I'll my two cents in as a Christian.
Evolution is a tool that God has used throughout time to make sure his creations remain viable as their habitats change. I dont believe it to be random but more like a complex series of equations desigined to get the optimum result from each new generation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll my two cents in as a Christian.
Evolution is a tool that God has used throughout time to make sure his creations remain viable as their habitats change. I dont believe it to be random but more like a complex series of equations desigined to get the optimum result from each new generation.
As an atheist I can accept that reasoning.
We can be friends even though we don't share the same beliefs.See how that works, humans?
Now if you had said any version of "it's magic" you'd lose all credibility in my eyes and you wouldn't get invited to brunch.
;-)
I'll my two cents in as a Christian.
Evolution is a tool that God has used throughout time to make sure his creations remain viable as their habitats change. I dont believe it to be random but more like a complex series of equations desigined to get the optimum result from each new generation.
As an atheist I can accept that reasoning.
We can be friends even though we don't share the same beliefs.See how that works, humans?
Now if you had said any version of "it's magic" you'd lose all credibility in my eyes and you wouldn't get invited to brunch.
;-)
Well to define magic is a whole other ball park involving things that would sound crazy to even the ghostbusters.
Btw what are we having for brunch and should i bring something?
Well to define magic is a whole other ball park involving things that would sound crazy to even the ghostbusters.Btw what are we having for brunch and should i bring something?
I'm an awesome cook. Just bring Mimosas. Or bloody mary's. Dealers choice.
I know you said them in jest, but people do ask them seriously. For those (and those who don't have a biology background but would like to know how to answer them)
Question: "If evolution is correct, then why are there still monkeys?"
Answer: There's a few rather common misconceptions in the question that need to be addressed.
First off, evolution does not posit that humans came from monkeys. We came from (and still are) Apes. The short difference is that monkeys usually have tails and apes usually do not (if you know enough to correct me on that point, chances are you don't need this answer) Monkeys are our cousins, not our ancestors. (with the possible exception of my nephew)
Ape and monkey are GROUPS of species. Not species.
Evolution is not a process with an end in mind. There is no mystical, platonic idea of "a human" or "a horse" or "a bird" for species to evolve into. Evolution does not posit that there is an end goal in mind and that species are part of a process to reach that end. It is a process driven by the past and the present, not the future.
It did not happen with us, but it is entirely possible to exist along side your "descendant" species. Some of the key factors for speciation is separation and adaptation. If there is a geographic barrier, say a large stretch of ocean, a few individuals can wind up there and begin to breed. The birds on the other side of the ocean will remain largely the same because conditions aren't changing much, but the birds on the island will, over the course of generations, adapt and change to their new homes, eventually becoming a subspecies, and perhaps at some point a new species altogether.
In short, "descendant" species do not have to supplant the parent species, they can move out, move on, or leave their parents a room in the house they take over.
|
Quantum gravity...{sets aside popcorn, whispers:} Shhhhh, don't tip off the Poni-boi.Psst... Roddy is actually a pushover in a fight; I'm sure you can mug him easily and just take the sunglasses.Unfortunately Roddy just ran out of bubblegum...The Sooner you accept String Theory as your only truth we can move on to selecting sheldon as a high priest.
{steals ambrosia slaads popcorn and giggles}
Dont ya mean Quantum Loop Gravity? No wonder you will believe any old rubbish.
|
|
I'll my two cents in as a Christian.
Evolution is a tool that God has used throughout time to make sure his creations remain viable as their habitats change. I dont believe it to be random but more like a complex series of equations desigined to get the optimum result from each new generation.
At superposition all life is the same life so I created the universe and I'll tell you now...I just let it fall where it lands.
And another thing: I frequently play with dice. I just ignore the results and tell the players any old rubbish.
|
As much as i like the (relatively) more plausible explanation it seems rather odd that the real gods creation myth is no more accurate than anyone elses. For example, the order of creation is wrong (birds evolved well after land animals for examples)Personal opinion only!!!
The way I look at Genesis is as follows. God was trying to explain to man how everything was done but being that man had only just mastered the art of making permanent settlements and not much else as far as science. So when God first explained quantum physics and complex amino acids, he got blank stares. So he decided to give an allegory in a way that it was more easily understood by Bronze Age civilization.
However, "giving the bird" evolved WELL BEFORE the invention automobile!
|
|
As much as i like the (relatively) more plausible explanation it seems rather odd that the real gods creation myth is no more accurate than anyone elses. For example, the order of creation is wrong (birds evolved well after land animals for examples)Personal opinion only!!!
The way I look at Genesis is as follows. God was trying to explain to man how everything was done but being that man had only just mastered the art of making permanent settlements and not much else as far as science. So when God first explained quantum physics and complex amino acids, he got blank stares. So he decided to give an allegory in a way that it was more easily understood by Bronze Age civilization.However, "giving the bird" evolved WELL BEFORE the invention automobile!
How do you know Birds evolved after land animals? Because someone said so? What if they are wrong? We only assume facts based on data but if the basic data is corrupted or our analysis of the data is flawed then we could be looking at a situation where time is a false concept.
I've concluded that the Concept of Time is a consequence of continuous change in Possibility and the moment of change in possibility is a Singularity so a Black Hole becomes a determining factor in any 'change' or evolution of a species. If we remove time as a factor we are then looking at a state change where time is like the light given off during the state change.
How do you know Birds evolved after land animals? Because someone said so? What if they are wrong? We only assume facts based on data but if the basic data is corrupted or our analysis of the data is flawed then we could be looking at a situation where time is a false concept.
Hello epistemic nihilism.
The short answer is that we know that fossils are in sedimentary rocks.
We know how sedimentary rocks form because we can see the processes of erosion and compaction happening around us.
We know that because of the way sedimentary rocks form the further down you go the older the rocks get, because there's no way for a river to deposit a layer of sediment, compact it, pick the layer up , put a layer under it, and put the old layer back down.
We can confirm this by dating layers of igneous rock in between layers of sediment, and if your fossils are really recent you can check that this works with carbon dating.
I've concluded that the Concept of Time is a consequence of continuous change in Possibility and the moment of change in possibility is a Singularity so a Black Hole becomes a determining factor in any 'change' or evolution of a species. If we remove time as a factor we are then looking at a state change where time is like the light given off during the state change.
Was this written with magnetic poetry: physics version?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The molecular evidence is the smoking gun, probably providing the most powerful support for common descent (in this case, the idea that the first tetrapods were fishlike creatures exploiting littoral niches, from which evolved amphibians, from which evolved terrestrial animals not dependent on aquatic environments). I recommend this website highly for those wishing to educate themselves.
The molecular evidence is the smoking gun, probably providing the most powerful support for common descent (in this case, the idea that the first tetrapods were fishlike creatures exploiting littoral niches, from which evolved amphibians, from which evolved terrestrial animals not dependent on aquatic environments). I recommend this website highly for those wishing to educate themselves.
I prefer to live in ignorance and make ascertations based not on how things actually work, but how I think they should work. ;-)
|
|
The molecular evidence is the smoking gun, probably providing the most powerful support for common descent (in this case, the idea that the first tetrapods were fishlike creatures exploiting littoral niches, from which evolved amphibians, from which evolved terrestrial animals not dependent on aquatic environments). I recommend this website highly for those wishing to educate themselves.I prefer to live in ignorance and make ascertations based not on how things actually work, but how I think they should work. ;-)
You're a politician??
You're a politician??The molecular evidence is the smoking gun, probably providing the most powerful support for common descent (in this case, the idea that the first tetrapods were fishlike creatures exploiting littoral niches, from which evolved amphibians, from which evolved terrestrial animals not dependent on aquatic environments). I recommend this website highly for those wishing to educate themselves.I prefer to live in ignorance and make ascertations based not on how things actually work, but how I think they should work. ;-)
Nono, just a Creationist. If he's also a politician, he might be a Republican candidate for president :O
Nono, just a Creationist. If he's also a politician, he might be a Republican candidate for president :OYou're a politician??The molecular evidence is the smoking gun, probably providing the most powerful support for common descent (in this case, the idea that the first tetrapods were fishlike creatures exploiting littoral niches, from which evolved amphibians, from which evolved terrestrial animals not dependent on aquatic environments). I recommend this website highly for those wishing to educate themselves.I prefer to live in ignorance and make ascertations based not on how things actually work, but how I think they should work. ;-)
VOTE FOR ME!! **Nixon style double peace sign**
Monkeys are our cousins, not our ancestors. (with the possible exception of my nephew)Your cousin is your ancestor? Sounds like some weird time s%#+.
I've been watching Dr. Who, so that makes perfect sense to me though i know it shouldn't.
|
|
I've been watching Dr. Who, so that makes perfect sense to me though i know it shouldn't.Monkeys are our cousins, not our ancestors. (with the possible exception of my nephew)Your cousin is your ancestor? Sounds like some weird time s%#+.
Pfft. Stupid English. ALWAYS with the time-travelling. Phantom Tollbooth, Land Before Time, Big Ben. SO LAME>
|
|
What Yellowding said....For example, the order of creation is wrong (birds evolved well after land animals for examples)Personal opinion only!!!
What I said.However, "giving the bird" evolved WELL BEFORE the invention automobile!
[tongue in cheek]That'll be the last time that I waste a light-hearted quip![/tonuge in cheek]