prove me wrong on evolution

[Super Universe]

Alexander I would certainly recommend that you go out and get that formal education.
Life forms do not choose how to evolve, it's brain does not decide which way to go. Mutations occur naturally in all DNA which most often leads to problems for that life form. But once in a while a mutation occurs that helps a life form, gives it an advantage.

Reptiles are cold blooded so they lie in the sun to warm up in the mornings, this helps them move their muscles. Mammals are ready to go, so they have a distinct advantage.

This so called dispute between a belief in God and evolutionary theory is promoted by religion. God created the universe His way, not the way the pope thinks it should be.

How could God disagree with evolution since that is His vehicle for change? That's like saying a carpenter disagrees with wood and nails.

I believe in evolution and I believe absolutely, positively, 100% that God created the universe. Science is simply finding the clue's to God's great creation.

 

[Super Universe]

Alexander I would certainly recommend that you go out and get that formal education.

Life forms do not choose how to evolve, it's brain does not decide which way to go. Mutations occur naturally in all DNA which most often leads to problems for that life form. But once in a while a mutation occurs that helps a life form, gives it an advantage.

Reptiles are cold blooded so they lie in the sun to warm up in the mornings, this helps them move their muscles. Mammals are ready to go, so they have a distinct advantage.

This so called dispute between a belief in God and evolutionary theory is promoted by religion. God created the universe His way, not the way the pope thinks it should be.

How could God disagree with evolution since that is His vehicle for change? That's like saying a carpenter disagrees with wood and nails.

I believe in evolution and I believe absolutely, positively, 100% that God created the universe. Science is simply finding the clue's to God's great creation.

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, Thank you as I said I have no education But is it not Man the only thing on this Earth that could Evolve? Because you still have the matter of will don't you? As I look at it you must have CAUSE and EFFECT sorry I for get that on these things that is screaming sorry hope it didn't hirt your ears. But seriously don't you need will to evolve? It is as the old story for when I was a kid in school and the geraffe long neck animal my spelling sucks. It could not want to grow it's neck. It never and still does not have that mental capacity and come to think of it I don't think that man can either now that I really think of it.

 

[Fade]

Alex,

A brain is not a requirement for evolution. A will is not a requirement for evolution. I'm not sure why you think they are but you are sadly misguided.

 

[Opethian]

I think because of your lack of formal education you are very confused about evolution. You were never taught how it works and because of this you think there is a need for will or a brain to evolve. I would suggest that you do get some education, buy a good biology book, read about how evolution works, before you try to debate about the subject. If you want I'll make a thread here on how evolution works.

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, again in England it is guilty till proven innocent, Here in the US it is suppose to be innocent till proven guilty. But as we have seen here since we learned so much about DNA is that our prisons have not only innocent people, Proved by DNA but also that so called proff and evidence can be so so very wrong. And as for the so called science of the day it did replace the so called science of yesterday, or is the world still flat? Now to you all with the big educations and never learned, if an *** tells you the truth is it still the truth?

 

[Super Universe]

Man is not the only thing that can evolve. If that were true we would be surrounded by single celled amoeba.

A single celled amoeba does not have a will to evolve. Virus are the smallest life forms, just segments of DNA (or RNA) floating around protected by miniscule drops of water but these virus do not have a will, yet they evolve quicker than just about anything.

In my opinion, and there is no scientific basis for this, but once you get a life form that has evolved to the point of human beings further evolution has to be guided. The reason is because we are very dependant on complex systems: temperature regulation, vision, hearing, energy cycle, chemical balance, growth, repair, immunity... I could go on forever.

The human being is so complex that 99% of any further mutation is going to be harmful to one or more of our biological systems. I know science says that over time the 1% beneficial mutation is what causes us to evolve but I really do think that something is guiding our evolution from this point on.

 

[Opethian]

Yes, and that thing is natural selection

 

[Super Universe]

Yes natural selection. One of God's greatest inventions.

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, thank you super universe and in many points you are right but I have never wanted a formal indoctrination and that in my opinion is all it is because the answer to this thread is no I can't prove a negative! My thing is that first off as the courts everything is in other langueges. All of science now days you need a few years of school just to learn the English terminoligy. That as our court are very deceptive. The fact is that what ever you want to call it prove that their was Amino acids! we can't do it! You mention humans and our state. Try and calulate the number of bad mutation you have to go through to get one good mutation then multiply it by the unnumberable numbers of good mutations in our body then multiply it by the bad mutations and that is just for humans and we are not the only thing on this Earth. This number is so outragouse and you say it don't take faith to believe? I think the odds are better at hitting the big lotery without buying a ticket, than for this to be true. When you start with a theory and then try to prove it by eduation with time as the flat world it is proved a falsehood. How many times has so called science been proven untrue? Always in the past. So can science be trusted? NO!

 

[Opethian]

My thing is that first off as the courts everything is in other langueges. All of science now days you need a few years of school just to learn the English terminoligy. That as our court are very deceptive.

Why is it deceptive? English is not even my mother tongue yet I've had to study my university courses of biology, biochemistry etc... all completely in english, yet we didn't have any courses to teach us that terminology. This is called self-study: If you are interested in something and want to debate about it, you do an effort to be able to understand it before discussing it. It doesn't take that much effort to at least be able to talk about the basic mechanics, those are even taught in high school. You don't even need to buy a book, there's plenty of sites on the internet with clear and structured basic information.

The fact is that what ever you want to call it prove that their was Amino acids! we can't do it!

Yes we can. The Miller experiment managed to create a lot of different complex molecules from only a couple of simple primordial molecules, including a number of amino acids. Sure, not all 25 necessary amino acids most people think are required for life were formed, but who says all of these molecules were already used/needed in the most primitive life? That's what evolution is all about: change.

You mention humans and our state. Try and calulate the number of bad mutation you have to go through to get one good mutation then multiply it by the unnumberable numbers of good mutations in our body then multiply it by the bad mutations and that is just for humans and we are not the only thing on this Earth. This number is so outragouse and you say it don't take faith to believe?

You are seriously confused here. There's no logic in these sentences you wrote so please next time you try to make a point form it in logically sentences, explain what you think is outrageous and what you are actually trying to say instead of writing incomprehensible pieces of text like this.

I think the odds are better at hitting the big lotery without buying a ticket, than for this to be true. When you start with a theory and then try to prove it by eduation with time as the flat world it is proved a falsehood. How many times has so called science been proven untrue? Always in the past. So can science be trusted? NO!

Science always proven untrue? Keep living in your dream world! Science can be trusted, if it couldn't, we would still be cavemen, and you wouldn't be able to post things on this forum with your computer.

 

[Super Universe]

Science gave us computer's and the internet. It took us to the moon. We have paper, vehicles, aircraft all because of it. When your child is sick do you not take them to a doctor who is trained in the science of the human body?

How many times has science been proven untrue? Many, and many more will come. But do you deny gravity just because someone once had a theory about it that was incorrect?

You blame science when it is a purely logical control. If you want to blame someone then blame the humans who misunderstand the physical rules.

Our understanding of the universe is ever changing, evolving, like life itself.
God created the universe the way He wanted it to be not the way you, the pope, or anyone else think it should be.

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, had to go back ( sorry) many I take it don't like my opinion. Oh well. Why languag makes a differance is that science has to make up it's own langueg to be able to speak in it. Evolution has so many different variations all with there own name to confuse. If you believe that it took 100 billion mistakes times 100 billion mistakes to come up with one person and we have how many known things on this Earth? Times it by your other number and the number you come up with is the number to ONE that you believe so you are saying that the odds of this evolution theory are over 1oo billion X 100 billion X the number of things, plants animals insect everything on this planet that great big number to ONE against your point and you say you believe this? How much schooling do you have? Cause I'll sorry to say you have very little common sence cause to bet on any thing that has odds over 1,000,000,000/1 against is a very very stupid bet don't you think? You just stated that Evolution is the results of billions of mutations that happened for no reason of will. We my ignorant understanding of this languag as of a few others, what you are claiming is called ADAPTING. To EVOLVE you must want, Do you notice that the word selective (who is selecting) Please don't try and turn NATURE into something it is not. Nature can no more select as a rock can.

 

[alexander garcia]

Hi, Gravity good point lets look at it. We know that there is something that draws things to the ground. Now to say that we know about it is a joke right? Gravity defies owr laws of nature. Everything is pulled to the ground at the same rate of speed no matter the size or wieght of the object. To mention so we don't go off on science dubble talk this means that without exterior effects on the object all things fall at the same rate of speed. This defies the laws of size and wieght, they are exempt from physical rules. Let me dope some zeros you believe that 1,000,000,000/1 agianst is good odds?

 

[Opethian]

If you believe that it took 100 billion mistakes times 100 billion mistakes to come up with one person and we have how many known things on this Earth? Times it by your other number and the number you come up with is the number to ONE that you believe so you are saying that the odds of this evolution theory are over 1oo billion X 100 billion X the number of things, plants animals insect everything on this planet that great big number to ONE against your point and you say you believe this? How much schooling do you have? Cause I'll sorry to say you have very little common sence cause to bet on any thing that has odds over 1,000,000,000/1 against is a very very stupid bet don't you think?

No, the way you came up with that 1,000,000,000/1 is some very ****ed up logic and a proof that you really don't understand what you're talking about. You don't grasp the concept of natural selection, nor the concept of mutations and their changes on the DNA. Stop debating on this topic because it is only making you look very foolish and ignorant.

You just stated that Evolution is the results of billions of mutations that happened for no reason of will. We my ignorant understanding of this languag as of a few others, what you are claiming is called ADAPTING. To EVOLVE you must want, Do you notice that the word selective (who is selecting) Please don't try and turn NATURE into something it is not. Nature can no more select as a rock can.

Another complete misunderstanding of natural selection. I think I will really have to make a thread for you to understand it, because what you're arguing about is pointless because you don't grasp it.

 

[Opethian]

Hi, Gravity good point lets look at it. We know that there is something that draws things to the ground. Now to say that we know about it is a joke right? Gravity defies owr laws of nature. Everything is pulled to the ground at the same rate of speed no matter the size or wieght of the object. To mention so we don't go off on science dubble talk this means that without exterior effects on the object all things fall at the same rate of speed. This defies the laws of size and wieght, they are exempt from physical rules. Let me dope some zeros you believe that 1,000,000,000/1 agianst is good odds?

Wow, you have a complete misunderstanding of basic physics too. Go read a physics book before you talk about gravity.

 

[Super Universe]

How much schooling do I have? 65 semester units, almost entirely in science, with a GPA of 3.90.

One of my classes, Geology, was taught by a devote Southern Baptist. Another, Physical Anthropology, was taught by a practicing Roman Catholic.
Some of the greatest human minds the world has ever known believe in evolution. And you are?

The odds are not 1,000,000,000/1 that humans would evolve, they are 1/1. How do I know this? Because we are here.

Now you can assume that the odds were that much against humans evolving, or higher if you wish. But then doesn't this prove the influence of some other guiding force in the universe?

When the deer population gets too high there is more food available for the wolves, also the increase of population increases the spread of disease so the population is reduced. Then the wolf population gets too big and sends the deer population back down, too many wolves leads to some not surviving and the wolf population drops.

There are many controls. It's a balance, not a perfect one but a balance nonetheless.

Do you think God is constantly monitoring the balance of energy and matter, turning switches on and off, twisting dials to keep the universe running smoothly? God created the universe and put physics and science in charge to control the day to day operation of matter and energy in the universe.

It's not stupid, it's smart.

 

[Opethian]

I agree that if there ever is such a being as a god, the onlything he ever caused was the big bang. This event alone held the information of how the entire universe would evolve, simply because what it caused was based on the way the bang arose. So, logically, this is the latest period in which one would be able to believe in a god. After that, everything is logically explainable by science. We keep discovering more things, and as we do, we get closer and closer to this ultimate origin. The moment we stop discovering anything and something can truly not be explained, is where we reach a possible god. And I don't think it will happen soon...

 

[Endless]

Yes we can. The Miller experiment managed to create a lot of different complex molecules from only a couple of simple primordial molecules, including a number of amino acids. Sure, not all 25 necessary amino acids most people think are required for life were formed, but who says all of these molecules were already used/needed in the most primitive life? That's what evolution is all about: change.

If i remember correctly these were a mixture of left handed and right handed, infact his experimentation did more to prove that abiogenesis was not possible. Consider the following quote from a paper in 1999.

Simpson, S., Life’s first scalding steps, Science News 155(2):24–26, 1999; p. 26.
'… no one has ever satisfactorily explained how the widely distributed ingredients linked up into proteins. Presumed conditions of primordial earth would have driven the amino acids toward lonely isolation. That’s one of the strongest reasons that Wächtershäuser, Morowitz, and other hydrothermal vent theorists want to move the kitchen [that cooked life] to the ocean floor.’

 

[Endless]

Science has not failed, you have failed to understand Science.
You have answered your own question in the above statement.
"the only examples are extrapolation backwards by studying existing genetic sequences ". Never mind that you contradict yourself by saying there are 'no' examples in the preceding sentence.

No Opethian, you have failed to read what i wrote - science has failed in it's experimentation to bridge this gap - there are no examples of this. The only so called evidence is assuming it happened and comparing similar sequences and postulating how it could have happened. Science has failed in the lab - there are no examples. Why not?
Read my last reply for a more complete reply on how science has failed.