Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Why so many evolution threads in Science?

Karmanator
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2014 5:42:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
That really seems to have more to do with religion than it does with science.

Here in a article looking at religion, mainly atheists, buddhists, hindus and jews don't have as much of a problem with evolution. The rest of the religions fall close to or below the 50%.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

United States is at the bottom of evolution believers in the world. Is this due to a lack of good science education? Coincidentally the US also happens to fall pretty low in Math and Science. I think that is a little more than just a coincidence. I think not believing in evolution truly requires a general lack knowledge of the sciences. To top it off for some odd reason the Republicans are the ahead of the curb when it comes to denying evolution.

All those evolution stats are in the article.

Here are stats for education in the world putting US near the bottom for Math and Science. At least the sciences are getting better for the US over the years, like starting to make the top ten list by 2011 for 8th graders, but it can certainly be better, .
http://en.wikipedia.org...
fazz
Posts: 1,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2014 9:15:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/24/2014 9:00:49 PM, apb4y wrote:
Dr. Obvious is determined to drive Creationism down our throats even if it kills him.

What exactly is "Creation"ism..
Subutai
Posts: 3,150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2014 9:26:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Because creationists, for some reason, have decided to attack evolution the most out of all theories, even though it has arguably been more vigorously shown to be correct than any other theory (coincidentally for that very reason). I personally find the evolution of life on Earth to be an interesting topic.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
apb4y
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/24/2014 11:51:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/24/2014 9:15:11 PM, fazz wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:00:49 PM, apb4y wrote:
Dr. Obvious is determined to drive Creationism down our throats even if it kills him.

What exactly is "Creation"ism..

Creationism is the idea that all life was created at the same time, in its present form, by an omnipotent deity, etc. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly disproves this; the fossil and genetic data shows a gradual evolution and variation from ancestral species over millions of years. Creationists have never gotten over being disproved, and go out of their way to present false information that supports their views.
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 12:08:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/24/2014 11:51:40 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:15:11 PM, fazz wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:00:49 PM, apb4y wrote:
Dr. Obvious is determined to drive Creationism down our throats even if it kills him.

What exactly is "Creation"ism..

Creationism is the idea that all life was created at the same time, in its present form, by an omnipotent deity, etc. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly disproves this; the fossil and genetic data shows a gradual evolution and variation from ancestral species over millions of years. Creationists have never gotten over being disproved, and go out of their way to present false information that supports their views.

Just a small correction-- creationists will concede that life has evolved according to its own "kind," just not from simple to complex life. They coin the term "micro evolution" to distinguish it from the totality of evolution. They seem to believe that there are natural barriers against life evolving outside of a created "kind"-- a vague term that they refuse to fully define. That is because the Bible doesn't define it, either.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
fazz
Posts: 1,617
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 12:15:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/24/2014 11:51:40 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:15:11 PM, fazz wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:00:49 PM, apb4y wrote:
Dr. Obvious is determined to drive Creationism down our throats even if it kills him.

What exactly is "Creation"ism..

Creationism is the idea that all life was created at the same time, in its present form, by an omnipotent deity, etc. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly disproves this; the fossil and genetic data shows a gradual evolution and variation from ancestral species over millions of years. Creationists have never gotten over being disproved, and go out of their way to present false information that supports their views.

"Just a small correction-- creationists will concede that life has evolved according to its own "kind," just not from simple to complex life. They coin the term "micro evolution" to distinguish it from the totality of evolution. They seem to believe that there are natural barriers against life evolving outside of a created "kind"-- a vague term that they refuse to fully define. That is because the Bible doesn't define it, either."

^If what Fly is saying is correct, is there evidence to prove the link between amoeba-like matter into bigger fleshed out mammals (according to science)?
apb4y
Posts: 480
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 12:27:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/25/2014 12:15:22 AM, fazz wrote:
At 10/24/2014 11:51:40 PM, apb4y wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:15:11 PM, fazz wrote:
At 10/24/2014 9:00:49 PM, apb4y wrote:
Dr. Obvious is determined to drive Creationism down our throats even if it kills him.

What exactly is "Creation"ism..

Creationism is the idea that all life was created at the same time, in its present form, by an omnipotent deity, etc. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly disproves this; the fossil and genetic data shows a gradual evolution and variation from ancestral species over millions of years. Creationists have never gotten over being disproved, and go out of their way to present false information that supports their views.

"Just a small correction-- creationists will concede that life has evolved according to its own "kind," just not from simple to complex life. They coin the term "micro evolution" to distinguish it from the totality of evolution. They seem to believe that there are natural barriers against life evolving outside of a created "kind"-- a vague term that they refuse to fully define. That is because the Bible doesn't define it, either."

^If what Fly is saying is correct, is there evidence to prove the link between amoeba-like matter into bigger fleshed out mammals (according to science)?

Certainly. We just need to analyse the genetic variation to determine what order different species diverged in, and compare it with the fossil record to establish the timing.

For example:

Human DNA and Chimpanzee DNA is about 99% the same.

Human DNA and Mouse DNA is about 95% the same (probably more, actually).

Human DNA and Earthworm DNA is about 75% the same.

Human DNA and Banana DNA is about 20% the same.

Therefore:

Bananas split off from the family tree first (when Plants and Animals separated).

Earthworms split off later (when the group containing Vertebrates split off from the other Animals).

Mice (and other Rodents) split off before Primates came along.

Humans and Chimpanzees split off fairly recently (about 7 million years ago).

It's important to remember though: An earlier split from our lineage doesn't make these organisms "primitive"; they've evolved just as much if not more than we have during that time.
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 9:51:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Having a lot of threads on the same issue indicates that the posters of the repetitive threads do not truly want to engage in honest discussion. Inundating the forum with repetitive threads allows for the illusion of "this argument has yet to be refuted and still stands." When an argument is addressed in one thread, it just pops up in another thread. It turns what could be honest debate into a game of "Whac a Mole."

Just more blatant dishonesty from the creationist camp.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 9:58:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/25/2014 9:51:45 AM, Fly wrote:
Having a lot of threads on the same issue indicates that the posters of the repetitive threads do not truly want to engage in honest discussion. Inundating the forum with repetitive threads allows for the illusion of "this argument has yet to be refuted and still stands." When an argument is addressed in one thread, it just pops up in another thread. It turns what could be honest debate into a game of "Whac a Mole."

Just more blatant dishonesty from the creationist camp.

I agree with this, unnecessary generalizations of "creationists" notwithstanding.

It's stupid. We should talk about something else. I mean, I can stand to learn every bit as much as anyone else about genetic biology and whatnot, and I'm quite interested in it, but we're not even talking about the subject itself. We're barely grazing the surface while repeating the same thing over and over. It's absurd.

Why don't we talk about current human advancements, where we may be going, what recent discoveries genetic science has yielded, etc? We could always just derail such threads and get into these conversations, but this is a site about argumentation, and accordingly, people just want to argue.

Wonder whether there's an "intelligentdiscussion.com?"

Of course there is. http://intelligentdiscussion.com...

Naturally, it just one guy, some blowhard with a chip on his shoulder about people making him feel stupid, and how he perceives their contribution to his insecurities some degree of pretentious.

Oh, people. >_>
Fly
Posts: 2,042
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 10:48:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/25/2014 9:58:11 AM, Such wrote:
At 10/25/2014 9:51:45 AM, Fly wrote:
Having a lot of threads on the same issue indicates that the posters of the repetitive threads do not truly want to engage in honest discussion. Inundating the forum with repetitive threads allows for the illusion of "this argument has yet to be refuted and still stands." When an argument is addressed in one thread, it just pops up in another thread. It turns what could be honest debate into a game of "Whac a Mole."

Just more blatant dishonesty from the creationist camp.

I agree with this, unnecessary generalizations of "creationists" notwithstanding.

It's stupid. We should talk about something else. I mean, I can stand to learn every bit as much as anyone else about genetic biology and whatnot, and I'm quite interested in it, but we're not even talking about the subject itself. We're barely grazing the surface while repeating the same thing over and over. It's absurd.

Why don't we talk about current human advancements, where we may be going, what recent discoveries genetic science has yielded, etc? We could always just derail such threads and get into these conversations, but this is a site about argumentation, and accordingly, people just want to argue.

Wonder whether there's an "intelligentdiscussion.com?"

Of course there is. http://intelligentdiscussion.com...

Naturally, it just one guy, some blowhard with a chip on his shoulder about people making him feel stupid, and how he perceives their contribution to his insecurities some degree of pretentious.

Oh, people. >_>

Oh, man... you actually got my hopes up with that link-- which I went to before reading your rather accurate description of it. It's a blog, but why does it repeat the guy's name with dates below it as if on a tombstone or epitaph? Weird...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2014 10:52:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/25/2014 10:48:51 AM, Fly wrote:
At 10/25/2014 9:58:11 AM, Such wrote:
At 10/25/2014 9:51:45 AM, Fly wrote:
Having a lot of threads on the same issue indicates that the posters of the repetitive threads do not truly want to engage in honest discussion. Inundating the forum with repetitive threads allows for the illusion of "this argument has yet to be refuted and still stands." When an argument is addressed in one thread, it just pops up in another thread. It turns what could be honest debate into a game of "Whac a Mole."

Just more blatant dishonesty from the creationist camp.

I agree with this, unnecessary generalizations of "creationists" notwithstanding.

It's stupid. We should talk about something else. I mean, I can stand to learn every bit as much as anyone else about genetic biology and whatnot, and I'm quite interested in it, but we're not even talking about the subject itself. We're barely grazing the surface while repeating the same thing over and over. It's absurd.

Why don't we talk about current human advancements, where we may be going, what recent discoveries genetic science has yielded, etc? We could always just derail such threads and get into these conversations, but this is a site about argumentation, and accordingly, people just want to argue.

Wonder whether there's an "intelligentdiscussion.com?"

Of course there is. http://intelligentdiscussion.com...

Naturally, it just one guy, some blowhard with a chip on his shoulder about people making him feel stupid, and how he perceives their contribution to his insecurities some degree of pretentious.

Oh, people. >_>

Oh, man... you actually got my hopes up with that link-- which I went to before reading your rather accurate description of it. It's a blog, but why does it repeat the guy's name with dates below it as if on a tombstone or epitaph? Weird...

I know!!!!

I read that, reread the whole blog post, and then felt a little creeped out by how much it can read like a suicide note.

I decided to keep it lighthearted and hope that no one else noticed, lol.

But, yeah, yikes. Idk, I'm just hoping that he was simply weird enough to date when he wrote it the post, as some sort of passive-aggressive way of subtly stating, "It's been this long since my open invitation generated any meaningful response," or whatever.

One can only hope it's only douchy and not tragic.