THE age old question
By vampyrefey
@vampyrefey (26)
Australia
8 responses
@Fargale (760)
• Brazil
28 Mar 07
Vampyrefey, this really IS such an age-old question, that it has already been covered in several other threads here in MyLot. If you're not satisfied with Latrivia's excellent response up there, I invite you to check out those threads that are already going on about the subject.
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
28 Mar 07
There's no solid proof that humans were created from a higher being. This theory stems from the belief that life on Earth is too complex to have come about by evolution - that's pretty much what the argument comes down to. That, and wild assumptions that because science has not come up with all the answers as to how we got from point A to point B on the evolutionary ladder, evolution must be an invalid theory.
I believe that it's possible that we evolved into what we are now. It's the most scientifically supported theory, at the moment, and probably the most believable to the objective mind.
1 person likes this
@leavert65 (1018)
• Puerto Rico
29 Mar 07
More than just being to complex, the complexity is irreducible
DNA is a genetic code. Codes don't evolve. No evolution of DNA, no evolution of life.
Not only has evolutionists not coming up with all the answers, they've come up with next to none
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
29 Mar 07
First of all, let me remind you that you've already conceded to the fact that microevolution exists. Second of all, the code changes for better or for worse - which is what causes evolution in the first place. Do you realize that all forms of evolution begin with DNA? Do I need to remind you that all mutations - small scale examples of evolution - begin with a simple error in DNA? One small chemical mismatch and a person could end up with Down's Syndrom or any number of genetic defects. What is this if not microevolution? A divine error? Hardly.
Make up your mind...either microevolution is possible, or it's not.
Also, scientists are coming up with answers - far more than creationists, and evolutionists even have evidence to back them. Changes in species induced by a changed of environment have been being studied for years. In a seven year study on guppies performed by David Reznick and his team, they found that a group of guppies taken from a dangerous area of a stream, to a less dangerous area of a stream, the guppies experienced a change in size, rate of maturation, and fertility.
Not that this will convince you of course, because you still cling to that silly little ideology of irreducible complexity...which has yet to be proven as well. Furthermore, before you begin to spout off about how "you have proof that irreducible complexity is a fact, and I'm just an arrogant evolutionist who refuses to see it", remember that speculation is not considered fact.
2 people like this
@leavert65 (1018)
• Puerto Rico
29 Mar 07
Again, microevolution is a HORIZONTAL change, not a VERTICAL change like macroevolution. Microevolution fits the design model; macroevolution doesn't
Microevolution doesn't require new genetic information; macroevolution does.
Microevolution would NEVER allow frog to evolve into a prince; macroevolution will
Are you starting to get it now? One more example
Microevolution - a monkey will always remain some variety of monkey
Macroevolution - a monkey can potentially evolve into a man
What answers are evolutionists coming up with? Name one or two
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
31 Mar 07
Actually there really isn't any proof for either of those ideas.. All there is, is observation.. which is what science is! But when it comes to origins.. what you have at best, is possibilities.. theories.. Some scientists have said "God is a hypothesis we don't need" - but that doesn't make any difference as to if he exists or not.. What do you think? Do you think everything that is, came about by chance? Or do see behind it intelligent design? This is the question we must seek to answer. It is still hotly debated among the scientists.
:))
@pangeacat (619)
• United States
31 Mar 07
Now, my personal problem with ID, is not that it isn't possible. And, I know that neither side can be exactly proven (at least, not right now ~ time will tell which side if either will have solid, concrete, undeniable proof).
My problem is that there are sooooooo many different creation myths (and I don't mean myth as in "lie", I mean it in the "legendary tradition that cannot be scientifically proven" sense, which is the definition uttered by my college mythology professor). so, if there are so many different creation myths, how can anybody be sure which is most accurate? Most of them parallel, so one could argue that they're all coming from roughly the same kind of myth. But, the Christians certainly won't accept that the ancient Egyptian creation myth (which was unchanging and thriving religiously for approximately 5000 years, until ceaser Augustus took over Egypt) is true, and the ancient Egyptians would have been unlikely to accept that the Norse creation myth was true, and so on.
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
31 Mar 07
hi! to me religion and philosophy is belief. And science is "observable data" - the question to answer (to my mind) is did all things which are come to be by chance? or is there intelligence involved? One of the debates now in scientific circles (since our better knowledge of the DNA code in all living things) is "where does information come from? I could quote to you the intricacy of the eye.. the ear.. the bird for flight.. etc, etc, but you could say it's possible they evolved.. sure.. but how is it proven and fact? I think the proven is just one of those things that is repeated over and over, til so many believe it, but no matter how many times it's repeated, it doesn't really make it anymore true.. If you're asking what my faith is, it would be christian, since almost 30 years ago in the Rocky Mountains.. and it's based on personal experiences which keep happening.. I believe in the father and son of the bible, because I feel I know them.. Also I've asked them many questions, and wow, did I get answers.. tho they are slightly different from the mainstream..
:))
@leavert65 (1018)
• Puerto Rico
31 Mar 07
Intelligent design just gives the science for creation; it doesn't get involved the different creation accounts.
@pangeacat (619)
• United States
31 Mar 07
I, personally, am confused by your question. What exactly are you asking?
@leavert65 (1018)
• Puerto Rico
31 Mar 07
We DID NOT evolve. There is no evidence of man's evolution and especially none that anybody on mylot has been able to point to.
1 person likes this
@pangeacat (619)
• United States
30 Mar 07
Well, I personally fall in the middle. I do believe in evolution, I do also believe in a higher power.
No, there is no scientific proof of creationism/God/ a higher power of any kind. To be fair though, if there was scientific proof of such a being, faith would be meaningless.
Allow me to elaborate on what I mean. Because I see scientific proof of gravity (wait, let me throw something up into the air, just to make sure it still works, lol.) ~ I don't need to have faith in gravity. I believe that gravity exists, because I can scientifically prove that it does (at least, to myself). Therefore, "faith" in gravity is pointless, meaningless, and unnecessary. Faith in God (or a god/goddess/higher power) DOES require faith. One of the main reasons it requires faith is because I can't simply throw a ball, watch it hit the ground, and conclude that God exists. I have to search for God (or whatever). If I find that there are things in life that tell me there must be a god of some kind (complexity of life, higher brain function, etc.) then great ~ I am able to prove to myself that there is a god of some kind. That doesn't mean that it's scientifically provable. It still requires faith, belief, and personal feeling.
Now, some people feel that they need to prove that God does or does not exist. I really don't see why, but they do.
I say that Evolution doesn't HAVE to contradict the theory that there IS a God. Likewise, Creationism doesn't HAVE to contradict the theory that Evolution has happened and continues to do so. Some people, however, feel that the two HAVE to be contradictory. And maybe, for them, the two can NOT coexist.
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
31 Mar 07
..hi! I prefer science.. evolution is fast becoming outdated.. and no evidence of intelligence in 'design'?? Even if one lives in the city, they should be able to clearly see that all things do not come about by chance.. the odds of New York City coming together by chance would be.. what? Well New York City is about as complex as one single cell is.
@gsnarayanan (1704)
• India
1 Apr 07
If one can give a proof, then the proved matter is said to come under the control of human being. God is one, who can not be analysed by any one. The God has no beginig or end. The God is responsible for all activities in the Universe however small or big it may be. The God has created, protects and destroyes. The God has no beging or end. God exists every where and manages the happenings!
@arseniajoaquin (1732)
• Philippines
1 Apr 07
The Holy Bible is the Word of God which is the truth. If you do not believe that, you will never find a proof that God exists because your existence you even doubt your existence as you are a creation of God but you don't believe. It's good if you know how you became into existence. Good if you know how everything came into existence. All of these are in the Holy Bible which many people do not believe.
