itt: evolution and trolling

[Money]

There are just so many questions that can't be answered by the Theory of Evolution that I cannot accept it as a viable theory. I'm not asking for the answers to these questions, but I am asking how these questions can fit into the Theory of Evolution:

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?
2. Where did matter come from?
3. How did matter get so perfectly organized?
4. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
5. How did life develop from non-life?
6. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
7. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
8. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
9. What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
10. How did photosynthesis evolve?
11. How did thought evolve?
12. Where did the human emotions, such as love, hate, jealously, and moral justice come from?
13. What are the odds that the evolutionary process, proceeding by random changes, would produce human beings, plus millions of species of animals, birds, fish, and insects, all with symmetrical features, i.e., one side being a mirror image of the other? We take symmetry in all these creatures for granted, but is that a reasonable outcome for a random process?
14. Why are there 2 sexes anyhow?
15. If the first generation of mating species didn't have parents, how did the mating pair get to that point anyhow? Isn't evolution supposed to progress when an offspring of a mating pair has a beneficial mutation?
16. How did the heart, lungs, brain, stomach, veins, blood, kidneys, etc. develop in the first animal by slow, minute steps and the animal survive while these changes were occurring?
17. Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?

I'm not talking about a few flaws in the Theory. These are major unanswerable questions, many of which can by no means fit. How did unicellular organisms develop into multi-cellular organisms? Seriously, how does a wolf turn into a whale and where are the transitional fossils? How did something as complex as the human eye or brain happen by chance mutations and reactions, much more life itself!? The examples of extreme improbability I provided earlier only account for the spontaneous arrangement of the simplest forms of life; how can you explain that this life not only spontaneously arranged itself but survived, reproduced, and developed into a multi-cellular organism? The probability is just unfathomable. I cannot accept this theory.

EDIT: These aren't just questions I want to throw around at you so that you can just gloss over and say "Oh my goodness, is he at it again?". These are questions I want you to seriously stop and think about and concentrate on. The reason I believe ID is because it provides an answer to every question I have ever been asked(Though not always with undeniable evidence. My point is that the model FITS).

if a human made all this, which ppl claim GOD WAS A LIVING BEING than who made him?

plz.


answer to #15. Asexual


get better schools

[Squeezer]

did you really have to quote that bullshit twice in a row?

gotsta keep my eyes cool man.

[gran guerrero]

On my acid trip, I smoked bong hits with God

[Squeezer]

On my acid trip, I smoked bong hits with God

Did you get anything good (read: funny) out of him?

Does he have nice hair? Is it pampered?

[milosh]

I like muffins

"Probably not God
Dumb luck
Not sure, but probably not from ribs and divine creation
I'd probably say, "What's a coelacanth?"
Not sure exactly which part (I've only taken psych 101...not for me), but some part of the brain controls these
No one can answer that, but I doubt it was God."
-*Gives you a muffin*

EDIT: It seems that everyone in this thread is assuming that all my answers are simple "God did it" replies based solely on faith and without any mechanism for scientific truth. The only replies that fit this mentality are the replies listed above.

"Big Bang
See answer to #1"
-http://www.naturalnews.com/003643.html

When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
Instinct and thousands of years of practice
With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
Sperm and Egg most likely
Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
Plants and animals aren't that smart and are really good at survival.
How did photosynthesis evolve?
Millions of years of training
Why are there 2 sexes anyhow?
So that life can continue.
If the first generation of mating species didn't have parents, how did the mating pair get to that point anyhow? Isn't evolution supposed to progress when an offspring of a mating pair has a beneficial mutation?
Not all humans evolved overnight. There were lots of Neanderthals around.
-None of these address the question


How did thought evolve?
The same way our brain continues to evolve today. We observed things and adapted accordingly
-I can't reject this as I don't understand it.

What are the odds that the evolutionary process, proceeding by random changes, would produce human beings, plus millions of species of animals, birds, fish, and insects, all with symmetrical features, i.e., one side being a mirror image of the other? We take symmetry in all these creatures for granted, but is that a reasonable outcome for a random process?
Pretty goddamn rare. Consider yourself and this planet very lucky.
-No kidding... more rare than is conceivable.

Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?
lawl see dinosaurs for proof that species existed before we were "given this Earth by God."
-There are many possibilities to this answer: http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37

[Kolar]

-There are many possibilities to this answer: http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37

And a YEC also.

[Squeezer]

http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=37[/I]

The bible also tells of great floods, raining fire and brimstone, 6-headed serpents and other wacky shit that's never occurred in modern times. The book of Job is more of a fable than a literal account anyway.

And furthermore how could a human write about dinosaurs walking around among them when dinosaurs obviously predate language (or human life for that matter)?

[Kolar]

Young Earth Creationist (YEC) believe that the Earth is 12,000 years old and that humans and dinosaurs lived together.

[Epinephrine]

There are just so many questions that can't be answered by the Theory of Evolution that I cannot accept it as a viable theory. I'm not asking for the answers to these questions, but I am asking how these questions can fit into the Theory of Evolution:

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?
2. Where did matter come from?
3. How did matter get so perfectly organized?
4. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
5. How did life develop from non-life?
6. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
7. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
8. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
9. What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
10. How did photosynthesis evolve?
11. How did thought evolve?
12. Where did the human emotions, such as love, hate, jealously, and moral justice come from?
13. What are the odds that the evolutionary process, proceeding by random changes, would produce human beings, plus millions of species of animals, birds, fish, and insects, all with symmetrical features, i.e., one side being a mirror image of the other? We take symmetry in all these creatures for granted, but is that a reasonable outcome for a random process?
14. Why are there 2 sexes anyhow?
15. If the first generation of mating species didn't have parents, how did the mating pair get to that point anyhow? Isn't evolution supposed to progress when an offspring of a mating pair has a beneficial mutation?
16. How did the heart, lungs, brain, stomach, veins, blood, kidneys, etc. develop in the first animal by slow, minute steps and the animal survive while these changes were occurring?
17. Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?

I'm not talking about a few flaws in the Theory. These are major unanswerable questions, many of which can by no means fit. How did unicellular organisms develop into multi-cellular organisms? Seriously, how does a wolf turn into a whale and where are the transitional fossils? How did something as complex as the human eye or brain happen by chance mutations and reactions, much more life itself!? The examples of extreme improbability I provided earlier only account for the spontaneous arrangement of the simplest forms of life; how can you explain that this life not only spontaneously arranged itself but survived, reproduced, and developed into a multi-cellular organism? The probability is just unfathomable. I cannot accept this theory.

EDIT: These aren't just questions I want to throw around at you so that you can just gloss over and say "Oh my goodness, is he at it again?". These are questions I want you to seriously stop and think about and concentrate on. The reason I believe ID is because it provides an answer to every question I have ever been asked(Though not always with undeniable evidence. My point is that the model FITS).

1) Half of those questions have nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
2) Some other of those questions can be guessed at from an application of the theory of evolution, but it would only be an educated guess and no serious person would say it would even ATTEMPT to explain it.
3) The final questions few are quite neatly answered by the theory.



Seriously, you might as well question why the theory of relatively doesn't explain why bears are brown, but penguins are black/white because that is how silly you sound in that post.

P.S. I don't think anyone believes that wolves evolved into whales, but if you want to believe that then fine.

[milosh]

The bible also tells of great floods, raining fire and brimstone, 6-headed serpents and other wacky shit that's never occurred in modern times. The book of Job is more of a fable than a literal account anyway.

There is a necessary inference between the literal and figurative. Many believe that Revelation is completely factual; I however do not. The occurrence of a world-wide flood is possible. I'm not quoting this source as an end-all means for fact vs. fiction, but for probability reasons. http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=95

And furthermore how could a human write about dinosaurs walking around among them when dinosaurs obviously predate language (or human life for that matter)?

Oh my.

[milosh]

1) Half of those questions have nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
2) Some other of those questions can be guessed at from an application of the theory of evolution, but it would only be an educated guess and no serious person would say it would even ATTEMPT to explain it.
3) The final questions few are quite neatly answered by the theory.

I do revoke the manner in which I asked the questions. I did not intend to try to force you all to fit all of the answers into one Theory. If you have the answers, I am interested. I'm just searching for truth as are you(I think).

[DoTheFandango]

milosh, while you are claiming that nothing being said "relates to the question", which is the philosophical equivalent of plugging your ears, squinting your eyes, and going "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU", you need to realize that some of what you dismiss so easily are credible, possible answers.

sure people don't have all the answers to what happened. I certainly couldn't tell you what existed before the big bang, even though Stephen Hawking would say "That's like asking what's north of the North Pole". but you don't know what existed before God created all of life in 7 days either. There isn't a page before the first page for that answer. You say nothing existed before God, where did God come from then? There are plenty of unknowns in both paths, choosing one as fact is pointless.

You fill your cracks with one theory, others fill it with another. Whose problem is it if they are wrong and you are right? No one but their own. Let them be, everyone just chill and relax. When we all reach the end, our questions will be answered.

[Epinephrine]

As someone who hasn't grown up in a religious family (actually I would say that most Chinese people are not religious of any sort going back thousands of generations), I find the entire idea of religion kind of odd.

I find it further odd that people who are religious would even think that to NOT be religious is to adhere to an even STRICTER 'faith'.

To not be religious is to believe that other possibilities exist aside from whatever your parents told you or what you were told as a kid when you went to church. You can pick whatever you wish you believe it honestly doesn't matter. Meanwhile if you are religious, by definition you have a set of beliefs that you DO believe in. Which is more strict? Which is more rigid?


Personally I choose to believe in science, because the idea in science is that we should reject things we cannot prove. Even things which are 'proven' in science, are accepted as just the 'best possible explanation' instead of some god-given truth that someone wrote about 2000 years ago.

Why should I believe what some guy believed 2000 years ago, when almost everything that people believed back then have turned out to be false, including some simple things like oh say the Earth not being flat.

In the end though, you can believe whatever you want to believe and we can just agree to disagree.

[Squeezer]

There is a necessary inference between the literal and figurative. Many believe that Revelation is completely factual; I however do not. The occurrence of a world-wide flood is possible. I'm not quoting this source as an end-all means for fact vs. fiction, but for probability reasons. http://drdino.com/articles.php?spec=95

In response to the craziness that is that article above I present this:

Many of Austin's arguments take advantage of the fact that he is only studying a single region of the earth. For example, by documenting that there are no undisputed reefal limestones in the Canyon, he is able to explain all limestones as carbonate grains reworked by the Flood. The fact that classic reefs of equivalent age are found in nearby New Mexico is never mentioned. Another strategy has to do with scale. He points out the widespread distribution of sedimentary formations and attributes them to a vast flood rather than local coastal environments. But a global flood should produce worldwide sedimentary units, and those in the Grand Canyon cover only a minuscule area compared to the whole earth. Austin also asks why there is so little bioturbation of Grand Canyon sediments if they were deposited over millions of years, but a better question would be why there is any bioturbation at all if the sediments were deposited during a rapid flood. How he can attribute the overlying Mesozoic rocks, famous for their dinosaur trackways, to late in the Flood when all animals outside the Ark were supposed to be dead is even more mysterious. The book never even addresses the single most obvious problem with Flood geology: that the sedimentary rock record is composed of thousands of distinct fossil zones in unvarying order. Austin uses fossils where they suit him, however, such as attributing logs in Petrified Forest National Park, just east of Grand Canyon, to Flood driftwood!

Published by Timothy H. Heaton, professor of Earth Sciences at the University of South Dakota in response to an essay titled Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe.

You're not one of those people that believe Jesus rode dinosaurs right?

edit: Full article here: http://www.usd.edu/esci/creation/grandcyn.html

Give it a quick read. I learned something!

[milosh]

milosh, while you are claiming that nothing being said "relates to the question", which is the philosophical equivalent of plugging your ears, squinting your eyes, and going "LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU", you need to realize that some of what you dismiss so easily are credible, possible answers.

In response:

When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
Instinct and thousands of years of practice
(So the first single cell organism was able to survive for thousands and thousands of years? No wait, this is more in the order of millions or billions of years. And how can it have beneficial mutations if it has no offspring?)

With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
Sperm and Egg most likely
(This makes some level of sense. I hope you can expound some. I don't mean to ask you to expound on fact but distinctly on fiction. I wish not to know what happened as such knowledge is impossible to obtain; I wish to know what could have been.)

Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
Plants and animals aren't that smart and are really good at survival.
(I don't understand this response.)

How did photosynthesis evolve?
Millions of years of training
(Where did food come from? If the cells lived off of thermal vents why did they change to photosynthesis?)

Why are there 2 sexes anyhow?
So that life can continue.
(Can life not continue asexually?)

If the first generation of mating species didn't have parents, how did the mating pair get to that point anyhow? Isn't evolution supposed to progress when an offspring of a mating pair has a beneficial mutation?
Not all humans evolved overnight. There were lots of Neanderthals around.
(This is not addressing humans, but the first generation of mating species.)

You fill your cracks with one theory, others fill it with another. Whose problem is it if they are wrong and you are right? No one but their own. Let them be, everyone just chill and relax. When we all reach the end, our questions will be answered.

I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm not trying to prove myself right or prove someone else wrong. I simply want the truth, and I also think that our society has bred us into thinking a certain series of ideas. There are certain things that simply infuriate me, such as the fact that disproved theories or known frauds are printed in many textbooks and taught; this isn't good for either side of this argument. This thread is, if you will, for my own benefit. I have a need to express this idea and so I am willfully submitting myself to discrimination and persecution not for the purpose of martyrdom, but for truth(FOR GOOD SCIENCE!).