when I caught measles in grade school, then becamw immune, did I evolve
right there on the spot?
LOL
MY POINT about skyscrapers, or mabe a B2 BOMBER, is that someone
designed it, it didnt make itself. can u give me that?
If so, then any single cell lifeform , which is far more complicated,
was an accident? a cooincidence? OK.

Fedman: "fitnessfanatic insects and viruses do not evolve, they mutate,
there is a difference"

Mutation and evolution are almost the same thing. When a mutation
occurs, depending on whether it's benificial or not to the organism it
changes the circumstances of the survival of it's self and possibility
of have more offspring. Say a cat developes a stripe coat of fur caused
by a mutation, and this new stripe coat helps in staying camoflagued
while hunting, this is a benefit. That mutation cause the cat to evolve
and eventually that cat will have great, great, great x100,000
grandchildern that are tigers. That's evolution in a nutshell.

ok then.

i think you should thrw that theory in the back of my hearse with the
rest of the dead. LOL. COULDENT RESIST THAT ONE, SORRY. (PICTURE OF A
HORSE DRAWN HEARSE.)

We all know the party line, fitness but thank you for playing.
mabe we can all learn something.

just a thought, when i go to the Gym and work out, im shooting for the
6 pack abs, fat bicep muscles, ect. if i succeed have I evolved into
somethig else or improved what I already was? Will my great
grandchildern now have a better chance of six pack abs out of the
hopper?

Eveolution Ram is not something we normally see happening. I'm feeling
benevolent tonight so let me try this.
If God set up nature, as sort of a babysitter to us. Then nature
would, according to God's will, allow us to change in some way, when it
became necessary for our survival. So do you know anyone that has had
three sets of teeth, two sets of baby teeth and then permanant ones? I
have. Anyway, let's say before we had electricity, or homes to live in,
or even a way to create and control fire that "nature" saw to it that we
got three sets of teeth to ensure that we could chew our uncooked foods
and use our teeth as tools to get to those foods. We not longer need
this, so how many people still have 3 sets of teeth? This is small
scale but not the only example just one to set your brain in motion.
Another thing to consider is that we were not the only species on this
planet, HOWEVER, we had enough DNA in common with these other species to
breed with with - which in itself brings changes in our own surviving
species.
Even if you don't agree that this has happened for the sake of
argument, can you see, understand, that eveolution is not something we
typically see happening. And the fact that written history on a
biological and physical level is only a very brief period in the age of
this planet can not give us proof of this eveolution. Hope you were
not too stressed over defending your position to see some logic in this
reply as I'm not attacking you (at the moment )

yup thats the party line there too.

Comparing [ (a) changes to an organism that occur during its lifetime to
(b) changes to a species that occur over many generations ] is
completely nonsensical. The first does not involve any change in the
individuals genome whatsoever, while the second usually (always?)
involves at least a change in how common (frequent) certain genes are in
the population. It can also involve new genes being introduced.

Fitnessfanatic is correct that we can *observe* changes in the
characteristics of a population (which imply changes in the frequency of
genes in that population) over generations. This *is* evolution of that
species, but does not prove that life originated through evolution.

thanks for the input.

The difference between Creationism and Evolution:
Creationism explain the WHY.
WHY there are humans on this earth? The answer to creationists is that
God was lonely and He created man to fill that emptiness. They take this
belief on faith. It gives them belief in spirit, a purpose to live and
it inspires them. Conversely one can say man, through blind faith, needs
God to give him purpose to live.

Evolution explains the HOW.
HOW humans came in to being on this earth? To evolution proponents that
answer is evolution. A graduate transition from chemicals interacting in
a pond of "goo" to, and through billions of years of evolution, the
present day plants and animals. Animals which are at a basic level are
walking breathing sacks of chemicals.
God is not nessarily in the equation. Those in scientific field are
interested in how the universe came into being in all of it's
complexities. Scientists can not believe on "blind faith" alone because
"blind faith" is not based on facts. Their purpose for living is to
explain the universe to prove God existance.

Fitness, very good. At one time it was thought that Aristotle, at
least philisophically, proved that there was a God. He became a child
of the church, until a well educated bishop actually read and understood
what Aristotle was saying. Very basically it was that it took some kind
of action on the part of some force to start the motion that actually
created the universe. In one recent explantion the author said, it was
like some force kicked a football into a motionless field which set off
a chain reaction like a big bang (both ideas were later developed by
different prominent figures "big bank theory" "cause and affect"
"thermodynamics") However, this could hardly be considered God.
Aristotle was quickly excommunicated from the church, his precious
papers were destroyed and we lost a great wealth of possible knowledge
and information due to this. Today, in this time, because so many
need, require or are simply comfortable with a religion, I think it's
necessary to somehow incorporate science and religion. Instead of
proving the existance of a god or gods, it would be to all our benefits
to get some basic agreement and understanding between the religious and
the scientific. It would be great to get poeple to accept that perhaps
their god(s) created a self sustaining world, capable of evolution in
order that it would survive without constent intervention from that
supreme being. This would allow all poeple to join forces and look to
broader scopes by combining all resources to future scientific
exploaration and understanding of our presence in this universe.
Wouldn't it be great to see the end of wars that are begun because of
cultural or belief oriented bias based on religion?

my position is that the scientists ARE running on blind faith. despite
the lack of fossils to prove thier claim, and despite the astronomical
odds, they continue to believe. Often there are hoaxes involved. I think
to accept creationism is to admit God, a leap thier not willing to
make. The theory of evolution itself has evolved over time also.
As i have stated before, anyone who is a believer in God should pray
about this. Thats what I did and I was led to change my opinion. not
blind faith, but good science led me to this conclusion. A lot of
scientists these days are jumping off the evolution bandwagon for
exactly the same reason. Just keep an open mind on this as I believe it
wont be long before all the various mutations of the evolutionary theory
will inevetably fold in the face of the facts available.

scientists are running on blind faith, and religion is gaining knowledge
based on scientific facts?

thats the most absurd thing ive ever heard...

whats so scientific and or actually provable about the idea that god
decided one day to throw some people on the earth? what about that
screams logic and probable?

the above statement by rambill is probably .. no definetly the most
effed up, confused , most balderdash statement ive ever read!

I believe both exist together. Also it is ONLY through my scientific
studies, that I can even bring truth that there is a God. There is/has
to be a medium. That is the only way to prove one way or another.

Also the number of atoms that were mentioned earlier, I believe is the
number in our galexy, not the universe. Huge difference. Actually,
according to the big picture,'the combining of the proteins in goo' is
not as rare as people orginally thought. Even if is it right about the
number being in our universe; has anyone heard of the multiverse? Also,
who was tring to say that they believe that life only exists on our
planet? And if they exist on other planets(mathamatics proves it), that
is alot of going aganist the odds using that number.Also everything is
brought by theroy before made fact, that is unless people just believe
what they have been told/taught or read. This logically brings me to
conclude that evolution and creationism goes 'Hand in Hand'.

>> my position is that the scientists ARE running on blind faith.

In any large collection of people, you will have some that 'run on blind
faith'. In any situation where the prevalent scientific dogma is
'taught as fact' in the schools, you will have some practicing scientist
who simply accept it as fact. But not all scientists are running on
blind faith, and most of the scientists i've talked to will *seriously
consider* a well reasoned & researched argument. No offense rambill,
but the anti-evolutionists rarely make such arguments, though they often
(through their own ignorance) believe that they are.

>> the lack of fossils to prove thier claim, and despite the astronomical odds, they continue to believe. Often there are hoaxes involved.

That calculation of odds you mention required arbitrary decisions,
estimations, assumptions on the part of the calculator. Why should a
serious scientist give it much consideration? A 'lack of fossils'
neither proves nor disproves much. Hoaxes happen in life, and also
neither prove nor disprove much.

>> I think to accept creationism is to admit God, a leap thier not willing to make.

There are *many* scientists (and simply thinking individuals) who accept
God, who accept Jesus as their savior, who have their religious practice
at the center of their lives, who 'believe in evolution'. They aren't
running scared, they aren't in denial, they simply think its the most
reasonable explanation we have.

>> The theory of evolution itself has evolved over time also.

Yes! And this is a strength! It will continue to evolve. Some
components of the theory of evolution are *very* well established, and
some components are less so. I take the fact that the theory of
evolution continues to evolve as evidence that the scientific process is
at least partly *working*.

massagetrade',

This post has been beaten to death.

It is WAYYYY beyond the confused statements, and small time two-bit
insults you've just posted.

If you had taken the time to read all 8 pages of messages on this
subject, I'm sure you would not have added this redundant message of
yours.

Not that you don't have the right to your own claim to redundant
statements!!! YOU DO!!! It's just that I feel for those who pick-up
their courage to participate in these debates, and lose all credibility
with a single 'half thought' contribution of 60 words.

The way this posting was launched with rambill79's affirmation:

­'... Is anyone religious enough to believe that we evolved from some
goo in a pond?'

anyone understood that it had been adequately answered in the very first
reply from Prussia:

'... hon ... you perhaps meant, theory of evolution by Darvin (Darwin)
and if I'm not mistaken he is not a God No? 8gRIN*


Prussia correctly pointed out the two misconceptions which rambill79
message conveyed:
1) She first points out the fact that the affirmation refers to
Darwin's theory of Evolution, keywords being 'theory', 'evolution',
and 'Darwin'.
'Theory' because anyone concerned, 'knows' that a scientific theory does
not have the value of scientific law, and that science belongs to the
domain of observed and verifiable facts; not DOGMA.
'evolution' because it just makes it more of a conversation between
adults, when compared to referring to it as 'goo'!!!
... And 'Darwin', because we're talking about the theory of evolution,
and in that context, Darwin belongs exclusively to the scientific
community.

2) Prussia goes on to clarify more facts, being that '...Darwin is not a
GOD', meaning and implying that Darwin is neither the Pope, a
Cardinal, a Bishop, a Mullah, a Rabbi, a Monk, or any other member of
the clergy, the church or any religious movement,

Therefore whether or not one agrees with his theory of evolution, it
will NEVER BE A MATTER OF 'BELIEVING' IN IT:
­'... Is anyone religious enough to believe that we evolved from some
‘goo’ in a pond?'

It was a 'misengineered' question to be polite, and Prussia answered it
fully in 20 words!!!

All other 7 & 7/8 pages have been written to address rambill79's
confused, and stubborn denial! On that note, let me assure you that
'JOSS' & 'Fitnessfanatic' are doing an excellent job of compassion. If
they don't succeed in having 'rambill79' get how confused and deep in
denial he is, no one will!!!
For the rest,it might make for interesting entertainment, but the
debate has long been closed.

Now, with respect to your confused and insult filled message
'massatrade', you seem to agree with rambill79 in your opening
statement, and yet totally disagree with him a few words later. Like
most who do, youappear to ague for the theory of evlolution for what it
is: 'a theory', on evolution; not a sceintific law, but a work in
progress. Which would mean you totally disagree with rambill79 rejection
of anything to do wiht the GOO thing!!! That's the confusion!

With respect to insult filled, you attack all scientists of being led by
'blind faith'.
I'm sure you know that in their capacity and role as scientists, they
have no committed or allegiance to the church, to religion, or to FAITH!
Maybe they do in their personal lives, like you and I, but not in their
professional lives.

To claim that they're all victims of 'blind faith' is to claim that they
are all incompetents and 'charlatans' in following the scientific
approach.
Unless you have proof and credible witnesses to support your very
serious claims, I for one must file your comment as
'confused-small-time-two-bit and gratuitous insults and attacks: most
'UNCHRISTIAN'!!!

The other thing you might do, is recognize that there is no possible
debate left to be had here, and move your capable and contributive
abilities to other posts where they might serve a purpose.

I saw just a bit of a south park episode where they were discussing
"evolution". My youngin at his tender age is already asking thanks to
that bit of south park. ROTFLMAO!! (he also thinks he is jewish)

I forgot to add the money trials went on not far from where we live. One
day i will drive lil britches up to see this bit of history!

Voil,

What a wonderful post! Your sincerity and directness is greatly
appreciated. I can see why someone would perceive this thread to be
closed, but i disagree. I look forward to discussing the points you
have raised in private email, and hope you give that the same amount of
attention as you have in this post.

I'm sure you are right that some of my statements are 'confused', but
that is one reason why we have these forums, to have conversations where
peoples confusion can be addressed.

One thing I'd like to publicly respond to is your suggestion that my
post was "insult filled", a claim you repeatedly made in your post. I
was surprised to read this, and concerned that I might have accidently
stated a direct insult to an actual person as a consequence of poor word
choice or mis-statement. I carefully re-read my post and the only place
I feel I might have been 'insulting' was the comment I made about the
poor arguments generally presented by 'anti-evolutionists', which I hope
rambill does not take personally.

Its clear, however, that your statement that my post was 'insult
filled' was based on a complete misunderstanding of my post.

>> To claim that they're all victims of 'blind faith' is
...
>> you attack all scientists of being led by 'blind faith'.

I said no such things. Why do you accuse me of saying things which I
didn't say?

So basically you accuse me of 'being insulting' because you believed
that I was accusing 'all' scientist of being 'led by blind faith' ?

I'll post more after discussing this in email.

Ok, I'll just check some other topics while I wait guys.