Well a lot of people have been telling me evolution is real. They give me the most craziest surreal 'facts'. Has anyone discovered any fish with legs? Any humans with gills or fins? If you put all the pieces of a watch into you're pocket and shake it around for trillions of years, will it ever become a watch? Is there but one possibility? Or if you completely dismantle a chicken and a fish, and put it into a box, shaking it around for trillions of years. Will it ever become a fish with wings? or a chicken with fins? :l
I managed to sift through quite a bit of this Website, and there are 2 things that really struck me.
1) This guy's 'credentials' are a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and... nope, that's it. You are using a poorly made Website written by an engineer as an academic source for disproving evolution.
2) There is nothing but deconstruction on this Website. What I mean by this, is he finds whatever little piece he can, argues against it, and uses that to show that a much greater chunk is false. For example, he used supposedly inconsistent radiometric dating results of moon rock to show that radiometric dating doesn't work. He used a supposedly faulty understanding of horse evolution to show that evolution is false. I say 'supposedly' because I cannot find any sort of scientific discussion to back up either of these claims. And the citations on his page - get this - are his own Website! He is citing himself as the main reference for these claims. That suggests that he tested the moon rocks and got inconsistent results.
At the end of the day, this guy just isn't qualified to debunk evolution. Most of his questions and objections come from a complete misunderstanding of the theory.
i'm not positive but I think a already posted a link or two on previous pages. if not, my last post included a link
As others have pointed out, disproving Evolution isn't the same thing as proving Creationism.
even though ur gone now, perhaps you will read this tommorrow
who are you to say how much we do or do not understand? I understand very much, thank you
I'm sort of surprised how misunderstood my statement was...
Notice that he intentionally excludes the origin of life.
Yeah, done reading that. Evolution doesn't cover how life began and I don't want to wade through piles of crap produced by people who don't even understand that much.
1) I in no way referred specifically to you ShinyCowBeast.
2) The site you linked makes it seem as if the author of the quoted book is trying to dodge something by not including the origin of life in a book on Evolution. He has no obligation to do so because Evolution does not cover how life came to exist, only how it changes. I did not feel like looking through the rest of the site of people who do not even understand the parameters which Evolution covers, as not knowing something so simple as that shows that they do not have a very good understanding of the subject.
3) The only way which you would be included in my statement is if you thought the Theory of Evolution attempts to explain how first life came to exist. If you do, you obviously don't know as much about Evolution as you claim, since this would show you don't even know what it covers.
Evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of life, but instead starts as soon as that first life exists. Other theories attempt to cover how life came to exist.
I do believe that live does slowly evolve. I do partly beleive that us, humans could have come from chimpanzee. Sice they are so like us just we are evolved to think, and comstuct things better. This is so because chimpanzee's do use tools to help then get bugs out of the ground easier by using sticks. So it is plausible to think evolution is possible.
I do partly beleive that us, humans could have come from chimpanzee
You shouldn't, because we didn't. Common misconceptions about Evolution include...
1) That we evolved from modern apes. This is wrong. We evolved from a common ancestor.
So it is plausible to think evolution is possible.
It's not just plausible, it is proven that things change over time. We have seen micro-evolution in labs, have glimpses of it through ring species, and the fossil record.
Oh so we evloved from these CHLCA and that is why there is no more of that ape. So it would be hard to proof that we actually came from there. But I understand were you are coming from.
So it would be hard to proof that we actually came from there.
Even in the absence of a living ancestor, genetic studies allow us to retrace phylogenetic trees. We don't necessarily have to show an ancestor in a cage to proove we are part of the great apes.
We don't necessarily have to show an ancestor in a cage to proove we are part of the great apes
I understand but it is hard to convince lots of people that we have come from these great apes if there is no good hard eveidence. Unless you have some?
Because they died off since they could not evolve and adapt. But we and the modern apes have done just that, which is why we're here today and not them.
How can life form by itself? No one, not even scientists, can CREATE, (not talking about cloning) life (even in a lab). People trying to prove evilution try creating life, but of course fail. Also the odds of 18,000 DNA (OR RNA) letters lining up in proper order for life to begin by itself is 1/4 to the power of 18,000. That's more than you think. It's almost 3 pages full of zeros. That's pretty much no chance at all.
