Evolution? The most GDed ridiculous Fing thing ever to have been imagined

a reply to: TerraLiga

You've aptly demonstrated in one, badly written, short paragraph how totally ignorant you are.

And your opinion works the same for you. I could use some better writting skills
but I do alright for a trucker don't ya think?

originally posted by: mikell
And the first things they want AI to do is learn and evolve!

Cars evolve too is that what we're talking about. Things that have
been created? lol

a reply to: Randyvine2

The origin of life is a separate thing from evolution. Evolution explains the diversity of life not its origin. The origin of life is a separate question.

Though “God did it” is a pretty bad answer to the question that is untestable, unable to be proven and does not expand our knowledge of reality at all.

a reply to: Ohanka

You can't have evolution with out the oirigin of life that's the whole point.
Life comes from life in every instance and model we know. And yet your
belief system initiates something that is impossible. Life from nothing
intelligence from mud? You have to be delusional to even think that
BS is viable.

I have to go see my grand kids who even they are smart enough
to believe in God now.

originally posted by: Kurokage
You're obviously very young so I found the most basic explaination of evolution I could find for you.
There's no need for an imaginary invisible magic friend.
The easiest way to see evolution is look at how different breeds of dog or buggies have been bred for size or colour and how this happens in nature.

Nothing but existing genetic coding WITHIN the KIND or species.

We adapt.

a reply to: Randyvine2

The THEORY of Evolution has become a religion in and of itself in that it is BELIEVED as fact rather than taken as the hypothesis that it is.

One thing it's adherents like to ignore is the fact that before his died himself Darwin had some reservations about his own theory.

Evolutionary theory suggested the slow mutation or adaptation of species over time to suit there environment but never had a concise answer for the sudden appearance of multiple species all at once such as the so called Cambrian Explosion (Disproven fossil theory that suggested that before the Cambrian era there were only extremely simple and single celled organism's but we have since found fossils that are supposedly older that are already complex).

Yet people will claim that the theory is FACT, they will not say it is there opinion that it is fact or that it was the opinion of some deluded and actually bad school teacher that it was fact but that it IS fact and they will argue it as such until they are blue in the face (which they undoubtedly would be if they really were fish).

The so called Fossil Record is so full of holes that if we take it as face value Species APPEAR out of no where and then some guy find's something similar then claims it is it's ancestor and that it used to look like this or that.

Evidence against evolution, Dating of stratification is undoubtedly wrong due to intact upright tree stump fossils that pierce though supposedly millions of years of stratification.

The Paluxy river track's which show fully anatomically modern HUMAN footprints some of which have been stepped on by later but contemporaneous duckbilled dinosaur footprint's.

Gold chain found in a lump of Coal in the 1800's in Scotland, Hammers and other tools found also in Scotland in the 1800's, the Nampa Doll or Figurine supposedly millions of years old but of an anatomically human shaped figure in clothing from a time when only early Neanderthal's were supposed to be around and probably not even in the Americas by that point in time and oh so very many other so called Ooparts which are either millions or even hundreds of millions or billions of years old found in lime stone, coal and other deposits OR are evidence of the great flood, log mat theory and erroneous dating pushed by an anti Christian and anti Church fraternity that see religion as there enemy.

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: Kurokage

You're the one posting evolution isn't real and your imaginary friend did it! Now thats ignorant, but thats all you do here on ATS, insult posters, post opinion pieces and completely miss out any facts.

See this is how prepoterous your belief system is. In your case you have to
have a magic show happen with out the magician. That never happens on
any stage lab or hostile environment. So the imagination is all yours my
ignoramous.

You say I have to have a magic show without the magician?? Believing a magic invisble elf wished everything into excistence is even far more prepoterous, I've posted evidence to back up my claims. What have you posted?? Post one piece of evidence that proves anything you've said is true....
You need to keep off the 'shrooms before coming onto ATS.
And for a person who claims to be religious you love throwing round the insults don't you.

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: Ohanka

You can't have evolution with out the oirigin of life that's the whole point.
Life comes from life in every instance and model we know. And yet your
belief system initiates something that is impossible. Life from nothing
intelligence from mud? You have to be delusional to even think that
BS is viable.

In this vast universe that has existed for nigh on 14 billion years, with all the permutations of matter and energy in all of it's forms, it is perhaps conceivable that a self replicating molecule could arise. It might be extremely rare and conditions too might have to be favourable for a long time, no one can say. In fact we might be alone in this universe given how hostile to life (as we understand it) it can be.
I think consciousness is more of a mystery but it might be something that has arisen from a complex neural network in a natural way.

originally posted by: Ohanka
a reply to: Randyvine2

The origin of life is a separate thing from evolution. Evolution explains the diversity of life not its origin. The origin of life is a separate question.

Though “God did it” is a pretty bad answer to the question that is untestable, unable to be proven and does not expand our knowledge of reality at all.

I suppose life appearing spontaneously out of the quantum void of nothing is testable and verified through experiment?

Many realists agree, if something is untestable its not even worth talking about from a scientific standpoint.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Cars evolve too is that what we're talking about. Things that have
been created? lol

Exactly !

Darwinism is dialectical materialism and Marxism, the time period and the location in history which these two came about and coalesced speaks volumes. Not long after we see the rise of Communism on the world stage and all the the horrors it entailed and even into the rise of Socialism in Nazi Germany.

a reply to: mikell

originally posted by: Terpene

Certain bio synthetic process are hard to explain in a linear evolution theory.

Polymerization of amino acids and nucleic acids is one of the most improbable hurdles for evolutionary theory. Protein chains and DNA chains do not spontaneously form in water, they DECOMPOSE. So it is absurd to think that order could have been built against this basic thermodynamic law.

originally posted by: Ohanka

Though “God did it” is a pretty bad answer to the question that is untestable

It's a much more likely answer than "random chance did it". It is far more likely that Ordered intelligent systems came from an intelligent source, rather than random chance.

How proteins and DNA emerge sponttaneously

How could the blind forces of Nature create large and highly information-laden molecules like DNA and proteins just by random processes? DNAimage9_1 carries information for the synthesis of proteins, but it requires the prior availability of certain protein molecules for performing its genetic duties. Such proteins help the double-helix DNA molecule to uncoil itself and split into two strands for replication purposes. Therefore, DNA and certain proteins must have emerged independently, by some efficient (and therefore reasonably likely) chemical processes. But how? The answer has to do with the chemical evolution of autocatalytic sets of molecules, which could consume energy-rich molecules and other precursors (‘food’) to ‘reproduce’. These molecules were the predecessors of proteins and DNA etc., and thence of life.

Catalysis

Catalysis is a process that facilitates or speeds up a chemical reaction. Often, a chemical process may involve two or more intermediate reactions. A catalyst is a molecule that speeds up the production of an end product of the chemical process by participating in the intermediate reactions, but separates at the end of the chain of reactions, thus becoming available all over again for further catalysis. Often, a chemical reaction may almost never occur if no catalyst is present. Enzymes are examples of proteins that assist (i.e. catalyze) chemical reactions in biological systems.

a reply to: Randyvine2
If god created all there is, then evolution was a part of his plan

why get mad at the evidence god left for us

originally posted by: Kurokage

How could the blind forces of Nature create large and highly information-laden molecules like DNA and proteins just by random processes? DNAimage9_1 carries information for the synthesis of proteins, but it requires the prior availability of certain protein molecules for performing its genetic duties. Such proteins help the double-helix DNA molecule to uncoil itself and split into two strands for replication purposes. Therefore, DNA and certain proteins must have emerged independently, by some efficient (and therefore reasonably likely) chemical processes. But how? The answer has to do with the chemical evolution of autocatalytic sets of molecules, which could consume energy-rich molecules and other precursors (‘food’) to ‘reproduce’. These molecules were the predecessors of proteins and DNA etc., and thence of life.


Catalysis

Catalysis is a process that facilitates or speeds up a chemical reaction. Often, a chemical process may involve two or more intermediate reactions. A catalyst is a molecule that speeds up the production of an end product of the chemical process by participating in the intermediate reactions, but separates at the end of the chain of reactions, thus becoming available all over again for further catalysis. Often, a chemical reaction may almost never occur if no catalyst is present. Enzymes are examples of proteins that assist (i.e. catalyze) chemical reactions in biological systems.

There is no known mechanism for self-catalyzed polymerization of amino acids monomers into the polymer form. This means you can't spontaneously get amino acid or DNA chains in water. The opposite is true. If any amino acid or DNA chains exist in water, they will eventually decompose back into the monomers. This is counter-productive for any hopes of a random chance abiogenesis event. If there were such a mechanism to reverse this natural process, it would be in every biology textbook and the discovery would grant nobel prizes. But it does not exist. The theory is not possible, biological creatures require a Logical designer.

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: Randyvine2
Intelligent Design is just the dumbest thing anybody ever believed.

So, you, an intelligent person, suppose it is unintelligent that you came from an intelligent source? That is literally the most unintelligent possibility imaginable.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Randyvine2
If god created all there is, then evolution was a part of his plan

why get mad at the evidence god left for us

He is referring to the theory that evolution is the origin of species, which has never been shown to be possible. Adaptation on the other hand happens every day, but it all occurs within the potential of the pre-disposed genome within individuals and populations. We have never observed an instance where genetic preferences have amalgamated into the origin of a new kind of organism... mice remain mice, fruit flies remain fruit flies, E. Coli remains E. Coli. over 73,000 generations of E. Coli were artificially selected in an attempt to evolve them, and guess what? It's still E. Coli.... To put things in perspective, 73,000 generations of hominid evolution is approximately 1.5 million years of hominid evolution. This shows we wouldn't expect hominids to show any noticeable change of species even in 1.5 million years. The theory is bunk, but many scientist's paychecks and the hubris of the acolytes rely on them persisting the lie.

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: Ohanka

You can't have evolution with out the oirigin of life that's the whole point.
Life comes from life in every instance and model we know. And yet your
belief system initiates something that is impossible. Life from nothing
intelligence from mud? You have to be delusional to even think that
BS is viable.

I have to go see my grand kids who even they are smart enough
to believe in God now.

Atemporal cheat codes aren't the answer either. You can't sidestep the "causeless cause" paradox by scribbling out the common sense physics of life begets life only to turn around and reassert it. So whence the cause that birthed the penultimate cause? Infinite regression resumes with a vengeance.

Yeah like believing in a sky wizard isn't retarded at all.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Atemporal cheat codes aren't the answer either. You can't sidestep the "causeless cause" paradox by scribbling out the common sense physics of life begets life only to turn around and reassert it. So whence the cause that birthed the penultimate cause? Infinite regression resumes with a vengeance.

Not unless something existed eternally. An atemporal Being is the answer to existence in its entirety. Something cannot come from nothing. Since something exists, we know it did not come from nothing, and therefore must have existed eternally. This timeless eternal Being from which all things come is rightfully called "Alpha-Omega", because this super-Being encompasses the entirety of all time.

originally posted by: Lysergic
Yeah like believing in a sky wizard isn't retarded at all.

No you have it mixed up, we are not retard apes. We come from an Intelligence that transcends temporal and spatial limitations.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Lysergic
Yeah like believing in a sky wizard isn't retarded at all.

No you have it mixed up, we are not retard monkeys. We come from an Intelligence that transcends temporal and spatial limitations.

Apes. We are cousins of the ape family, specifically pan hominidae.

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: Kurokage

You can't even answer a simple question with out lying what are doing here?

The amount of time proposed by evolution is preposterous especially
in a hostile environment. And how many times did this magic have to
take place with no magician against unbeatable odds. It's super stupid.

I thought you were a child, now I know you are.
Don'y worry, you'll grow out of imaginary friends and being scared of the boogie man.
You can't seem to grasp or understand the basic idea of evoulution. Maybe watch the videos I posted ,I'm sure it will help you understand basic science better.

The amount of time is only preposterous to you because your only see it in human life span terms...

Britannica

Radiometric dating indicates that Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago. The earliest fossils resemble microorganisms such as bacteria and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae); the oldest of these fossils appear in rocks 3.5 billion years old (see Precambrian time). The oldest known animal fossils, about 700 million years old, come from the so-called Ediacara fauna, small wormlike creatures with soft bodies. Numerous fossils belonging to many living phyla and exhibiting mineralized skeletons appear in rocks about 540 million years old. These organisms are different from organisms living now and from those living at intervening times. Some are so radically different that paleontologists have created new phyla in order to classify them. (See Cambrian Period.) The first vertebrates, animals with backbones, appeared about 400 million years ago; the first mammals, less than 200 million years ago. The history of life recorded by fossils presents compelling evidence of evolution.

Darwin and his followers found support for evolution in the study of embryology, the science that investigates the development of organisms from fertilized egg to time of birth or hatching. Vertebrates, from fishes through lizards to humans, develop in ways that are remarkably similar during early stages, but they become more and more differentiated as the embryos approach maturity. The similarities persist longer between organisms that are more closely related (e.g., humans and monkeys) than between those less closely related (humans and sharks). Common developmental patterns reflect evolutionary kinship. Lizards and humans share a developmental pattern inherited from their remote common ancestor; the inherited pattern of each was modified only as the separate descendant lineages evolved in different directions.

Micro and macro - two separate things.

Example: there are many types of birds, due to observed micro evolution/adaptation but they’re still birds.

Also, the whole “magic man in the sky” trope is childish and unnecessary. Just my opinion.