Do people actually believe in that evolution rubbish?

[sunni56]

Luis; So after refusing to engage or answer any questions, you come back with one of your own? Are you having a laugh? :biglaugh:

 

[Ouroboros]

Are you here to add any value or to simply spout rubbish? If you don't understand a question or evolution, than just ask.

I gave you several links to study. Did you? One of them was to Berkeley University.

It's better that you do take your time and study it instead of spouting misconceptions of evolution. Your questions show that there are some fundamental things you haven't understood yet. Instead of me trying to argue and show you the evidence, it's better to go to some resources where they have taken their time and collect all data. The problem of understanding evolution is that you have to take it from many angles at the same time and the data is extensive. I know it's not easily comprehended, but you can do it, if you're willing to.

 

[sunni56]

I gave you several links to study. Did you? One of them was to Berkeley University.

It's better that you do take your time and study it instead of spouting misconceptions of evolution. Your questions show that there are some fundamental things you haven't understood yet. Instead of me trying to argue and show you the evidence, it's better to go to some resources where they have taken their time and collect all data. The problem of understanding evolution is that you have to take it from many angles at the same time and the data is extensive. I know it's not easily comprehended, but you can do it, if you're willing to.

I think you need to learn two subjects; biology and English. Biology because I believe you are masking your incompetence of the theory with deflections, and English because you don't understand my posts. http://www.bbc.co.uk/learning/subjects/english.shtml And also, make use of the Berkley link will you.

 

[Ouroboros]

I think you need to learn two subjects; biology and English. Biology because I believe you are masking your incompetence of the theory with deflections,

How is giving your resources and guiding you in the right direction a deflection?

and English because you don't understand my posts.

Obviously I don't since you're using "deflection" wrong.

By the way, one evidence that we share ancestry with fish is that we share genes with them. The mapping of ancestry is done through DNA comparisons. There are life that doesn't share the same genes with fish, but we do, and mammals do. It's like reading a book where a few words or letters are changed here and there but you still can read and understand the story. But you know this since you studied evolution already.

Gene commonality, simple overview: http://genetics.thetech.org/online-exhibits/genes-common

 

[sunni56]

How is giving your resources and guiding you in the right direction a deflection?


Obviously I don't since you're using "deflection" wrong.

By the way, one evidence that we share ancestry with fish is that we share genes with them. The mapping of ancestry is done through DNA comparisons. There are life that doesn't share the same genes with fish, but we do, and mammals do. It's like reading a book where a few words or letters are changed here and there but you still can read and understand the story. But you know this since you studied evolution already.

That highlighted word has been used incorrectly, like I said; learn English. BBC have a decent section that could get things moving for you in the right direction.

Don't forget Biology though, try and learn them simultaneously Good luck.

 

[Revoltingest]

Could somebody please explain to me how this miracle is supposed to work? Saying that humans were once fishes is a nice fairy story but the way some people describe it, it's as if they've literally seen a fish turn into a human, which is just not the case.

I'm so late jumping in this thoroughly trampled thread, but here it goes.
Evolution is an unavoidable consequence of these conditions: billions of years, changing environment, genetic mutation,
natural selection & reproduction. Now, a supreme being could've created it all (I'm skeptical though.), but evolution would
proceed inexorably anyway. (Stochastic processes won't stop for anyone, no matter how tall his hat or flowing his beard.)
Is it fantastic that a flounder could've become a talk show host on NPR or the EIB? Yes. But a magic man in the sky who
spoke the universe into existence is pretty fantastical too. I don't accept it though, because it lacks predictive & explanatory
power. So put me in the "rubbish" camp.

 

[Ouroboros]

Okay, here's your straight answer, no "deflections".

"Do people actually believe in that evolution rubbish?"

No. People believe in an accurate evolution, not in evolution rubbish.

Humans did evolve from a common ancestor to fish, not modern fish as such. We share ancestry. So no, no one has or ever will see a fish evolve to a human. It's not how evolution works. It's a straw-man fallacy to argue that way. And the only reason to someone starting a question in such an aggressive and improper way is someone who doesn't care for the answer, which also is obvious from the rest of the conversation.

No deflections there. Happy?

(And btw, I did study English and Biology. Straight A honor student, thank you very much. Now it's your turn.)

 

[Ouroboros]

So put me in the "rubbish" camp.

You and me both.

I rather be in the scientifically accurate "rubbish" camp than the alternative.

 

[Draka]

I find it highly ironic that someone who obviously believes in creation is demanding that people have witnessed pretty much the whole of the evolutionary process in order to substantiate their accepting it when there is no way they can ever claim the same for their belief in creation. Especially considering that one can see evidence for evolution to back it up, but no evidence for creation at all. Downright hysterical.

 

[Iti oj]

Fine I admit. I went for a trip with the dr once and saw the change happen. Yes I observed it, we did indeed evolve.

 

[sunni56]

I'm so late jumping in this thoroughly trampled thread, but here it goes.
Evolution is an unavoidable consequence of these conditions: billions of years, changing environment, genetic mutation,
natural selection & reproduction. Now, a supreme being could've created it all (I'm skeptical though.), but evolution would
proceed inexorably anyway. (Stochastic processes won't stop for anyone, no matter how tall his hat or flowing his beard.)
Is it fantastic that a flounder could've become a talk show host on NPR or the EIB? Yes. But a magic man in the sky who
spoke the universe into existence is pretty fantastical too. I don't accept it though, because it lacks predictive & explanatory
power. So put me in the "rubbish" camp.

Thanks for your considered input, appreciate it. And you're never too late to join in

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I've studied evolution, so no need to patronize me. Now answer the question; did you or did you not witness a fish transitioning into a human being, yes or no?

I've never seen that, but I have seen a human being transition into a blubbering fool. Recently.

 

[Ouroboros]

You'll be telling me fossils are made in 30 minutes and put there by atheists to trick us next!

LOL.

Actually, it was the Devilatheist who started the whole Evilution theory. It's all wrong because chickens don't cross the road, they lay eggs--which came first of course.

Wait, that's what my creationist friend told me when I mentioned I took geology at college....

We all evolved from Noah. That's a fact.

 

[Secret Chief]

Hang on. I'm a bit drunk now.

 

[Father Heathen]

Hang on. I'm a bit drunk now.

These sort of threads do drive one to drink, don't they.

 

[Riverwolf]

I've studied evolution, so no need to patronize me. Now answer the question; did you or did you not witness a fish transitioning into a human being, yes or no?

No, because evolution in the real world is nothing like evolution in Pokemon.

If someone actually told you that that's how evolution works, then that person is equally misinformed. That a fish can turn into a human is rubbish, and no self-respecting scientist would consider it even remotely possible in the natural world or currently-existing technology. Therefore, though you claim to have studied evolution, it would appear that your studies have failed to give you the proper knowledge of what it's supposed to be.

But I have observed evolution... in a way. You see, you look different from your parents, even though there are parts of you that do resemble them, but there's also parts that resemble a great-grandparent (my red hair is from my great-great-grandmother; none of my more recent relatives had this hair). THAT'S evolution at work.

 

[Ouroboros]

Hang on. I'm a bit drunk now.

I'll catch up tonight.

We'll brew again next week or the week after. Just ordered grains yesterday.

 

[Ouroboros]

No, because evolution in the real world is nothing like evolution in Pokemon.

:bow: Best comment ever!

 

[sunni56]

No, because evolution in the real world is nothing like evolution in Pokemon.

If someone actually told you that that's how evolution works, then that person is equally misinformed. That a fish can turn into a human is rubbish, and no self-respecting scientist would consider it even remotely possible in the natural world or currently-existing technology. Therefore, though you claim to have studied evolution, it would appear that your studies have failed to give you the proper knowledge of what it's supposed to be.

But I have observed evolution... in a way. You see, you look different from your parents, even though there are parts of you that do resemble them, but there's also parts that resemble a great-grandparent (my red hair is from my great-great-grandmother; none of my more recent relatives had this hair). THAT'S evolution at work.

You've just written a whole paragraph of ********. I didn't say evolution is a fish turning into a human being Mr. Kojo, I asked if you've seen a fish turn into a human being. There's a difference between a question and a statement, something the homo erectus probably knew.

And about Pokemon; gotta catch 'em all.

 

[Draka]

It seems as if you're the only one that actually understood where I'm coming from, or maybe I'm being deceived. Nobody else seemed to comprehend the intent behind the question, it was not about the theory of evolution, it was about the conviction behind it. Right, so you've admitted that it is not possible for a fish to transition into a human, so could you explain why some of those who accept the theory give off the impression that they have seen all of the stages at play last weekend?

I have yet to see how admitting the obvious answer of "no" to a ridiculous question of whether or not we've witnessed a fish change into a human is admitting that the transition is not possible via evolution. Nor have I ever seen anyone claim that they have ever "seen all of the stages at play last weekend". What we have seen is fossil evidence and more that verifies how evolution has taken place and how one lifeform has transitioned into another throughout billions of years to bring us to the point we are now.

You seemed quite perturbed that so many wouldn't bother to answer your question to begin with, but then look at your answer when someone actually does. Why do you think so many wouldn't bother to answer you? They knew the type of response that was coming.