flamingjimmy Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 There are many different stories about this- what I was trying to present was that 'evolutionist scientists' will use any source to project that evolutionary took place (that we decended from xyz or whatever). Piltdown man (an oran-utan jaw and human skull), Nebraska man (a pig’s tooth), Ota Benga (the African in the cage), Haeckel’s drawings and Piltdown bird (2002) to prove dino-bird hypothesis are some of the famous scandals in evolutionary arena. So automatically all the other thousands of pieces of research that back the theory of evolution are also made up? all of them? for the last 150 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz1 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 So automatically all the other thousands of pieces of research that back the theory of evolution are also made up? all of them? for the last 150 years? No- evolution in the plant and animal kingdom happens (but not change from one species to another- unless you have 100% proof) bt to suggest humans went through the same process is not. Scientists are still looking for evidences to support the Theory of Evolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 No- evolution in the plant and animal kingdom happens (but not change from one species to another- unless you have 100% proof) bt to suggest humans went through the same process is not. Scientists are still looking for evidences to support the Theory of Evolution Scientists will always be looking for evidence to support evolution, that's how science works, when was the last time you looked for evidence for your theory of how we came to be? also, that was a very cheap little attack you tried just there, i thought you didn't judge entire groups by single individuals and events, or does that just apply to groups that you belong to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Matt] Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 There are many different stories about this- what I was trying to present was that 'evolutionist scientists' will use any source to project that evolutionary took place (that we decended from xyz or whatever). Piltdown man (an oran-utan jaw and human skull), Nebraska man (a pig’s tooth), Ota Benga (the African in the cage), Haeckel’s drawings and Piltdown bird (2002) to prove dino-bird hypothesis are some of the famous scandals in evolutionary arena. One or two misunderstandings, badly researched science and a few frauds does not invalidate the vast body of actual science that shows evolution to be fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Matt] Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 No- evolution in the plant and animal kingdom happens (but not change from one species to another- unless you have 100% proof) bt to suggest humans went through the same process is not. Scientists are still looking for evidences to support the Theory of Evolution You've obviously not heard of endogenous retrovirus reverse transcription and how the genetic markers the process leaves behind on our genome shows that humans share a common ancestor with the other apes beyond all reasonable doubt. Its a fact... You should maybe read the thread and follow the links I've posted before you make your own comments.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 There are many different stories about this- what I was trying to present was that 'evolutionist scientists' will use any source to project that evolutionary took place (that we decended from xyz or whatever). You've got it exactly wrong scientists start with the evidence and then develop theory from that and the evidence for evolution in overwhelming. It's denialists like you who start with a received truth, in your case 'allah created man' and then desperately try to shape the evidence using all manner of dishonest means to support their desired conclusion. Piltdown man (an oran-utan jaw and human skull), Nebraska man (a pig’s tooth), Ota Benga (the African in the cage), Haeckel’s drawings and Piltdown bird (2002) to prove dino-bird hypothesis are some of the famous scandals in evolutionary arena. And who demonstrated pitdown man to be a fraud? Was it denialist Islamists like you or scientists? Who demonstrated that there are errors (deliberate or otherwise) in Haeckel's drawings? Was it denialist Islamists like you or scientists? The reason we know the above to be invalid is because the scientific method ruthlessly exposes petty frauds, it doesn't build monolyths to defend them like religion does. The theory of evolution doesn't rest on any of the cases you mention it is supported by the entire fossil record, the distribution of species around the planet, genetics, the existence of penicillin resistant bacteria and bacteria that can eat nylon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baz1 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Scientists will always be looking for evidence to support evolution, that's how science works, when was the last time you looked for evidence for your theory of how we came to be? What I believe is a lot more plausible. It is not based entirely on faith but facts too. I do not deny that some forms of evolution took place- but according to God's plan,. Not by natural selection. Also, if we can accept everything has a designer-take a mobile phone, though we did not see him/her design your mobile,then why do we so easily reject that humans/complex universe did not have a designer? How can then sane people believe that the human mind, which is such a complex device, there are more connections in the brain than there are atoms in the universe, came about by mere chance and no one designed it, when we believe that the mobile we have has a designer, even when we have not seen him. People should not forget that science has taken U-TURNS many a times. I'm off to bed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopsie Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 What I believe is a lot more plausible. It is not based entirely on faith but facts too. I do not deny that some forms of evolution took place- but according to God's plan,. Not by natural selection. Also, if we can accept everything has a designer-take a mobile phone, though we did not see him/her design your mobile,then why do we so easily reject that humans/complex universe did not have a designer? How can then sane people believe that the human mind, which is such a complex device, there are more connections in the brain than there are atoms in the universe, came about by mere chance and no one designed it, when we believe that the mobile we have has a designer, even when we have not seen him. People should not forget that science has taken U-TURNS many a times. I'm off to bed now. Why do theists choose to ignore the simple fact that the theory of evolution does not suggest that anything came about by chance or accident?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Matt] Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 What I believe is a lot more plausible. It is not based entirely on faith but facts too.[ I do not deny that some forms of evolution took place- but according to God's plan,. Not by natural selection. Also, if we can accept everything has a designer-take a mobile phone, though we did not see him/her design your mobile,then why do we so easily reject that humans/complex universe did not have a designer? How can then sane people believe that the human mind, which is such a complex device, there are more connections in the brain than there are atoms in the universe, came about by mere chance and no one designed it, when we believe that the mobile we have has a designer, even when we have not seen him. People should not forget that science has taken U-TURNS many a times. I'm off to bed now. I'm sorry but your watchmaker argument has been successfully refuted many a time over ever since its inception over two hundred years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 No- evolution in the plant and animal kingdom happens (but not change from one species to another- unless you have 100% proof) bt to suggest humans went through the same process is not. Why not? Because you say so? What's so special about human DNA which means that unlike that of all other species it isn't susceptible to natural selection? If we haven't evolved and aren't still evolving then why does all the evidence suggest that we did? Why does sickle cell anaemia exist? Why did Eurasian diseases decimate indigenous populations in America, Australia and so forth why are natives populations there still more susceptible to disease than Eurasians? Scientists are still looking for evidences to support the Theory of Evolution Of course scientists are looking for evidence that's what they do, and seeing as evolution is ongoing and studying how for example pathogens evolve is of considerable importance for or continued success as a species they'll never stop finding evidence which supports evolution. The simple fact that scientists are still doing research in no way implies that the theory is in any way invalid or in trouble, it simply means we don't knwo everything yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.