Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

  

186 members have voted

  1. 1. Did humans evolve through natural selection and random mutation from other primates and those primates from other non-primate species?

    • Yes.
      96
    • No.
      53
    • Don't know/Undecided
      37
  2. 2. Were Adam and Even two human beings (Homo sapiens sapiens) created without being part of a species that evolved from lower species?

    • Yes.
      52
    • No.
      99
    • Don't know/Undecided
      35
  3. 3. What describes better what the Garden of Eden mentioned in Genesis is/was?

    • An actual place that existed or exists on Earth.
      80
    • A symbol for something else but NOT an actual place.
      76
    • Don't know/Undecided
      30


Recommended Posts

You are probably right, but then this topic is not high on my priority list. What does bother me is the attitude some have that if you do not believe in evolution you are an ignorant savage that doesn't read.

As if the reason we don't agree with them is because we don't know what they're talking about. Yeah. Kinda silly.
Link to comment

oops

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment

Go to the general discussions menu and check out the date it shows for this post.

You will see why this thread is immortal.

Link to comment

I have yet to hear of a theory other than evolution that explains the geographic distribution of species, the dna relationships of species, the variation seen within a species, the variety of birth anomalies, the capability of different species to interbreed and others not to, the function of genes in animals from which they didnt come, animals that can be only crossed in vitro.

Animals only producing their own kind clearly fails.

Animals existing for < 10,000 years fails.

Evolution passes.

Link to comment

What separates ALL mankind from chimpanzees in a way that dogs are not separate from jackals?

Good question to which no one really knows the answer, yet if we are in fact in the image of God, then something may in fact separate us that we do not fully comprehend. But then there will be some beasts in the Celestial Kingdom so we really shouldn't get too carried away. Right now the Church basically accepts evolutionary theory except in the case of Adam and Eve, but we don't know for sure what takes us out of the evolutionary chain. We do know that some of us share the Neanderthal genes, but we don't fully understand the implications of that either.

Link to comment

What separates ALL mankind from chimpanzees in a way that dogs are not separate from jackals?

1. Math and science

2. Worship of God

3. Understand the universe with our (2?)-pound brains.

(And I am a strong evolutionist)

Edited by Hamilton Porter
Link to comment

What separates ALL mankind from chimpanzees in a way that dogs are not separate from jackals?

Brain size in humans is much different(larger) than that of the other great apes. The female mammary glands in humans, while functionally the same, is much more developed than any of the other great apes. Age of sexual maturity in much longer in humans. Our local cords are much lower in our throats allowing for talking. Our social organizations. Our use of fire. Invention of the wheel. Our ability to invent complex machines is obviously far greater than any of the other great apes. I don't know enough about dog v jackal physiology to comment.

Edited by thesometimesaint
Link to comment

Brain size in humans is much different(larger) than that of the other great apes. The female mammary glands in humans, while functionally the same, is much more developed than any of the other great apes. Age of sexual maturity in much longer in humans. Our local cords are much lower in our throats allowing for talking. Our social organizations. Our ability to invent complex machines is obviously far greater than any of the other great apes. I don't know enough about dog v jackal physiology to comment.

And exactly what does that establish?

Link to comment

That we are evolutionarily far different than any other of the great apes, including the Chimps.

So is that a difference in degree or a difference which implies something more than evolutionary divergence?

Link to comment

And I have a bit of difficulty taking anyone seriously whose elitist attitude leads them to denigrate someone who disagrees with them.

Those who cannot defend the argument attack the man. I have denigrated no one.

Edited by semlogo
Link to comment

So is that a difference in degree or a difference which implies something more than evolutionary divergence?

I don't know what that means. We are genetically different enough from any of the other great apes as to not be able to interbreed. That genetic isolation has allowed for all the other evolutionary differences. Including our technology that reenforces and amplifies those differences.

Link to comment

No the focus of my replies is to get you to see that your dogma is not as set in in concrete as you seem to believe. As I have stated earlier I do not care about evolution. What I care about is the attitude that it is all over but the party and that everybody else better get in line.

I don't recognize your caricature of me.

Link to comment

You forgot those tests, and the testability of the earths age, rely on a goodly number of assumptions which may or may not be valid assumptions.

Safe assumptions, like the laws of physics continuing to work even when inconvenient to one's interpretation of scripture.

Link to comment

You are probably right, but then this topic is not high on my priority list. What does bother me is the attitude some have that if you do not believe in evolution you are an ignorant savage that doesn't read.

I see evolution deniers misrepresenting evolution. That indicates either a lack of reading or reading scurrilous sources of information.

Link to comment

Proof of intelligent design is observed in the fact that things like DNA are known to not arise on their own without planning and design beforehand. Evolutionists swear in the reality of chemical evolution but yet fail in every attempt to prove it. All they have proven and continue to uphold is the reality that things like DNA show elements of design, purpose and intelligence of the which DO NOT RISE on their own.

I dont care what you state about evolution and the origins of life being separate, you absolutely will find no class in high school or college that teaches basic biology that doesnt include theories on the origins of life in the evolution section of the biology book or class. Evolution DOES INCLUDE theories on the origins of life.

The building blocks of DNA arise spontaneously. The appearance of design and actual intentional design are two very different things.

Biology is a broader topic than evolution. It is not surprising that a biology textbook would mention abiogenesis AND evolution. But what evolution deniers refuse to believe, even though they've been told many times, is that evolution and abiogenesis are two separate fields of study. I don't know what impedes this information from sinking into your awareness.

Link to comment

I see evolution deniers misrepresenting evolution. That indicates either a lack of reading or reading scurrilous sources of information.

Now would be a fine time for you to clear up any misrepresentation you see, or think you see. Just remember to KISS, or keep it simple... well, you probably already know what I meant.
Link to comment

1. Math and science

2. Worship of God

3. Understand the universe with our (2?)-pound brains.

(And I am a strong evolutionist)

~~

Brain size in humans is much different(larger) than that of the other great apes. The female mammary glands in humans, while functionally the same, is much more developed than any of the other great apes. Age of sexual maturity in much longer in humans. Our local cords are much lower in our throats allowing for talking. Our social organizations. Our use of fire. Invention of the wheel. Our ability to invent complex machines is obviously far greater than any of the other great apes. I don't know enough about dog v jackal physiology to comment.

~~

Good question to which no one really knows the answer, yet if we are in fact in the image of God, then something may in fact separate us that we do not fully comprehend. But then there will be some beasts in the Celestial Kingdom so we really shouldn't get too carried away. Right now the Church basically accepts evolutionary theory except in the case of Adam and Eve, but we don't know for sure what takes us out of the evolutionary chain. We do know that some of us share the Neanderthal genes, but we don't fully understand the implications of that either.

But we wouldn't say that someone who doesn't worship God is not human, nor someone that doesn't understand the universe. A newborn human is less able to comprehend math than an adult chimpanzee. All of this ignores the patient with severe dementia who can do none of the above. Individuals are born with smaller brainsize than chimps (microcephalics/lissencepalics), born without breasts, born without vocal cords, and autistic enough that they can generate much less social interaction than a dog does.

As a species, we have done great things, but the ability to do these things is not what makes us human. (or would you argue that the individuals noted above are not human?)

Edited by bu11fr0g
Link to comment

bu11fr0g:

The first part isn't my post.

I said nothing about the worship of God, or understanding the universe.

As for infant humans abilities with math you're comparing apples to oranges. A fairer comparison would be infant to infant or adult to adult.

A fairer comparison would be a demented human to a demented human, a demented great ape with a demented great ape.

Microcephaly or lissencephaly etc., are rare conditions and should not be considered as a norm.

The human brain always goes to completion and is hardwired to anthropomorphize. That is why smilies work :)

Edited by thesometimesaint
Link to comment

One of my husband's (a native Utahan) heros: http://www.dinosaurjim.com/index.html

PS: I transferred from Illinois to California through Utah in middleschool. My first year in California was basically a repeat of what I had already learned in Utah and before that Illinois and contrary to my previous homework habits, I had to take home homework once in my four years of highschool in California....so if Utah is supposed to be low in education value, I would hate to see where California's setting is at (and since I am a native Californian this troubles me greatly).

Utah's problems with its schools are fundamentally the same as the US's problems with its schools. I would assume that California falls into the same category. I haven't seen results from the States that display much hope for the future. The US continues to slide backwards in regard to school results in reading, math and sciences.

I'm not amused by this because the US is, after all, the most powerful nation in the world. Doubly troubling for me is, that as a teacher myself, my country of Sweden, which has long held the position of being the envious little brother to the States, now has a Minister of Education who insists on copying the systems of schooling seen in the States. And Sweden has begun a backwards slide in reading, math and sciences. Strangely, here in Sweden, we could have easily copied the system from Finland, that consistently produces results in math, reading and sciences in the top 3 of the whole world. But Finland is not a country that Sweden, traditionally, looks up to.

Link to comment

Utah's problems with its schools are fundamentally the same as the US's problems with its schools. I would assume that California falls into the same category. I haven't seen results from the States that display much hope for the future. The US continues to slide backwards in regard to school results in reading, math and sciences.

I'm not amused by this because the US is, after all, the most powerful nation in the world. Doubly troubling for me is, that as a teacher myself, my country of Sweden, which has long held the position of being the envious little brother to the States, now has a Minister of Education who insists on copying the systems of schooling seen in the States. And Sweden has begun a backwards slide in reading, math and sciences. Strangely, here in Sweden, we could have easily copied the system from Finland, that consistently produces results in math, reading and sciences in the top 3 of the whole world. But Finland is not a country that Sweden, traditionally, looks up to.

Sad to see. However the US and Norway have fundamentally different social structures, and cultural histories. So I am not too sure the Norway system would work here in the US. I watched Sputnik go up and the vast changes it brought to education in the US. Maybe we just need a serious challenge to get us moving forwards again.

Edited by thesometimesaint
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...