Creationist - The necessary steps to evolution and what has been proven

a reply to: Isurrender73

You cant have evolution without creation. Evolution is what happens to creations.

In 100 years when mans intelligence increases slightly he might be able to understand.

a reply to: Shadow Herder

Yoking up creationism with evolution just makes it more painfully obvious how different they are. Like an electric car with a diesel engine.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
a reply to: Isurrender73

You cant have evolution without creation. Evolution is what happens to creations.

In 100 years when mans intelligence increases slightly he might be able to understand.

I assume you are implying that evolution is creation in action?

You do realize that concept is one of the unwritten precepts of the ancient Mystery Schools?

100 years in the future, 3,000 years in the past....that is timeless knowledge.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Shadow Herder

Yoking up creationism with evolution just makes it more painfully obvious how different they are. Like an electric car with a diesel engine.

Your Avatar makes it painfully obvious what your futile grasp of the "Big Picture" truly is:

A little pussy comically overwhelmed by an insurmountable intellectual height.

a reply to: Eclecticist

Good, good. Let the butthurt flow through you.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Eclecticist

Good, good. Let the butthurt flow through you.

I don't understand.

Could you please elaborate?

originally posted by: 321Go
So, BtW, through the discovery and examination of fossil evidence we can see the evolution of feathers – in that they didn't start out as such, they evolved into feathers. This is to say that dinosaurs didn't plan to fly, they evolved to make use of their feathers. Some dinosaurs still had 'flight' without feathers, but these should be more accurately described as gliders, rather than fliers.

I'll try to address the questions you raised previously one by one, if you're happy with that?

You asked about the development of lungs, but this is a very long story so I'll be brief. In summary, there were several attempts at producing organs that could extract oxygen from water, some more successful than others. The simplest, which is still used today, is a tube-like structure – very simple but very inefficient. The next major development was gills and these have been located in a few different positions inside and outside the organism. Our internal lungs were next and were used by the majority of the quadruped land-based animals, but at that time were due to the nature of the internal organ structure of the time, creatures who had this system could not walk or run and breath at the same time because the sideways curving spine used to move the limbs compressed one lung and elongated the other, rending them useless while in motion. This system is still in use by most lizards and many reptiles, including the crocodile, bearing in mind these are very ancient creatures. We also use this same lung design, but we are bipedal and don't rely on our spine to enable movement.

There have been many different intermediate types and even some creatures that have utilised two different types of lung system. The major breakthrough in lung design was by certain bipedal dinosaurs (our lineage is from quadrupeds, unfortunately). These lungs were incredibly efficient as air only flowed one way through the lung, instead of in/out. This enabled these dinosaurs to move very fast for extended periods and was ideal for the hunting carnivores that bore them. Birds share a more developed type of this lung.

The full story, which is a couple billion years long, also includes the dramatic environmental changes that were occurring on our planet at the time, and was possibly the most significant driving force behind lung evolution and design, but that is equally as detailed and long. I'm sure this information is available online somewhere and can fill in all the details I have sketched out here.

Thanks for the effort but thats just an explanation and I can imagine evolution on my own.

Telling me what you think happened and how and why is not evidence, as I have stated previously I understand evolution and would accept it if shown evidence to confirm it. Thats not evidence, just supposition.

That's fair enough, but I'll tell you where I got the evidence – I read it from the scientists who are researching the topics concerned. I don't have a special pass, or privileged in any way. In fact, anyone can do it – even you. I was trying to save you some effort in reading over 600 pages of (evidenced and photographically illustrated) research in oxygen processing/lung development from leaders in their fields.

It's certainly not what I think, it's what approx 20 scientists from around the world (including your own country) have discovered over 16 years. I'll leave you to do your own research from now on.

The either / or debate of evolution / creationism is probably just a reflection of humanities current lack of being able to view things holistically.

There is a lot that humanity doesn't yet know or comprehend, such as the origins and rationale of the formation of matter, or the influence of extra terrestrial dust / organic matter on terrestrial DNA. There are other things though these basic principles required for both aspects are imperative for a complete theory.

originally posted by: 321Go
That's fair enough, but I'll tell you where I got the evidence – I read it from the scientists who are researching the topics concerned. I don't have a special pass, or privileged in any way. In fact, anyone can do it – even you. I was trying to save you some effort in reading over 600 pages of (evidenced and photographically illustrated) research in oxygen processing/lung development from leaders in their fields.

It's certainly not what I think, it's what approx 20 scientists from around the world (including your own country) have discovered over 16 years. I'll leave you to do your own research from now on.

I was an evolutionist, reading and studying made me realise the evidence was not empirical, hence its not a science, just a faith statement

Evolution and christianity can coexist, just read John Stott. I am not bound by belief, just logic.

This is a thread about creation, not religion per se. Of course they can co-exist.

I know a lot of members here completely dismiss what you have to say, I can see that, but I had no history with you or was aware of your previous posts. It's now quite evident that you will not look for evidence or even data yourself – you practically demand to have it put in front of you. Borntowatch is the most apt username you could possibly have chosen. How about borntofindoutformyself? I'll even give you a heads-up; buy a book called 'A New History of Life'. It's a difficult read in some places as it was written by two authors so is a bit disjointed, but the data is solid.

I'm afraid I can't communicate with an adult who demands to be fed. I have enough being a dad to my son to be one to you too.

originally posted by: 321Go
This is a thread about creation, not religion per se. Of course they can co-exist.

I know a lot of members here completely dismiss what you have to say, I can see that, but I had no history with you or was aware of your previous posts. It's now quite evident that you will not look for evidence or even data yourself – you practically demand to have it put in front of you. Borntowatch is the most apt username you could possibly have chosen. How about borntofindoutformyself? I'll even give you a heads-up; buy a book called 'A New History of Life'. It's a difficult read in some places as it was written by two authors so is a bit disjointed, but the data is solid.

I'm afraid I can't communicate with an adult who demands to be fed. I have enough being a dad to my son to be one to you too.

and thats a fair comment but your preaching and lack of evidence is telling more than anyone watching could be persuaded by

Its not a choice dictated by preaching what you believe, science is evidence

Go figure

borntofinditformyself

Take the advice offered, your preaching has no effect, move along

and just bye the bye, science is explaining, science is not a secret, liars have secrets.
If it was true empirical evidence would drown me out

Touche

a reply to: borntowatch

If it was true empirical evidence would drown me out

It does. What makes this statement by you even sadder is that you refuse to actually look at the inordinate amount of evidence that exists.

originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: borntowatch

If it was true empirical evidence would drown me out

It does. What makes this statement by you even sadder is that you refuse to actually look at the inordinate amount of evidence that exists.

The whole OP of this thread remains unchallenged, unanswered and you challenge my statement

Where is the fossil record, I guess its by the gramaphone in the loungeroom

When a man makes up his mind without evidence no evidence disproving his opinion will change his mind. - Heinlein

a reply to: borntowatch

The whole OP of this thread remains unchallenged, unanswered

No, the OP has been challenged and answered repeatedly over the last 10 pages of this thread.

and you challenge my statement

Your statement isn't even worth challenging. Anyone who has seen your posts in this part of ATS knows that they're bereft of any kind of understanding of science on your part. To wit...

Where is the fossil record, I guess its by the gramaphone in the loungeroom

See? Devoid of even the most basic understanding of science. By all means, keep typing away.

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: 321Go

Perhaps this is your first time debating borntowatch, he always does this where he ignores all responses to him and repeats himself over and over like a parrot. Just wait, eventually he'll tell us that no proof of evolution has ever been posted. There's a reason I haven't typed out really long responses to anything he's said yet.

Krazyshot, you kidder
Saying silly things about me and what I have said, telling people storys. Of course I believe in evolution,
I believe all humanity came from Adam and Eve,
I believe that there was a pair of common ancestor for each Kind.

Funny word Kind in relation to biology, it seems as vague as the word species

It may SEEM that way, but it isn't. I have no idea what a "kind" is. I have a VERY good idea of what a species is.

Anyway, its not true you saying I dont believe in evolution, its just the religiosy science (I dont think you understand real science either, you need to study some more about what real science is) part of evolution i dont believe in

Exactly, you don't believe in evolution. I already got that.

I am just asking for reasoned valid evidence, not links to vague assumption based religiosy sites where scientists work on best guess effort.

Uh huh SURE you are.

To believe in evolution I need
Repeatable
Observable
Testable
(those experiments are real science, you need to understand that before you can preach your faith at me)
EVIDENCE

Hey whenever you are ready to open your eyes and ears I'm more than ready as are MANY people on ATS, but you need to drop the fallacies and strawmans from your argument first.

so now you can release your anger, frustration and hate

Go ahead

Anger? Like I said, I've gone through this song and dance enough times that I know what to expect from talking to you. There is no more anger, only mild bemusement.

originally posted by: borntowatch

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: borntowatch

Mutations don't have purposes. Things just happen and that mutation ends up getting used for something.

Thats awesome, so precious, so childlike.

Feathers just mutated from nothing, for no apparent reason into feathers, wow that was lucky.

I just cant think of a reply, cant think of anything that could explain or make me understand how anyone could believe that.

Sounds like a personal problem. Maybe if you spent more time actually STUDYING evolution instead of trying to think up stupid ways to debunk it, you wouldn't have this problem.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Sounds like a personal problem. Maybe if you spent more time actually STUDYING evolution instead of trying to think up stupid ways to debunk it, you wouldn't have this problem.

Nah, it is easier to believe in fairy tale bronze book then try to learn yourself. After all, if he is correct and God created everything, would that mean that walking birds and aquatic mammals are clear examples where God messed up??

It is interesting that even there is huge amount of evidence toward evolution, enough for scientist to conclude Theory of evolution being correct, further proved by genetics and DNA tests parrots will continue with parody of denial and trolling.

If any of them even tried to study or at least 'read' about current science and discoveries, we would not have this discussion, would we??

originally posted by: SuperFrog

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Sounds like a personal problem. Maybe if you spent more time actually STUDYING evolution instead of trying to think up stupid ways to debunk it, you wouldn't have this problem.

Nah, it is easier to believe in fairy tale bronze book then try to learn yourself. After all, if he is correct and God created everything, would that mean that walking birds and aquatic mammals are clear examples where God messed up??

It is interesting that even there is huge amount of evidence toward evolution, enough for scientist to conclude Theory of evolution being correct, further proved by genetics and DNA tests parrots will continue with parody of denial and trolling.

If any of them even tried to study or at least 'read' about current science and discoveries, we would not have this discussion, would we??

You know I was thinking. You know that fallacy where Creationists ask if there is evidence of a monkey turning into a human? Well I was pondering, if that was discovered, wouldn't that be evidence of God instead? Because such an event would be magical and has never been witnessed since.

Or what if you apply their own strategy @ them - Where they there to witness creation?!

I find this one hilarious as well...



Let's not go into details as for example, who did Adam and Eve's children marry and have children with?!