Evolution-For Doc...

Evolution-For Doc...

PAUL
PAUL

July 20th, 2011, 1:34 pm #1

Hi Doc...

Lets start at the beginning shall we....

What proof do you have that single celled organisms can develop into multi celled organisms and eventually to animal life we see around us?
Quote
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 20th, 2011, 3:14 pm #2

Paul: What proof do you have that single celled organisms can develop into multi celled organisms

Look in a mirror.

Woman Skeptic: Professor Haldane, even given the billions of years that you say were available for evolution, I simply cannot believe it is possible to go from a single cell to a complicated human body with its trillions of cells organized into bones and muscle and nerves, a heart that pumps without ceasing for decades, miles and miles of blood vessels and kidney tubules, and a brain capable of thinking and feeling.

Haldane: But Madam, you did it yourself! And it only took nine months.


But, if you are asking for a transitional form between single cell organisms and multicellular organisms, it was a life form very similar to extant slime molds. Slime molds begin their life cycle as amoeba-like cells, which mate to form zygotes which then grow into plasmodia, the multicellular stage of the slime mold life cycle after cellular mitosis.

And the fossil record has evidence of slime mold dating back 1.5 billion years.

If life is doing it now, it was doing it then.

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Last edited by edstrange13 on July 20th, 2011, 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

PAUL
PAUL

July 20th, 2011, 8:24 pm #3

""""Look in a mirror.""""

Yes that the proof of Gods creation now answer the question...





""""Woman Skeptic: Professor Haldane, even given the billions of years that you say were available for evolution, I simply cannot believe it is possible to go from a single cell to a complicated human body with its trillions of cells organized into bones and muscle and nerves, a heart that pumps without ceasing for decades, miles and miles of blood vessels and kidney tubules, and a brain capable of thinking and feeling.""""

No we will get to humans later you still need to prove that it is possible for a single celled organism to develop into a multi celled one...



""""Haldane: But Madam, you did it yourself! And it only took nine months.""""

Yes isn't creation wonderful now answer the question...




""""But, if you are asking for a transitional form between single cell organisms and multicellular organisms, it was a life form very similar to extant slime molds. Slime molds begin their life cycle as amoeba-like cells, which mate to form zygotes which then grow into plasmodia, the multicellular stage of the slime mold life cycle after cellular mitosis. """"

No I'm asking for proof not a statement of belief....

Its no good saying what the life form it developed into until you provide proof it did...





""""And the fossil record has evidence of slime mold dating back 1.5 billion years.

If life is doing it now, it was doing it then.""""


Its no good saying what the life form it developed into until you provide proof it did...

Do you have it or not?




Quote
Share

Joined: May 4th, 2005, 1:31 pm

July 21st, 2011, 2:42 am #4

Of evolution, and supports the idea that different species have developed and died off over millions of years.

Current observation we can see single cell animals.

Are current single cell animals evolving? Hard to tell. And yes the evidence for evolution is greatly inferential.

But there is more evidence of evolution than any other theory. I used to support ID Paul, and was very anti-evolution. But over time, many years, I just have not seen evidence for ID. There is not inferetial data even to say "Oh, here is ID occurring".

The difficult that many believers have is taking Genesis literally, and thus they feel that a Creator/First Cause and evolution are not complementary. They are .. you can believe in one without believing in the other, and you can believe both as well.

Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

July 21st, 2011, 4:24 am #5

I don't mean to be difficult, but there is only evidence.
Just because to similar fossils are found doesn't mean one transformed into the other. And that is all they have to go on. Its a weak theory.

From a creationists point of view, God is the inventor of stable DNA'ed creatures of all kinds. And as the inventor/designer God obviously experimented many many times. Simply because it pleased HIM.

And just because some reptile looking thing had some feathers, doesn't indicate it was transforming, but rather that God was toying with the creation of new creatures. Like Jesus saying to God, "hay I have an idea, and I call it feathers, lets make a creature with these feathers and see how it works out.".. It doesn't mean the creature slowly mutated to create feathers which had never existed before. It simply mean God manifested another slightly different creater with some new features.

The truth is evolutionists don't have one example of a species slowly changing, but the changes are all radical, like feathers or no feathers, there's no specimens in between.

And from simple observation is why creationists vs evolutionists is 55% vs 13%.

That's how I see it.

Tim


Quote
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 21st, 2011, 2:54 pm #6

""""Look in a mirror.""""

Yes that the proof of Gods creation now answer the question...





""""Woman Skeptic: Professor Haldane, even given the billions of years that you say were available for evolution, I simply cannot believe it is possible to go from a single cell to a complicated human body with its trillions of cells organized into bones and muscle and nerves, a heart that pumps without ceasing for decades, miles and miles of blood vessels and kidney tubules, and a brain capable of thinking and feeling.""""

No we will get to humans later you still need to prove that it is possible for a single celled organism to develop into a multi celled one...



""""Haldane: But Madam, you did it yourself! And it only took nine months.""""

Yes isn't creation wonderful now answer the question...




""""But, if you are asking for a transitional form between single cell organisms and multicellular organisms, it was a life form very similar to extant slime molds. Slime molds begin their life cycle as amoeba-like cells, which mate to form zygotes which then grow into plasmodia, the multicellular stage of the slime mold life cycle after cellular mitosis. """"

No I'm asking for proof not a statement of belief....

Its no good saying what the life form it developed into until you provide proof it did...





""""And the fossil record has evidence of slime mold dating back 1.5 billion years.

If life is doing it now, it was doing it then.""""


Its no good saying what the life form it developed into until you provide proof it did...

Do you have it or not?



Paul said: No we will get to humans later you still need to prove that it is possible for a single celled organism to develop into a multi celled one...

I just did. You were once a single celled organism and developed into a multicellular organism. Your response ("God done it") to my previous answer shows why you are rejecting scientific evidence.

There's not much I can do to help explain the biological sciences to you if you are going to reject evidence for non-scientific reasons.

Just go back to reading your book of Hebrew fables. Science doesn't fit you well.

Paul said: Yes isn't creation wonderful now answer the question...

Yet again, I did answer the question. You just don't like my answer. Your problem, not mine.

Paul said: Do you have it or not?

Yet again, I gave the evidence. You just don't like the peer-reviewed, physical, testable, scientific evidence. Your problem, not mine.

You know, there's a reason why all accredited, reputable universities that study biology teach science and not mythology.

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 21st, 2011, 2:57 pm #7

Of evolution, and supports the idea that different species have developed and died off over millions of years.

Current observation we can see single cell animals.

Are current single cell animals evolving? Hard to tell. And yes the evidence for evolution is greatly inferential.

But there is more evidence of evolution than any other theory. I used to support ID Paul, and was very anti-evolution. But over time, many years, I just have not seen evidence for ID. There is not inferetial data even to say "Oh, here is ID occurring".

The difficult that many believers have is taking Genesis literally, and thus they feel that a Creator/First Cause and evolution are not complementary. They are .. you can believe in one without believing in the other, and you can believe both as well.
You don't have to be an atheist to learn about evolution. I know quite alot of theistic evolutionists. Well... you, for example. That was the one and only issue my older sister had with believing the evidence for evolution... she didn't want to give up her god.

"What? You can still believe in evolution AND in God?"

Yep. You sure can.

"Science doesn't make it impossible to believe in God, it just makes it possible to not believe in God." -- Steven Weinberg, physicist

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 21st, 2011, 3:03 pm #8

I don't mean to be difficult, but there is only evidence.
Just because to similar fossils are found doesn't mean one transformed into the other. And that is all they have to go on. Its a weak theory.

From a creationists point of view, God is the inventor of stable DNA'ed creatures of all kinds. And as the inventor/designer God obviously experimented many many times. Simply because it pleased HIM.

And just because some reptile looking thing had some feathers, doesn't indicate it was transforming, but rather that God was toying with the creation of new creatures. Like Jesus saying to God, "hay I have an idea, and I call it feathers, lets make a creature with these feathers and see how it works out.".. It doesn't mean the creature slowly mutated to create feathers which had never existed before. It simply mean God manifested another slightly different creater with some new features.

The truth is evolutionists don't have one example of a species slowly changing, but the changes are all radical, like feathers or no feathers, there's no specimens in between.

And from simple observation is why creationists vs evolutionists is 55% vs 13%.

That's how I see it.

Tim

Tim said: Just because to similar fossils are found doesn't mean one transformed into the other.

Right there is the primary reaason you don't believe in biological evolution via the process of natural selection.

You don't understand it.

Your inability to understand it doesn't change the facts.

Tim said: The truth is evolutionists don't have one example of a species slowly changing,

Yes there is. You just don't accept the example.


-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

July 21st, 2011, 11:14 pm #9

>>Tim said: Just because to similar fossils are found doesn't mean one transformed into the other.
>>Right there is the primary reaason you don't believe in biological evolution via the process of natural selection.
>>You don't understand it.
>>Your inability to understand it doesn't change the facts.

So you attempt to chisel away at my confidence instead of explaining an answer? OK.


>>Tim said: The truth is evolutionists don't have one example of a species slowly changing,
>>Yes there is. You just don't accept the example.

So show me the example.

Quote
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 22nd, 2011, 7:25 pm #10

Tim said: So you attempt to chisel away at my confidence instead of explaining an answer? OK.

I gave you an answer. You just didn't like the answer.

Tim said: So show me the example. (of a transitional form)

Gladly! Tell you what... pick out one example from these hundreds of examples of transitional forms and tell me why you disagree with the paleontological findings.

Transitions from primitive fish to sharks, rays, and skates
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... .html#fish

Transitions from primitive fish to bony fish
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... .html#bony

Transitions from fish to the first amphibians
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... html#amph1

Transitions from amphibians to the first reptiles
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... html#rept1

Transitions from synapsid reptiles to the first mammals
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... .html#mamm

Transitions from diapsid reptiles to birds
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-tra ... .html#bird

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share