Do you believe in the Darwin Theory?

We didn't evolve from apes, so. . .Adam and Eve.

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Judging from Gamespot, not everybody believes in it, and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who don't visit Gamespot and don't believe in Darwin's theory.

This is the country with a mormon as a presidential candiate.

Godly_Cure

Wow! I'd bet there are those in other countries that don't believe in evolution and because some don't here, you'll generalize an entire country? Leaders in many countries have subscribed to a religion. I find it discriminatory that you would feel one is not qualified for a job due to religious beliefs.

That's against the law by the way, and against the founding nature of this country.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

[QUOTE="Godly_Cure"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Judging from Gamespot, not everybody believes in it, and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who don't visit Gamespot and don't believe in Darwin's theory.

This is the country with a mormon as a presidential candiate.

MetalGear_Ninty

Wow! I'd bet there are those in other countries that don't believe in evolution and because some don't here, you'll generalize an entire country? Leaders in many countries have subscribed to a religion. I find it discriminatory that you would feel one is not qualified for a job due to religious beliefs.

That's against the law by the way, and against the founding nature of this country.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

And here I thought it was born in Jerusalem.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

MetalGear_Ninty

A large percentage? I doubt that. It's taught in schools here. In addition, it doesn't disprove the majority of religious views. I'd say a small percentage is more accurate. And I'm sure you'd find that in most other countries as well.

I'd say the majority of people DON'T regard Scientology as religion but as this country was founded on religious freedom, we'll not stop those from believing what they wish.

[QUOTE="Godly_Cure"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Judging from Gamespot, not everybody believes in it, and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who don't visit Gamespot and don't believe in Darwin's theory.

This is the country with a mormon as a presidential candiate.

MetalGear_Ninty

Wow! I'd bet there are those in other countries that don't believe in evolution and because some don't here, you'll generalize an entire country? Leaders in many countries have subscribed to a religion. I find it discriminatory that you would feel one is not qualified for a job due to religious beliefs.

That's against the law by the way, and against the founding nature of this country.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

1. America has its citizens bombarded with more knowledge than any other country, if they dont believe in evolution it is choice

2. The only ones who think scientology is a religion are scientologist, the rest know it to be a cult, and a dangerous one

no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)

Down with Darwin's Theory of Evolution and up with Jesus!

/sarcasm

Yes.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]Yes. The idea that we evolved from apes is a common misunderstanding. It states humans and apes had a common ancestor millions of years ago.james28893

Yup. Homo Sapiens evolved from Homo Erectus, or Homo Neanderthalis I think.

Yeah thats why they lived on Earth all at the Same time right? Look it up.

no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)seanxixamx99

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Godly_Cure"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Judging from Gamespot, not everybody believes in it, and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who don't visit Gamespot and don't believe in Darwin's theory.

This is the country with a mormon as a presidential candiate.

seanxixamx99

Wow! I'd bet there are those in other countries that don't believe in evolution and because some don't here, you'll generalize an entire country? Leaders in many countries have subscribed to a religion. I find it discriminatory that you would feel one is not qualified for a job due to religious beliefs.

That's against the law by the way, and against the founding nature of this country.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

1. America has its citizens bombarded with more knowledge than any other country, if they dont believe in evolution it is choice

2. The only ones who think scientology is a religion are scientologist, the rest know it to be a cult, and a dangerous one

no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)

:lol: I lol'ed...

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)DeeJayInphinity

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)DeeJayInphinity

wrong, micro is the evolution(or change) of a species as a way of adaption(like dogs that lived out in the cold would eventually micro evolve to have longer fur, this is very simple and has been observed everywhere. So no one should have any problem with it, it is simply the ability for a species to change to best fit its enviroment and survive, IMO it is proof of a intelligent God or Creator

Macro, however, is for those same adaptions to actually change the animals DNA itself, as in those same dogs would eventually evolve into a bear or something. Or the most common example - apes evolving into humans. Now macro has NEVER been observed. Never. It has been theorized because it is how scientists explain how everything got here. Sure scientist say they have macro evolution, but this is bull, and im sure you could easily break down there claim to micro evolution. And it wouldnt be suprising for scientists to make up evidence or twist results, lets face it, their jobs rest on whether they are right or not

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)Dracargen

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)seanxixamx99

wrong, micro is the evolution(or change) of a species as a way of adaption(like dogs that lived out in the cold would eventually micro evolve to have longer fur, this is very simple and has been observed everywhere. So no one should have any problem with it, it is simply the ability for a species to change to best fit its enviroment and survive, IMO it is proof of a intelligent God or Creator

Macro, however, is for those same adaptions to actually change the animals DNA itself, as in those same dogs would eventually evolve into a bear or something. Or the most common example - apes evolving into humans. Now macro has NEVER been observed. Never. It has been theorized because it is how scientists explain how everything got here. Sure scientist say they have macro evolution, but this is bull, and im sure you could easily break down there claim to micro evolution. And it wouldnt be suprising for scientists to make up evidence or twist results, lets face it, their jobs rest on whether they are right or not

how do you explain the nested hierarchy in taxonomy?

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Godly_Cure"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"]

Judging from Gamespot, not everybody believes in it, and I'm pretty sure that there are a lot of people who don't visit Gamespot and don't believe in Darwin's theory.

This is the country with a mormon as a presidential candiate.

jointed

Wow! I'd bet there are those in other countries that don't believe in evolution and because some don't here, you'll generalize an entire country? Leaders in many countries have subscribed to a religion. I find it discriminatory that you would feel one is not qualified for a job due to religious beliefs.

That's against the law by the way, and against the founding nature of this country.:|

Yes, but a large percent of Americans don't believe in evoultion, intelligent design was born in your country. I'm not attcking America as a whole here; I think its a great country, just aspects within the USA.

Also, the USA is one of the only countries to regard scientology as a religion.

1. America has its citizens bombarded with more knowledge than any other country, if they dont believe in evolution it is choice

2. The only ones who think scientology is a religion are scientologist, the rest know it to be a cult, and a dangerous one

no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)

:lol: I lol'ed...

well it does seem funny, but what I mean is that America is a melting pot of culture. Im not saying we are the smartest, but we do have all the opinions of the world here

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)DeeJayInphinity

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)seanxixamx99

wrong, micro is the evolution(or change) of a species as a way of adaption(like dogs that lived out in the cold would eventually micro evolve to have longer fur, this is very simple and has been observed everywhere. So no one should have any problem with it, it is simply the ability for a species to change to best fit its enviroment and survive, IMO it is proof of a intelligent God or Creator

Macro, however, is for those same adaptions to actually change the animals DNA itself, as in those same dogs would eventually evolve into a bear or something. Or the most common example - apes evolving into humans. Now macro has NEVER been observed. Never. It has been theorized because it is how scientists explain how everything got here. Sure scientist say they have macro evolution, but this is bull, and im sure you could easily break down there claim to micro evolution. And it wouldnt be suprising for scientists to make up evidence or twist results, lets face it, their jobs rest on whether they are right or not

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)Dracargen

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)seanxixamx99

wrong, micro is the evolution(or change) of a species as a way of adaption(like dogs that lived out in the cold would eventually micro evolveto have longer fur, this is very simple and has been observed everywhere. So no one should have any problem with it, it is simply the ability for a species to change to best fit its enviroment and survive, IMO it is proof of a intelligent God or Creator

Macro, however, is for those same adaptions to actually change the animals DNA itself, as in those same dogs would eventually evolve into a bear or something. Or the most common example - apes evolving into humans. Now macro has NEVER been observed. Never. It has been theorized because it is how scientists explain how everything got here. Sure scientist say they have macro evolution, but this is bull, and im sure you could easily break down there claim to micro evolution. And it wouldnt be suprising for scientists to make up evidence or twist results, lets face it, their jobs rest on whether they are right or not

If you're going to waste your time on explaining micro and macro evolution...at least do it properly without your BS bias.

And no, their jobs do NOT rest on whether they're right or not.

nude_dude do you believe in the darwin theory? s0upor_salad

Neutral.

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)Mr_sprinkles

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

Macro:

-Micro

-Micro

-Micro

-Micro

Macro:

-Micro

-Micro

-Micro

And so on, multiple micros create a macro. Simple really. Evolution is evolution, 500 micro evolutionary steps will most certainly become a macro evolutionary step.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)notconspiracy

No, even evolutionists know that it is seperated into two parts: Micro and macro. Micro is the tiny changes that we see all the time, and macro is the large changes that take millions of years.

So do all the definitions of microevolution and macroevolution on a simple Google search.

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]no i dont believe in evolution(micro-sure macro-never)notconspiracy

wrong, micro is the evolution(or change) of a species as a way of adaption(like dogs that lived out in the cold would eventually micro evolve to have longer fur, this is very simple and has been observed everywhere. So no one should have any problem with it, it is simply the ability for a species to change to best fit its enviroment and survive, IMO it is proof of a intelligent God or Creator

Macro, however, is for those same adaptions to actually change the animals DNA itself, as in those same dogs would eventually evolve into a bear or something. Or the most common example - apes evolving into humans. Now macro has NEVER been observed. Never. It has been theorized because it is how scientists explain how everything got here. Sure scientist say they have macro evolution, but this is bull, and im sure you could easily break down there claim to micro evolution. And it wouldnt be suprising for scientists to make up evidence or twist results, lets face it, their jobs rest on whether they are right or not

how do you explain the nested hierarchy in taxonomy?

I think I kno what that is, but im not sure. Is it the thing that explains how the way species are organized HAS to be that way or something like that? Forgive me if I'm way off.

So do all the definitions of microevolution and macroevolution on a simple Google search.Dracargen

[QUOTE="Dracargen"]So do all the definitions of microevolution and macroevolution on a simple Google search.DeeJayInphinity

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="Dracargen"]So do all the definitions of microevolution and macroevolution on a simple Google search.notconspiracy

anyway seanx, you were pretty close to what the nested hierarchy is.

basically, it is the classification of living things into groups. these groups always fall into groups within groups, within groups. this has been observed for well over 200 years.

While this might not seem like a prediction to you, the linnaen classification scheme only works to classify things. with evolution, we can predict what we wont find in the tree of life. for instance, we can use evolution to predict the non-existence of chimeras, which are organisms with features that come from distinctly different phylogenetic relationships, I.E a bird with mammary glands or a mammal with feathers.

it also predicts that phylogenies based on genetics will match phylogenies based on morphological characteristics. this is why whenever a new species is discovered, living today or in the fossil record, the theory of evolution is tested. if this new genome or species or fossil cannot fiti within the nested hierarchy, evolution is wrong because the predictions made by it dont match reality.

so far, no chimeras have thus far been found, and evolution has passed every single test

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

seanxixamx99

Well, whether or not it's true, it's certainly more believable and has more going for it than some other theories. *cough religion cough cough*.

Also, it annoys me when people say that we evolved from monkeys. That's like saying that horses evolved from deer. We simply share a common ancestor. And as for saying we evolved from apes? We are apes, Great Apes in fact, along with the Bonobo?, Chimpanzee, Gorilla, and Orangutan (sic).

anyway seanx, you were pretty close to what the nested hierarchy is.

basically, it is the classification of living things into groups. these groups always fall into groups within groups, within groups. this has been observed for well over 200 years.

While this might not seem like a prediction to you, the linnaen classification scheme only works to classify things. with evolution, we can predict what we wont find in the tree of life. for instance, we can use evolution to predict the non-existence of chimeras, which are organisms with features that come from distinctly different phylogenetic relationships, I.E a bird with mammary glands or a mammal with feathers.

it also predicts that phylogenies based on genetics will match phylogenies based on morphological characteristics. this is why whenever a new species is discovered, living today or in the fossil record, the theory of evolution is tested. if this new genome or species or fossil cannot fiti within the nested hierarchy, evolution is wrong because the predictions made by it dont match reality.

so far, no chimeras have thus far been found, and evolution has passed every single test

notconspiracy

well that doesnt seem to be proof of evolution to me, It seems more like God made many different kinds then told them to "reproduce after their own kind" therefore you would find them branching off quite well, you wouldnt be able to cross a bird and a horse, that would defy what God said.

well that doesnt seem to be proof of evolution to me, It seems more like God made many different kinds then told them to "reproduce after their own kind" therefore you would find them branching off quite well, you wouldnt be able to cross a bird and a horse, that would defy what God said.seanxixamx99

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

notconspiracy

I've seen lots of mutations, they all end up with the creature dying or being screwed up. I have heard of some mutations that can benefit a creature and are minor at best, but the likelyhood of these changes occuring again, and again, and again, and again etc... is simply impossible

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]well that doesnt seem to be proof of evolution to me, It seems more like God made many different kinds then told them to "reproduce after their own kind" therefore you would find them branching off quite well, you wouldnt be able to cross a bird and a horse, that would defy what God said.DeeJayInphinity

thats what that hierarchy things states, it seems to me to be proof of order and design in life

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

seanxixamx99

I've seen lots of mutations, they all end up with the creature dying or being screwed up. I have heard of some mutations that can benefit a creature and are minor at best, but the likelyhood of these changes occuring again, and again, and again, and again etc... is simply impossible

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

notconspiracy

:lol: This is priceless, the oppertunities for Pwnage are endless! :lol:

You know that whales have rudimentary leg bones for back legs, right? You know that they used to live on land, right?

Did you know that the ancestors of whales were a carniverous ungulate (hoofed mammel). What made this animal unusual was the fact that it had proper toes, but with hooves on each toe.

But the best part is... the closest modern day comparison to the appearance of this animal... IS A WOLF! :lol: This is just priceless.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]well that doesnt seem to be proof of evolution to me, It seems more like God made many different kinds then told them to "reproduce after their own kind" therefore you would find them branching off quite well, you wouldnt be able to cross a bird and a horse, that would defy what God said.seanxixamx99

thats what that hierarchy things states, it seems to me to be proof of order and design in life

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

DeeJayInphinity

I've seen lots of mutations, they all end up with the creature dying or being screwed up. I have heard of some mutations that can benefit a creature and are minor at best, but the likelyhood of these changes occuring again, and again, and again, and again etc... is simply impossible

micro, I can have the cold A LOT in my life, eventually micro evo will make me virtually immune to it. But then again the cold virus is ALWAYS changing too. Quite a vicious cycle if you ask me. Micro evolution doesnt have to been from parent to offspring to offspring and so on. It can occur in one person. Once again, proof of an intelligent God programming complex change and abilities into his work.

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]well that doesnt seem to be proof of evolution to me, It seems more like God made many different kinds then told them to "reproduce after their own kind" therefore you would find them branching off quite well, you WOULDNT be able to cross a bird and a horse, that would defy what God said.DeeJayInphinity

thats what that hierarchy things states, it seems to me to be proof of order and design in life

Oh, i see u thought I said that you could. No I was stating that it would be impossible. So no Pegasus basically.

[QUOTE="seanxixamx99"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="seanxixamx99"]

my apologies let me set my record straight

I believe that micro evolution and even speciation can occur (in fact it is essential to the creationist model)

I believe that coyotes and foxes prolly had a common canine ancestor, but I believe there is a limitation to this(like coming from a whale ancestor), the limitations are written in the genetic material itself. Micro explains these changes. And sometimes the changes can be extreme after a while, but I do not believe that you can change the genetic material.

DeeJayInphinity

I've seen lots of mutations, they all end up with the creature dying or being screwed up. I have heard of some mutations that can benefit a creature and are minor at best, but the likelyhood of these changes occuring again, and again, and again, and again etc... is simply impossible

People don't like to think this through, that's the problem.

Of course you aren't going to get beneficial mutations again and again and again... but!

Say you had an animal (for simplicities sake, lets pretend that it can reproduce asexually).

That animal has two children. One with a mutation for slightly longer legs, one with slightly shorter legs. The taller one can see predators that are hiding in the grass, and survive. The shorter one gets eaten, but you wouldn't call any of these animals that different from their parent. Now, there is a chance that this mutation persists through to the offspring, and if it remains benificial the offspring's offspring will keep that trait. Now do you see how it works? Sure, beneficial mutations are rare, but if they are beneficial, they'll have a good chance to persist, while those with harmful mutations don't last long.

micro, I can have the cold A LOT in my life, eventually micro evo will make me virtually immune to it. But then again the cold virus is ALWAYS changing too. Quite a vicious cycle if you ask me. Micro evolution doesnt have to been from parent to offspring to offspring and so on. It can occur in one person. Once again, proof of an intelligent God programming complex change and abilities into his work.seanxixamx99

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="Nude_Dude"]

That we have evolved from the apes?

Or do you believe in the existence of Adam and Eve, which were created by sand from the God?

Nude_Dude

I am error....."evolved".

Oh, i see u thought I said that you could. No I was stating that it would be impossible. So no Pegasus basically.seanxixamx99