Charles Darwin and the "Tree of Life"

[Marc39]

Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life

Now, what's "odd", BBC listed the program under "religion".

That's because it takes way more "Faith" to believe in the Theory of Evolution.

Than it takes to believe in even the most far out religion.

Muzzies believe mankind evolved from a blood clot.

 

[JBeukema]

All living organisms are made up of cells,are cells living matter ?

Oh i don't need to educate myself if that education is gonna teach me a natural process thought of all those things mentioned

this is a problem. willful ignorance i'd call it.

do natural processes think in the first place? have you come to realize that we are made up from the matter that we ingest, and that whether it is alive or dead has little bearing on that facility?

I would say if we are the product of a natural process then yes the natural process for life would have to be a thinker.

Examples, it had to think to create blood to sustain life. It had to think to create red and white blood cells. It had to think to create the brain. It had to think to create genders and sex organs to keep life going. It had to think to create eyes that dilate because of light.

Yeah the natural process sounds like it was an intelligent designer.

You must be trying to get your Poe certification with the ATL....


it's not working

 

[SmarterThanHick]

When did i say i wasn't educated ? you might want to check the depth of the water before you jump in.

Somewhere between saying you didn't need to educate yourself on the matter on which you are speaking, and insinuating that red blood cells and hair are living tissues. That's where you showed you weren't educated. By all means, tell me you really have a biology major.

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life

Now, what's "odd", BBC listed the program under "religion".

That's because it takes way more "Faith" to believe in the Theory of Evolution.

Than it takes to believe in even the most far out religion.

Thats ridiculous sm, evolution deals with reality, religion is purely mythical...

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life

Now, what's "odd", BBC listed the program under "religion".

That's because it takes way more "Faith" to believe in the Theory of Evolution.

Than it takes to believe in even the most far out religion.

Muzzies believe mankind evolved from a blood clot.

As good a religious myth as any, jews wrap things round their arms, put little boxes on their heads, wear little caps, put big blankies over themselves and rock back and forth...glass houses etc

 

[JBeukema]

 

[Youwerecreated]

this is a problem. willful ignorance i'd call it.

do natural processes think in the first place? have you come to realize that we are made up from the matter that we ingest, and that whether it is alive or dead has little bearing on that facility?

I would say if we are the product of a natural process then yes the natural process for life would have to be a thinker.

Examples, it had to think to create blood to sustain life. It had to think to create red and white blood cells. It had to think to create the brain. It had to think to create genders and sex organs to keep life going. It had to think to create eyes that dilate because of light.

Yeah the natural process sounds like it was an intelligent designer.

You must be trying to get your Poe certification with the ATL....


it's not working

Nope ,just pointing out the obvious products of design and see if people on your side can be honest enough to admit to intelligence being involved with the creation of life.

Talk about irony,non-intelligence created the brain.

 

[Youwerecreated]

When did i say i wasn't educated ? you might want to check the depth of the water before you jump in.

Somewhere between saying you didn't need to educate yourself on the matter on which you are speaking, and insinuating that red blood cells and hair are living tissues. That's where you showed you weren't educated. By all means, tell me you really have a biology major.

Poor choice of words on my part because all people who attend school there was an attempt to brainwash in believing such an absurd opinion. Just some of us could see evidence all around us to say no way to the many theories that make up the biggest and most outrageous theory of them all.

I have studied and educated myself on this theory and it is even more rediculous then it was when i was in middle school many moons ago.

Mutations producung new information that brings about a new destinct organism,now that is funny.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life

Now, what's "odd", BBC listed the program under "religion".

That's because it takes way more "Faith" to believe in the Theory of Evolution.

Than it takes to believe in even the most far out religion.

Thats ridiculous sm, evolution deals with reality, religion is purely mythical...

What reality ? you mean opinions.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

As good a religious myth as any, jews wrap things round their arms, put little boxes on their heads, wear little caps, put big blankies over themselves and rock back and forth...glass houses etc

And yet none of those things appear to demand that evolution is wrong. Did you have some other point to make, or did you just want to lash out at another religion for no particular reason?

Poor choice of words on my part because all people who attend school there was an attempt to brainwash in believing such an absurd opinion. Just some of us could see evidence all around us to say no way to the many theories that make up the biggest and most outrageous theory of them all.

I have studied and educated myself on this theory and it is even more rediculous then it was when i was in middle school many moons ago.

Mutations producung new information that brings about a new destinct organism,now that is funny.

Once again you show yourself to lack education on the matter. You have not educated yourself on the topic in the least, seeing as you continue to repeatedly make mistakes regarding basic reproducible biologic fact. Here's an easy way to show that you are completely clueless on the topic, and don't understand what evolution is all about: just tell me what the term natural selection means. Surely if you know that certain scientific knowledge on this is wrong, you must know the actual knowledge itself. So share with the class what the simple term natural selection means.

Until then, let's take this time to recap: you have absolutely no education in the matter. You heard a middle school simplification of it years ago, and think that gave you comprehension. You have repeatedly made errors regarding basic biology, and are incapable of actually differentiating living from non-living tissue. You don't understand what the term "scientific theory" actually means. You don't understand what evolution is. And yet despite this gaping void of knowledge on the topic, you think you were truly intelligent enough, knowing absolutely nothing about it, to conclude evolution is a lie.

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

That's because it takes way more "Faith" to believe in the Theory of Evolution.

Than it takes to believe in even the most far out religion.

Thats ridiculous sm, evolution deals with reality, religion is purely mythical...

What reality ? you mean opinions.

No, I was contrasting myth with reality, thanx

 

[Youwerecreated]

As good a religious myth as any, jews wrap things round their arms, put little boxes on their heads, wear little caps, put big blankies over themselves and rock back and forth...glass houses etc

And yet none of those things appear to demand that evolution is wrong. Did you have some other point to make, or did you just want to lash out at another religion for no particular reason?

Poor choice of words on my part because all people who attend school there was an attempt to brainwash in believing such an absurd opinion. Just some of us could see evidence all around us to say no way to the many theories that make up the biggest and most outrageous theory of them all.

I have studied and educated myself on this theory and it is even more rediculous then it was when i was in middle school many moons ago.

Mutations producung new information that brings about a new destinct organism,now that is funny.

Once again you show yourself to lack education on the matter. You have not educated yourself on the topic in the least, seeing as you continue to repeatedly make mistakes regarding basic reproducible biologic fact. Here's an easy way to show that you are completely clueless on the topic, and don't understand what evolution is all about: just tell me what the term natural selection means. Surely if you know that certain scientific knowledge on this is wrong, you must know the actual knowledge itself. So share with the class what the simple term natural selection means.

Until then, let's take this time to recap: you have absolutely no education in the matter. You heard a middle school simplification of it years ago, and think that gave you comprehension. You have repeatedly made errors regarding basic biology, and are incapable of actually differentiating living from non-living tissue. You don't understand what the term "scientific theory" actually means. You don't understand what evolution is. And yet despite this gaping void of knowledge on the topic, you think you were truly intelligent enough, knowing absolutely nothing about it, to conclude evolution is a lie.

Thank you for the question,but I notice you avoid the points I make,why ? It's a natural process where the organisms better adapted to their environment survive and the ones not adapted well die off. Example, Darwins finches. The longer beaked finch flourished during timed of drought where the shorter beaked finches did not do to well during times of drought . The interesting thing though was when the drought was over the shorter beaked finch made a comeback . O am out of town now so when I return I will introduce an article dealing with the faulty claims of evolitionists that evolution is the result of natural selection.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Thats ridiculous sm, evolution deals with reality, religion is purely mythical...

What reality ? you mean opinions.

No, I was contrasting myth with reality, thanx

Reality,hmm,so someone was around to see the evolution process or is it based on opinion and explanations of the evidence ? Your process sounds like it could be a myth to. The answer is ,which one actually took place.

 

[geauxtohell]

What reality ? you mean opinions.

No, I was contrasting myth with reality, thanx

Reality,hmm,so someone was around to see the evolution process or is it based on opinion and explanations of the evidence ? Your process sounds like it could be a myth to. The answer is ,which one actually took place.

So do you accept the mechanism of evolution?

 

[SmarterThanHick]

If you feel I overlooked one of your claims, point it out instead of making vague references. Oh and you appeared to miss the "selection" part of natural selection in your explanation. Dare I ask if you understand how evolution works at the genetic level?

 

[Urbanguerrilla]

What reality ? you mean opinions.

No, I was contrasting myth with reality, thanx

Reality,hmm,so someone was around to see the evolution process or is it based on opinion and explanations of the evidence ? Your process sounds like it could be a myth to. The answer is ,which one actually took place.

Yes, evolution is based on EVIDENCE, it deals with 'reality' in contrast to religion which deals with magic stuff such as parting sea to let 'chosen people' pass, allowing blind people to see again, allowing the lame to walk and having 'spirits' fly around, appear and disappear - IOW unreality.

 

[frazzledgear]

​

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6IrUUDboZo

The religious will tell you because all life was shimmered into being by the same Gawd.

And the left will tell you that our planet once had magical properties to create living, conscience organisms out of nonliving materials -only to immediately lose that property, something that has never once been seen to ever occur anywhere in the known universe and even though man has spent nearly his entire existence trying to force nonliving chemicals to make a living organism -they will still insist to their last breath that it is actually a "natural" event. In spite of the fact in order for something to be "natural", it must be seen to occur in nature! What a dilemma. You people are actually making the greater leap of "faith" believing in magical properties of nonliving materials as being something "natural" than I am by insisting that if nonliving materials ever produced a living organism there would be nothing "natural" about such an event! Which is why the left really does treat the theory as a religion in the first place -demanding we all worship at that altar or be labeled heretics! But the best evidence about whether it is or is not a natural event for nonliving materials to produce a living organism -doesn't favor your side.

The theory that an unknown alien life form seeded our planet makes more sense biologically than pretending nonliving materials used to have magical properties to create living, conscience life but now no longer has that property anywhere in the known universe. Real "natural", huh. Get real.

 

[Youwerecreated]

​

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6IrUUDboZo

The religious will tell you because all life was shimmered into being by the same Gawd.

And the left will tell you that our planet once had magical properties to create living, conscience organisms out of nonliving materials -only to immediately lose that property, something that has never once been seen to ever occur anywhere in the known universe and even though man has spent nearly his entire existence trying to force nonliving chemicals to make a living organism -they will still insist to their last breath that it is actually a "natural" event. In spite of the fact in order for something to be "natural", it must be seen to occur in nature! What a dilemma. You people are actually making the greater leap of "faith" believing in magical properties of nonliving materials as being something "natural" than I am by insisting that if nonliving materials ever produced a living organism there would be nothing "natural" about such an event! Which is why the left really does treat the theory as a religion in the first place -demanding we all worship at that altar or be labeled heretics! But the best evidence about whether it is or is not a natural event for nonliving materials to produce a living organism -doesn't favor your side.

The theory that an unknown alien life form seeded our planet makes more sense biologically than pretending nonliving materials used to have magical properties to create living, conscience life but now no longer has that property anywhere in the known universe. Real "natural", huh. Get real.

Well said. I intend to address genetics evolution not sure why he brought that up because that one of the most solid arguments against macroevolution. They claim their theory is supported by the evidence but its not,its supported opinions and speculation of the evidence .

 

[rdean]

No, I was contrasting myth with reality, thanx

Reality,hmm,so someone was around to see the evolution process or is it based on opinion and explanations of the evidence ? Your process sounds like it could be a myth to. The answer is ,which one actually took place.

Yes, evolution is based on EVIDENCE, it deals with 'reality' in contrast to religion which deals with magic stuff such as parting sea to let 'chosen people' pass, allowing blind people to see again, allowing the lame to walk and having 'spirits' fly around, appear and disappear - IOW unreality.

Except for replacing "severed limbs". I don't remember reading that in the Bible. Everything else, I've watched "Binny Henn" do on the religion channel.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

And the left will tell you that our planet once had magical properties to create living, conscience organisms out of nonliving materials

No. No educated biologist will ever say that. EVEN IF such a thing were true, it would be equal between science and religion, meaning you'd pretty much agree with it anyway. Nonetheless, evolution has nothing to do with how life first came to be on this planet. Regardless of what you believe in as the cause, evolution, something separate from that, has been extensively studied and proven.

Unfortunately, you have zero education in the matter, which is not only the underlying reason behind you making so many mistakes as to what you think educated people do know, but also is the reason why you are clueless on the topic.

-demanding we all worship at that altar or be labeled heretics!

Well no. This is you projecting religious practices onto an educated group. The educated group demands every single person look at the reproducible evidence for themselves and draw the most logical conclusion, or come to some alternate conclusion based on that evidence. That is how smart people think. Given X, what are the possibilities?

Once again, you lack of education precludes you from producing such logic. This is seen by your inability to produce alternate conclusions from the genetic evidence supporting evolution, to instead just complain "it's wrong".

The theory that an unknown alien life form seeded our planet makes more sense biologically than pretending nonliving materials used to have magical properties to create living

Sure, if you think that is a more logical conclusion from the evidence, go for it. It still doesn't contradict evolution in any other way. Whether a deity, aliens or a natural event from primordial earth created the first life, the basis of evolution is still unchanged and fully supported.

So again your task comes back to: do you want to continue misunderstanding what all the smart people know, remain unable to actually analyze the evidence yourself, and generally stay in your ignorant state? Or will you drop the unsupported blind belief of "no it's wrong because I don't understand it" to adopt something more logical and mature?

Well said. I intend to address genetics evolution not sure why he brought that up because that one of the most solid arguments against macroevolution. They claim their theory is supported by the evidence but its not,its supported opinions and speculation of the evidence .

In my last post, I asked you to stop making vague claims. I see you can't help yourself sometimes. If you want to make a point, make it. Otherwise, these hand waived references of "there's no evidence" is just immature. The equivalent would be me saying "the bible says you're wrong". It's just inane.