Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 8th, 2007, 07:57 AM   #101
magna-007
Senior Member
 
magna-007's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-13-06
Location: Portland, MI
Posts: 311
iTrader: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryann View Post
I dont find evolution and creationism to be mutually exclusive. It never says how god made anything or prohibited anything from changing. If you think about it Americans have evolved into taller people in the last two hundred years, there are definitely changes happening.
I dont however, think that people evolved from apes. Why have no other species of ape evolved into anything other than an ape since? It really isnt logical.
You could also say why do 13 year old kids look like "mature adults" these days, a lot more so than even 20 years ago. Honestly, I think it has to do with our food. Look at what is pumped into our beef cattle and chicken. Steroids and growth enhancing drugs are used on many large cattle farms these days. To think those chemicals don't linger in that food would be foolish.
Evolution is definitely very very minute in the scheme of things. For some to think humans evolved from a one celled tad pole in a mud puddle to what we are today is just idiotic.
magna-007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 08:16 AM   #102
magna-007
Senior Member
 
magna-007's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-13-06
Location: Portland, MI
Posts: 311
iTrader: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveKerwin View Post
Bruce, I agree about the "need" thing.

Let me ask you this: Do you think the ceolocanth can be BOTH over 300 million years old and a transitional species at the same time?
Look at the Crocodile too. How old are its ancestors? But its still here in pretty much its same form. Not much has changed from the fossils that have been found. I think some animals just hang out longer than others. Yeah, man thought this fish was gone for good, but then someone found one and it "appears" to be the same as the older ones. I think things adapt and change minutely over long periods of time. But the word evolve might be used too generally. Adapt is why a Sherpa can climb Mt Everest much more easily than you or I. They have lived there for so damn long, they have adapted to that climate and altitude. Same with Eskimos in the arctic or an Indian that still lives in the jungle the same way his ancestors did. Our bodies adapt or learn to resist things too, infections and disease.
magna-007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 11:48 AM   #103
ScOoTeR
GLFWDA Member #07520
 
ScOoTeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-09-05
Location: Howell
Posts: 21,222
iTrader: (35)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveKerwin View Post
It is the burden of the evolutionist to show transitional species.
Then it is the burden of christians to show me God. And by that I mean bring him to my front door and say hi. You are asking no less.
ScOoTeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 12:55 PM   #104
Naypalm[]Maker
steveo's alt...
 
Naypalm[]Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-15-07
Location: Davison
Posts: 822
iTrader: (5)
nasty lookin fish
:chiefwoohaw:
Naypalm[]Maker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 01:43 PM   #105
FrankNBrew
Me balls are huge
 
FrankNBrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Warren
Posts: 2,543
iTrader: (13)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScOoTeR View Post
Then it is the burden of christians to show me God. And by that I mean bring him to my front door and say hi. You are asking no less.
Jesus joined the forums today...so be careful.
FrankNBrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 06:01 PM   #106
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankNBrew View Post
You pointed out that scientists found fossils of a certain species. Then, based on evidence, these same scientists made the statement that this species had evolved into another species, and is now extinct. However, recently a couple of these species were discovered alive.

So what's the big deal? They found evidence that points to different variations of this species, indicating some of these have changed...yet some species have not changed. Why is that so hard to believe? How would this information invalidate anything these scientists have mentioned in the past?

I assumed your argument is that scientists made a mistake, so they must be wrong about a lot of stuff...specifically evolution.

If that is not your point, then what is?
First, you never quoted where I said what you claimed I did. And like you said, you assumed. Thanks for asking what my point was. Second, my point is not that evolution must therefore be undermied. Instead, my point was that I think it is time that some people get intellectually honest about this fish. If someone wants to investigate beyond that, it is their business.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 06:12 PM   #107
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by magna-007 View Post
Look at the Crocodile too. How old are its ancestors? But its still here in pretty much its same form. Not much has changed from the fossils that have been found. I think some animals just hang out longer than others. Yeah, man thought this fish was gone for good, but then someone found one and it "appears" to be the same as the older ones. I think things adapt and change minutely over long periods of time. But the word evolve might be used too generally. Adapt is why a Sherpa can climb Mt Everest much more easily than you or I. They have lived there for so damn long, they have adapted to that climate and altitude. Same with Eskimos in the arctic or an Indian that still lives in the jungle the same way his ancestors did. Our bodies adapt or learn to resist things too, infections and disease.
Well, personally I don't think the croc has ancestors, but that is off topic, lol.

Anyway, I hear what you are saying. BUT... this is the difference: the croc is not claimed, nor was it ever, to be a transitional species. The ceolocanth HAS been labled that, and at this point, it is dishonest to still call it that. This is why I said it cannot be both 300 million years old AND a transitional species all that the same time. I have shared the logic why already.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 8th, 2007, 06:14 PM   #108
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScOoTeR View Post
Then it is the burden of christians to show me God. And by that I mean bring him to my front door and say hi. You are asking no less.
That is not the topic of this thread. I am not coming in here and saying that God exists and you all need to know it. I am talking about one type of fish, and what its discovery means.

I realize I am asking an equivalent thing. But when someone asks me a question about God that I am not about, I don't make something up and act like it fits. I say either I do not know, or I need time to investigate to give a reply. I am honest with people, and I expect others to be equally honest.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 07:55 AM   #109
FrankNBrew
Me balls are huge
 
FrankNBrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Warren
Posts: 2,543
iTrader: (13)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveKerwin View Post

Anyway, I hear what you are saying. BUT... this is the difference: the croc is not claimed, nor was it ever, to be a transitional species. The ceolocanth HAS been labled that, and at this point, it is dishonest to still call it that. This is why I said it cannot be both 300 million years old AND a transitional species all that the same time. I have shared the logic why already.
Why do you say it cannot be both 300 million years old AND a transitional species all that the same time??? Why is it not feasible that some variations of this fish transitioned to other species, where some did not? I think it's very feasible.
FrankNBrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 09:04 AM   #110
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankNBrew View Post
Why do you say it cannot be both 300 million years old AND a transitional species all that the same time??? Why is it not feasible that some variations of this fish transitioned to other species, where some did not? I think it's very feasible.
One reason: the length of time.

Think about it. The reasoning behind why a species can remain unchanged for such a length of time is strictly due to the fact that it had no need to change and had no mutation which changed it. So it this fish was so hardcore and perfect that it made it all that time with no change, then it would make no sense whatsoever that it was a transitional species. Look at it another way:


1. The ceolocanth is claimed to have survived over 300 million years without changing.
2. A transitional species leads to new species by changing over time.
3. Therefore, the ceolocanth is either not 300 million years old or not a transitional species.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 01:24 PM   #111
Naypalm[]Maker
steveo's alt...
 
Naypalm[]Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-15-07
Location: Davison
Posts: 822
iTrader: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankNBrew View Post
Jesus joined the forums today...so be careful.
lol
:chiefwoohaw:
Naypalm[]Maker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 02:40 PM   #112
FrankNBrew
Me balls are huge
 
FrankNBrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Warren
Posts: 2,543
iTrader: (13)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveKerwin View Post
One reason: the length of time.

Think about it. The reasoning behind why a species can remain unchanged for such a length of time is strictly due to the fact that it had no need to change and had no mutation which changed it. So it this fish was so hardcore and perfect that it made it all that time with no change, then it would make no sense whatsoever that it was a transitional species. Look at it another way:


1. The ceolocanth is claimed to have survived over 300 million years without changing.
2. A transitional species leads to new species by changing over time.
3. Therefore, the ceolocanth is either not 300 million years old or not a transitional species.
Think about it. If all humans came from one man and one woman, why do some have dark skin and large penises? Why do others have yellowish skin with squinted eyes and small penises? (no offense, Immortal) And why do the hippies look exactly like Jesus? Why are some changing, yet others stay exactly the same? It's called different environments.

When species move to different climates they adapt...and eventually evolve.
FrankNBrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 02:51 PM   #113
disorder xj
Happy,happy,joy,joy
 
disorder xj's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-13-06
Location: Mio MI.
Posts: 2,899
iTrader: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankNBrew View Post
Think about it. If all humans came from one man and one woman, why do some have dark skin and large penises? Why do others have yellowish skin with squinted eyes and small penises? (no offense, Immortal) And why do the hippies look exactly like Jesus? Why are some changing, yet others stay exactly the same? It's called different environments.

When species move to different climates they adapt...and eventually evolve.
we all came from africa .and moved all over the world . sucks for you racist fellows . your great great greatgreatgreat granddaddy was a black man .
disorder xj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 03:55 PM   #114
FrankNBrew
Me balls are huge
 
FrankNBrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Warren
Posts: 2,543
iTrader: (13)
Quote:
Originally Posted by disorder xj View Post
we all came from africa .and moved all over the world . sucks for you racist fellows . your great great greatgreatgreat granddaddy was a black man .
Werd, brotha.
FrankNBrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 05:47 PM   #115
Ditchdigger
Natural Born Wierdo
 
Ditchdigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-14-07
Location: Shanty Creek Michigan
Posts: 102
iTrader: (0)
The earth is not 6,000 years old...that is a fact...There are writings on walls all over the world that are far older than that. I can walk out on to the beach at Pictured Rocks a see tens of thousands of years of wave actions eating away at the shoreline. I can hike up very old sandstone cliffs with very very old cedar trees embeded in the stone. I can walk the deserts of Neveda and find petroglyphs from Indian tribes dating back more than 10,000 years. I can go fishing at a Pier in Petoskey and sit on massive slabs of Mud...rock solid mud, full of Tribulites and bi-valves. I can walk upon large petrifeid logs in teh middle of the desert...they are ROCK...wood can not turm to ROCK in 6,000 years just lying around.................The evidence is overwhelming on the age of earth

While the debate about evolution may have some steam..............The debate of the Earth being millions of years old is dead.


The point of this thread is....................."I have an argument about ONE fish that proves the world is only 6,000 years old."


BULLSHIT.

The good lord made us yeah...............but how long is a day ? when he created the world in 7 ? I mean shit There are many dudes in the bible that are hundreds of years old, And some dudes had sex with there own daughters and some of Gods dudes came down to earth and had sex with the daugters of men( read the first 20 chapters of the bible you will be blown away)......................Jesus made water into wine for a party of drunk peeps so they could enjoy more drunken fun................

Get my point here ?....................Interpertation is key when you read the bible


The planet is very very old.......
Ditchdigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 07:19 PM   #116
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankNBrew View Post
Think about it. If all humans came from one man and one woman, why do some have dark skin and large penises? Why do others have yellowish skin with squinted eyes and small penises? (no offense, Immortal) And why do the hippies look exactly like Jesus? Why are some changing, yet others stay exactly the same? It's called different environments.

When species move to different climates they adapt...and eventually evolve.
Way to not address anything I said.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 07:21 PM   #117
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdigger View Post
The point of this thread is....................."I have an argument about ONE fish that proves the world is only 6,000 years old."

Get my point here ?....................Interpertation is key when you read the bible
That is NOT the point of this thread, which has already been made more than clear if you read any of the posts. Rather, this thread is about one fish, and the need to be honest about it.

Hey, keep the Bible out of this thread! Back on topic...
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 08:30 PM   #118
Ditchdigger
Natural Born Wierdo
 
Ditchdigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: 06-14-07
Location: Shanty Creek Michigan
Posts: 102
iTrader: (0)
I did read the entire thread...........and I thought the creation peeps were coming from the bible point of view...........sry

You are saying that one fish missed the evolution train......PROVING evolution is wrong. hum............ there are alot more than just one fish that missed that train.......Sharks, Rays, Flys, Mosiqutos, Alligators, Dragonflys, etc....

It has been said already in this thread but, just because you find one fish you have not seen in 100 million years or more doesn't mean that at in some point in the past it did not go through evolution. Many of the Sharks today are the same as they were millions of years ago. So some ugly ass fish comes up from the depths to get a Big Mac, big deal.

Evolution is happening as we breath..................some things faster some slower............The very fact we are dealing with " Bird flu " is a excellent example of evolution.

See, the reason why mircorganisms, bateria, mold, fungus, viruses etc...can alter, morf or "evolve" to better take avantage of life is simple ....they reproduce millions of generations in one day.

So while so fish can only reproduce once twice a year or what ever. it only means it takes that much longer to "evolve "

So if you want to know if evolution really happens watch CNN.....evolution is everywhere...................the Cold you get this year evolved from the one you got last year..that's why your body has no antibodies to fight it your body needs to develope new antibodies (which could be an argument for evolution)...... And the next plauge that wipes out 3/4 of mankind will owes it success to ....... Surprize........EVOLUTION.

People make mistakes all the time. So they got it wrong the fish didn't grow legs...............It slipped of the record...that proves nothing. A mistkae was made. Dont you make mistakes ?


AND your not asking anyone to be honest your asking them bow to your point of view

Last edited by Ditchdigger; August 9th, 2007 at 08:56 PM.
Ditchdigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 09:15 PM   #119
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdigger View Post
People make mistakes all the time. So they got it wrong the fish didn't grow legs...............It slipped of the record...that proves nothing. A mistkae was made. Dont you make mistakes ?


AND your not asking anyone to be honest your asking them bow to your point of view
People make mistakes all the time, correct, but it is not often when they own mistakes. The scientific community acted like finding the ceolocanth was a good thing for them, but in reality it was not a good thing for them. They should have said "I guess we were wrong on this one!"

Of course I make mistakes, like being nice to sglide, but I am man enough to admit it.
Dave Kerwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 9th, 2007, 09:18 PM   #120
zjkid
Senior Member
 
zjkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-18-07
Location: EL
Posts: 3,928
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ditchdigger View Post
I did read the entire thread...........and I thought the creation peeps were coming from the bible point of view...........sry

You are saying that one fish missed the evolution train......PROVING evolution is wrong. hum............ there are alot more than just one fish that missed that train.......Sharks, Rays, Flys, Mosiqutos, Alligators, Dragonflys, etc....

It has been said already in this thread but, just because you find one fish you have not seen in 100 million years or more doesn't mean that at in some point in the past it did not go through evolution. Many of the Sharks today are the same as they were millions of years ago. So some ugly ass fish comes up from the depths to get a Big Mac, big deal.

Evolution is happening as we breath..................some things faster some slower............The very fact we are dealing with " Bird flu " is a excellent example of evolution.

See, the reason why mircorganisms, bateria, mold, fungus, viruses etc...can alter, morf or "evolve" to better take avantage of life is simple ....they reproduce millions of generations in one day.

So while so fish can only reproduce once twice a year or what ever. it only means it takes that much longer to "evolve "

So if you want to know if evolution really happens watch CNN.....evolution is everywhere...................the Cold you get this year evolved from the one you got last year..that's why your body has no antibodies to fight it your body needs to develope new antibodies (which could be an argument for evolution)...... And the next plauge that wipes out 3/4 of mankind will owes it success to ....... Surprize........EVOLUTION.

People make mistakes all the time. So they got it wrong the fish didn't grow legs...............It slipped of the record...that proves nothing. A mistkae was made. Dont you make mistakes ?


AND your not asking anyone to be honest your asking them bow to your point of view
your giving examples of micro evolution and trying to use them as examples of macro evolution.
zjkid is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:40 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.27166 seconds with 50 queries