Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 157

Thread: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

  1. #31
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I see them used interchangably too often so just wanting to clarify.

    Do you mean Creationists as in LITERAL creationists, IE those that believe the earth is as old as the Bible says it is and men lived in the time of Dinosaurs and fossil records are absolutely false and god went "poof" and man was there...

    Or do you mean creationists as in the derogatory term placed on people who believe in Intelligent Design?


    Because while I understand evolution is in general a rather disliked and disputed notion to literal creationists, I thought with most ID'ers the notion of evolution isn't just not disputed but is readily accepted as a generalized idea?
    Bad News: 'Intelligent Design' IS just respun creationism, and of course needs a DesignER/GOD. And is identically deservant of derogation.

    Several postings now of:
    Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Intelligent design is the assertion that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection."[1][2]
    It is a modern form of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, but one which avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer.[3]
    The idea was developed by a group of American creationists who Reformulated their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to Circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science.[4][5][6] Intelligent design's leading proponents – all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank[7][8] – believe the designer to be the God of Christianity.[9][10]

    Advocates of intelligent design seek to fundamentally Redefine Science to accept Supernatural explanations,[11] arguing that intelligent design is a scientific theory under this new definition of science.[12]
    The Unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is NOT science.[13][14][15][16]
    The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are NOT science because they are not testable by the methods of science."[17] The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it Pseudoscience.[18] Others in the scientific community have concurred, and some have called it Junk science.[19][20]......"

    Overview

    The term "intelligent design" came into use after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1987 case of Edwards v. Aguillard that to require the teaching of "creation science" alongside evolution was a violation of the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state endorsement of a religion. In the Edwards case, the Supreme Court had also held that "teaching a variety of scientific theories about the origins of humankind to school children might be validly done with the clear secular intent of enhancing the effectiveness of science instruction".[24] In drafts of the creation science textbook 'Of Pandas and People', almost all derivatives of the word "Creation", such as "Creationism", were Replaced with the words "intelligent design".[21] The book was published in 1989, followed by a "grass-roots" campaign promoting the use of the book to teach intelligent design in high-school biology classes.[25]....."
    Last edited by mbig; 07-02-10 at 04:37 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  2. #32
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    Evolution and how the first cell came into being are not the same.
    The concept/word is 'abiogeneis'

    Abiogenesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Correct. However see my other post. The mention of evolution in this post, based on the targeting of creationism, is not meant to prove evolution but more to prove evolution in regards to a way that disproves the notion of creationism. However, to my understanding, the notion that evolution exists doesn't disprove creationism directly as, outside of the most literalistic versions of creationism, evolution can still exist.

    Which is why I don't think that poster's point is irrelevant to the discussion. If Dana posted this talking about evolution and disproving "Those that believe evolution doesn't exist" then I'd agree. But he specifically called out all creationists and did it in such a way to suggest that this somehow proves their beliefs wrong, which it does not necessarily do.

  3. #33
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    Hate to break this to you but... "Intellent Design' IS just respun creationism, and of course needs a DesignER/GOD. And is identically deservant of derogation.

    Several postings now of:
    Intelligent design - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Regardless if its "respsun", or just a change in theory, and regardless of what militant athiests may hate or think about it, there is still a distinct difference between:

    "There is an intelligent designer/god/supernatural force of which was the catalyst for the creation of the universe and/or life"

    and

    "The earth is 10,000 years old and the Christian god put man directly on the earth in the garden of eden and fossil records are a lie"

    Just because you have personal disdain due to your personal faith for both views doesn't mean they're the same view.

  4. #34
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Regardless if its "respsun", or just a change in theory, and regardless of what militant athiests may hate or think about it, there is still a distinct difference between:

    "There is an intelligent designer/god/supernatural force of which was the catalyst for the creation of the universe and/or life"

    and

    "The earth is 10,000 years old and the Christian god put man directly on the earth in the garden of eden and fossil records are a lie"

    Just because you have personal disdain due to your personal faith for both views doesn't mean they're the same view.
    They Both replace rationality with the Supernatural.
    And as I showed above, ID is just stealth creationism.

    Is Young Earth Creationism/YEC (actually they claim 6000 years) worse than mere creationism?
    Sure! because it's more easily and demonstrably false and obvious to all but the totally blocked.
    In fact, YEC is so ridiculous it should go in the Conspiracy section as the 9/11 truthers have a far better case than they.

    One can believe in God with no problem, it's just when people start to attribute deeds to him that conflict with scientific evidence to the contrary that it is.

    God for many just being a concept/Substitute, as one can see here and in all strings, to explain everything/anything that the believer doesn't understand.
    This "Then how do you explain..." is just fallacious deduction, and has lead in the past to the Tens of Thousands of other gods to do the same (Fire, Lightning, Rain, etc).

    The 'God' in this string is the "Well then how did life..."? God.
    We don't know yet!.. but all the other gods vanished when we did find out.
    Last edited by mbig; 07-02-10 at 04:56 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  5. #35
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    This statement is pants-on-head ignorant. The research behind evolution is extensive.
    Screw the research. Look at the tangible commercial products.

    You use gasoline? That's found via applying evolutionary time lines to track ancient diatom concentrations in certain geological locations that are conducive to oil formation. Creationism has produced tangible nothing but print and media propaganda.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #36
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I see them used interchangably too often so just wanting to clarify.

    Do you mean Creationists as in LITERAL creationists, IE those that believe the earth is as old as the Bible says it is and men lived in the time of Dinosaurs and fossil records are absolutely false and god went "poof" and man was there...

    Or do you mean creationists as in the derogatory term placed on people who believe in Intelligent Design?
    Uh, Zyphlin, you do realize that Intelligent Design is nothing more then repackaged Animism no?

    What we cannot explain now or what is complex to explain now, aka the eye is the cause of a "designer" is the same functional principle as why ancient people (and some today) believe that the rains were caused by the Rain God. Can't explain = Supernatural caused it. There is no reason to accept Intelligent Design if you reject that Zeus doesn't throw lightning bolts.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  7. #37
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Well, this is intresting.

    I am a creationist, by the way. Perhaps an odd one by some lights... I believe that whatever happened, whatever the details, it did so by God's will and in whatever time scale He dictated. Was it a literal "poof-BAM" six days? Or is the six days symbolic of six eras? Or did Time itself bend to the Creator's will?

    I dunno. I ask Him when I see Him. This sort of news doesn't phase me or alter my beliefs in any way. I'm perfectly capable of discussing evolution as if I believed it, which I don't: I acknowlege it as a working theory based on available evidence, derived from a scientific viewpoint that necessarily excludes God and the miraculous. When I'm discussing existing science, I'll use scientific terms and theories; that doesn't mean I accept the exclusion of God. That necessity in evolution, of excluding God from its calculations, is the reason I can never fully accept it because I believe in a Creator God who was in control of things.

    A scientist looks at how the electron in an "excited" atom moves from higher to lower potential and emits a photon, and is pleased to have discovered how nature allows for the creation of light.

    I look at the same information, and accept the scientific aspects of it, and think "ah, so THAT is how God ordered the laws of nature to create light!"

    Matter of perspective. To me, all things are both natural and supernatural, such as a leaf blowing in the wind. Natural, because that is the effect of moving air on something with the physical characteristics of a leaf. Supernatural, because leaves blowing in the wind are part of God's will, how he designed the world to work. Scientists call them "laws of physics", I think of them as "how God made things work."

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  8. #38
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,751

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    I think you mean "postulate".

    Evolution is far from proven in that regard. There is zero evidence that humans came from monkeys.

    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  9. #39
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Tibetans live at altitudes of 13,000 feet, breathing air that has 40 percent less oxygen than is available at sea level, yet suffer very little mountain sickness. The reason, according to a team of biologists in China, is human evolution, in what may be the most recent and fastest instance detected so far.

    More here at the link
    Anything which increases knowledge and supports Darwin's theory is good news to me.
    I can't say I've met many creationists in London but that may be because of the status of Darwin and the emphasis on him in our science lessons at school.
    Last edited by Laila; 07-02-10 at 10:08 PM.


  10. #40
    blond bombshell

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    uk
    Last Seen
    10-19-12 @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,729

    Re: Scientists Cite Fastest Case of Human Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Well, I can't speak for all Creationists, but here's my opinion.

    I don't discount that humans, and all species, have an amazing ability to adapt. I don't discount that over time, humans have changed in different ways as part of a "survival of the fittest" weening out process. I readily accept those conclusions.

    What I don't accept - and I say this for effect, not saying you believe this - is that a paramecium turned into a fish thing, which turned into a salamander, which turned into a squirrel, which turned into a monkey, which turned into a human. I realize that is an oversimplification of the theory of evolution, but that aspect of it remains the most implausible and unproven aspect of the whole thing.

    Evolution, or the changing and adaptation of the earth's species, is not in my mind at odds with Creationism. It is in itself, a "miracle" as you would prescribe the religious views on these things.

    Whatever the process is not necessarily for us to understand, and it is certainly in the control of a higher power in my mind. Science and religion do not have to conflict with each other, which most Christians acknowledge.

    Churches are not filled with just mindless idiots, as non-believers would like to think. Albert Einstein believed in God, and many of the congregation each Sunday are educated, successful people who have given this a great deal of thought. Don't let the over-the-top televangelists paint the stereotype for you.
    Einstein didnt believe in a personal god of any discription and used the term god basically as a tool can we please put this myth to bed.You need to read a decent book about evolution.I would reccomend anything by stephen jay gould something like the Panda's thumb is more of an easy read for someone who isnt to interested in just a strauight educational book.
    The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

Page 4 of 16 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •