• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Dawkins and Wendy Wright debate.

The Neo Nerd

The Neo Nerd

Well-Known Member
It must be really hard to stick ones fingers in ones ears and go "LAH LAH LAH IM NOT LISTENING" and type at the same time.

Maybe earplugs are being used.
 
Gloone

Gloone

Well-Known Member
painted wolf said:
Well, Aegyptopithecus zeuxis is an extremely ape-like "monkey" as is the range of species in the genus Pliopithecus. Who are even more ape-like save for a small tail remnant. Saadanius hijazensis, is a very "monkey like" ape.
So you have a pretty good set of transitional forms right there.

Plus, if you want more than fossils there are dozens of genetic studies showing humans are related to the old world monkeys more closely than the new world monkeys.
such as:
F4.medium.gif

Adaptive evolution of cytochrome c oxidase subunit VIII in anthropoid primates — PNAS

not to mention molecular evidence and on and on...

wa:do
Click to expand...
Saying we are ape-like doesn't mean anything other than we share some common similarities with apes. It doesn't mean they are our long lost ancestors. Unless you want to call them that. :facepalm:

animal - definition of animal by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
1. A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
2. An animal organism other than a human, especially a mammal.
3. A person who behaves in a bestial or brutish manner.
4. A human considered with respect to his or her physical, as opposed to spiritual, nature.
5. A person having a specified aptitude or set of interests: "that rarest of musical animals, an instrumentalist who is as comfortable on a podium with a stick as he is playing his instrument" (Lon Tuck).

Based on the first definition we share a lot of similarities with animals. So what.....
Based on the second we are not animals. So what....
Based on the third it is a person that acts like a monkey or wild animal. So what...
Based on the fourth is only relates to the physical opposed to the spiritual. So what...
Based on the fifth a person that resemsble animal like talent. So what...

You must clearly define how evolution is to be perceived before we continue with this conversation.
 
painted wolf

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Gloone said:
Saying we are ape-like doesn't mean anything other than we share some common similarities with apes. It doesn't mean they are our long lost ancestors. Unless you want to call them that. :facepalm:

animal - definition of animal by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
1. A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
2. An animal organism other than a human, especially a mammal.
3. A person who behaves in a bestial or brutish manner.
4. A human considered with respect to his or her physical, as opposed to spiritual, nature.
5. A person having a specified aptitude or set of interests: "that rarest of musical animals, an instrumentalist who is as comfortable on a podium with a stick as he is playing his instrument" (Lon Tuck).

Based on the first definition we share a lot of similarities with animals. So what.....
Based on the second we are not animals. So what....
Based on the third it is a person that acts like a monkey or wild animal. So what...
Based on the fourth is only relates to the physical opposed to the spiritual. So what...
Based on the fifth a person that resemsble animal like talent. So what...

You must clearly define how evolution is to be perceived before we continue with this conversation.
Click to expand...
OMG really?:faint:
So that genetic data is what then? Coincidence or a cruel joke?
And the fossils?

wa:do
 
Gloone

Gloone

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
Is he trying to get out of the hole he dug by scratching at the sides hoping the hole fills up?
Click to expand...
No, why do I need evolution to tell me that I live in a world full of mammals, fish and reptiles. I just seen a T.V. show where a crab seen a wave coming and it was smart enough to hide into its stupid little crab hole it dug. Do you think that thing thought it was safe from the wave that toppled over it. Obviously not!
 
painted wolf

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Gloone said:
No, why do I need evolution to tell me that I live in a world full of mammals, fish and reptiles. I just seen a T.V. show where a crab seen a wave coming and it was smart enough to hide into its stupid little crab hole it dug. Do you think that thing thought it was safe from the wave that toppled over it. Obviously not!
Click to expand...
But it will tell you about human diseases and the potential development of new diseases.
Unless you don't care about that sort of thing?

wa:do
 
painted wolf

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Gloone said:
Oh!!! Now I am the bad guy because I don't agree with your monkey hypothesis.
Click to expand...
Nope, just a bit cocky, ignorant and dismissive about evolution, the evidence and what it means in the modern world. :angel2:

I've never called you a bad person for it. :flirt:

wa:do
 
Pegg

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
Orbital said:
I agree with Dawkins.

Because Wendy never actually made a point.
Click to expand...

she made the same point 3 or 4 times which Dawkins was unable or unwilling to answer

"where if the evidence of microevolution of one species to another"

and another good point she made a few times which he did not address was
" why is the evidence against evolution censored out and only the evidence which favor evolution presented? We would like to see ALL the evidence and not just the parts you want us to see. We want to see the controversy too"

both very good points and im with her on that.
 
Gloone

Gloone

Well-Known Member
painted wolf said:
Nope, just a bit cocky, ignorant and dismissive about evolution, the evidence and what it means in the modern world. :angel2:

I've never called you a bad person for it. :flirt:

wa:do
Click to expand...
Actually it isn't really your hypothesis it is Dawkins, saying we are kin monkeys. You made a rather good one. I'm sure monkeys are nice to have as pets, just like dogs, but I would probably keep them in a cage while I'm sleeping. :monkey:
They seem little more rabid than rabbits.
 
McBell

McBell

mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Pegg said:
she made the same point 3 or 4 times which Dawkins was unable or unwilling to answer

"where if the evidence of microevolution of one species to another"

and another good point she made a few times which he did not address was
" why is the evidence against evolution censored out and only the evidence which favor evolution presented? We would like to see ALL the evidence and not just the parts you want us to see. We want to see the controversy too"

both very good points and im with her on that.
Click to expand...
Still beating that dead horse?
 
The Neo Nerd

The Neo Nerd

Well-Known Member
Pegg said:
she made the same point 3 or 4 times which Dawkins was unable or unwilling to answer

"where if the evidence of microevolution of one species to another"

and another good point she made a few times which he did not address was
" why is the evidence against evolution censored out and only the evidence which favor evolution presented? We would like to see ALL the evidence and not just the parts you want us to see. We want to see the controversy too"

both very good points and im with her on that.
Click to expand...

What did you expect him to whip it out in front of her.

He told her to go to the smithsonian museum and see their exhibit.

And the evidence against evolution isn't censored out. That's her opinion she gave no evidence to back up this claim, she didn't even give an example.

The problem with debating creationists so much is there are only so many many arguments they put forward before they just put their fingers in their ears and you just get sick of beating your head against the brick wall that is their ignorance.

-Q
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top