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

Huh?

lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between
2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is
3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

So how are those explained? She said science disproves evolution only (and also creationism only and said anyone that only believes one is just stupid or ignorant)
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 12:42:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM, lovelife wrote:
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between
2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is
3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

So how are those explained? She said science disproves evolution only (and also creationism only and said anyone that only believes one is just stupid or ignorant)

Well, technically, when a human fetus enters conception, they are with gills, from there, the gills actually turn into cheeks. So your first point IS disproven by science. As for the heart, every living thing does a have a center of necessary material distribution, just as complex as the human heart, for example chloroplast is maintain and distributed by the stem of a plant, like a heart distributes blood throughout the body. For your 3rd point, I dont have much knowledge, humans actually have much more in common with fish than dogs. As a matter of fact, recent studies show our second closest relative is fish. You wouldnt believe I'm a christian too huh?
J.Kenyon
Posts: 4,194
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 12:45:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM, lovelife wrote:
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov...

2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is

Mullerian two-step. http://www.talkorigins.org...

3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

Either chimps or bonobos.

lrn2google.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 12:48:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 12:42:14 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM, lovelife wrote:
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between
2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is
3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

So how are those explained? She said science disproves evolution only (and also creationism only and said anyone that only believes one is just stupid or ignorant)

Well, technically, when a human fetus enters conception, they are with gills, from there, the gills actually turn into cheeks. So your first point IS disproven by science.

But live and independant, no step between since fetuses can't give birth.

As for the heart, every living thing does a have a center of necessary material distribution, just as complex as the human heart, for example chloroplast is maintain and distributed by the stem of a plant, like a heart distributes blood throughout the body.

How did it go fromsingle cell organisms to that complex tho?

For your 3rd point, I dont have much knowledge, humans actually have much more in common with fish than dogs. As a matter of fact, recent studies show our second closest relative is fish. You wouldnt believe I'm a christian too huh?

Huh, thats interesting really. Mom said science is backwards with evolution and that dolphins evolved from pigs.

BQP The convo started with mom saying I'm dumb because I'm an atheist, I'm "on your side" with evolution so to speak, but she's on your religions side.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:05:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM, lovelife wrote:
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between
2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is
3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

So how are those explained? She said science disproves evolution only (and also creationism only and said anyone that only believes one is just stupid or ignorant)

1.) Gills didn't evolve into lungs; swim, or gas bladders did; a sack that fish use to maintain boyancy in the water by absorbing gas; (see lung fish on wikipedia)

2.) There is a common misconception with evolution; that things somehow assemble themselves from nothing to what we see today; this is not the case.

For example, the engine in the bugatti veyron wasn't designed from nothing; it took existing engine technology then improved and refined it. The same goes for the technology before that, all the way back to the first engine ever designed.

I'd bet you comparing that very first engine to the bugatti veyrons v-16 and you would not beleive one led to the other; but if you lay out all the engines over time, you'd almost certainly see that there isn't that much differnce between each step. The same goes for structures like the heart.

3.) I don't think we are. We're very closely related to chimps and bonobos; gorillas are slightly further away, but we're still closely related; much more so that dogs.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:12:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between

Among other things, Lungfish seem to be demonstrate the evolutionary gap between gills and lungs. Of the Lungfish, some breath completely through primitive lungs and their gills have become inoperable (the no longer use their gills so through evolution they have atrophied to become unusable). However, the Australian Lungfish can breath through both its primitive lung and gills.

Two important points about the above. One, there is a clear demonstration that is still around today of how a gill breathing creature could have evolved lungs. Two, evolution can explain why Lungfish have inoperable gills. Through natural selection, Lungfish with the primitive lungs had an advantage. As the primitive lung became the primary source of oxygen, the gills were not used and therefore became inoperable even though they are still present.

Creationism offers no explanation as to why most Lungfish have inoperable gills.

2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is

There is no evidence to support this and in fact a simple examination of the circulatory systems of creatures seem to indicate other wise. Some creatures, such as flatworms, have no circulatory system. Other creatures have a very primitive circulatory system in which the circulatory and digestive system are one (example is a jellyfish). Once we get to creatures with actual hearts, we see that fish have the most basic hearts with a single pump and two chambers, amphibians and reptiles have more advanced hearts with extra chambers and one or two pumps, birds and mammals
have complete separation of the heart into two pumps and four chambers to the heart.

What you may notice is this exactly coincides with what the fossil records tells us about the order in which evolution occurred. First came simple invertebrate like flatworms and jellyfish. The first vertebrae were fish, followed by amphibians and reptiles and last came birds and mammals. Given what we know, we would expect the simplest circulatory systems/hearts to be found in the oldest (evolution wise) creatures and the newer species to have evolved more advanced hearts. This is exactly what we see.

Creationism makes no predictions (it isn't science after all) about what we would expect to find in the circulatory system of different creatures.

3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

Well this one is just plain false. Besides looking at the three and going "Wait a minute, two of these look and act a lot more like each other than the third", we have genetics on our side:

Humans and chimps are some 96-98% similar genetically. (http://www.genome.gov...)

Humans and dogs (as well as cats) are somewhere in the neighborhood of 86-90% similar.
(http://genome.cshlp.org...)

Not to mention the fossil record...
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:36:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 12:48:15 PM, lovelife wrote:
At 10/2/2010 12:42:14 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 10/2/2010 12:35:03 PM, lovelife wrote:
How do I explain mom's big gaps in evolution? I was never one for studying such things but she said
1) Gills and lungs are too different to be related and there is no steps between amphibians breathe through skin and are not a step between
2) Heart structure is all or nothing and too complex to go from none to how it is
3) we are as closely related to dogs as we are to gorillas. (I thought oragatangs were our closest relatives)

So how are those explained? She said science disproves evolution only (and also creationism only and said anyone that only believes one is just stupid or ignorant)

Well, technically, when a human fetus enters conception, they are with gills, from there, the gills actually turn into cheeks. So your first point IS disproven by science.

But live and independant, no step between since fetuses can't give birth.

As for the heart, every living thing does a have a center of necessary material distribution, just as complex as the human heart, for example chloroplast is maintain and distributed by the stem of a plant, like a heart distributes blood throughout the body.

How did it go fromsingle cell organisms to that complex tho?

For your 3rd point, I dont have much knowledge, humans actually have much more in common with fish than dogs. As a matter of fact, recent studies show our second closest relative is fish. You wouldnt believe I'm a christian too huh?


Huh, thats interesting really. Mom said science is backwards with evolution and that dolphins evolved from pigs.

BQP The convo started with mom saying I'm dumb because I'm an atheist, I'm "on your side" with evolution so to speak, but she's on your religions side.

I see what your saying. Well even single celled organisms (Amoeba) have nuclei which are essentially the main control center as the heart is in a human body. Essentially, our hearts are our "nuclei". If I understand correctly, in order to adapt to its surroundings, any living being will adjust its genes so that it's offspring will be accustomed to the condition which the original parent changed its genes for. That still happens today as a matter of fact with humans. I watched a nova special on this once.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:43:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
So if I'm understanding correctly there is tons of evidence easy to show her and she just doesn't bother looking?

<much like me, except I don't get all holier than thou about it, I try to understand everything first when accused of ignorance, or before accusing others>
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:50:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Lol now she's calling me dumb cause I had to explain to her what a lungfish was. -_- sometimes you just have to stop arguing.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 1:59:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 1:50:34 PM, lovelife wrote:
Lol now she's calling me dumb cause I had to explain to her what a lungfish was. -_- sometimes you just have to stop arguing.

Always the best thing to do.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 2:03:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 1:59:01 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 10/2/2010 1:50:34 PM, lovelife wrote:
Lol now she's calling me dumb cause I had to explain to her what a lungfish was. -_- sometimes you just have to stop arguing.

Always the best thing to do.

Only when you know its pointless to continue.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
BellumQuodPacis
Posts: 1,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2010 2:07:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 10/2/2010 2:03:49 PM, lovelife wrote:
At 10/2/2010 1:59:01 PM, BellumQuodPacis wrote:
At 10/2/2010 1:50:34 PM, lovelife wrote:
Lol now she's calling me dumb cause I had to explain to her what a lungfish was. -_- sometimes you just have to stop arguing.

Always the best thing to do.

Only when you know its pointless to continue.

Yep.