Evolution. Pfffft

[LTCArmyRet]

So, you admit that there could be something that better explains life on this planet better than evolution? Bottom line: evolution is still a theory, a best guess. Which means we still do not understand completely.

What do you mean by "still a theory?" There's nothing else for it to be. Surely you know that theories don't become "laws," right?
Now, it is considered a fact that species do change over time. The exact mechanics are not understood completely. And older theories such as Lamarckism and parts of Darwin's original theory have been proven wrong.

But is understanding something completely necessary for anything?

This leaves the option of believing that there is a greater power with a hand in how we came to be on this planet. .

How do you figure that? I mean you can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't make it supportable.

It is supportable. Just because you choose to believe whatever you want, doesn't make it the only possible answer.

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

 

[pinqy]

Enquiring minds still want to know how a furry creature strong as hell could devolve into a weak, pink creature in the wild and survive.... Never makes sense, muchless trying to compete for a mate in the wilderness it goes against all the rules of the strongest survive..

The principle is "survival of the fittest," not "survival of the strongest." Our ancestors may not have been stronger, but they were smarter and probably had other advantages. So strength was not as important, protection of fur was not necessary, and those weaker and less hairy could survive just as well.

 

[pinqy]

What do you mean by "still a theory?" There's nothing else for it to be. Surely you know that theories don't become "laws," right?
Now, it is considered a fact that species do change over time. The exact mechanics are not understood completely. And older theories such as Lamarckism and parts of Darwin's original theory have been proven wrong.

But is understanding something completely necessary for anything?


How do you figure that? I mean you can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't make it supportable.

It is supportable. Just because you choose to believe whatever you want, doesn't make it the only possible answer.

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Enquiring minds still want to know how a furry creature strong as hell could devolve into a weak, pink creature in the wild and survive.... Never makes sense, muchless trying to compete for a mate in the wilderness it goes against all the rules of the strongest survive..

The principle is "survival of the fittest," not "survival of the strongest." Our ancestors may not have been stronger, but they were smarter and probably had other advantages. So strength was not as important, protection of fur was not necessary, and those weaker and less hairy could survive just as well.

So you trying to fucking tell me they were born with an IQ 100 times more?


I call bullshit it would of have to have evolved.... They would of needed strength to survive and attract the mates...


How many pink , skinny and weak damn tigers, bears or lions you see in the wild?

 

[pinqy]

Enquiring minds still want to know how a furry creature strong as hell could devolve into a weak, pink creature in the wild and survive.... Never makes sense, muchless trying to compete for a mate in the wilderness it goes against all the rules of the strongest survive..

The principle is "survival of the fittest," not "survival of the strongest." Our ancestors may not have been stronger, but they were smarter and probably had other advantages. So strength was not as important, protection of fur was not necessary, and those weaker and less hairy could survive just as well.

So you trying to fucking tell me they were born with an IQ 100 times more?

Y

Enquiring minds still want to know how a furry creature strong as hell could devolve into a weak, pink creature in the wild and survive.... Never makes sense, muchless trying to compete for a mate in the wilderness it goes against all the rules of the strongest survive..

The principle is "survival of the fittest," not "survival of the strongest." Our ancestors may not have been stronger, but they were smarter and probably had other advantages. So strength was not as important, protection of fur was not necessary, and those weaker and less hairy could survive just as well.

So you trying to fucking tell me they were born with an IQ 100 times more?

No. How could you think I was trying to tell you that?

I call bullshit it would of have to have evolved...

"would of have to?" Is English not your native language? That would explain some things.

Any way, yes of course they evolved. That's what I was saying. Were you thinking on hairy, les intelligent ancestor just suddenly gave birth to a modern human? That's ridiculous. The change took millions of years.

They would of needed strength to survive and attract the mates...

No, they needed any qualities that would help them survive and attract mates. Strength and intelligence would work best. But standing upright, using tools, and strength isn't as important.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

It is supportable. Just because you choose to believe whatever you want, doesn't make it the only possible answer.

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

 

[Old Rocks]

What do you mean by "still a theory?" There's nothing else for it to be. Surely you know that theories don't become "laws," right?
Now, it is considered a fact that species do change over time. The exact mechanics are not understood completely. And older theories such as Lamarckism and parts of Darwin's original theory have been proven wrong.

But is understanding something completely necessary for anything?


How do you figure that? I mean you can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't make it supportable.

It is supportable. Just because you choose to believe whatever you want, doesn't make it the only possible answer.

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Now just how did you get that kind of nonsense out of what I said? Adaptation to environment is over many, many generations. And if the environments change too rapidly, those are times of extinction.

 

[Old Rocks]

Enquiring minds still want to know how a furry creature strong as hell could devolve into a weak, pink creature in the wild and survive.... Never makes sense, muchless trying to compete for a mate in the wilderness it goes against all the rules of the strongest survive..

The principle is "survival of the fittest," not "survival of the strongest." Our ancestors may not have been stronger, but they were smarter and probably had other advantages. So strength was not as important, protection of fur was not necessary, and those weaker and less hairy could survive just as well.

So you trying to fucking tell me they were born with an IQ 100 times more?


I call bullshit it would of have to have evolved.... They would of needed strength to survive and attract the mates...


How many pink , skinny and weak damn tigers, bears or lions you see in the wild?

Our weak, non-hairy ancestors killed many of those strong tigers, bears, and lions with spears and traps. And the very strong that tried to attack those animals directly died, the smart ones that used their brains survived and had descendants.

 

[Old Rocks]

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

 

[Old Rocks]

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

 

[WinterBorn]

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

He probably used the word "might" because there is no sure way to be positive. Anyone who claims differently is lying.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

He probably used the word "might" because there is no sure way to be positive. Anyone who claims differently is lying.

Thank you for making my point!

 

[LTCArmyRet]

So by that premise, if we start taking chimps at birth, teach them to speak, read, write, wear clothes, eventually they will become human? I don't think so.

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

So you don't know either. You ASSUME that evolution is fact, it is not.

 

[WinterBorn]

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

He probably used the word "might" because there is no sure way to be positive. Anyone who claims differently is lying.

Thank you for making my point!

If that was your point, you wasted your time. No one, at least no one with any biology training, would say there was definitive proof.

 

[WinterBorn]

Nobody thinks so. Nobody is saying that's possible.

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

So you don't know either. You ASSUME that evolution is fact, it is not.

You don't know for sure either.

But the their if evolution is the best answer with the facts we have.

 

[LTCArmyRet]

old rocks did, given the right environment, a chimp will evolve into man.

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

So you don't know either. You ASSUME that evolution is fact, it is not.

You don't know for sure either.

But the their if evolution is the best answer with the facts we have.

The facts also do not rule out ID, which is the option I choose to believe.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, I did not. Given the right environment, a million of generations of chimps might evolve into a creature similar to us.

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

So you don't know either. You ASSUME that evolution is fact, it is not.

You don't know for sure either.

But the their if evolution is the best answer with the facts we have.

The facts also do not rule out ID, which is the option I choose to believe.

No problem. As I have said before, you are welcome to believe what you want. But ID does not fit the parameters of science. Therefore, has no place in science class.

Also, there are facts that support Evolution. Are there facts that support ID?

 

[LTCArmyRet]

MIGHT? MIGHT? So you admit that evolution has holes in it!! And do you KNOW what that environment is???

You seem to assume that evolution has a direction. As to what environment or environmental factors would influence the future evolution of chimps, since we don't know the future, we cannot know that. As far as holes in evolution, you are going to have to define what you mean by that, if you can.

So you don't know either. You ASSUME that evolution is fact, it is not.

You don't know for sure either.

But the their if evolution is the best answer with the facts we have.

The facts also do not rule out ID, which is the option I choose to believe.

No problem. As I have said before, you are welcome to believe what you want. But ID does not fit the parameters of science. Therefore, has no place in science class.

Also, there are facts that support Evolution. Are there facts that support ID?

Yeah, the gaps that exist in the evolution theory. I'm not saying evolution has not occurred, it's just not the complete answer.

 

[Weatherman2020]

So, you admit that there could be something that better explains life on this planet better than evolution? Bottom line: evolution is still a theory, a best guess. Which means we still do not understand completely.

What do you mean by "still a theory?" There's nothing else for it to be. Surely you know that theories don't become "laws," right?
Now, it is considered a fact that species do change over time. The exact mechanics are not understood completely. And older theories such as Lamarckism and parts of Darwin's original theory have been proven wrong.

But is understanding something completely necessary for anything?

This leaves the option of believing that there is a greater power with a hand in how we came to be on this planet. .

How do you figure that? I mean you can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't make it supportable.

It is supportable. Just because you choose to believe whatever you want, doesn't make it the only possible answer.

Is it? Can you offer any evidence in support of ID? I mean, besides "Evolution is wrong"?

If we evolved from apes, how come there are still apes today? wouldn't they have evolved too?

No. Evolution involves adaptation to a changing environment. If a creature is doing well in a certain environment, then it will mostly likely not evolve, unless forced too by competition for it's niche.

No one denies a moth may turn whiter over time to adapt to its environment. But as the fossil records show, after 120 million years we still have moths because a moth will always be a moth.