101–110 of 117 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe in physics. Do you believe we understand everything about physics ? we don't. For example gravity, there still much to learn about the force behind gravity.
So you are saying god rests in gravity? Why is it relevant if we understand all of physics? 5000 years ago people did understand almost nothing of physics, yet the laws of physics still applied.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are only asking for the basics of evolution, every textbook should have you covered (or even Google). And it doesn't happen the way you imagine it, those traits don't have to evolve from one day to the next. Bears can live in Canada because they can hibernate, they didn't live there and had to learn how to hibernate on short notice when winter came.
Have you not read textbook that explained specialized traits as reaction to the environment ? How could that be possible when these traits are needed immediately. You miss the point, why don't we have thousands of animals with the ability to hibernate that don't need them ? Of course traits don't have to evolve rapidly if you already have them or don't need them. But why would you already have the ability to hibernat…
Because a tendency to hibernate is likely negative for survivorship when it's not necessary - if lots of other animals are moving around and you aren't, then something is more likely to come and kill you.
On the other hand, lots of animals have other varying traits that aren't obviously useful, but don't exact a significant enough toll to cause them to disappear.
> But why would you already have the ability to hibernate efficiently if you don't need it
Doesn't that assume that bears were transported into Canada and survived because they could hibernate? Isn't it perfectly possible that they moved further north gradually, increasing their tendency to sleep in cold conditions as they did so?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you have misinterpreted this entirely. This is not the "save the kids rhetoric". This is simply stating that rationality should be preserved above personal beliefs in education. Your rhetoric is the typical miscalculated rebuttal against that attitude, which I do not possess. An opportunity to explain beliefs should be presented in the correct context i.e. within the bounds of religious education, but that is…
I don't think they should , but I think they should be allowed to. You're never going to stop crazy people from saying crazy things, and sometimes those people might just happen to be teachers. Besides, if crazy ideas were verboten in education we'd still be in the dark ages slinging arrows at each other. Tenure was actually explicitly created for respected teachers to be able to say crazy things without getting fire…
If school teachers teach crazy and not generally accepted stuff they are doing it wrong and deserve to be fired.
Maybe I could have some sympathy if you were talking about university education – but school teachers? I mean, what the fuck?!
The Catholic Church's current belief is there is no conflict between evolution and church teachings. They do believe evolution was divinely inspired. They also go with the scientific theories on age of earth and gradual appearance of life. Its interesting to see the difference between the actual Catholic doctrine and those that broke away. If the non-evolution Christian truly needs everything spelled out, Genesis 1:2…
> I would love the non-evolution version of how we get good hunting dogs Creationists believe that the 2 dogs from Noah's Ark contained the genetic material for all dogs and that it is easier to believe that than believing that all dogs came from a rock or an amoeba. http://www.kenthovindblog.com/?p=542
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are only asking for the basics of evolution, every textbook should have you covered (or even Google). And it doesn't happen the way you imagine it, those traits don't have to evolve from one day to the next. Bears can live in Canada because they can hibernate, they didn't live there and had to learn how to hibernate on short notice when winter came.
Have you not read textbook that explained specialized traits as reaction to the environment ? How could that be possible when these traits are needed immediately. You miss the point, why don't we have thousands of animals with the ability to hibernate that don't need them ? Of course traits don't have to evolve rapidly if you already have them or don't need them. But why would you already have the ability to hibernat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you have misinterpreted this entirely. This is not the "save the kids rhetoric". This is simply stating that rationality should be preserved above personal beliefs in education. Your rhetoric is the typical miscalculated rebuttal against that attitude, which I do not possess. An opportunity to explain beliefs should be presented in the correct context i.e. within the bounds of religious education, but that is…
I don't think they should , but I think they should be allowed to. You're never going to stop crazy people from saying crazy things, and sometimes those people might just happen to be teachers. Besides, if crazy ideas were verboten in education we'd still be in the dark ages slinging arrows at each other. Tenure was actually explicitly created for respected teachers to be able to say crazy things without getting fire…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, but we have found millions of fossils in the ground from different time periods, and it looks an awful lot like different species slowly changed over time (and occasionally branched off or went extinct). If this weren't the case, scientists wouldn't believe in macroevolution either.
The thing is - there ARE plenty of scientists who disagree; they are just shunned by the rest of the academic circle-jerk for not following the wagon. So you, as a potentially scientifically-literate individual, are the victim of journal bias. Evolution is a _theory_ that is heavily debated- the cambrian explosion is one such debate that specifically has evidence against what your comment is. Too lazy to read? Watch…
Evolution can be further classified into "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Evidence for microevolution is directly observable (e.g. bacteria adapting to changes of nutrients in their environment, viruses adapting to vaccines). However macroevolution has never been directly observed. It is extrapolated from considering what occurs after a multitude of generations of microevolution. An interesting new documentary…
1. It's based on facts, like:
1. Mutation, that you can see mutations everyday, from
a microrganism to a whale.
2. The natural selection, that can you also can see
everyday.
1. For example with help of genetics.
Creationism isn't a scientific theory because you can't bring the facts. Show reproducible facts and then we can discuss.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are thinking about it backwards. Of course first there were only animals who couldn't hibernate, and who couldn't fly (for example single cell life forms...). It's not as if god dropped some bears into Canada and then when winter came they suddenly had to evolve the ability to hibernate. Why don't you go grab a book about evolution theory that explains all those things? I don't know how long it took to evolve fli…
The reason I ask about the how long flight took to evolve was because it was argued that evolution does not take thousands of years, and that's not true. I've read the books that's why I see the paradox. I'm not playing games, if there are factual answers I would not be asking questions here. If an animal could survive for thousands of years without hibernating there would be no reason for it. It could even prove dis…
Can't write longer replies now because I only have a phone atm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you observed god creating a new species?
God created everything in existence. We refuse to acknowledge it, because by doing so we have to come to terms with his moral law. This moral law is embedded in our conscience and becomes clear through an examination of the conscience. For example things like lying and stealing (which if we are honest most of us have done either or both at one time or another), become heavy burdens when examined in the light of our c…
Disclaimer: I'm a christian, but I know that God existence is just an assumption that I have made on faith, and it can't be verified nor disproved, because it isn't testable. It isn't scientific knowledge.