-
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!
Evolution is Not Progress
- Thread starter Jayhawker Soule
- Start date
- Status
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Well if it is NOT at ladder and it is NOT a process, WHY DON'T ELEPHANTS EVOLVE INTO
A MOUSE LIKE CREATURE AND HUMANS EVOLVE INTO A WORM LIKE CREATURE? If you don't get the logic of this statement then no wonder EVOLUTIONISTS are so misunderstood.
A MOUSE LIKE CREATURE AND HUMANS EVOLVE INTO A WORM LIKE CREATURE? If you don't get the logic of this statement then no wonder EVOLUTIONISTS are so misunderstood.
Thanks to you, I've coined a new term: "Norom" - it's perfect. 
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Well, thank you! All three of you have just proven that EVOLUTIONISTS have no idea what they are talking about. If species are larger and or smarter then their supposed ancestors THEN they MUST be PROGRESSING or climbing up a ladder. The very idea that you find my remarks so ridiculus only proves my view. No Evolutionist ever demonstrated that any species has reverted or digressed or is simplfying. No! What he says is apes can't build computers, only Humans can do that PRESENTLY, and yet HUMANS had apes in their linage. You laugh at me! I just shake my head and ponder... It is a wonder any person calling himself a "Christian" would even give evolutionary thought the time of day.
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
.....Alright, now I'm confused.
You are misunderstanding. Progression is evolution, but evolution is not progression, do you understand that? It is possible for a species to 'progress' (progression is a pretty subjective term) through evolution, aka, we see intelligence as a good thing, so for a species to develop higher intelligence would be 'progression', but not everything that happens in evolution has to be considered 'progression'. For a mouse to develop the ability to climb trees in order to acheive a new food source, he dosen't have to progress, so much as he just has to adapt. Even with his new ability to climb trees, he's still a mouse.
You're right about that. In my experience, I've come to see that Christians mostly gravitate towards irrational thought, and this is a pretty logical concept we're dealing with here.
standing_on_one_foot
Well-Known Member
I think I might see what you mean by the post, although it's a slightly unclear way of putting it...if I understand you right (and I actually doubt I do, but even so, the point I'm understanding is a good one), what you're saying is something of a reply to the question I've often heard asked, namely, if humans evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around? (this is, in and of itself, something of a flawed question, since we simply share ancestors, but you get the point) The thing is, we like to think we're at the top of some ladder. In terms of complexity, yeah, I'd say we're pretty high up, but from evolution's point of view (in a matter of speaking), we're just another species that happens to survive very well. The only progress involved in evolution is developing into something that is able to survive. So, in a sense, every species alive today is on top of a "ladder".
I don't think I'm phrasing this very well, but the point I'm trying to make is, from life's point of view, any species that works well is doing fine. We like to think we're superior to, say worms, and, yes, in ways we are. But from nature's point of view, what would make us superior? Size and intelligence? So what? We both survive well, and that, to be guilty of a little anthropomorphization here, is all evolution cares about.
So, yes, I agree with the original statement, I must say. As I see it, viewing ourselves as being the pinnacle of evolution is just a bit self-centered. (and I'm as guilty of this view as anyone else, I'll be the first to admit--it's a human thing, and this idea has its a good deal of value in other areas of our lives)
I don't think I'm phrasing this very well, but the point I'm trying to make is, from life's point of view, any species that works well is doing fine. We like to think we're superior to, say worms, and, yes, in ways we are. But from nature's point of view, what would make us superior? Size and intelligence? So what? We both survive well, and that, to be guilty of a little anthropomorphization here, is all evolution cares about.
So, yes, I agree with the original statement, I must say. As I see it, viewing ourselves as being the pinnacle of evolution is just a bit self-centered. (and I'm as guilty of this view as anyone else, I'll be the first to admit--it's a human thing, and this idea has its a good deal of value in other areas of our lives)
Named
Member
That must be it... We're all morons for disagreeing with a simple person like LittleNipper.
Though it's hardly a wonder why a person of your intellectual capacity has difficulty grasping such a concept.
One of the funniest things, in my experience, is a stupid person attempting to fathom a 'complex' theory.
It's also rather amusing that on failure, they declare it makes no sense...
What an ignorant individual.
standing_on_one_foot:
Yes, time after time arrogance stands in the way of accepting a theory like Evolution.
The first step is acknowledging humans as an animal species.
No, no... We're above that... <sigh>
Spiritually, what separates us from the other animals? (Assuming spirit exists)
Our intelligence is a product of the human brain, not a soul or spirit. So say our 'soul' leaves our body, how would you distinguish it from any other animal's?
[/rant]
Though it's hardly a wonder why a person of your intellectual capacity has difficulty grasping such a concept.
One of the funniest things, in my experience, is a stupid person attempting to fathom a 'complex' theory.
It's also rather amusing that on failure, they declare it makes no sense...
What an ignorant individual.
standing_on_one_foot:
Yes, time after time arrogance stands in the way of accepting a theory like Evolution.
The first step is acknowledging humans as an animal species.
No, no... We're above that... <sigh>
Spiritually, what separates us from the other animals? (Assuming spirit exists)
Our intelligence is a product of the human brain, not a soul or spirit. So say our 'soul' leaves our body, how would you distinguish it from any other animal's?
[/rant]
Evolution is the interplay of {Stuff Happens} and {Unintended Consequences}.
For as far back as anyone can remember, the Ugs and the Ows acted as predator and prey. As with all species, some Ugs were bigger than others, much as Ows varied in bright coloration and speed. The situation was relatively stable (though tense) until the onset of the "Deadly Drought", for not only did the "Deadly Drought" result in more than a few Ugs and Ows dying of thirst, but it tended to disproportionally hurt the larger and each species. Even worse, it virtually destroyed the Oopses, who had long been a convenient, if less than apetizing, source of food for both.
The impact was cataclysmic and the consequences far reaching. With the Oopses out of the equation, the predator-prey relationship intensified. Only the strongest and speediest and best camoflaged of the Ows survived to reproduce, and they more often than not gave birth to cubs that shares the traits of their parents. After a very few centuries, the Ows were much, much bigger in muscle and faster in escape than anything imaginable before the "Deadly Drought". Furthermore, the once brightly speckled males were now almost exclusively slate grey and near impossible to see at dawn and dusk.
The Ugs, too, bore the signature of the "Deadly Drought". Once, only the largest bulls got mating rites, but size comes with an energy cost, and the erstwhile Alpha Ugs were simply unable to effectively hunt the new and swifter Ows. Getting even larger and stronger was not an option. Those that did required even more food to survive, and the food source was dwindling. Thus, as the Ows grew modestly in bulk to power a new-found speed. The Ugs found each generation favoring the smaller, sleeker predators among them. No longer ponderous giants, they were now swift and cunning killing machines. As with the Ows, they now barely resembled their ancestors.
The Ows got bigger. The Ugs got smaller. The Oopses went extinct. Evolution is not a ladder but a sieve.
For as far back as anyone can remember, the Ugs and the Ows acted as predator and prey. As with all species, some Ugs were bigger than others, much as Ows varied in bright coloration and speed. The situation was relatively stable (though tense) until the onset of the "Deadly Drought", for not only did the "Deadly Drought" result in more than a few Ugs and Ows dying of thirst, but it tended to disproportionally hurt the larger and each species. Even worse, it virtually destroyed the Oopses, who had long been a convenient, if less than apetizing, source of food for both.
The impact was cataclysmic and the consequences far reaching. With the Oopses out of the equation, the predator-prey relationship intensified. Only the strongest and speediest and best camoflaged of the Ows survived to reproduce, and they more often than not gave birth to cubs that shares the traits of their parents. After a very few centuries, the Ows were much, much bigger in muscle and faster in escape than anything imaginable before the "Deadly Drought". Furthermore, the once brightly speckled males were now almost exclusively slate grey and near impossible to see at dawn and dusk.
The Ugs, too, bore the signature of the "Deadly Drought". Once, only the largest bulls got mating rites, but size comes with an energy cost, and the erstwhile Alpha Ugs were simply unable to effectively hunt the new and swifter Ows. Getting even larger and stronger was not an option. Those that did required even more food to survive, and the food source was dwindling. Thus, as the Ows grew modestly in bulk to power a new-found speed. The Ugs found each generation favoring the smaller, sleeker predators among them. No longer ponderous giants, they were now swift and cunning killing machines. As with the Ows, they now barely resembled their ancestors.
The Ows got bigger. The Ugs got smaller. The Oopses went extinct. Evolution is not a ladder but a sieve.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
A friendly reminder-- I would appreciate it if everyone would please try to keep the discussion civil. There is no need for childish name-calling and personal attacks. Thanks everyone.
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Actually, I see Christians moving to logical insights offered by some Creationistic throught and investigative work. They have found GOD
I sense that evolutionist don't wish to share the limelight nor invest anytime in attempting to seek GOD.
Is far as in terms of eternity, I would say Christians have the bases covered and not evolutionists.
I sense that evolutionist don't wish to share the limelight nor invest anytime in attempting to seek GOD.
Is far as in terms of eternity, I would say Christians have the bases covered and not evolutionists.
Darn it, Mr_Spinkles, don't take the stuff about the Ugs so damn personally. Why is it always about you?Mr_Spinkles said:
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Christians have their bases covered as far as incorporating the bible goes, and evolutionists have theri bases covered when it comes to incorporating science. It looks to me like everyone is a winner!
Mr Spinkles
Mr
You, sir, have no right to tell me how to feel....oh and by the way, my father was an Ug.Deut. 32.8 said:Darn it, Mr_Spinkles, don't take the stuff about the Ugs so damn personally. Why is it always about you?
I sense that evolutionist don't wish to share the limelight nor invest anytime in attempting to seek GOD.
You presume the evolutionists' mind is not a curious one. How should one begin their search to find god? What events or objects are we to observe? What predictions can we make?
You presume the evolutionists' mind is not a curious one. How should one begin their search to find god? What events or objects are we to observe? What predictions can we make?
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Wait, I'm confused...are Catholics considered 'Christians' or 'evolutionists'?
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
...Good question...I'm going to look up what the pope's official stance on evolution is. If it is accepted, that would be very interesting.
Just so you know, the pope has an 'official stance' on just about everything, plus he's infallible. So, if you ever need to know anything, anything at all...
Just so you know, the pope has an 'official stance' on just about everything, plus he's infallible. So, if you ever need to know anything, anything at all...
- Status