Creation or Evolution: The Statistics!!!

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the above idea is as much a misunderstanding - or a deliberate misstatement - of what the theory of evolution says as is the idea that it teaches that humans evolved from apes.

I really wish that people who want to refute evolution would have at least a passing understanding of what that theory actually says.

I'm sorry if that sounds intolerant, but I've taken the time to read all the sides of the argument and I really don't have the inclination to try to have a serious discussion with someone who obviously hasn't taken the time to do so.

And that's one (and only one of many) of the reasons why I cannot take creationsim seriously. Many, if not most, of the advocates of creationism that I have read either have not studied evolution enough to know what they are arguing against, or else they deliberately misstate what the theory teaches and take information out of context in order to bolster their own arguments. If they had serious and valid arguments against evolution, they wouldn't have to do that.

The genetic variation in code between the closest primate and Man is considered 2-7% (the Chimpanzee). The genetic variation between Chimpanzee and Gorilla is between 3-10%. Wherein the genetic variation between all of mankind is less than .03%.

Man may have evolved along with primates, but was never kin to one.

No one could say that Racoons are related to Apes, yet racoons have hands (four fingers and an opposable thumb). The apes have hands, or do they? They have four feet that resemble human hands but all four are proportionate to each other, and disproportionate to the hands of man. Yet the racoons front paws are similarly proportionate to the human hand.

Thirty years ago, Neandrathal man was considered a forebare of modern man. Now he is considered a dead end (in other words that version of homosapien did not take, and died off).

Why don't apes have sweat glands in their epidermus? But Humans and horses do? Why does no other mamals have this heat reducing system? Why does man have color vision but apes and horses don't (cats do, and some other animals). Why is it that a pigs heart can sustain a man's life, but an ape's heart cannot? Why is it that a pig's skin can be used to graft over burned human flesh but an ape's cannot?

Don't get me wrong, I think evolution goes hand in hand with creation, or intelligent design. I also think Man came up on his own, and is not an ape offshoot.

Can Apes obtain sentience? Perhaps they already have. But we are not from the same tree, neither are we and cetaceans.

my thoughts

v/r

Q

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by littlemissattitude

I really wish that people who want to refute evolution would have at least a passing understanding of what that theory actually says.

no disrespect, i am glad you have it all figured out & feel so much more intelligent, though i doubt your passing understanding of the theories &/or evidence supercedes mine.

exactly what breed of ape do you belong to?
or do you prefer the porky pig theory for your great grand parents?

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Or is there? Galaxies show the same signature as Solar systems...Why can't we see the universe showing the same signature as the galaxies and solar systems? Maybe we're too far away to see the reality of the universe.

In otherwords...we just don't know.

my thoughts

v/r

Q

i enjoyed your recent posts on this Q, especially the questions.

[Silverbackman]

Originally Posted by Bandit

i have never met anyone in my life who believes that.
like you know exactly how old the earth is?

You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Silverbackman

You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old.

thanks for that info & at least you are honest.
i dont care how old or young the earth is.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Silverbackman

You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old.

Actually there is no proof of the age of Earth. Speculation, yes. Carbon dating is proven to be faulty.

There is no proof of anything. The fossils we find? We can't carbon date. We find fossilized remains next to perfectly preserved specimens in peat bogs.

Q

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Bandit

What strikes me as curious is this; creation, specifically the God of the bible, has obliterated all comers since conception and explains an incredible amount of data with ONE ENTITY -the bible-( that would be God). Yet evolutionists attack it like it was pulled from the rear of an orangutan last week, brushed down, and pegged up as Religion with a capital R.

To objectively examine the masses of evidence and state that Almighty God is not the best explanation we have leaves me incredulous.

I'm flattered by your willingness to plagiarise my work.

Out of curiosity, what evidence is there for your Almighty God?

What do your theories (if they can be called anything more than idle conjecture) explain exactly?

Originally Posted by Bandit

All the dead bones on the planet have not proven evolution.

What a curious statement.

Originally Posted by Bandit

The fact that someone can significantly alter the body plan of species does not prove macro-evolution and it does not refute the God of creation.

Which god are we talking about again?

Originally Posted by Bandit

It seems to me that macro-evolution requires LOTS of NEW information and NEW genes that make NEW proteins that are found in NEW organs, systems & blah blah blah.

You've lost me.

Originally Posted by Bandit

The evolution theories lacks severe evidence.

What is severe evidence Bandit?

Originally Posted by Bandit

When a lobster gives birth to a mouse, let me know.

I'll keep you posted.

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Actually there is no proof of the age of Earth. Speculation, yes. Carbon dating is proven to be faulty.

There is no proof of anything. The fossils we find? We can't carbon date. We find fossilized remains next to perfectly preserved specimens in peat bogs.

Q

Can you provide some reading material that discredits Carbon dating?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

Can you provide some reading material that discredits Carbon dating?

You got it.

http://www.allsands.com/Science/carb...g-accuracy.htm

v/r

Q

[brucegdc]

I think Quahom is talking about the limits of carbon dating...not that it's wholely unreliable.. fossils are (presumably) millions of years old. Carbon dating works only up to about 50,000 years, and on organic material.

http://id-archserve.ucsb.edu/Anth3/C...on_Dating.html

[Jaiket]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

You got it.

Thank you.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Jaiket

[/font][/size][/color]

[font=Verdana]I'll keep you posted.

are you from the pig side or the ape side of humans? or something different.

do keep me posted

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by brucegdc

I think Quahom is talking about the limits of carbon dating...not that it's wholely unreliable.. fossils are (presumably) millions of years old. Carbon dating works only up to about 50,000 years, and on organic material.

http://id-archserve.ucsb.edu/Anth3/C...on_Dating.html

Agreed.

[I am free]

Originally Posted by Bandit

are you from the pig side or the ape side of humans? or something different.

do keep me posted

I am not sure what you mean by this. Is the idea of men and apes evolving from common ancestors repulsive to you?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by I am free

I am not sure what you mean by this. Is the idea of men and apes evolving from common ancestors repulsive to you?

You can not prove it happened.