Do you Believe in the theory of Evolution?

[ElTaino]

"In sum, the story of the Galapagos finches, claimed to represent one of the most impressive examples of evolution through natural selection, is a clear deception—but only one of hundreds of similar examples of evolutionists resorting to unscientific methods "

To get the full story of the finches, see:

http://www.darwinisminruins.com/5.html

information about the author of above website. you be the judge

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

here is a link to the galapagos research with charts

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/6/l_016_02.html

here is a link to a documentary on the subject

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/programs/ht/wm/3416_02_056.html

 

[ElTaino]

information about the author of above website. you be the judge

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

"In 1996, the SRF (harun's organization) distributed a book which was originally published the previous year, entitled Soykırım Yalanı ("The Holocaust Lie").<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-19>[20]</SUP>.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Oktarinterview_5-1>[6]</SUP> The publication of Soykırım Yalanı sparked much public debate.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-axt_20-0>[21]</SUP> This book claims that “what is presented as Holocaust is the death of some Jews due to the typhus plague during the war and the famine towards the end of the war caused by the defeat of the Germans.”<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-21>["</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>yeah... he's credible... next</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>

 

[DeathEatsaCracker]

Nothing that ive heard anything about has either evolved or been created in my lifetime....

Have you looked?

 

[jarhead60]

ProPokerPlayer wrote
"Nothing that ive heard anything about has either evolved or been created in my lifetime..."

I don't know about "created" but many lower life forms have mutated....for example aids. mad cow. flu virus, drug resistant sexual diseases, drug resistant TB, etc.

That doesn't mean that there are not problems with evolution theory, but all that the problems in evolution theory mean is that we don't have complete knowledge or know all the answers.

 

[festeringZit]

There is no such thing as macro-evolution. It is a fable.

 

[DeathEatsaCracker]

I remember years ago, when I first started debating creo kooks on the intertubes, nearly every single one of them denied that even micro evolution existed. It seems, their thinking (term used loosely. Very, very loosely) has evolved because I haven't heard anyone deny micro evolution in years.

I was talking to a friend of mine whose kids are going to private Catholic School. He said they are getting an in depth and thorough education on evolution in biology class which goes much deeper than what they would get in the public school systems. After a long history of suppressing scientists and their "sacrilegious" discoveries, they have finally come around to the inevitable.

The Fundies, however, are a different breed and will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future. They'll either come around or, like the wooly mammoth, go extinct. I'm hoping for the latter.

 

[steaktartar]

Evolution with a helping hand.

:toast:

 

[Willie99]

:toast:

TR and now Steak both return on the same day

as anyone ever seen them together?

(<)<

 

[rodomonte]

"In 1996, the SRF (harun's organization) distributed a book which was originally published the previous year, entitled Soykırım Yalanı ("The Holocaust Lie").<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-19>[20]</SUP>.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-Oktarinterview_5-1>[6]</SUP> The publication of Soykırım Yalanı sparked much public debate.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-axt_20-0>[21]</SUP> This book claims that “what is presented as Holocaust is the death of some Jews due to the typhus plague during the war and the famine towards the end of the war caused by the defeat of the Germans.”<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-21>["</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>yeah... he's credible... next</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>

You don't get off that easy. So this guy's nuts about the Holocaust. That doesn't mean he is wrong in his analysis of the finch's beaks.

Ted K. the Unabomber was nuts, but he got a PhD in mathematics. which is a higher degree than you have. Are you saying his degree is thus invalid and he can't do abstract critical thinking correctly because he is nuts? Even nut jobs can be right sometimes.

Please address what you think are errors in his analysis and don't take the easy way out.


Rodomonte
M.S. Nuclear Engineering

 

[punter]

Rodomonte
M.S. Nuclear Engineering

aka unemployed?

 

[ElTaino]

You don't get off that easy. So this guy's nuts about the Holocaust. That doesn't mean he is wrong in his analysis of the finch's beaks.

Ted K. the Unabomber was nuts, but he got a PhD in mathematics. which is a higher degree than you have. Are you saying his degree is thus invalid and he can't do abstract critical thinking correctly because he is nuts? Even nut jobs can be right sometimes.

Please address what you think are errors in his analysis and don't take the easy way out.


Rodomonte
M.S. Nuclear Engineering

look, i dont have all day to break down his analysis. if a guy writes a book containing fallacies that deny known facts, not to mention publishing and distributing flat out lies then whats stopping him from doing it again? nothing! please show me anything credible this man has done before thrusting a proven liar to the forefront of a debate. seriously, where is his independent research? has he spent the past 30 years in the galapagos? no. he's spent them in kookland assembling an army of cult followers who hang on his every word. prove him credible or bring someone else in who has credibility.

in the five minutes i read of his commentary all i see is a theory based on speculation. where is his field research? his cold hard facts? he doesnt provide any. where is his background in science? doesnt have that either. what he does have is the thinking of a religious fanatic. what he does provide is a quote "It is sure and certain that God has created all living things, together with their flawless characteristics". how does he know this? where is his proof? of course he doesnt say. i could read the rest, and next time i feel like a good laugh i just might. if ted k had a theory on mathematics, im almost certain he'd back it up with his OWN research and not specualtion about the research and comments of others. did you even read up on this guy? try again.

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

el taino
MA applied math,
MA cultural anthropology

 

[rodomonte]

look, i dont have all day to break down his analysis. if a guy writes a book containing fallacies that deny known facts, not to mention publishing and distributing flat out lies then whats stopping him from doing it again? nothing! please show me anything credible this man has done before thrusting a proven liar to the forefront of a debate. seriously, where is his independent research? has he spent the past 30 years in the galapagos? no. he's spent them in kookland assembling an army of cult followers who hang on his every word. prove him credible or bring someone else in who has credibility.

in the five minutes i read of his commentary all i see is a theory based on speculation. where is his field research? his cold hard facts? he doesnt provide any. where is his background in science? doesnt have that either. what he does have is the thinking of a religious fanatic. what he does provide is a quote "It is sure and certain that God has created all living things, together with their flawless characteristics". how does he know this? where is his proof? of course he doesnt say. i could read the rest, and next time i feel like a good laugh i just might. if ted k had a theory on mathematics, im almost certain he'd back it up with his OWN research and not specualtion about the research and comments of others. did you even read up on this guy? try again.

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

el taino
MA applied math,
MA cultural anthropology

You don't have time. That's the easy way out.

Here is some more grist for the mill from someone not certifiably nuts, but who obviously has read, "The Beak of the Finch," and has problems with its analysis. No one needs to repeat the research of the Princeton biologists. There are those who except their data, but come to different conclusions: http://pages.cthome.net/jbair/beakfinc.htm

I would bet that the word, "random," appears no where in the "The Beak of the Finch." It's just amazing that the only genes that mutate randomly are those that effect the beak, and they do it at unprecedented speed. I think what was observed is just normal variation in this trait.


Rodomonte

 

[barman]

There are those who except their data, but come to different conclusions: http://pages.cthome.net/jbair/beakfinc.htm

There are those who what?

 

[ElTaino]

"The great irony is that after twenty five years of observing, the net result is no change: Individual variation from year to year, surely, but nothing even remotely approaching one species turning into something else."

exactly. what, did you think and entire new species of bird would pop up in 25 years? no. either they would all die or slowly evolve to become "the fittest" and as number dwindled those who made it would pass on their more preferable genes.



""Evolutionists are watching life evolve" on different islands. Well, not on the Shetland"

nice diversion

"And extinction is an argument against natural selection producing new species." :think2:

not once the new species takes over. when one species evolves from another and has more preferable genes, driving out the other species with a similar food source, inner process etc

there is more here, thats just 2 minutes of reading.

for what its worth, both sides have their arguments and points on this topic and others. thats why thoughts and theories on creationism and evolution will forever be debated until there is ultimate proof. i can see how a 25 year study can be scrutinized. its only 25 years. 200-1000 years would be nice but neither of us will care then because we will be dust. personally, for me, i will admit that i dont exactly take the grants research as gospel, but while reading slanted authors break down their research too many fallacies are used while claiming the grants incorrect. i guess we will agree to disagree.

 

[Mr_Mark]

if evolution is true, it seems life here on earth is an accident. as complex as the human body and nature are, how everything works i dont believe it all happened by accident. to me it takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in God

 

[festeringZit]

if evolution is true, it seems life here on earth is an accident. as complex as the human body and nature are, how everything works i dont believe it all happened by accident. to me it takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in God

"to me it takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in God"

Bingo. We have a winner.

Darwinism is a religion that requires more faith than theism.