Home > Content > Creation and Evolution > Discussion: The necessities for evolution
The necessities for evolution
6 Comments - 1678 Views
Submitted By 9tails on 09/06/11
FreeHovind, 9tails, Creation and Evolution 

I was wondering about the mechanisms for evolution. Even though no evoultion has taken place in the past 6,000 years, it claims to hide behind billions and billions of years. There are aspects of the theory of evolution that must be consistant if the theory of evolution is even feesible. So, I devised a list of questions that put the theory of evolution in the right perspective.
 
What would the theory of evolution look like if the earth was only 6,000 years old?
 
Since the beginning of time, nothing has "evolved" into another kind of animal. Conclusion, the earth cannot be young if evolution is to not look stupid.
 
What proof is there of evolution?
 
The main construct of the evolution idea is in the fossils (since it miraculousy lacks any observational medium).  But as we have already discovered radiometric dating is the furthest thing from reliable and finding 'bones in the dirt' do not constitute any evolutionary discoveries. I'll explain.
 
Bones in dirt + years of erosion, weathering and damage + other bone diseases + intentional tampering and misrepresentation = an unconvincing case for evolution
 
Oddly enough, becomes more than convincing for someone who craves evolution to be true.
 
What would evolution look like if life did not exist on other planets?
 
Hmmm... life hasn't been found on any other planet.

» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/06/11 - 20:26 GMT
" was wondering about the mechanisms for evolution. Even though no evoultion has taken place in the past 6,000 years,"
 
ehmm
LUL WHAT?!
 
it HAS.
in fact IS ALLWAYS HAPPENING.
as long as there is life on earth, there is evolution.
not only that we have direct and indirect OBSERVED instances of speciation.
gj at outlining you ignorance of the concept YET AGAIN.
(*srly contact me via Ymail, i RLY feel obliged to clear up you misconceptions)
 
"it claims to hide behind billions and billions of years."
 
"hide behind"?
you mean it's observable in the fossil record?
 
"What would the theory of evolution look like if the earth was only 6,000 years old?"
 
wow, im not touching this, for starters.
how was the earht formed? has life yet developed?
eithe rclear up those, and other issues
(like saying "how would the theory look of the GOD HAD created the earth 6000 years ago in it's present form and put all the major bodyplans in place, both is livign organism and in the millions of fossils he hid in a particular order in the ground, whihc he ALSO organized in particular layers?"
now THAT i feel i can answer.)
 
"Since the beginning of time, nothing has "evolved" into another kind of animal."
 
FOSSIL record.
not only that, WHAT do you mean by :kind", srly, please DEFINE this term.
 
"What proof is there of evolution?"
what?  you mean how can we say it happens? or what evidence do we have for the current model?
 
because i can answer the fact real simple:
life forms consist of replicators.
the replication process isnt' perfect.
organism are subject to changing environmental factors.
the mutations can express themselves in organims.
 
POW, evolution is a attribute of all living things (ofc also viruses, though they aren't really "alive" in the sence that organism are).
and POW evolution is a fact.
 
"(since it miraculousy lacks any observational medium). "
 
speciation in oserved in labs and by biologist in the field.
 
me 1 you 0
 
"But as we have already discovered radiometric dating is the furthest thing from reliable"
 
no it is not.
ask a physisist why.
 
" 'bones in the dirt"
 
lawl if that's what you think fossils are...you are sorely mistaken.
NO BONE, or to the hovinds: "THERE'S NO FU*&ING CARBON IN IT!"
 
not only that, the bones are QUITE resiliant in certain soils, ofc not in acidic soild, like marshes, the bones just disolve there, but in certain sotrs of soils bones can intact for quite some time. which mean...we preserve collagen...
 
"Bones in dirt + years of erosion, weathering and damage + other bone diseases + intentional tampering and misrepresentation"
 
and you're prolably referring to neanderthals aren't you?
 
they were NOT old people wiht arthritis, wiki it if you don't believe me.
 
"Oddly enough, becomes more than convincing for someone who craves evolution to be true."
 
UCH* IRONY ALERT, UCH*
"What would evolution look like if life did not exist on other planets?"
 
exactly the same.
even if this where the only planet to sustain life, ToE would stil be an accurate way to explain it's diversity.
uless you are referrign to soemthign else when you say "evolution"...
 
 
"Hmmm... life hasn't been found on any other planet."
 
......SLRY.....
i'm not even going to adress the this one...it's just to fucking stupid.
» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
3 days - 4,497v
Posted 2009/06/14 - 0:56 GMT
" was wondering about the mechanisms for evolution. Even though no evoultion has taken place in the past 6,000 years,"
ehmm
LUL WHAT?!
 
Yeah, that's about the point where I stopped reading too. No evolution in the past 6,000 years? Yeesh.
» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
10 hours - 500v
Posted 2009/06/11 - 20:50 GMT
Even though no evoultion has taken place in the past 6,000 years, it claims to hide behind billions and billions of years.
 
What about microevolution and adaptation such as Darwin finches and U of T study showed water fleas developed on a ponty head?
 
Since the beginning of time, nothing has "evolved" into another kind of animal.
 
How come the polar bear has webbed feet as opposed to other bears? Why is the African lion the only wild cat that lives in groups?
Do plants and other living things (bacteria) evolve?
 
What proof is there of evolution?
 
Do the research!
 
But as we have already discovered radiometric dating is the furthest thing from reliable and finding 'bones in the dirt' do not constitute any evolutionary discoveries.
 
Independent measurements, using different and independent radiometric techniques, give consistent results.

Radiometric dates are consistent with several nonradiometric dating methods. For example:

The Hawaiian archipelago was formed by the Pacific ocean plate moving over a hot spot at a slow but observable rate. Radiometric dates of the islands are consistent with the order and rate of their being positioned over the hot spot.

Radiometric dating is consistent with Milankovitch cycles, which depend only on astronomical factors such as precession of the earth's tilt and orbital eccentricity.

Radiometric dating is consistent with the luminescence dating method.

Radiometric dating gives results consistent with relative dating methods such as "deeper is older"

The creationist claim that radiometric dates are inconsistent rest on a relatively few examples. Creationists ignore the vast majority of radiometric dates showing consistent results.

See radiometric dating resource web site.

Bones in dirt + years of erosion, weathering and damage + other bone diseases + intentional tampering and misrepresentation = an unconvincing case for evolution

Any tool will give bad results when misused. Radiocarbon dating has some known limitations. Any measurement that exceeds these limitations will probably be invalid. In particular, radiocarbon dating works to find ages as old as 50,000 years but not much older. Using it to date older items will give bad results. Samples can be contaminated with younger or older carbon, again invalidating the results. Because of excess 12C released into the atmosphere from the Industrial Revolution and excess 14C produced by atmospheric nuclear testing during the 1950s, materials less than 150 years old cannot be dated with radiocarbon

In their claims of errors, creationists do not consider misuse of the technique. It is not uncommon for them to misuse radiocarbon dating by attempting to date samples that are millions of years old or that have been treated with organic substances. In such cases, the errors belong to the creationists, not the carbon-14 dating method.

Radiocarbon dating has been repeatedly tested, demonstrating its accuracy. It is calibrated by tree-ring data, which gives a nearly exact calendar for more than 11,000 years back. It has also been tested on items for which the age is known through historical records, such as parts of the Dead Sea scrolls and some wood from an Egyptian tomb. Multiple samples from a single object have been dated independently, yielding consistent results. Radiocarbon dating is also concordant with other dating techniques.

What would evolution look like if life did not exist on other planets? 
Hmmm... life hasn't been found on any other planet
 
Do you not consider bacteria as life, which has been found on Mars?
» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
5 days - 8,032v
Posted 2009/06/11 - 21:56 GMT
"
Do you not consider bacteria as life, which has been found on Mars?"
 
w8... WHAT?
 
link. i havent heard this!
i know fo the magnitit bacteria, but im not entirely sure about them...
but that's probably my ignorance of astrobiology and magnite bactia speaking.
» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
10 hours - 500v
Posted 2009/06/11 - 23:15 GMT
What I meant was the possibility of life existed on Mars
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: The necessities for evolution
2 days - 2,415v
Posted 2009/06/12 - 1:41 GMT
"What proof is there of evolution?"
- I got this site: http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm
" Created and maintained by Dr. Dennis O'Neil
Behavioral Sciences Department, Palomar College, San Marcos, California
"
It's a small list and info of enough evidence for evolution so you can stop asking and actually learn what it is.

Also this site from Berkely university: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/home.php
A good library of everything to answer your questions tenfold 9tails. But i bet you're not gonna read it because "IT'S ALL LIES!!!" or simply "wrong" :o


This website is powered by Plexpedia
Usage of this site constitutes agreement to the » Legal Stuff