Darwins Theory of Evolution is not Fact, it is merely Theory

[QUOTE="greeneye59"]

Anyone see the National Geographic clip where a group of scientists were admiring the physiological makeup of a giraffe's heart and lungs andeverything and how amazing it was. They were all just like "Yeah" "Wow" "Incredible". Just mesmorized with how each function did this, this and this. And one of the scientists let's slip "Yes, beautifully designed." Everyone giggles. "Uh, evolved."

Man I gotta find that clip.

Evolution has a lot of holes which is why I believe in creation.

RationalAtheist

Do you know why giraffes have long necks?

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="gaming25"]

My point is that it has happened. Taking what I said at face value is fine since that isnt the big picture of the comment I made.

gaming25

Explain this

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] If it happened, it must be documented. I'm asking for examples for a claim YOU MADE. Guybrush_3

Explain this

How the hell did this crappy thread get so bi-

Nvm.

Dystopian-X

But metal does suck so I don't know why those guys are getting all upset :question::question:

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] If it happened, it must be documented. I'm asking for examples for a claim YOU MADE. Guybrush_3

Explain this

I dont even know anything about the image to explain anything about it.

I dont know why you think this is that important but here you go, from Dr. Robert Mitchell... "Evolutionists have also, over the years, pointed out the many so-called "vestigial organs" in the human body. It was their contention that these many organs were leftovers from millions of years of onward, upward evolutionary processes that no longer had a useful function. It can be argued that this viewpoint actually hindered the advancement of medicine, as many accepted this concept of vestigial organs and expended no effort to seek out possible functions for these organs. For example, for many years the thymus gland was held to be a nonfunctioning leftover of evolution. Many children had this gland irradiated needlessly. We now understand the thymus gland's important function in the development of a normal immune system. The appendix, pineal gland, tonsils and coccyx are further examples of organs long held to be leftovers from evolution, but now are known to have important functions in the development and operation of our bodies. Again, it would seem that evolution has been a hindrance rather than a help in the practice of medicine. In fact, there are "vestigial organs" in the human body-but left over from our embryonic development. That has nothing to do with "molecules-to-man" evolution."gaming25

See that wasn't too hard.

Vestigial organs can still hold some sort of function. Vestigial does not mean "meaningless", as it usually means reduced in many cases. You're "Doctor" firstly accuses "Evolutionists", an empty term used by ID proponents, and merely attacks Evolution as a theory simply because of the errors of doctors.

For example, the appendix def IS a vestigial appendage, along with the coccyx. There is no doubting this. What you're refering to as "holding medicine back" is nothing more than doctors performing unecessary procedures. It has nothing to do with Evolution.

In these cases (even if they are true, you're one quote is still quite flimsy) Evolution has done nothing to hold medicine back. Bad practitioning has.

All evolution says about vestigial appendages is that they are reduced or not used in many cases, and by tracing these back we can help determine phylogeny.

Please answer me this though: How exactly has Evolution held back medicine by telling us that V.A do exist? Evolution has only held medicine back in the same way that the laws of physics caused the Challenger space shuttle to explode.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="gaming25"]

My point is that it has happened. Taking what I said at face value is fine since that isnt the big picture of the comment I made.

gaming25

Pure supposition. Who is Dr Mitchell - I can't find him on Google. Where is your source?

Who is to say that determining organs as vestigal didn't spur some further scientific or evolutionary research?

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

[QUOTE="greeneye59"]

Anyone see the National Geographic clip where a group of scientists were admiring the physiological makeup of a giraffe's heart and lungs andeverything and how amazing it was. They were all just like "Yeah" "Wow" "Incredible". Just mesmorized with how each function did this, this and this. And one of the scientists let's slip "Yes, beautifully designed." Everyone giggles. "Uh, evolved."

Man I gotta find that clip.

Evolution has a lot of holes which is why I believe in creation.

alexside1

Do you know why giraffes have long necks?

No - wrong - take a cookie away.

It is to fight!

[QUOTE="fillini"] i'll give you Micro-evolution has been "observed", via fossils and such. But there has been no observations ofmacro-evolution to have occurred. one can theorize that this bird has similar traits to that so and so, and derive a theory from there. but observed or have evidencea fish hasmorphed into a lizard? not a chance.

Darwin's theory spawned the Theory of Evolution so how could it try to explain evolution exactly?

Give me the exact point where micro-evolution would become macro evolution.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] If it happened, it must be documented. I'm asking for examples for a claim YOU MADE. RationalAtheist

Pure supposition. Who is Dr Mitchell - I can't find him on Google. Where is your source?

Who is to say that determining organs as vestigal didn't spur some further scientific or evolutionary research?

[QUOTE="greeneye59"]

Anyone see the National Geographic clip where a group of scientists were admiring the physiological makeup of a giraffe's heart and lungsand stuff and how amazing it was. They were all just like "Yeah" "Wow" "Incredible". Just mesmorized with how each function did this this and this. And one of the scientists let's slip "Yes, beautifully designed." Everyone giggles. "Uh, evolved."

Man I gotta find that clip.

Evolution has a lot of holes which is why I believe in creation.

worlock77

Evolution has a lot of holes, but something with zero testable evidence to back it up doesn't?

I'msorrywhatwereyou saying?

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Give me the exact point where micro-evolution would become macro evolution.

fillini

What has thermodynamics got to do with evolution? And how are mutations not passed down?

:lol:

I don't think anything else has to be said.

That wasnt the point. You seem to forget why I said it. But trust me, it really wasnt that important.gaming25

Well, what was your point? Don't blame me for forgetting - blame yourself for not representing your thoughts adequately. How can I trust you? Do I need faith?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="greeneye59"]

Anyone see the National Geographic clip where a group of scientists were admiring the physiological makeup of a giraffe's heart and lungsand stuff and how amazing it was. They were all just like "Yeah" "Wow" "Incredible". Just mesmorized with how each function did this this and this. And one of the scientists let's slip "Yes, beautifully designed." Everyone giggles. "Uh, evolved."

Man I gotta find that clip.

Evolution has a lot of holes which is why I believe in creation.

Evolution has a lot of holes, but something with zero testable evidence to back it up doesn't?

I'msorrywhatwereyou saying?

Weasel words? just like a true believer to not define what they mean cause they don't want to be criticized.Macro is: major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. Micro is:1. evolutionary change involving accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties with a specis.Which bring into question that 1: this goes agianst the LAW of Entropy. and 2. mutations aren't passed downfillini

Bolded.

No it doesn't. Again, people who cite the 2nd law of TD have never taken a damn chemistry course in their life. The 2nd would apply to evolution if Earth were a closed system.

Go outside and look at the big golden glowing thing in the sky, then tell me that Earth is a closed system.

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

Give me the exact point where micro-evolution would become macro evolution.

fillini

Is that as specific as you can get? "from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species" is actually fairly vague. (considering the definition of species is fairly loose to begin with) and also if your definition of species is "organisms that can interbreed" then we in fact have observed macro evolution.

[QUOTE="gaming25"]

That wasnt the point. You seem to forget why I said it. But trust me, it really wasnt that important.

Well, what was your point? Don't blame me for forgetting - blame yourself for not representing your thoughts adequately. How can I trust you? Do I need faith?

[QUOTE="fillini"]Weasel words? just like a true believer to not define what they mean cause they don't want to be criticized.Macro is: major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. Micro is:1. evolutionary change involving accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties with a specis.Which bring into question that 1: this goes agianst the LAW of Entropy. and 2. mutations aren't passed downHoolaHoopMan

Bolded.

No it doesn't. Again, people who cite the 2nd law of TD have never taken a damn chemistry course in their life. The 2nd would apply to evolution if Earth were a closed system.

Go outside and look at the big golden glowing thing in the sky, then tell me that Earth is a closed system.

Don't start praying to it though!

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]

[QUOTE="fillini"]Weasel words? just like a true believer to not define what they mean cause they don't want to be criticized.Macro is: major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. Micro is:1. evolutionary change involving accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties with a specis.Which bring into question that 1: this goes agianst the LAW of Entropy. and 2. mutations aren't passed downRationalAtheist

Bolded.

No it doesn't. Again, people who cite the 2nd law of TD have never taken a damn chemistry course in their life. The 2nd would apply to evolution if Earth were a closed system.

Go outside and look at the big golden glowing thing in the sky, then tell me that Earth is a closed system.

Don't start praying to it though!

Ahhhhh religious threads.... some things you should just not bother with.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

Evolution has a lot of holes, but something with zero testable evidence to back it up doesn't?

gaming25

I'msorrywhatwereyou saying?

What difference does it make if it is humans or not?

[QUOTE="gaming25"]I dont know why you think this is that important but here you go, from Dr. Robert Mitchell... "Evolutionists have also, over the years, pointed out the many so-called "vestigial organs" in the human body. It was their contention that these many organs were leftovers from millions of years of onward, upward evolutionary processes that no longer had a useful function. It can be argued that this viewpoint actually hindered the advancement of medicine, as many accepted this concept of vestigial organs and expended no effort to seek out possible functions for these organs. For example, for many years the thymus gland was held to be a nonfunctioning leftover of evolution. Many children had this gland irradiated needlessly. We now understand the thymus gland's important function in the development of a normal immune system. The appendix, pineal gland, tonsils and coccyx are further examples of organs long held to be leftovers from evolution, but now are known to have important functions in the development and operation of our bodies. Again, it would seem that evolution has been a hindrance rather than a help in the practice of medicine. In fact, there are "vestigial organs" in the human body-but left over from our embryonic development. That has nothing to do with "molecules-to-man" evolution."HoolaHoopMan

See that wasn't too hard.

Vestigial organs can still hold some sort of function. Vestigial does not mean "meaningless", as it usually means reduced in many cases. You're "Doctor" firstly accuses "Evolutionists", an empty term used by ID proponents, and merely attacks Evolution as a theory simply because of the errors of doctors.

For example, the appendix def IS a vestigial appendage, along with the coccyx. There is no doubting this. What you're refering to as "holding medicine back" is nothing more than doctors performing unecessary procedures. It has nothing to do with Evolution.

In these cases (even if they are true, you're one quote is still quite flimsy) Evolution has done nothing to hold medicine back. Bad practitioning has.

All evolution says about vestigial appendages is that they are reduced or not used in many cases, and by tracing these back we can help determine phylogeny.

Please answer me this though: How exactly has Evolution held back medicine by telling us that V.A do exist? Evolution has only held medicine back in the same way that the laws of physics caused the Challenger space shuttle to explode.

Why do we still call it a theory? Shouldn't we call it Darwin's Facts of Evolution? Why have any theories at all if science proves it to be fact?

Just sayin'.

[QUOTE="gaming25"][QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

I'msorrywhatwereyou saying?

What difference does it make if it is humans or not?

If it wasnt important to the conversation why do you care so much? Anyway, im gonna go, been on here for too long.gaming25

I think it was important and that you are side-stepping discussion. It's no surprise to see you go - this is typically how these chats end. See you next time!

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] I think he meant one with actual humans.gaming25

What difference does it make if it is humans or not?

Like I said, my comment wasnt talking about what held back something more.gaming25

You're quote directly stated that Evolution has held back medicine more than it has helped advance it. Further more, you're blaming the faults of bad practitioners on a theory which merely states that vestigial organs exist, and they DO exist.

Why do we still call it a theory? Shouldn't we call it Darwin's Facts of Evolution? Why have any theories at all if science proves it to be fact?

Just sayin'.

greeneye59

There are facts of evolution, and there's the theory. It's a fact that evolution happened, and the theory tries to explain how it happened.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] I dont know why you think this is that important but here you go, from Dr. Robert Mitchell... "Evolutionists have also, over the years, pointed out the many so-called "vestigial organs" in the human body. It was their contention that these many organs were leftovers from millions of years of onward, upward evolutionary processes that no longer had a useful function. It can be argued that this viewpoint actually hindered the advancement of medicine, as many accepted this concept of vestigial organs and expended no effort to seek out possible functions for these organs. For example, for many years the thymus gland was held to be a nonfunctioning leftover of evolution. Many children had this gland irradiated needlessly. We now understand the thymus gland's important function in the development of a normal immune system. The appendix, pineal gland, tonsils and coccyx are further examples of organs long held to be leftovers from evolution, but now are known to have important functions in the development and operation of our bodies. Again, it would seem that evolution has been a hindrance rather than a help in the practice of medicine. In fact, there are "vestigial organs" in the human body-but left over from our embryonic development. That has nothing to do with "molecules-to-man" evolution."gaming25

Explain this

I dont even know anything about the image to explain anything about it.

That would be a pelvis... on a whale. Completely useless.

[QUOTE="Guybrush_3"]

[QUOTE="gaming25"] I think he meant one with actual humans.gaming25

What difference does it make if it is humans or not?

*all previous arguments have officially been discredited*

Yes we are. To say we aren't is laughable.

It's a good theory. I believe it.

The main thing that I dont like about evolutin is supposedly how it all started... A BIG BANG? Really? That just doesnt make any sense.-Big_Red-

Whatever happened, it's hard to make sense out of it, and I don't believe it has anything to do with evolution. You're free to think otherwise.

Why do we still call it a theory? Shouldn't we call it Darwin's Facts of Evolution? Why have any theories at all if science proves it to be fact?

Just sayin'.

greeneye59

That's because scientific facts can change - unlike religious facts (mostly). Scientists are careful to use the term "fact" within a relative perspective, so that new discoveries can be made that possibly could change those facts. Does your faith allow for such discovery?

Scientific hypotheses are turned into theories, or firm "models of understanding", once they supported by overwhelming evidence and have be open to debate, review, observation and experiment. So a theory is the nearest thing to truth there is in science.

As the scientific method of discovery has shown, such a flexible, yet rigorous method yields hugely beneficial results in increasing our understanding of our origins and abilities within our universe.

Just respondin'...

The main thing that I dont like about evolutin is supposedly how it all started... A BIG BANG? Really? That just doesnt make any sense.-Big_Red-

The main thing that I dont like about evolutin is supposedly how it all started... A BIG BANG? Really? That just doesnt make any sense.-Big_Red-

Weasel words? just like a true believer to not define what they mean cause they don't want to be criticized.Macro is: major evolutionary transition from one type of organism to another occurring at the level of the species and higher taxa. Micro is:1. evolutionary change involving accumulation of mutations leading to new varieties with a specis.Which bring into question that 1: this goes agianst the LAW of Entropy. and 2. mutations aren't passed downfillini

you do realize that theory is the highest level of proof in science?

there is no such thing as "fact" in science really..its not just in science ..in general..

there could always be another explanation for something else

science is a way to come to the best conclusions we can

The main thing that I dont like about evolutin is supposedly how it all started... A BIG BANG? Really? That just doesnt make any sense.-Big_Red-

The big bang theory isn't related to the theory of evolution, but if you want to talk about the big bang theory I have this to show you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COBE

We did an experiment to test our prediction on how we thought background radiation would look based on the big bang theory. The measurements matched perfectly. It is one of the single most successful experiments in the history of science.

It's a good theory. I believe it.

tocklestein2005

How come monkeys are the only creature to evolve to a higher life form? Dolphins and whales are pretty smart (just as smart as apes) and been around for millions of years loonger than apes so why no dolphin people or whale people or any other kind of people? Why just us?

How come monkeys are the only creature to evolve to a higher life form? Dolphins and whales are pretty smart (just as smart as) and been around for millions of years so why no Dophin people or whale people or any other kind of people? Why just us?

greeneye59

How come monkeys are the only creature to evolve to a higher life form? Dolphins and whales are pretty smart (just as smart as) and been around for millions of years so why no Dophin people or whale people or any other kind of people? Why just us?

greeneye59

[QUOTE="tocklestein2005"]

It's a good theory. I believe it.

xaos

How come monkeys are the only creature to evolve to a higher life form? Dolphins and whales are pretty smart (just as smart as) and been around for millions of years so why no Dophin people or whale people or any other kind of people? Why just us?

greeneye59

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="tocklestein2005"]

It's a good theory. I believe it.

bloodling