it to be selected as chosen people. Sucks to be us.

Evolution is based on an aggregate of facts, extrapolation, interpretation, and half truths.

Doctor Dre

Bush too

__________________

CET

Only desperate creationists say that.

__________________
Alt Journals, Blogs for Perverts!

Fitness and nutrition writer, and UNIX/Linux Sys Ad in training

"Just as a man who has fallen into a heap of filth ought to seek the great pond of water covered with lotuses, which is near by: even so seek thou for the great deathless lake of Nirvana to wash off the defilement of wrong. If the lake is not sought, it is not the fault of the lake."

esnem

I agree with a lot of what you're saying but there's a lot of historical facts in the bible. Never fails to amaze me that people who've never read it are the first to talk shit on it.

Probono

There are more factual errors than facts in the bible. They have been digging up the middle east for a century trying to prove the bible, rather unsuccessfully.

The gospels in the new testament don't even agree with each other and if you add the gospels they left out it become more of a comedy.

The one thing Islam hs going for is its that the Quran is " the world of god" spoken by god to his prophet and there are no conflicts since it says what ever was said last overrides what ever was said first. Makes it easy.

esnem

good point, no doubt HUGE inconsistencies in it...i had to read the quran for a middle eastern studies class once, never got through it all...what i find ironic is how many rednecks will say that the quran is utter garbage, but the bible is the word of god and to be taken literally.

Drake

The problem with 'historical facts' in the bible, if there are any, is that it doesn't make the bible true.

It's easy to place a fictional character (like Jesus) admidst real historical events and places. Think Forrest Gump.

William-Xfactor

Proof for the non believers

pornguy

that is why they are called THEORIES...
because neither one has been proven.

__________________
PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic

AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online!
TChicks.com | Angeles Cid | Mariana Cordoba | MAILERS WELCOME!

pornguy

that is the best PhotoCHOP ever!
Juicy will love it!!!

__________________
PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic

AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online!
TChicks.com | Angeles Cid | Mariana Cordoba | MAILERS WELCOME!

Joe Citizen

Scientific theories are never proven, they can only be falsified.

volante