The Evolution non-debate??

[Kamal35]

Hey, Grant!!!! Nice to meet you again!!!!!!!!!
This Kamal from Spain. Hope we keep in touch!

[Hoowle]

Professor Hoowle is back to continue the pedagogy.

Millions of people are taught that the fossil record furnishes proof of evolution. But, where are there fossils of half-evolved dinosaurs or other creatures?

What does "half-evolved" dinosaurs mean? there is no such thing as half-evolved species as per evolution theory. so, where did Harun Yahya got this idea of "half-evolved" species from? Creationism?

This is why I don't like debating Creationists. they ask these palpably dumb questions and attack straw man of their own creation. If you're critiquing Evolution theory, you must critique what the theory postulates not what you like. otherwise, you're debating dishonestly. last I remember Islam proscribes dishonesty, no?

There are no fossils of partially-evolved species to indicate that a gradual process of evolution ever occurred.

That's because evolution theory doesn't predict any "partially-evolved" species; so why would there be any evidence?

How, for example, were animals breathing, eating, and reproducing if there respiratory, digestive, and reproductive organs were still evolving?

See! this is what I mean when I said I don't like debating some creationists. anyone with no more than High School biology can answer this silly question. organs exists in all forms from simple to more complex. moreover, how does this question discredit evolution theory? to discredit evolution theory you need a SINGLE contradictory evidence, just ONE, and the whole theory falls apart. no amount of facile questions will substitute for a single shred of hard contradictory evidence.

In fact, precisely because of this problem more and more modern evolutionists are adopting a new theory known as Punctuated Equilibrium which says that plant and animal species evolved suddenly from one kind to another and that is why we don't see evidence of partially-evolved species in the fossil record.

punctuated equilibrium is now not part of evolution theory. I'm beginning to understand where this ignorance is coming from -- Harun Yahya is dropout. He doesn't even have a Uni degree in anything let alone in biology.

they say a little knowledge can be dangerous. he reads few books, is imbued with religious dogma and viola he is self-appointed authority on evolution theory.

[Hoowle]

you know, debating is two way street. I gave you a reply that had a partial list of "transitional forms" between humans and ape-like creatures we descended from. what is your response? do you reject the list I gave? if yes, why?

No Hoowle, you are the typical fraud. First of all let us put this into context because I have seen this argument before.

1. This illustration is from the august 1999 version of Time magazine and was illustrated by Douglas Theobald. MOST of them are fossils found that are filled in for the missing holes and the "blue" color signify the ones that could be least accurate.

2. Almost all of them are not even in our line of ancestry but "cousins". Since they cannot proof we are from them, they don't want to risk of looking like frauds by saying we are without any evidence so they use the "relative" word. (KEEP IN MIND THIS IS STILL IN OUR OWN LINE SEPARATE FROM APES/CHIMPS.

3. Most of important of all NONE are between Human line and Apes/Chimps. There is not ONE evidence that humans and apes were at any point joined.

This is not how debating works. you asked for transitional forms, I gave you a list. see how it works? I respond to your questions and you do likewise. not go on another topic before addressing mine. this is what I asked you in my last post and you haven't replied:

"you know, debating is two way street. I gave you a reply that had a partial list of "transitional forms" between humans and ape-like creatures we descended from. what is your response? do you reject the list I gave? if yes, why?"

... when you give me a reply to my question, I'll be happy to give reply to your post above.

[Hoowle]

Hoowle, William Paley's "Watchmaker" analogy contends that if u discover a sophisticated watch in the middle of the desert, then it's logical to conclude an equally or more sophisticated watchmaker must have made it, even if that watchmaker isn't readily accessible. Your example of dropping the watch in the amazon doesn't make any sense....whether the natives there don't understand the fact that a watch is man-made has no bearing on the fact that it is, much like how your inability to grasp how a Supreme Being fashioned and skillfully crafted us and our environment has no bearing on the fact that He did.

It is true that to us humans a watch MUST have a maker. but why? because we have experience with people making watches. we have evidence and good reasons for expecting watches to have makers. however, we have no experience with the Supreme Being "crafting" our environment. it takes a leap of faith to assume that a Supreme Being is behind our environment. you need to do better.

btw, the watchmaker argument is a variation of the "God of the Gaps." according to some Creationists the world is so complex and we know so little of how it works, God can fill this knowledge gap. basically committing argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.

As for your comment about science being self-correcting and religion remaining stagnant, something that is originally correct requires no further development.

This is called circular logic. your conclusion (requires no further development) assumes your premise (originally correct). how do you know it was originally correct? because Allah told you so? you have to first demonstrate that it was originally true then you have reasons for believing it has no need for no further development. it is like me saying: Microsoft makes best operating systems because Microsoft said so. I can make good money as Microsoft advertiser if we follow your line of reasoning.

Now, if the correct conclusion is the one you started off with, what's the need to further elaborate and investigate?

then you don't understand science. there are no certainties in science. if there were, they'd be no reason for scientists at all. what do you think all those scientists do everyday? they test other scientists works and theories. this is why science produces progress while religions produce nothing but divisions (there are some 10,000 religions in the world).

the one thing evolutionists have never been able to explain. How do you explain gravity?

Supporters of evolution theory don't explain gravity. you need to ask physicists.

[Real_Talk]

Hoowle, William Paley's "Watchmaker" analogy contends that if u discover a sophisticated watch in the middle of the desert, then it's logical to conclude an equally or more sophisticated watchmaker must have made it, even if that watchmaker isn't readily accessible. Your example of dropping the watch in the amazon doesn't make any sense....whether the natives there don't understand the fact that a watch is man-made has no bearing on the fact that it is, much like how your inability to grasp how a Supreme Being fashioned and skillfully crafted us and our environment has no bearing on the fact that He did.

As for your comment about science being self-correcting and religion remaining stagnant, something that is originally correct requires no further development. Science is a process, and through trial and error, certain conclusions are made until more viable explanations are uncovered. Now, if the correct conclusion is the one you started off with, what's the need to further elaborate and investigate? Religion remaining consistent does not detract from it's authenticity, it reinforces it.

Now for the BIG one....the one thing evolutionists have never been able to explain. How do you explain gravity?

WTF??? Are you serious? I mean really? Or are you retarded?

What the hell does got damn gravity got to do with evolution?

I really think idiots who know nothing about science or evolution should refrain from debating about it. Taking an introductory high school biology course before posting again in this thread.

[Real_Talk]

in other words, u need some time to research

Homey don't need anymore research cause he's pretty much destroyed all of ya'll in this thread.

props to hoowle for actually being educated beyond high school in the topic of evolution........unlike everyone else in this thread

[Cawar]

in other words, u need some time to research

Homey don't need anymore research cause he's pretty much destroyed all of ya'll in this thread.

props to hoowle for actually being educated beyond high school in the topic of evolution........unlike everyone else in this thread

@destroyed.

[Oxy-]

in other words, u need some time to research

Homey don't need anymore research cause he's pretty much destroyed all of ya'll in this thread.

props to hoowle for actually being educated beyond high school in the topic of evolution........unlike everyone else in this thread

I must agree, that youngfresh guy/girl whatever is pretty stupid. The questions being asked by him/her and the way he/she digested the information clearly shows his/her lack of intellect.


Idiot Perhaps comparing Youngfresh to an ape issnt such a bad thing

[Basra-]

Wallle there are a lot of none believers in the forum. Istaqfurulaah. Alcohol and western hemisphere has corrupted our warm blooded somali brethrem.

[Goljano Lion]

in other words, u need some time to research

Homey don't need anymore research cause he's pretty much destroyed all of ya'll in this thread.

props to hoowle for actually being educated beyond high school in the topic of evolution........unlike everyone else in this thread

I must agree, that youngfresh guy/girl whatever is pretty stupid. The questions being asked by him/her and the way he/she digested the information clearly shows his/her lack of intellect.




Idiot Perhaps comparing Youngfresh to an ape issnt such a bad thing

He shouldn't have inserted his opinions topics that he has no grasp of, poor boi

[Real_Talk]

Year after year scientist around the world are uncovering more and more evidence to push forward their theory as fact. Yes its still a "Theory" but ask yourself this, why is their a colossal amount of evidence to support this theory.

People are often hostile to Evolution because it instantly arouses fear that their religion is being undermined. Many scientist stand at a point where they both agree with evolution and agree with the notion that the pioneer of this process also exists "GOD" ... Religion and Evolution can co-exist


Muslims need to overcome their fear and ignorance.

It is still a theory. They haven't proved we come from apes.

SMH

That's because we don't come from apes homey. I really wish people would actually study what they are criticizing before making dumb objections like this. I wanna make this point clear one and for all....

Human ARE Apes!!!

We did not evolve from chimps or gorillas.

They are our cousins. Genetically we share nearly 98% of our DNA with them. I think the problem most people have is they believe evolution goes in a straight line. That there is a sort of plan or design to the process. That we humans are a sort of apex of evolution, with chimps and gorillas below us, and then all the way down the animal kingdom to bacteria and fungi. Well that is the mistake people. Evolution has no design and there is no culmination or apex to it. We humans are no more "evolved" than chimps, gorillas, whales, or even bacteria. Every living organism on earth right now is just as "evolved" as the next because they are descendant from a common ancestor that lived millions of years ago.

The theory of evolution holds that humans and other apes have a COMMON ape-like ancestor. Now that doesn't mean the common ancestor looked like chimps or gorillas. Remember chimps and gorillas have also been evolving for the 7-9 million years since the separation happened. The mistake you are making in your criticism of evolution is you expect to see a chimpanzee turning into a human in the fossil record. Well that my friend is a fallacy. The fossil record shows clearly the gradual change of an ape-like creature that walked on two legs into the modern-day homo-sapien. For nearly two million years we see the brain get bigger in these creatures. The facial morphology also changes to become more human-like with a smaller jaw. We see the bones get longer and taller. That my friend is all evolution tells us. How modern animals came about. Of course this example is very simple. The change from our ape-ancestor to modern-day humans isn't as incredible as lets say the evolution of a terrestrial land mammal to the modern-day whale. But even for that there is sufficient fossil evidence showing how a 60 million year old land mammal similar to modern-day hippos evolved into modern-day whales.


Please learn what you are criticizing before making such ignorant allegations.

Thanks

[Real_Talk]

3. Most of important of all NONE are between Human line and Apes/Chimps. There is not ONE evidence that humans and apes were at any point joined.

WTF???

Humans are apes ignoramus. We share 98% of our DNA with them. Chimps are genetically more closely related to humans than gorillas. How much more evidence do you need?

Evolution contends that we share a COMMON ancestor with chimps and gorillas. Not that we evolved from them. Also note that the common ancestor DID NOT look like chimps and gorillas. They are also fully evolved creatures just like humans are.

Sheesh..........I wish guys actually knew what you were arguing about..........then maybe there wouldn't be so many stupid allegation in this thread against evolution.........If you brought up these ignorant objections in a college level biological anthropology class..............you would be laughed outta the class

There are many educated objections to the theory of evolution but most of this thread is filled with uneducated objections that don't even ask the right questions. I suggest you learn about evolution before bringing up criticisms about it.

Thank you

[Real_Talk]

darwinism is nothing more than a subtle form of fascism!

If we have evolved from apes, what race, nation or people are at the peak of evolution at this point in time? and who are still in their "primitive state".....?

I think you are conflating social darwinism with actually biological evolution. Social darwinism is a bastardization of evolution. First of all evolution doesn't contend any sort of PEAK or DESIGN among organisms as I stated earlier. We humans are no more evolved than chimps or gorillas. There is no creature that is more evolved than another. I think most people who misunderstand the theory believe its a sort of straight line progression from bacteria to plants to birds to reptiles then mammals and finally humans at the top. But that is absolutely wrong. Every creature on planet earth is just as evolved as the other. The only thing that creates the difference we see are environmental pressures that impact natural selection.

Socialism darwinism is also just false because all humans are the same species. We are genetically the same. Every single human on earth shares 99.9% identical DNA. The only differences there are between human populations are CULTURAL. So there is no such thing as a "primitive state" other than those viewed through cultural bias.

[Real_Talk]

Case in point, evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. Their theories have helped nothing in the progress of science other than thousands of hoaxes suggesting the theory of evolution should take precedence over the Word of God...

LOL!!!

Now I've heard it all.

If the theory of evolution (which continues to stand through the rigors of peer review by all respected scientific journals) is fairy-tales for adults then what does that make your belief in a religion that says an invisible sky man is watching our every move all the time?

.......fairy-tales for children???

[Cawar]

Humans are apes ignoramus. We share 98% of our DNA with them

I know why we share that.. and quite honestly I believe in that deeply .. but you tell me how did that come about Mr real-talk..

Or you just made this new nick to support your other alias Hoowle.. and appear like you are winning an argument ..only in your mind of course..

But enlighten us..with concrete evidence that we actually came from a common ancestor..me/you/apes/Unicellular bacteria/fungi...and all animals basically..and living beings..including the trees..
you seem to know and believe in the theory more than the rest of us the ignorant masses.