Do You Believe We Came From Monkeys?

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by Ima Cat, Apr 24, 2017.

  1. Hollie
    Offline

    Hollie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    28,498
    Thanks Received:
    2,595
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +8,981

    I think you make several errors which need to be addressed. Yes, both Piltdown Man and the Archaeoraptor were errors made by greedy individuals but as it was pointed out earlier, those errors were discovered and remedied by scientists. It was actually a remarkable demonstration of the process of science correcting and adjusting.

    You are free to deny it but the reality is that the Theory of Evolution is among the most accepted and well documented theories in science.

    It should be pointed out that Darwin’s "Origin of Species" accomplished two very different things.

    First:, it demonstrated through a catalog of scientific detail the historical fact of evolution (assuming an understanding of the difference between levels of scientific certainty and the theories that explain them). Using fields as diverse as biology, comparative anatomy,selective breeding, geography and animal behavior, Darwin laid out the evidence and formed a working theory that evolution (descent with modification) had actually occurred.

    His evidence was overwhelming. Within little more than a decade after his theory was published, most of the leading biologists of his day were convinced that evolution (descent with modification) was true.

    Secondly, Darwin proposed a theory for explaining what we would learn to be fact: "Natural Selection." This, of course, is contrary to the claim by ID/ creationists that supernaturalism is the as a way to explain the diversity of life on the planet, (completely unsupported and it assumes the requirement for supernaturalism), Natural Selection makes no such requirement and makes no requirement for coincidence or magic. Evolution instead defines the objective criterion of "reproductive fitness" as the completely natural mechanism for driving biological change.

    Regarding your comment that ID/creationists “fight for another trial”, that simply isn’t true. Kitzmiller vs. Dover served as yet another humiliating loss for those looking to force religion into the public school system. There has been no concerted effort by any of the ID/ creation ministries to attempt another trial. In every instance, every single one, the UD/creation ministries have been handed humiliating losses. I gave you a roll call earlier to demonstrate that.

    You make an error in claiming that there is a requirement for belief in science. That simply isn’t true.

    The force of gravity, electromagnetism are forces we cannot directly observe, yet, there is no requirement for faith to perceive the existence of those forces.

    What we do know with certainty is that every discovery in the history of mankind has had a natural causation. I have no requirement for faith or belief supernaturalism to accept the "naturalistic" explanation of life. Every discovery in the history of science has had a naturalistic explanation, even those that were formerly thought to have a supernatural cause. I see no reason why the evolution of life should be any different. Should the subtle and complex formulas of calculus cause us to deduce an intelligent designer of mathematics? I have no faith in math. I have no faith in chemistry, or geology, or astronomy. Things are as they are.

    If you have evidence of any phenomenon that has a supernatural cause, please identify it.

    You make the statement “evolution is the science that is more based on faith”. There is no requirement for faith. This was addressed earlier. The Theory of Evolution is among the best supported in science. It really is difficult to believe that you can seriously suggest that there is some global conspiracy of scientists, universities, colleges and a history of learning that has progressed since the Dark Ages.

    Here's a specific evolutionary fact: It is a fact that there is genetic variation within species. It is a fact that this genetic variation is passed on. That, essentially, is evolution. It is a fact that the earth is billions of years old, and that the oldest known microfossil is 3.8 billion years old. That leaves a lot of time for genetic variation to be shaped by selective pressures. It also tends to confound your requirement for supernatural creation.

    Instead of spouting vague, unsupported claims about conspiracy theories in the science realm, why don't you state some specifics? What, specifically are the conspiracies that you believe are being furthered by those horrible Darwinists and Evilutionists?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Hollie
    Offline

    Hollie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    28,498
    Thanks Received:
    2,595
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +8,981

    The Hybrid Hypothesis: The Gorilla and the Koolokamba


    You’re kidding with Eugene McCarthy, right?

    Even if you’re not kidding, lie to me and tell me you’re kidding.

    Encyclopedia of American Loons: #1958: Eugene M. McCarthy

    Eugene M. McCarthy (no known relation) is a pseudo-evolutionary crackpot biologist famous for his completely ridiculous crackpot idea that “humans evolved after a female chimpanzee mated with a pig” (known as the MFAP hypothesis). Now, McCarthy does have relevant credentials, which he knows to exploit in debates – indeed, McCarthy has made serious academic contributions on hybridization (though other academic commentators have noted even here his tendency to endorse any speculative and unsupported claim that looks like it’ll fit his hypothesis) – and his idiocy has therefore predictably attracted occasional attention from various less-than-serious news media outlets over the last decade. Scientific journals and establishments have been less impressed with his work, which is partially why the media likes to portray him as a victim. You’ll find a short and to-the-point critique of his ideas here.
     
  3. james bond
    Offline

    james bond Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2015
    Messages:
    2,366
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Ratings:
    +728
    Heh. ToE is only accepted because the opposition has been systematically eliminated, but what I have been saying just sails over your head. Look, I pointed out that fraud had to be committed in order for people to believe in macroevolution. Both cases! Macro does not happen. How many times do I have to repeat it? The creation scientists are the ones whose evidence destroys monkeys to man and dinosaurs to birds. It's not creation scientists who made errors and committed fraud. It's the evo scientists. They've made so many errors, but you just let it slide. Talk about believing in myths and superstitions. It's no wonder that atheists and atheist scientists are usually wrong.

    I think you can't demonstrate humans from monkeys and birds from dinosaurs, so you keep going off the subject. There is plenty to discuss just on why humans from monkeys fails.

    None of my claims are unsupported. I have provided the links to back it up. They were made by evolution scientists, too. I'm not sure what you are afraid of because anyone with an open mind would realize that evolution is BS. It just so happens that the powers that be want you to believe it so the general public's lives can be cut short.
     
  4. james bond
    Offline

    james bond Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2015
    Messages:
    2,366
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Ratings:
    +728
    Talk about crackpots, you didn't even read the link.

    There are other vids of chimpanzee variants.


    Chimps and gorillas at play


    If any of them were going to become human, then we'd have the science fiction movie Planet of the Apes. Macroevolution is science fiction. I can't believe the atheists here cannot tell the difference.


     
  5. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    58,657
    Thanks Received:
    7,114
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +18,573
    Hell, I cannot believe that any person of more than room temperature IQ could accept the nonsense that you spout. Ah well, people like you don't count in science, in any case.
     
  6. RWS
    Offline

    RWS Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +485
    BTW the answers are 02:78, for the division.
    And 56:25 for the multiplication.

    This is sexagesimal math. That is outrageous for us today to understand. But it was the first math. And it was taught to the Sumerians by the Anunnaki. And we still use it today, but we don't make calculations based on it.
     
  7. RWS
    Offline

    RWS Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +485
    For instance, what is 3 minutes and 30 seconds, times 2 minutes and 30 seconds?

    We understand adding them together, but not multiplying or dividing them. It's a totally different concept than the easy decimal version we use today.

    So for the first human civilization to choose to use sexagesimal, and invent math and science and writing, is a little weird. Unless, as they said, they were taught.

    And who taught them? The Anunnaki. "Those who from Heaven to Earth Came"

    And everything since, is plagiarism based on the original Sumerian (and Assyrian/Babylonian) writings.

    FYI, the answer is 8 hours and 45 minutes. Figure it out... It makes no sense, but is correct. Use your watch or clock and thank the Sumerians for the sexagesimal counting system, and thank god you don't have to multiply or divide with it. :)
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2018
  8. Hollie
    Offline

    Hollie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    28,498
    Thanks Received:
    2,595
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +8,981

    It just seems odd that you’re promoting conspiracy theories about evilutionists / atheist scientists but you somehow accept the crackpot notions of Eugene McCarthy.

    This is the result of a chimp mating with a pig, at least according to the ID/ creation quacks you define as heroes.

    Evolutionary theory that a chimp mated with a pig is pure sausagemeat

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Hollie
    Offline

    Hollie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    28,498
    Thanks Received:
    2,595
    Trophy Points:
    265
    Ratings:
    +8,981
    The Theory of Hybidization according to Eugene McCarthy has some interesting outcomes.

     
  10. james bond
    Offline

    james bond Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2015
    Messages:
    2,366
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Ratings:
    +728
    I finally looked up Eugene McCarthy. Was thinking someone associated with McCarthyism. He was a Democrat and friend of Bill Clinton. Doesn't sound like a YEC creation science person to me.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

azs

,
news