Forums » The Lounge » Read Thread

This is one of the best evolution debates I've seen in a while. Mostly because it includes actual scientific evidence, studies, and conjecture rather than petty squabbling. It's technically on whether Creationism should be tought with evolution, but it quickly evolved (teehee) into an evolution debate, which you can see here:

http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Biblical-Creation-Should-Be-Taught-Alongside-Evolution-in-Public-High-School-Biology/1/comments/

Don't you know? Evolution is a proven fact now. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3GagfbA2vo

 Hahaaha, Welcome to the internet, where the facts are made up and your oppinions don't matter.

I think what he's trying to say is that it's not a debatable topic because it's constantly being observed happening over and over again. Saying evolution doesn't happen is like watching somebody writing their paper and repeatedly saying "your pen's out of ink". Regardless of the fact that the pen is still using ink to write the paper, you're just clinging to a belief because you don't want it to be wrong, not because it's correct.

On a side note, I have no idea if this guy is credible or not. Never heard of him before. I do like his quote "There are two types of people on this subject. Those that are ... (forgot the exact quote but it has to do with being excited over the simplicity of evolution), and those that just don't understand it."

Also, "We all use our forelimbs for different purposes. Whales swim, bats fly, Lemon walks, I... Jazz hands", that one cracked me up.

it's true. evelution is real

I don't believe evolution actually is agianst the bible; but I am also not a bible humper, politically incorrect term my family uses for people who take the bible way to literly.

Haha, I'm pretty sure it's supposed to be Bible Thumper, not Bible Humper.

I think (and please correct me if I'm wrong here as this is just what I've gathered) the main contradiction comes in the introduction of man itself. The Bible says that Man was created in God's image. Fairly straght forward, I don't think there's any debate that that's what the Bible says and means. However, the evolutionist (which has evolved (teehee) from Darwin's original claim so the two are not synonymous) claim is that everything had a common ancestor, and the first thing that started to resemble man actually came when the Apes'/humans' ancestor split into an ape ancestor and a human ancestor. The Human ancestor then evolved and evolved  and evolved untill you had the Cro-Magnons and the Neandertols, untill the Neandertols died off and Cro-Magnons were allowed to spread the world peacefully and evolve untill we're the talking, walking, thinking (most of the time) Human that we are today.

And that's where it contradicts the Bible. The Bible says that God created man in his image. However, the Creationist belief says that Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor, so God would look a whole lot more like a monkey than a man if this were true.

Yes but I believe evolution is how we percieve god creating man.

Once again: Mixture of the two = Monkey God.

I actually give people who say that God started evolution a lot of credit. It's not fundamentalist by any means, but I respect it.

That is kinda what I am trying to say.

A claim against that, however, is the evolution of humans themselves. Although normally we would evolve through macroevolution due to our extremely complex bodies, there have been a few instances of microevolution which would suggest that humans can still evolve out of this state, which was apparently made in the image of God. For example, a human in India had an adaptation (I can't remember what specifically) That made him become unaffected to electricity. He shows this by wrapping conducting wire around himself and turning on the electricity that would flow through him while others use gauges to show how much electricity is flowing. He also does other things like holding onto electrical wire during a flowing current, running into electric fences, etc. Another example is Blubber-girl (as I can't remember her name I'm gonna make her a superhero). She would swim in the Baltic sea for years to an island and back since she was a little girl. A few decades later, despite the fact that this was a feat that used huge amounts of calories, she was extremely fat. She had this tested, and Scientists discovered that she wasn't growing fat, her body had actually developed blubber in order to counteract the harsh coldness of the Baltic sea.

By extremely fat I don't mean obese, she didn't look it (which is what fat means) she just looked a little overweight and she weighed a huge amount.

Maybe we haven't reached gods image yet because we can still evole. If he set off the evolution process than maybe we are still reaching his image.

I've always thought maybe (my religion side speaking) the bible is not talking about our bodys but our spirits and minds are shaped to operate like gods but because we are still evolving we have not reached his level of thought. Our bodys are not completely connected to our spirit. (now with a bit of science added).

The only thing I'm kinda scared of is our brains.

If you study the skull sizes of the average person around the caveman time, they had much larger brains, allowing them to think more and become smarter. (That doesn't mean that an elephant is smarter, it's just how the brain is made.)

Over time, the size and the ridges on the brains slightly diminish.

That's my worry.

If we evolve so much that there is no threat, would we downgrade?

Brains being bigger doesn't mean they're smarter, that's not how they work.

It's not the size of our brains that make us more "upgraded", it's the complexity. Our brains are simply more complex, so we are "smarter". As our brains became more complex, we were able to do more and think more advanced thoughts. That's why we're not still in caves, drawing on walls, and breeding with our sisters, even though our brains are slightly smaller than they used to be.

"That's why we're not still in caves, drawing on walls, and breeding with our sisters, even though our brains are slightly smaller than they used to be."

?That's why the majority of people don't sit infront of their computer all day, typing on forums and cybering with strangers. Even though our brains are slightly smaller than they used to be. :P

Your point is? That doesn't actually prove anything, if anything it shows that our brains are complex enough to design and impliment something as mind-boggling as the internet.

I'm just saying that we still do similar things to the past despite our complex minds

No, you're just over trivializing it.

Other people say that? I'm the only one I know that says it! Then again, it's a big world.

I have a unique opinion, (i think), that is that Evolution is correct. I believe Evolution was kick-started by god, and that the course of life took place because of god. I think that a day for god lasts a very long time, as our lives are a blink in god's eye. The world could've been made in 6 god-days, and maybe the 7th day is when evolution occurred, as god rested. I think this is a plausible solution, although it can cause Atheists and Christians to argue with me :l

That's very similar to the views I had when I was a Christian.  It's also why I discounted the "6,000 year" argument.

It's all religious people VS. people who believe in science but at least in America, where we have the freedom to express our own religion creationism and evolution should not be taught side by side. 

http://www.dorkly.com/comic/31747/super-effective-evolution

Do you not believe in science because you're religious? Athiesm is not the belief of science (as pretty much everybody believes that science exists, but certain theories go disputed) it's the disbelief in a divine power.

Also, I have no problem with creationism being taught in a Christian private school, but it shouldn't be in public schools where the pupils might not be Christian. If they do, they have to teach every form of creationism, including the Christian, Muslim, and even Scientological form, in addition to the evolutionary theory.

I still go with the Religion of God/Religion of the Supernatural(spirits and whatnot)/And Religion of Science

  These are the three base religion's of the world.

Religion of Science? I still don't know what you guys mean. I haven't seen a single athiest who worships science, and every athiest I've ever known (including myself) regards science the exact same way as when they were Christian. We don't substitute science for God, we simply drop God.