Evolution happening before our very eyes? Awesome.

[Ruptga]

nef.

 

[zinfamous]

So what do you believe?

I would say that I believe you are fucking idiot. ...but i don't believe that.

You see, I know it to be true. You have provided incontrovertible evidence of such throughout your membership here.

In fact, you have provided more text on AT for proof of your idiocy, than your Bible provides text as "proof" of Creation.

amazing.

 

[Jeff7]

What do you think that probability is that the automobile randomly self-assembled over time? Of course, you don't believe that but you do believe that it happened for a single cell organism whch is infinitely more complex.

\ no sarcasm

That's a simple one: cars lack capacity for self replication, and they corrode fairly rapidly. Something like that would thus be like finding a big chunk of nobelium lying on the ground. Its maximum half life is listed as being 58 minutes. Unless some natural phenomenon can be found which would spontaneously create a large piece of an unstable element, then it might be time to start looking for a crazier explanation.


Life still exists because the basic building blocks which happened to have the means to self-replicate were the ones that survived longer in their environments. Things that can't self replicate will eventually erode or decay away, toward a least-energy state. Something that has the ability to absorb energy from its environment and use that to make more of itself will have a distinct advantage when it comes to continuing to exist.
In that process of continuing to exist, various things can go awry, some of which are good, some of which are bad. If it's bad, boom, you're dead. If it's good, you survive and continue to replicate.

I see that as the simple path from nonlife to simple life, to biological evolution - just a bunch of things with the ability to maintain their basic form amidst a hostile environment.

We only see life as "complex" because we're trying to analyze the results of a 3-billion-year-long process in a comparatively minuscule time period.

nef.

Hey now, none of that. This r srs thread.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Just wondering, how long to think it took for the first single cell organism to evolve into a human???

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Just wondering, how long to think it took for the first single cell organism to evolve into a human?

About a billion years.

 

[xSauronx]

Just wondering, how long to think it took for the first single cell organism to evolve into a human??

decided the pic wasnt relevant?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

decided the pic wasnt relevant?

I'm trying to put it in my signature, but no luck.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I pointed out that it isn't. Biological organisms are much more complex than mechanical objects.

Then what is the point of mentioning it at all, if it has nothing to do with biological organisms? One can only surmise that you're simply obfuscating, which is just another type of dishonesty.

But you think that mechancial objects are designed and biological objects come from nothing via some magical random process.

No, I don't.

Please explain your logic.

I do not believe that "biological objects come from nothing via some magical random process" so take your strawman and shove it straight up your ass, fucktard.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I do not believe that "biological objects come from nothing via some magical random process" so take your strawman and shove it straight up your ass, fucktard.

That is exactly what he wants, to get to you, make you lose your cool.

Now, another quote by the great man in your sig "The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion."

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

That is exactly what he wants, to get to you, make you lose your cool.

I'm cool as a cucumber, dude.

Now, another quote by the great man in your sig "The greatest tragedy in mankind's entire history may be the hijacking of morality by religion."

Truth.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

About a billion years.

If the earth is 4.55 billion years old, then it took 3.55 billion years to fort he first cell to be formed, and 1 billion years for that cell to evolve into a human.

Is there general agreement for this?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I do not believe that "biological objects come from nothing via some magical random process" so take your strawman and shove it straight up your ass, fucktard.

If biological objects didn't come from nothing via some magical random process, how do you believe that it happended? Or do you only think that you know how it didn't happen?

 

[totalnoob]

If the earth is 4.55 billion years old, then it took 3.55 billion years to fort he first cell to be formed, and 1 billion years for that cell to evolve into a human.

Is there general agreement for this?

No, magic man made the first cell on day 2 when he created plants. The next day he made the sun. (Gen 1:16)

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

If bilogical objects didn't come from nothing via some magical random process, how do you believe that it happended?

How do I believe what happened? I'm not convinced that life has a beginning. Why should I hold an explanatory belief for an event which has not been demonstrated to have happened?

 

[xSauronx]

If biological objects didn't come from nothing via some magical random process, how do you believe that it happended? Or do you only think that you know how it didn't happen?

I'm pretty sure that all of that has either been explained, linked to, or discussed ad nauseum so far.

Regardless, Im not sure I understand the difference between what you think is the "magical random process" of biological existence and a magical, invisible man that always existed and created everything you see.

Seems like if you want to accept a ridiculous, magical concept that we cant even examine (ie: an "intelligent designer") then accepting things we can see and examine should be far less of a stretch for you to handle.

 

[totalnoob]

and phin, you really need to stop with this epic "random" strawman. Everywhere in nature we see the opposite of randomness. Things move in predictable ways and the process of abiogenesis was almost certainly CUMULATIVE. It was a result of tiny steps over billions of years...not a random "poof!" event as you seem to be insinuating..or as you believe it actually happened (via magic man).

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I'm pretty sure that all of that has either been explained, linked to, or discussed ad nauseum so far.

Regardless, Im not sure I understand the difference between what you think is the "magical random process" of biological existence and a magical, invisible man that always existed and created everything you see.

Seems like if you want to accept a ridiculous, magical concept that we cant even examine (ie: an "intelligent designer") then accepting things we can see and examine should be far less of a stretch for you to handle.

So you can't conceive of an intelligent designer but you can conceive of a magical random process for creating biological matter?

Why can't imagine you imagine a designer for a highly complex living organism?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

and phin, you really need to stop with this epic "random" strawman. Everywhere in nature we see the opposite of randomness.

Agreed, all the evidence points against randomness and towards intelligent design.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

If the earth is 4.55 billion years old, then it took 3.55 billion years to fort he first cell to be formed, and 1 billion years for that cell to evolve into a human.

Is there general agreement for this?

It was a shot in the dark; I'm not an anthropologist or biologist. But I do know that for a LONG time, the earth was an uninhabitable and very nasty place. It might have been a billion years from the first single cell to humans; it might have taken 3 billion years. My point is, it took a long fucking time and all this stupid posturing, like "give me a call when a skink gives birth to a primate," is completely and mind-numbingly retarded. What evolution-deniers (yes, I am grouping them in with 9/11 truthers and holocaust deniers) seem to think is that macroevolution happens over the course of a hundred or even a few thousand. Try millions.

We aren't going to see a monkey evolve into something resembling a human naturally in the course of human history (unless humans really manage to live for millions of years), so stop asking for such ridiculous proof. The record of DNA and fossils easily proves evolution.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Okay, let's asume the absurd belief that an extremely complex living cell came into existence through random processes. How did this cell acquire the ability to reproduce itself?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

The record of DNA and fossils easily proves evolution.

Who told told you that, and why do you believe them?

 

[Newbian]

Who told told you that, and why do you believe them?

We call them scientists and the proof that has been found.

You show me the bones of Jesus and I will see if they can still walk on water. :awe:

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Who told told you that, and why do you believe them?

A Physical Anthropology professor told me that in a lecture. He provided ample evidence and I don't have any reason to believe he has an alternate agenda to push. If you're going to believe your own conjecture over the evidenced research of a credited and well-respected scientist, then there's no hope.

I can't give you damning evidence of evolution off the top of my head, because I'm not an expert. I have, however, been presented with evidence that is good enough for me. If you're really curious about the theory and its supporting evidence, go talk to such an expert at a local university.

 

[Regs]

This thread needs an enema.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

We call them scientists and the proof that has been found.

If a scientist says something it must be true, even if it doesn't stand up against critical analysis?