RB,

Naw. I saw the point. I was just being very literal about the whole thing.

I realize it's not a good argument towards God's existance, since it is another entity all together; but either is "There are still Monkey's! So Evolution doesnt exist!".

 

I realize that too. The whole "monkeys still exist" arguement is made by those who know nothing about religion or evolution. I'm not trying to start a fight, I just don't like it when people think of these bogus reasons (on both sides of the arguement) to try and disprove the other.

Anyway, I'm not the most educated on either subject, so I think I'll keep my foot out of my mouth on this one.

 

well, actually, we needed a new system of dating, and some guy (i forget his name) wanted to use the birth of jesus as a starting point. He traced the years of kings, etc, and came up with the date that we use today. Unfortunately, he was off a little bit (6-12 years). But anyway, just because we write the date down doesn't prove the existence of god. Many view jesus as the son of god (which, just in case you were curious, he probably never even called himself that), but that might not be the case. We do know, though, that he did exist, and during his time on earth he made an impact on many people. So really, all you can say is that we are proving that jesus is just an influential character in time.

 

You have to be the dumbest person i have heard speak. NO, the neandertal (yes, no H) did exist, we have several skeletons of them. There also another species of man called the Cro-magnon, which we are descendent of. The Neandertal went extinct, and since we haven't found any clue that we cross-bred with them, they don't really matter in our evolution, so to speak.

I could sit here allllllllllll day and disprove all of the sh*t that comes out of your mouth

*edit* oh and the things about the monkeys? All mammals are descendants of rats (remember the dinosaurs?) we all evolved from them after the dinosaurs went extinct, and I know rats still exist today. Just because they evolved doesn't mean they all did.

 

I don't see the point in trying to disprove evolution just because you have religious conviction unless you believe that everything in the Bible means exactly what it says rather than being something open to interpretation.

There have been skeletons of several pre-human species found that are not apes and of which there are no longer any living examples. The species Homo erectus, homo habilus, etc.

The "Christian" calendar was created in the year 500 by some monk, his name I forget offhand. He extrapolated when the birth of Jesus was, and yeah, it's not like math was a hugely refned pursuit at the time.

Finally, there are plenty of people in the world who believe in the same G-d as Christians (Jews and Muslims) that don't share the same ideology of Jesus as the son of G-d and savior.

 

I've never looked at it that way...that we are in a transitional phase. That's great.

I've heard this somewhere where they say...homo sapiens haven't been around enough to prove or disprove evolution. Evolution as well as creationism are just theories. Although we have been around enough to see examples of MICRO-evolution, we have not been around long enough to see MACRO-evolution. That is not to say it doesn't happen. But with MACRO-evolution there are usually missing links between two phases of a species (for lack of a better word). That is also not to say that is doesn't happen, but that we might have not found the evidence to support it.

 

Wow, a post with intellectual value.

Talk about rare.

BTW I'm for evolution.

 

I like to think that it's not so much that it's a transitional phase, it's just that the "updated version" is capable of surviving on its own.

Example (with Simpsons influence):

A fish spontaneously mutates a third eye and the brain capacity to take advantage of it. This allows it to see better than other fish with two eyes. It survives and mates, which produces more three-eyed fish. These three-eyed fish keep surviving and mating, etc. Two-eyed fish are still around and doing just fine for themselves, they just don't happen to have three eyes. The fact that the three-eyed fish succeeds does not necessarily mean that the two-eyed fish dies out. In some cases that does happen but not necessarily.

Same deal with apes and people. Just because we exist and are able to keep going doesn't mean that apes are no longer able to survive. At some point this might be true but for now they're doing fine for themselves.

I guess that kind of is a transition phase also. Slightly different, but yeah.

 

Anybody that can use the Simpsons in a creationism/evolution thread is definitely "evolving " in the right direction.

 

HAHAHAHA man, you are definately the funniest person on HAN. Ok first of all, how would we take pictures of something thousadands of years ago, NO CAMERA YOU MORON. And we HAVE found skeletal remains so WTF are you talking about?

now as far as the debate goes, I love the way that creationists can sit here all day and try to find holes in the evolution theory, ummmm at least we have a theory. I would love for one of you to try to prove to me that god exists "uhhhh, he just does". You have no theory for us to try to find holes in.

If religion never existed and somebody tried to start it today, he would be in a straight jacket in 30 seconds. I love this debate, my friends and I argue about this all the time. Evolution all the way.