By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Do you think Darwin is right

largedarryl on 12 February 2009
Bursche said:
emilie autumn said:
evolution through adaptation is the only logical solution to life existance as we know it, unless you believe theres a God

 

 You can't have both? What if God placed the ability to adapt in us, knowing how the patterns of our environments would always change? Why can't there be a middle ground instead of the extreme left or right and no middle?

That is exactly right, there is nothing in the fundamental theory of evolution that discounts Intelligent Design.  Both theories could be put together very easily (and logically).

 



Around the Network
halogamer1989 on 12 February 2009

macro and micro, then yes. Personally, I am a Christian so anything else is off base for me. If anyone else wants to think of theirself as evolved from a smelly ape then by all means, have at it.



emilie autumn on 12 February 2009
Bursche said:
emilie autumn said:
evolution through adaptation is the only logical solution to life existance as we know it, unless you believe theres a God

 

 You can't have both? What if God placed the ability to adapt in us, knowing how the patterns of our environments would always change? Why can't there be a middle ground instead of the extreme left or right and no middle?

 

yes, god may have placed such an ability in us, but the thing is not only humans are the ones that adapt and evolve through time. we started as an unicelular organisms and through time and changes in the enviroment we evolved, still there exists in this world unicelular organisms that haven't evolved since their existance, that brings up more questions as if they don't evolve ¿are they perfect? ¿were they moleculy different but adapted perfectly to every enviroment? i believe in god and the scientific explanation involves such random sequences of events, but maybe god planed everything to be like these.



 

SamuelRSmith on 12 February 2009

Well, yeah, I think Darwin is right. But then again, I haven't been taught anything else. Hell, we even have Darwin on the back of some of our moneys!

Seriously, the first time I even heard of creationism or ID was on the web, I had never heard of it before then.



super_etecoon on 12 February 2009
largedarryl said:
Bursche said:
emilie autumn said:
evolution through adaptation is the only logical solution to life existance as we know it, unless you believe theres a God

 

 You can't have both? What if God placed the ability to adapt in us, knowing how the patterns of our environments would always change? Why can't there be a middle ground instead of the extreme left or right and no middle?

That is exactly right, there is nothing in the fundamental theory of evolution that discounts Intelligent Design.  Both theories could be put together very easily (and logically).

 

Assuming the existence of God...which isn't logic, but rather, faith.

 

 



Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 12 February 2009
halogamer1989 said:

macro and micro, then yes. Personally, I am a Christian so anything else is off base for me. If anyone else wants to think of theirself as evolved from a smelly ape then by all means, have at it.

 

 The only reason you, yourself, aren't smelly is because you wash. Well, at least, I hope you do.



halogamer1989 on 12 February 2009

What about the ancient aliens ppl? They might be thine angels of olde



halogamer1989 on 12 February 2009
SamuelRSmith said:
halogamer1989 said:

macro and micro, then yes. Personally, I am a Christian so anything else is off base for me. If anyone else wants to think of theirself as evolved from a smelly ape then by all means, have at it.

 

 The only reason you, yourself, aren't smelly is because you wash. Well, at least, I hope you do.

Shower this morning.  Very refreshing if I do say so myself...

 



akuma587 on 12 February 2009
Jackson50 said:
Darwin was the catalyst for the development of modern evolutionary theory, which I agree with, but he was wrong on many things. Of course, that is to be expected. For instance, although he existed at the same time as Mendel, he was unaware of Mendel's work and the idea of genetic drift.

Exactly.  Newton isn't so well remembered because he got every detail right (his theory of gravity for instance is pretty outdated) but because he got so much else right and was so astonishingly ahead of his time.

Darwin's theory was pretty elegant in how simple it was and how intuitive it is.  He was grasping for straws in terms of some of the evolutionary mechanisms (like genes), but everyone else was too at the time.  The technology simply wasn't there.  Mendel didn't fully understand what they were either, at least as we understand genes now.  He had no idea what DNA was.

As time has gone on and with the help of other scientists, evolution has turned into the fundamental unifying theory in biology.  Its everywhere you look.  Its withstood just about every major test that's been thrown at it, and if it didn't it was more because the model we were using for evolution at the time was bad rather than the theory itself.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

halogamer1989 on 12 February 2009
akuma587 said:
Jackson50 said:
Darwin was the catalyst for the development of modern evolutionary theory, which I agree with, but he was wrong on many things. Of course, that is to be expected. For instance, although he existed at the same time as Mendel, he was unaware of Mendel's work and the idea of genetic drift.

Exactly.  Newton isn't so well remembered because he got every detail right (his theory of gravity for instance is pretty outdated) but because he got so much else right and was so astonishingly ahead of his time.

Darwin's theory was pretty elegant in how simple it was and how intuitive it is.  He was grasping for straws in terms of some of the evolutionary mechanisms (like genes), but everyone else was too at the time.  The technology simply wasn't there.  Mendel didn't fully understand what they were either, at least as we understand genes now.  He had no idea what DNA was.

As time has gone on and with the help of other scientists, evolution has turned into the fundamental unifying theory in biology.  Its everywhere you look.  Its withstood just about every major test that's been thrown at it, and if it didn't it was more because the model we were using for evolution at the time was bad rather than the theory itself.

 

I could activate inactive genes in an emu and turn it into a veloceraptor like creature but that does not mean velociraptors evolved from emus.  What about the ancient Ice Age pyramids with grey alien research, Von Daniken, etc. ;)