Total Posts:106|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Convince me to become an evolutionist

NewLifeChristian
Posts: 1,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!
Pro-Life Quotes:

"I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born."
- Ronald Reagan

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."
- Thomas Jefferson

"A person is a person no matter how small."
- Dr. Seuss
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
NewLifeChristian
Posts: 1,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.
Pro-Life Quotes:

"I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born."
- Ronald Reagan

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."
- Thomas Jefferson

"A person is a person no matter how small."
- Dr. Seuss
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:38:51 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

Ok, what is the reason why makes you believe what the bible says is true?

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

Why do you believe so?
Regardless of polls, you have to analyse what their research says. Does it seem logical? There is evidence of this when scientists dig out fossils and such, so I don't believe it's made up.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
Briannj17
Posts: 360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:42:31 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Ponders of Mine
by Brian N. Johnson

God made man?
How can we know?
Are we part of His plan?
Or is he just as so?

I wish we would know,
which side is the truth,
I believe such is so,
So I follow it through.

I follow the teachings that God did layout,
In faith and good spirit,
Nary a day do I go without,
Promise of heaven as I draw near it.

But a question clouds my mind.
Am I in his plan?
But an answer I don't find.
Is he a figment of man?

I believe in him still,
For promise of gold,
For the world holds just nil.
So with God I'll grow old.
http://www.debate.org...
King of Poetry in this poem lacking era
Briannj17
Posts: 360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:44:15 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
I'm talking in rhymes for no apparent reason,
I really don't know why.
Perhaps it's the season?
http://www.debate.org...
King of Poetry in this poem lacking era
NewLifeChristian
Posts: 1,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:55:59 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:38:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

Ok, what is the reason why makes you believe what the bible says is true?

My first reason for believing that what the Bible says is true is that I've personally experienced miracles. There are a variety of other reasons as well, some include the historical accuracy of the Bible (archaeologists have confirmed biblical events had happened, see "Is the Bible accurate concerning the destruction of the walls of Jericho?" at ChristianAnswers.net) and the scientific accuracy of the Bible as well. There's a lot of scientific evidence for a young Earth and creation overall.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

Why do you believe so?
Regardless of polls, you have to analyse what their research says. Does it seem logical? There is evidence of this when scientists dig out fossils and such, so I don't believe it's made up.

I don't see any logic in arguments in favor of evolutionism. All I say is a bunch of propaganda from pseudoscientific organizations promoting the false religion of evolutionism.
Pro-Life Quotes:

"I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born."
- Ronald Reagan

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."
- Thomas Jefferson

"A person is a person no matter how small."
- Dr. Seuss
NewLifeChristian
Posts: 1,236
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:57:35 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:42:31 PM, Briannj17 wrote:
Ponders of Mine
by Brian N. Johnson

God made man?
How can we know?
Are we part of His plan?
Or is he just as so?

I wish we would know,
which side is the truth,
I believe such is so,
So I follow it through.

I follow the teachings that God did layout,
In faith and good spirit,
Nary a day do I go without,
Promise of heaven as I draw near it.

But a question clouds my mind.
Am I in his plan?
But an answer I don't find.
Is he a figment of man?

I believe in him still,
For promise of gold,
For the world holds just nil.
So with God I'll grow old.
Do you do poetry as a hobby?

You're really good at it. That's a talent I wish I had.
Pro-Life Quotes:

"I've noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born."
- Ronald Reagan

"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only object of good government."
- Thomas Jefferson

"A person is a person no matter how small."
- Dr. Seuss
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 9:58:42 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:55:59 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:38:51 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

Ok, what is the reason why makes you believe what the bible says is true?

My first reason for believing that what the Bible says is true is that I've personally experienced miracles. There are a variety of other reasons as well, some include the historical accuracy of the Bible (archaeologists have confirmed biblical events had happened, see "Is the Bible accurate concerning the destruction of the walls of Jericho?" at ChristianAnswers.net) and the scientific accuracy of the Bible as well. There's a lot of scientific evidence for a young Earth and creation overall.

Ok we need to be careful here. Why is it that you believe these archealogists, but you don't believe those who argue for evolution? Either side could be biased right? Also what are these miracles? (Also, please do not lie, only truth)

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

Why do you believe so?
Regardless of polls, you have to analyse what their research says. Does it seem logical? There is evidence of this when scientists dig out fossils and such, so I don't believe it's made up.

I don't see any logic in arguments in favor of evolutionism. All I say is a bunch of propaganda from pseudoscientific organizations promoting the false religion of evolutionism.

Please explain a bit more. What about it isn't logical? And evolution is not a religion.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
Danb6177
Posts: 433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 10:29:09 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Evolution is a religion if the definition of religion is something believed by faith. Evolution does require an amount of faith to believe its true.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 10:57:04 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Could you be wrong?

If so, how could you tell?
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2016 11:30:31 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

LOL. Scientists understand evolution is a fact of nature through observation, evidence and rigor, not some ridiculous poll.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Danb6177
Posts: 433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 2:23:07 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 11:30:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

LOL. Scientists understand evolution is a fact of nature through observation, evidence and rigor, not some ridiculous poll.

Scientist use observation, evidence and rigor to draw conclusions based on logic that form theories. Facts are something completely different.
Cobalt
Posts: 991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 4:49:23 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
Let's go on a journey.

1. Do you believe in DNA?

If no: You should research the subject. The existence of DNA is well documented and has been extensively studied.

If yes: Continue.

-----------------------

2. Do you believe that two animals mating can produce a third animal with unique DNA?

If no: Research this. Again, it is well documented.

If yes: Continue.

---------------------------

3. Do you believe that two creatures of the same species with slightly different DNA can have different chances of survival?

If no: Consider that sickle cell is result of some African-Americans DNA. Consider that people with sickle cell may be more prone to survival in ancient Africa, where this trait provides resistance against malaria. There are multiple examples of small variations DNA benefiting or hurting a particular species.

If yes: Continue

--------------------------

Congratulations! You believe in natural selection. This means that you acknowledge that animals can produce offspring with unique DNA that increases their chances of survival! You may or not be aware that this implies, with the addition of time, that nature effectively "selects" the best candidate for survival.

--------------------

4. Do you believe that the Earth has been around for about 4 billion years?

If no: You should look at the evidence. We have a significant amount of geographical evidence supporting the idea that the Earth is about this old. Does this not gel well with your Biblical views? No worries! The Bible doesn't talk about time much as far as the creation of Earth is concerned. Even when it does, many Biblical scholars believe that these "times" are more parable than fact -- allowing for illiterate Christians of the old age to remember the Creation story.

After all, it's a whole lot easier to remember that "on the third day, God created the land, ocean and plants" than to remember "on the 1,642,500,000,000 day the universe God set into motion formed the Earth, on the 1,460,000,000,000 day the oceans formed, and a little after that time plants came too". Yea, the first is much more memorable.

If yes: continue

--------------------------

5. Do you believe that the first life on Earth appeared about 3.5 billion years ago?

If no: This may be the hardest part to accept, but you're almost done with the journey! We don't have a whole lot of hard evidence that life began this long ago; rather we think this is the case given analysis of animal DNA and other factors. However, we definitely have hard evidence that life existed 2.7 billion years ago. And heck, that's still a whole bunch of time. If you can at least accept that, continue. If not, seriously look into the evidence. If you're at the point where you'd prefer to deny evidence in order to maintain your current set of beliefs, well then you really weren't looking for any answers, were you?

If yes: continue

------------------------

Congrats! You believe in evolution. Evolution is best described as natural selection over a really long period of time. Since you believe that life has been around for a while and since you believe in natural selection, you then by definition believe in evolution!

When two living things have a kid, you don't see much of a change in that kid from the parents. They maybe have a 0.1% improvement in "chance of living" over their parents and fellow peers, assuming they won the "DNA lottery". But when you consider the billions of creatures that are born every year and the millions and millions and millions of years life has been around, that 0.1% improvement really starts to make a difference.

In fact, it makes such a difference that an "origin species", a species in which every member is basically the same who all lived at the beginning of life -- that species can end up as millions of different species after billions of years.

Next time you're pondering evolution and you see a nasty slug crawling across the ground and you think to yourself, "How on Earth could I and that thing have come from a common ancestor", realize that literally trillions of creatures have lived, died, and reproduced since the point when your lineage and the slug's lineage divided.
Evidence
Posts: 849
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 7:26:15 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/14/2016 4:49:23 AM, Cobalt wrote:
Let's go on a journey.

1. Do you believe in DNA?

If no: You should research the subject. The existence of DNA is well documented and has been extensively studied.

If yes: Continue.

-----------------------


Yes, ..

2. Do you believe that two animals mating can produce a third animal with unique DNA?

If no: Research this. Again, it is well documented.

If yes: Continue.


Yes, unique, like a poodle is from a Great Dane.

---------------------------

3. Do you believe that two creatures of the same species with slightly different DNA can have different chances of survival?


Yes, I, a white man working in the machine shop for ten years (mostly 12 hour shifts), got fed up where I had to get out, and went on an adventure where I survived in the wild for a long time, (living on fish from the creek, drank its water, learned to eat cactus fruit, ran in 115 degree heat over AZ mountains sometimes all day and night with no water (except cactus fruit, no food) and in a few months evolved into an Indian. I could run up the hill so fast and so quietly where I would often come upon family of deer within touching distance, where when they spotted me they freaked out.
Yes, from a white pale never hiked AZ desert especially mountains, and in six months I evolved into an Indian. Years late I took my nephew and brother way out there to do a hike, they almost died from exhaustion. Similar DNA, mine a teeny-tiny bit different, yet I could survive, while they would have died out there without me, all within six months.

That's evolution, but telling me that this fossil of a lizard evolved over "millions and billions" of years into that other fossil of a bird, .. well, .. first of all that's NOT science. What science does is having observed a lizard change into a bird, or some other completely different species. NOT make up some "long, long time ago" fairytale.

I have yet to see ONE, just one picture of the species called "Common Ancestor", because whatever this animal/plant/algae is, it always produces two completely different species! Can ANYONE please show me what kind of creature or rock or tree this "Common Ancestor" creature is? Anyone?

If no: Consider that sickle cell is result of some African-Americans DNA. Consider that people with sickle cell may be more prone to survival in ancient Africa, where this trait provides resistance against malaria. There are multiple examples of small variations DNA benefiting or hurting a particular species.

If yes: Continue

No.
A hypothetical survival, set in an unknown "millions and billions of years ago" environment is not science. There is no sure way to tell how ANY environment was "millions and billions of years ago", not alone give such accurate information of it where it produces a particular species. Get real Evolutionists!?

--------------------------

Congratulations! You believe in natural selection. This means that you acknowledge that animals can produce offspring with unique DNA that increases their chances of survival! You may or not be aware that this implies, with the addition of time, that nature effectively "selects" the best candidate for survival.

God selects, we select, but your Mother-evolution does NOT select, because there is no will or plan, or any intelligent design in your natural evolution. Please don't conflict I.D. with your Mother Nature, she don't give a hoot if anything survives or not. All she does is just mutates, there is no "selection", .. like; " Oooh, hey this is good, and oh my, this looks or works terribly, let's throw this one out OK honey daddy-Time?" And Daddy Time don't care either, if a lump of tree and flesh and rocks would mutate into a hideous ball, why would Mother Nature or Father Time give a hoot for it to survive or not? Confusing our loving caring Intelligent Designer Creator God with Mother Nature.

4. Do you believe that the Earth has been around for about 4 billion years?

If no: You should look at the evidence. We have a significant amount of geographical evidence supporting the idea that the Earth is about this old. :

based on what? Comparing it to itself? Oh, like looking at a tiny speck around us with a telescope, compared to the unknown infinite size of the universe, and saying it is expanding, we just know it is because George Lemaitre said it is, so it must be exactly 13.75 billion years old!
Unbelievable!?

Trees, leaves, monkeys have DNA:

In the center of every plant cell, from algae to orchids " and in the center of every animal cell, from jellyfish to you and me " there"s a copy of the organism"s genetic material. This DNA carries a complete blueprint of the organism. It"s what transfers characteristics from one generation to the next.

There are pretty obvious differences between plants and animals, but " at the chemical level " the cells of all plants and all animals contain DNA in the same shape " the famous "double helix" that looks like a twisted ladder. What"s more, all DNA molecules " in both plants and animals " are made from the same four chemical building blocks " called nucleotides.

What is different is how these four nucleotides in DNA are arranged. It"s their sequence that determines which proteins will be made. The way the nucleotides are arranged, and the information they encode, decides whether the organism will produce scales or leaves " legs or a stalk.

if all this was just evolving without will or plan of anyone or anything, there would be some gross mutated monkeys growing on trees, .. just hanging off branches like leaves. When they get ripe, they would fall down and the lions would feed on them.

I just love how the impersonal, chaotic, mutation by chance does so much choosing, selecting and arranging in perfect sequence! And oh yes, .. caring, .. it is mind boggling how much care goes on in the cosmic accident that did not have man or any damn thing in mind, yet look at the DNA strand, like a secretary taking impeccable notes, always double checking making sure not one dot or tittle is left out, .. LOL. I mean talking about I.D., .. man, Mother Nature is a darn Genius, and to do all this from nothing is WOW, what an architectural background she must have!? Talking about magical beings in the supernatural realm, wow, now she is it.

But not God, OK! No God could do such careful and intelligent design as we see in nature, it had to happen by itself with no plan, no design in mind, just the infinite chance that we find in 'nothing'. Hey, once you have nothing, the possibilities are infinite, where ANYTHING can happen, right? .. LOL.
There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root. - Henry David Thoreau
Cobalt
Posts: 991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 7:59:34 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/14/2016 7:26:15 AM, Evidence wrote:

First of all, and I mean no disrespect here, your "wilderness living" is not relevant to the idea of evolution. You learned to live in the wild just I l have learned how to deconstruct a virtual database. Living in the wilderness was a learned skill for you. It is not surprising your direct family members could not do as well as you, since they didn't go through the sort of "training process" that you did.

This is irrelevant to natural selection. Natural selection concerns the very small things. Like a desert lizard that is slightly more "sand colored" than his peers. That desert lizard is slightly more able to survive, since he blends into his environment more. You will probably never see natural selection in your life time. Natural selection occurs over tens of thousands of years, a time period much longer than your probable lifespan.

Next, you will never see a picture of a common ancestor. Cameras did not exist in that time. However, you may be fortunate enough to see evidence that implies the diversion of species. In fact, you are this fortunate -- as there currently exists enough evidence to imply the species divergence trend.

If you're looking for pictures to prove your beliefs, you're going to be out of luck. Until recently, cameras (and pictures) didn't exist. Other types of evidence are necessary to determine what happened in the past.


No.
A hypothetical survival, set in an unknown "millions and billions of years ago" environment is not science. There is no sure way to tell how ANY environment was "millions and billions of years ago", not alone give such accurate information of it where it produces a particular species. Get real Evolutionists!?

Of course we cannot know the exact state in which the world existed many millions of years ago. However, we have a great amount of geographical and biological evidence that reveals how the world worked at that time. While it may not be "absolute" evidence, it is convincing evidence. (And you have to realize, absolute evidence rarely exists.)

We know many facts regarding how animals act on this planet, regardless of species -- largely due to the fact that we share the "building blocks" of DNA.

God selects, we select, but your Mother-evolution does NOT select, because there is no will or plan, or any intelligent design in your natural evolution. Please don't conflict I.D. with your Mother Nature, she don't give a hoot if anything survives or not. All she does is just mutates, there is no "selection", .. like; " Oooh, hey this is good, and oh my, this looks or works terribly, let's throw this one out OK honey daddy-Time?" And Daddy Time don't care either, if a lump of tree and flesh and rocks would mutate into a hideous ball, why would Mother Nature or Father Time give a hoot for it to survive or not? Confusing our loving caring Intelligent Designer Creator God with Mother Nature.

You hit on a few good points. I was emphasizing the successes of nature, but for every "natural success" there are many failures. Think of it like the lottery. Every organism born has a 1/20,000 chance of having DNA that gifts it with some unique natural advantage. After trillions of births, this means there will be millions and millions of unique gifts. Over time, these unique gifts allow species to "split" into multiple types of species.

By "selection", I am not implying that "mother nature" makes choices. Rather, I am showing that in a "lottery DNA" system, the best DNA usually wins.

based on what? Comparing it to itself? Oh, like looking at a tiny speck around us with a telescope, compared to the unknown infinite size of the universe, and saying it is expanding, we just know it is because George Lemaitre said it is, so it must be exactly 13.75 billion years old!
Unbelievable!?

Trees, leaves, monkeys have DNA:

In the center of every plant cell, from algae to orchids " and in the center of every animal cell, from jellyfish to you and me " there"s a copy of the organism"s genetic material. This DNA carries a complete blueprint of the organism. It"s what transfers characteristics from one generation to the next.

There are pretty obvious differences between plants and animals, but " at the chemical level " the cells of all plants and all animals contain DNA in the same shape " the famous "double helix" that looks like a twisted ladder. What"s more, all DNA molecules " in both plants and animals " are made from the same four chemical building blocks " called nucleotides.

What is different is how these four nucleotides in DNA are arranged. It"s their sequence that determines which proteins will be made. The way the nucleotides are arranged, and the information they encode, decides whether the organism will produce scales or leaves " legs or a stalk.

if all this was just evolving without will or plan of anyone or anything, there would be some gross mutated monkeys growing on trees, .. just hanging off branches like leaves. When they get ripe, they would fall down and the lions would feed on them.

You're actually describing the mutation process pretty well. There would have been a lot of "mutated monkeys". In fact, look around you. Look at all the children who are born with terrible disfigurements, with cancers that are not curable. Notice, additionally, that they die. They do not reproduce. Their flawed DNA does not live on.

Also notice that there are geniuses who change the world dramatically who have children. Their children are provided for, educated and sent onward with trusts containing a lot of money. Because good DNA prospers. Mutated monkeys don't hang from trees looking deformed -- they die young. Just like negatively mutated children die young.

I just love how the impersonal, chaotic, mutation by chance does so much choosing, selecting and arranging in perfect sequence! And oh yes, .. caring, .. it is mind boggling how much care goes on in the cosmic accident that did not have man or any damn thing in mind, yet look at the DNA strand, like a secretary taking impeccable notes, always double checking making sure not one dot or tittle is left out, .. LOL. I mean talking about I.D., .. man, Mother Nature is a darn Genius, and to do all this from nothing is WOW, what an architectural background she must have!? Talking about magical beings in the supernatural realm, wow, now she is it.

It is not a matter of choice. It is random. It's a unique type of random -- better organisms tend to live and poor organisms tend to die. Natural selection isn't actual selection, it's just a random process. But out of this process, the most fit individuals tend to live.

But not God, OK! No God could do such careful and intelligent design as we see in nature, it had to happen by itself with no plan, no design in mind, just the infinite chance that we find in 'nothing'. Hey, once you have nothing, the possibilities are infinite, where ANYTHING can happen, right? .. LOL.

God could be responsible. But evolution is very possible (and evidentially probable), so God really shouldn't factor.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 10:21:53 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

You should be a "Evolutionist" . This way your free to ask questions with no consequence. How are we here? Where did we come from ? How old is the earth? Are our ancestors chimps? Did god make us? Find the answers you can grasp. And are most comfortable with. Maybe you think god made chimps and we are ancestors with them. Maybe corn invented us .

But as soon as you say your a " Creationist". Question time ends there. God made you. And everything. If you question it, then you run the risk of not going to heaven. If you quit being a evolutionist. You find comfort in something you thought out.
tejretics
Posts: 6,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 11:20:27 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
Evolution functions by multiple mechanisms. Two major mechanisms of evolution come to mind, and if both are proven to exist and compliment each other, then we can conclude that "evolution" as commonly understood by science is true. I'll be specifically arguing with regards to species with sexual reproduction.

(1) Genetic mutations. A genetic mutation is an error in transcription of genetic information, causing a permanent change in the hereditary gene structure. When cells divide, they are supposed to be exact copies of each other, due to the presence of identical genetic information. Essentially, cell division occurs via two processes -- mitosis and meiosis. In mitosis and all other forms of vegetative propagation, the cells are identical to each other, e.g. human cell division via mitosis. But in meiosis and sexual reproduction, the cells are not identical as genetic information is, often, transcribed incorrectly, changing the phenotype of the resulting cell. Genetic mutations definitely occur -- they are responsible for causing cancer.

(2) Selection. When a mutation occurs in a cell during sexual reproduction in a species, it might be a net benefit or harm to the phenotype of the cell and its interaction with the environment. The mutation, if favorable to a species, will be "favored" by a gene. It's called a "biased mutation." According to Wikipedia, "Certain phenotypic traits or, on a genetic level, alleles of genes, segregate within a population, where individuals with adaptive advantages or traits tend to be more successful than their peers while reproducing." The consistent favoring of certain traits and rejection of others forms selection. Selection is confirmed by the following facts: (1) variation exists between organisms in morphology, physiology, and behavior, (2) different traits confer different rates of survival and evolution, and (3) these traits are heritable. By definition, selection is changes in the heritable traits of organisms over populations that generates variation. Fact 1 is true by simple observation; fact 2 is also true by observation, e.g. a polar bears' fur offers camouflage in icy regions; and fact 3 is true due to traits being passed on from parents, which is recognized as a scientific fact.

Evolution is, basically, the changes in heritable phenotypic traits caused by the interaction between the genotype and the environment over successive biological populations. All of this together results in speciation (the formation of species):

Certain genetic mutations are selected for, and allow for interaction between the genotype and the environment to form separate phenotypic traits. Constant changes in phenotypic traits keep occurring by this process, since there are constant, separate genetic mutations that interact with the environment. This entails that, eventually, *multiple* traits of organisms will be selected against in favor of new traits, which would, eventually, result in the formation of new species. In other words, if microevolution is demonstrated, then speciation is undeniable simply because constant, differing microevolution results in speciation. For instance, if two species tried to interbreed, the massive differentiation in genes will likely result in miscarriages. There are four mechanisms of speciation. In animals, the most common is allopatric speciation, which occurs in geographically isolated populations, during which selection can produce rapid changes in organisms, resulting in species formation. Allopatric speciation has been observed in Anolis lizards. The second mechanism is peripatric speciation, which "occurs when small populations of organisms become isolated in a new environment." These isolated populations are much smaller than parental populations. The third mechanism is parapatric speciation, where a small population enters a new habitat, but there is no physical separation between the two populations. Finally, in sympatric speciation, changes occur simply due to mutations and selection naturally, without changes in habitat or location.

Speciation has been observed (e.g. evening primrose, kew primrose). [http://www.talkorigins.org...]
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
v3nesl
Posts: 4,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 1:10:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/13/2016 11:30:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

LOL. Scientists understand evolution is a fact of nature through observation,

So we always get this attempt to prove evolution through semantics. So you define the word 'evolution' to mean 'changes in descent', something like that. But in that case, there is no theory of evolution, just the observation of evolution. That would be like defining gravity as 'falling'. There would be no 'theory of falling', just the observation that things fall. There is strong scientific consensus that things fall.

The 'theory of evolution', however (using theory in the non-technical sense) is the theory that all extant life descended from a single common ancestor. So we probably should, in general, debate the the theory of universal common descent, since the word evolution has been turned into a synonym for genetics.
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 1:18:04 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 11:20:27 AM, tejretics wrote:
... All of this together results in speciation (the formation of species):

...
Speciation has been observed (e.g. evening primrose, kew primrose). [http://www.talkorigins.org...]

And we have to point out this semantics game as well. This definition of species is not what Darwin meant when he wrote "On the origin of species". He simply meant "how all the different kinds of life got here".

This definition of species is really "reproductive failure". Two populations lose the ability to interbreed. There is no new functionality, just loss of function.

It is the creative claims of evolution that must be addressed by the faithful if this is ever to be a real science theory. Selecting from pre-existing information - fine, no magic there, but creating that information in the first place? That's a whole different story. Lungs, heart, brain - if you can't demonstrate how these arise, with no guidance, it's just a fairy tale. And yes - demonstrate. Demonstrate how it can happen, don't just write papers for other faithful ones to review.
This space for rent.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 1:31:32 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 1:10:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
So we always get this attempt to prove evolution through semantics. So you define the word 'evolution' to mean 'changes in descent', something like that. But in that case, there is no theory of evolution, just the observation of evolution. That would be like defining gravity as 'falling'. There would be no 'theory of falling', just the observation that things fall. There is strong scientific consensus that things fall.

The 'theory of evolution', however (using theory in the non-technical sense) is the theory that all extant life descended from a single common ancestor. So we probably should, in general, debate the the theory of universal common descent, since the word evolution has been turned into a synonym for genetics.

The level of your ignorance of science, language, and logic never fails to amaze me.

1. The word "evolution" is commonly understood by people with basic education levels as meaning "the theory of evolution". A common component of evolution (or the theory of evolution if you are unable to make the connection between commonly used condensed language) is "change in decent.

2. There are both observations of evolution (genetic, fossils, experimental) and a theory of evolution (selection and mutations) that explain the observations. If you need a simple synonym to help you connect these ideas there are both observations of gravity (falling) and a theory of gravity (general relativity) that explains why things fall. There is a strong scientific consensus that evolution best explains the observations of evolution just like there is a strong scientific consensus that general relativity best explains the observations of gravity. The beauty of science is that these things could be wrong and or open to modification just like general relativity did to Newton's theory of gravity.

3. The 'theory of evolution' is used in a very technical sense. The word 'theory' is well defined in science. It is people like you who use 'theory' in a non-technical sense.

4. 'Evolution' has not been used as a synonym for 'genetics'. Evolution encompasses and predicted what we would see in genetics.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 1:58:35 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 1:10:44 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/13/2016 11:30:31 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:36:49 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:34:14 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Well, there is strong scientific consensus that proves that Evolution is "most likely" true. If you do not mind me asking, why do you believe in creationism? (it will help the discussion)
My main reason is the Bible.

I am aware of the strong scientific consensus that evolutionism is most likely true; however, I believe those polls could've been easily biased in favor of evolution and/or the scientists could've been pressured into voting for evolution.

LOL. Scientists understand evolution is a fact of nature through observation,

So we always get this attempt to prove evolution through semantics. So you define the word 'evolution' to mean 'changes in descent', something like that. But in that case, there is no theory of evolution, just the observation of evolution. That would be like defining gravity as 'falling'. There would be no 'theory of falling', just the observation that things fall. There is strong scientific consensus that things fall.

The 'theory of evolution', however (using theory in the non-technical sense) is the theory that all extant life descended from a single common ancestor. So we probably should, in general, debate the the theory of universal common descent, since the word evolution has been turned into a synonym for genetics.

The problem is your lack of understanding simple concepts in science, let alone other concepts, hence there is no debate, it's just religionists denying facts in favor of their mythical holy books doctrines.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 2:35:49 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

That would be impossible. A position not arrived at by reason cannot be changed by reason.
Briannj17
Posts: 360
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 3:04:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:57:35 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:42:31 PM, Briannj17 wrote:
Ponders of Mine
by Brian N. Johnson

God made man?
How can we know?
Are we part of His plan?
Or is he just as so?

I wish we would know,
which side is the truth,
I believe such is so,
So I follow it through.

I follow the teachings that God did layout,
In faith and good spirit,
Nary a day do I go without,
Promise of heaven as I draw near it.

But a question clouds my mind.
Am I in his plan?
But an answer I don't find.
Is he a figment of man?

I believe in him still,
For promise of gold,
For the world holds just nil.
So with God I'll grow old.
Do you do poetry as a hobby?

You're really good at it. That's a talent I wish I had.

Yes and in competition.

Thank you, it only happens when I'm in a certain mood.
http://www.debate.org...
King of Poetry in this poem lacking era
v3nesl
Posts: 4,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 3:25:05 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 1:31:32 PM, Floid wrote:
....
4. 'Evolution' has not been used as a synonym for 'genetics'. Evolution encompasses and predicted what we would see in genetics.

Evolution predicted genetics? Come on, Floid, you owe it to yourself to make some honest attempt to actually understand what you're parroting. I mean, look - either take what the scientific community says on faith, which is not an unreasonable position, or try to check their answers. If you want to debate evolution, you really have to do the latter. So get off the fence and really think about it. You have to be living in a bit of a fantasy world to make a statement like this.
This space for rent.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 7:19:50 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/14/2016 3:25:05 PM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/14/2016 1:31:32 PM, Floid wrote:
....
4. 'Evolution' has not been used as a synonym for 'genetics'. Evolution encompasses and predicted what we would see in genetics.

Evolution predicted genetics? Come on, Floid, you owe it to yourself to make some honest attempt to actually understand what you're parroting. I mean, look - either take what the scientific community says on faith, which is not an unreasonable position, or try to check their answers. If you want to debate evolution, you really have to do the latter. So get off the fence and really think about it. You have to be living in a bit of a fantasy world to make a statement like this.

Your reading comprehension issues strike again. I said evolution "predicted what we would see in genetics". Do you disagree that a human is genetically more similar to an ape than to a mouse? Guess what predictions Darwin made in the 1800s?
janesix
Posts: 3,467
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2016 9:37:12 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

If you could please not send me debate challenges, that would be great. I would much rather prefer debating in the forums. Thanks and let the "mini-debate" begin!

Which is more likely, that the first man was poofed into existence, or you developed slowly over millions of years from simple to increasingly complex?
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 1:05:38 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

There's no such thing as an Evolutionist, NLC, nor any reason to adopt evolution as a matter of faith.

There are people who understand how science works, and how that has produced current biological knowledge. Those who do can readily understand why common ancestry is beyond reasonable doubt, and explore how speciation occurs.

Those who don't, are free to make up whatever fiction they wish and call it truth, though being free to do so doesn't make it responsible to do so.

So I can't convince you to become an 'evolutionist' since there's no such thing; and I can't convince you to study science, since you may not gain in any way you value from doing so.

However, I'm willing to argue that creationist beliefs are ignorant, undisciplined, scientifically invalid and irresponsible to propagate in any society where science is doing a more transparent, diligent and accountable job.
Cobalt
Posts: 991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 4:14:48 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 1:05:38 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

There's no such thing as an Evolutionist, NLC, nor any reason to adopt evolution as a matter of faith.

There are people who understand how science works, and how that has produced current biological knowledge. Those who do can readily understand why common ancestry is beyond reasonable doubt, and explore how speciation occurs.

Those who don't, are free to make up whatever fiction they wish and call it truth, though being free to do so doesn't make it responsible to do so.

So I can't convince you to become an 'evolutionist' since there's no such thing; and I can't convince you to study science, since you may not gain in any way you value from doing so.

However, I'm willing to argue that creationist beliefs are ignorant, undisciplined, scientifically invalid and irresponsible to propagate in any society where science is doing a more transparent, diligent and accountable job.

+1
v3nesl
Posts: 4,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2016 2:20:52 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/15/2016 1:05:38 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 1/13/2016 9:24:38 PM, NewLifeChristian wrote:
I firmly believe that creationism is the way to go; however, I'm always open to a little debate. :)

There's no such thing as an Evolutionist, NLC, nor any reason to adopt evolution as a matter of faith.

There are people who understand how science works,

And then there are those who understand how the laws of nature work.
This space for rent.