If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

a reply to: secretboss

SO you admit you don't understand evolution? Because no where does it say we evolved from extant (existing) primates, rather we shared a common ancestor. Fossils and genetics agree on this.

So troll or uniformed?

originally posted by: anton74
Back to recycling Behe's nonsense. How about coming up with something otiginal.

I've never read Behe. I am addressing the logical impossibility of a piece-by-piece construction (i.e. evolution) of a functional system that requires all the pieces to be in place for it to work.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: anton74
Back to recycling Behe's nonsense. How about coming up with something otiginal.

I've never read Behe. I am addressing the logical impossibility of a piece-by-piece construction (i.e. evolution) of a functional system that requires all the pieces to be in place for it to work.

That is Behe. You've picked up his recycled arguements off of a Creationist website. Read "Darwin's Black Box".

Irreducible Complexity

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: anton74

ID is nothing more than rebranded Creationism.

Gotta disagree there

Chinese biologists & paleontologists concur: ID is not creationism, and more reasonable than Darwin because as their fossil records demonstrate, there are less species now than before, and mutations account for diversity in hair colour and lifting bricks, but not diversity in species. obviously

You and five other people on this planet believe that. Who cares what a couple Chinese people think. Replace Evolution with ID and God becomes the next logical step.

Even the courts don't buy the ID argument argument.

I'm bored so um,

If we make paper from trees why are there still trees? If we make paper and houses out of trees, why are there still trees? I mean if some trees became houses, how are there still trees? If both paper and houses are made from trees how are there still trees? How can it ever be possible to have all three, I mean we start with trees and we get both houses and and paper, while still having trees... the madness, how is this possible?

One we didn't evolve from monkeys, but even if we did, hopefully this analogy helps point out how ridiculous this question is.

Just because some of something has changed into something else, doesn't mean all of something did... sheesh.

a reply to: anton74

Even the courts don't buy the ID argument argument.

We don't trust the same courts
maybe a monkey will explode in the dinosaur way or even the big way and make that science, too

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: anton74

Even the courts don't buy the ID argument argument.

We don't trust the same courts
maybe a monkey will explode in the dinosaur way or even the big way and make that science, too

The would be pretty cool but, that doesn't Change what ID is about. Please do some research on the ID movement.

You can argue all you want that ID isn't about religion but, the argument is already over.

Kitzmiller V. Dover

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: anton74

Even the courts don't buy the ID argument argument.

We don't trust the same courts
maybe a monkey will explode in the dinosaur way or even the big way and make that science, too

I hate when monkeys explode in the dinosaur way.

No doubt the ID "movement" has its Oswalds

but the reality is still not the kind of thing explosions make

ID is held as a self evident truth by many irreligious people, yes

a reply to: Greggers

I hate when monkeys explode in the dinosaur way.

Don't we all?

It's like, let's all be extinct because of explosions which is also how we showed up but in like species-specific droves, and then bam, no more monkeys, just their bones in a zoo and a kid from the 5th century of Dawkins calendar saying "wow so we're descended from bones?" and their teacher saying "yes, this is how observation and experiment work"

originally posted by: anton74

That is Behe. You've picked up his recycled arguements off of a Creationist website. Read "Darwin's Black Box".

Irreducible Complexity

Interesting. I've given this a lot of thought over time... the more I learned about the complexity of life through biology/physiology/chemistry, I realized the impossibility of self-assembly from chaos. This logical impossibility is not enough though, concrete evidence is required. Carbon-dating dinosaurs (link) will eventually break the ice and have us re-evaluate the historical timeframe... unfortunately the old-dogmatists are severely impeding this shift, but the truth will be revealed soon enough.

We are so complex that we can convince ourselves that our lives are meaningless and we all descended from a common microbe

originally posted by: Puppylove

If we make paper from trees why are there still trees? If we make paper and houses out of trees, why are there still trees?

Can you think of a metaphor that does not involve intelligence?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: anton74

That is Behe. You've picked up his recycled arguements off of a Creationist website. Read "Darwin's Black Box".

Irreducible Complexity

Interesting. I've given this a lot of thought over time... the more I learned about the complexity of life through biology/physiology/chemistry, I realized the impossibility of self-assembly from chaos. This logical impossibility is not enough though, concrete evidence is required. Carbon-dating dinosaurs (link) will eventually break the ice and have us re-evaluate the historical timeframe... unfortunately the old-dogmatists are severely impeding this shift, but the truth will be revealed soon enough.

We are so complex that we can convince ourselves that our lives are meaningless and we all descended from a common microbe

Too bad you link is nonsense.

originally posted by: anton74

Too bad you link is nonsense.

You see, this is the exact negligence that allows ignorance to perpetuate. It took you 2 minutes to respond - surely you did not even read the link. How do you know its nonsense if you haven't read it? Is it because it challenge your contemporary worldview?

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Greggers

I hate when monkeys explode in the dinosaur way.

Don't we all?

It's like, let's all be extinct because of explosions which is also how we showed up but in like species-specific droves, and then bam, no more monkeys, just their bones in a zoo and a kid from the 5th century of Dawkins calendar saying "wow so we're descended from bones?" and their teacher saying "yes, this is how observation and experiment work"

I also hate it when monkeys explode in the big way.

a reply to: Greggers

Some say it creates worlds

they have no evidence, and perdy big explosions like them nukes don't do this one bit

the big explosions don't even need a monkey, just a little bit of nothing and kabloey

originally posted by: wisvol
the big explosions don't even need a monkey, just a little bit of nothing and kabloey

Yes, but you have to admit, monkeys make them much worse.

a reply to: Greggers

Explosions plus monkeys honestly were above my school's explorations of the origin of species

they did have us kill smaller animals to see what was inside

and practice hardcore necromancy with the skeletons of that one chimp lucy

that was intriguing

but years later, with more knowledge of explosions I think exploding monkeys sums the paradigm up neatly

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Greggers

Some say it creates worlds

they have no evidence, and perdy big explosions like them nukes don't do this one bit

Well if I've learned anything from my exchanges with you in this thread, it's that the only way to figure out what the heck you're talking about is to make ridiculous statements until you finally articulate it.

So thanks for that. . . . I guess.

By the way, The Big Bang was not an explosion, and it is more accurate to call it The Expanding Universe Framework. However, given your previous responses, I don't expect this is going much of anywhere.

a reply to: Greggers

Call it what you will, but was it you or your brother who quoted Sagan? because that guy says bang

the sphere's music is Dopplered? because if it is, we're farther away from certain things than yesterday, like we're going in orbit and everything else too