Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: DON'T WORRY

Expand Messages
  • strange_alein
    >>I m not denying the big holes we have in evolution though<< This line confuses me more than anything in that previous post. I am unaware
    Message 1 of 217 , Jun 29, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      >>I'm not denying the big holes we have in
      evolution though<<<br><br>This line confuses me more
      than anything in that previous post. I am unaware of
      any 'big holes' as you so eliquently called it, in
      the prospect of evolution. Now, mabey I just happen
      to have read all the wrong journals, and look at all
      the wrong exibitis and such, but I see no big holes.
      1.) If you are reffering to the idea of the 'Missing
      Link' you can just as good as scratch it. My mind is a
      little fuzzy as to wear this missing link was, I believe
      it was either after homo habilius, or the
      austrolopithicus. Sorry, not awake yet :).<br>Anyway, they found
      there missing link back in 1999. However, there was
      much argument over wheather or not it was acctually
      the missing link. As recently released in a british
      journal (another one of those names I can't remember) it
      was concluded that over much observation and debate,
      they had found there missing link. The problem was,
      because of the layout in the frontal regions of the skull
      and braine, people did not realize what it was until
      a full analazies of the skeltal system was
      preformed. So, sorry charlie, We are cousins of the apes :)
      <br>2.) If you see the gaps between the speices to
      species evoultion, that again has been proven again and
      again and again and again and again. A nice little trip
      to the field musem in chicago Ill, or the musem of
      natural history in NY (us), can show you skeletal records
      of complete spieces to speices evoltuion. Wasps to
      ants, whales to (damn, another mind laps) ect. have all
      been proven and are on display. So check it out
      :)<br>If there is another subeject that you find wrong
      with evolution I would really like to hear
      it.<br><br>~John
    • lemondead
      ... Before I rebuke this guy s statements, I d just like to say I m new to the group, from Missouri, and 14 years old. *waves* ... Not reproduced in labs?
      Message 217 of 217 , Nov 21, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In teenatheistsoftheworld@y..., scorcher150 wrote:
        Before I rebuke this guy's statements, I'd just like to say I'm new
        to the group, from Missouri, and 14 years old. *waves*



        > LoL.<br><br>Hey, have you looked at this "proof"
        > for evolution? Explain abiogenesis. How did it occur
        > in the wilderness of a hostile planet and yet can't
        > be reproduced in million dollar labs by trained
        > scientists? The odds against it are astronomical.

        Not reproduced in labs? Scientists have passed electricity through
        chemicals and gotten the basic materials for life. No, they have not
        created life, but think about this: We have only understood
        electricity for 300 years. The conditions on the young earth were
        different: molten, hot, and a soup of chemicals. We have done fairly
        few experiaments on the subject when compared to the MILLIONS of
        years and TRILLIONS of lightening bolts that must of struck the
        surface of the earth. Millions of years is a long time. You
        underestimate the sheer amount of time that passed between the
        formation of earth and the creation of life. The odds are certainly
        less astronomical, anyway, than a guy with supernatural powers coming
        into existence and decided to make a planet.

        Explain the
        > beggining. Nothing blew up into something? Sounds like it
        > takes more faith to believe in atheism than God to me.

        *snort* That is laughable. What about your God? Where did he come
        from? Didn't he bring something from nothing? The creation of life
        was the converting and bonding of one element to another, perfectly
        natural processes that change one type of something to another, and
        you say that it is more likely for a being to come out of nowhere,
        create the Earth, the universe, and life for some mysterious purpose.

        > Explain how life survived when the sun would have been so
        > much closer to the earth at the time.

        The sun was not closer to the earth at the time in any signifigant
        way.

        Explain how
        > mutations are positive.

        Do you have a thing against change? Winning the lottery is good,
        isn't it? If you fiddle with genes, things, both good and bad, can
        happen. Some people, due to strange flukes of nature, are more
        resistant to sunburn, others are more intelligent. The tiny
        characteristics that separate us from our parents, caused by blips in
        the genes and such, make a genetic make-up that is either superior or
        deficient. Malfunctions can lie undetected for thousands of years.
        Take AIDS for example. Most people are utterly devastated by the
        disease. However, there are a few people who have been found in
        Africa who are resistant. How? Genetics.


        Explain how EVERY animal and plant
        > in the world is perfectly adapted to its environment
        > simply because of random, damaging mutations.

        Not every animal is perfectly adapted. How come we have a blind spot
        in our eye? How come corals are damaged by the slightest change of
        water temperature, natural or otherwise? We don't see drastically
        unadapted creatures because they don't survive. As time goes on, a
        creature becomes more and more fit for their environment. Alligators
        are an ancient species and are well-adapted. However, the mackaw
        monkies in Japan (a relatively recent species) developed a fondness
        for hot springs because they notice the cold, unlike polar bears.

        Explain
        > how transitional forms (i.e. wolf to whale) survived.

        Again you underestimate the passage of time. A wolf didn't become a
        wolf-whale in two days, two hundred years, or even two thousand
        years. Transitional forms were not innefficient creatures. A bird-
        dinosaur could run or launch themselves from trees to safety, not
        quite being perfect at gliding or at running, but combined they are
        enough to save. Gradually, very gradually, beasts that prefer and are
        better at flying are more numerous and those that run dwindle. Flyers
        mate with other flyers and produce animals that are even better at
        gliding. Thus the dinosaurs make the lengthy change to birds.

        > Explain how simbiotic relationships "evolved." Explain
        > why there arent millions of fossils of evolution.

        What are you talking about? If you dig into the fossil layer, you
        find tiny bacteria, then muti-celled, then primitive sea life, then
        more complex sea life, then animals that crawl from pool to pool,
        then the first land creatures, etc. The fossil record is quite full
        and there are indeed millions. Only a few gaps exist (such as the
        missing link between apes and humans, which is rapidly narrowing with
        new discoveries).

        > Explain why there are no transitional animals living
        > today, if evolution does ideed take place.

        Again, this is ignorant. What about mudcrawlers? have you ever seen
        those? They are fish that can survive on land for a day or two, since
        they have weak lungs and fin-leg things, when they crawl from pond to
        pond as they dry up. If that's not transitional, I don't know what
        you want.

        Explain how a
        > new species would populate an area, you would need to
        > have both a male and a female with the exact same
        > reproductive mutations to be able to breed with eachother.

        That's not true. Mutations are not always drastic. They do not make
        an animal sterile. Your mother, I should hope, differs in her genes
        from your father and you are here, aren't you?

        > I'll be looking forward to your response.<br><br>Best
        > wishes,<br>Jon


        You too. ^^

        ~Lemondead

        Where little boys play at sports, grown men play at war. I, for one,
        will take no part in it.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.