GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2012, 20:50   #81
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
This is not proof of evolution. If species change due to inherited traits the variability is already contained within their gene pool.
Yes it is evolution. Ask any biologist or geneticist. As for thing already being contained within a gene pool, considering all life is composed of four nucleotides, that claim could be made about almost any genetic change.
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:51   #82
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,468


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarge1400 View Post
So the laws of physics have changed too?
Oh yes, we established that when we were informed that rain didn't happen until the flood...

__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:52   #83
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
Well, you said it AM. It is a change over generations....tens, hundreds, thousands of generations. And as such by the very definition of evolution it happens too slowly to witness it happening. That is why it is nigh impossible to be proven.
Except it has been. It has been observed, and what happens over tens, hundreds, thousands of generations also happens over 2 or 3 at a smaller scale and all those changes can be and have been observed. I'll ask again, what other proof could you possibly want?
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:55   #84
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,468


Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenDrake View Post
I wonder what Vic's explanation of the light from stars is? I mean the light that has been traveling at the speed of light for billions of years to reach us....
It is a test of faith, you see. God created the light as if it were already in transit knowing we would discover this and that it would give us pause. If you mentally block out this information from your conscious mind and instead choose to blindly believe an arcane text then you pass and you get to go to heavan.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 02-21-2012 at 20:55..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:55   #85
Animal Mother
Not Enough Gun
 
Animal Mother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,651
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
I was taught out of those books in school. I was shown the fake embryonic drawings and led to believe that they were authentic even though the academic world had discovered they were fakes many years before. The fakes really supported the theory of evolution so they retained them for use in textbooks.
What textbook was this?
Quote:
Do you believe everything you read?
Apparently you do, as long as it fits your preconceived beliefs.
Quote:
Just because it is expected that you fit your "evidence" into the framework of the evolutionary theory doesn't make the theory valid.
If you have evidence to offer that disproves evolutionary theory, please do so.
Quote:
One example is the persistance of soft tissue in T Rex bones. Soft tissue means proteins and proteins are chemically active. The scientist who discovered soft tissue in T Rex bones still believes it to be 70 million years old. This is impossible. Proteins cannot exist that long without being degraded.
On what basis do you make the claims that proteins were discovered, that they were from the original animal, and that protein can't exist for 70 million years? Was it divine revelation?
__________________
"Pain, or damage, don't end the world. Or despair. Or beatin's. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you've got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man, and give some back."
Animal Mother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:56   #86
Woofie
CLM Number 293
Disirregardless
 
Woofie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Here
Posts: 10,245
Send a message via AIM to Woofie
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
Haven't you noticed that science is unable to provide misssing links?
.
You're referring to this argument.

http://www.myvidster.com/video/31685...lution_Debate_
__________________
"Turns oit i had irrisputable proof i was out of the country" youngdocglock

"I don't need to figure probabilities, and I don't need facts." JBnTx

"Maybe they should drink like Woofie and come up with pure brilliance." OXCOPS

"Woofie is the only smart one around here." Photoman642
Woofie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 20:57   #87
GreenDrake
Rip Lips
 
GreenDrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 7,806
The horse is standing at the lake....he is not thirsty. In fact, he is dead....but we shall continue to club him just in case.
__________________
"Can you FLY, Bobby?"
P229 EDC
GreenDrake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 21:03   #88
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,468


Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
What textbook was this?
He is referring to Haeckel's drawings that have been widely discredited and were in continued use in textbooks long after they were proven to be false. I do believe it has been quite sometime since they were finally deleted, though.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 21:22   #89
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarge1400 View Post
So the laws of physics have changed too?
The river would have had to flow uphill until it eroded the river bed low enough to flow downhill. The laws of physics didn't change. Just an observation about the river where it starts and where it flows to in the Grand Canyon. I seriously doubt that the water flowed uphill. That is just the way the topography of the Grand Canyon is at present.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 21:27   #90
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
What textbook was this?
Apparently you do, as long as it fits your preconceived beliefs.
If you have evidence to offer that disproves evolutionary theory, please do so.
On what basis do you make the claims that proteins were discovered, that they were from the original animal, and that protein can't exist for 70 million years? Was it divine revelation?
I bought in to the theory of evolution as it was presented in a way that did not disclose its flaws. I even became a Christian before I began to question the Theory of evolution.
So I am a converted evolutionist and I love science. What is your excuse for having preconceived beliefs? BTW I posted the link to one of the stories about the soft tissue in the T Rex bone.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 21:39   #91
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
He is referring to Haeckel's drawings that have been widely discredited and were in continued use in textbooks long after they were proven to be false. I do believe it has been quite sometime since they were finally deleted, though.
You are correct, I am old, but the drawings were dis proven long before my textbook was printed. Why do you suppose such obvious fakes were employed to teach evolution?
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Vic Hays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 21:45   #92
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,468


Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
You are correct, I am old, but the drawings were dis proven long before my textbook was printed. Why do you suppose such obvious fakes were employed to teach evolution?
Lazy textbook editors, no reason to assume nefarious motives (other than Haeckel's self serving one).
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 02-21-2012 at 21:47..
Geko45 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 22:04   #93
Sarge1400
Senior Member
 
Sarge1400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
The river would have had to flow uphill until it eroded the river bed low enough to flow downhill. The laws of physics didn't change. Just an observation about the river where it starts and where it flows to in the Grand Canyon. I seriously doubt that the water flowed uphill. That is just the way the topography of the Grand Canyon is at present.
Ah, I understand what you meant now. Thanks for the clarification.
Sarge1400 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 23:36   #94
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Lazy textbook editors, no reason to assume nefarious motives (other than Haeckel's self serving one).
There is just not much evidence to prove evolution. Evolution is rather a philosophy that they fit the facts into.

I am an inventor and I look for anomalies. Often an anomaly can be useful and leads to a better understanding if the truth is found out about it. When an anomaly is found the evolutionists disregard it because it doesn't fit their model.
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Last edited by Vic Hays; 02-21-2012 at 23:38..
Vic Hays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2012, 23:42   #95
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,957
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
I was taught out of those books in school. I was shown the fake embryonic drawings and led to believe that they were authentic even though the academic world had discovered they were fakes many years before. The fakes really supported the theory of evolution so they retained them for use in textbooks.
There really isn't evidence that Haeckel was intending to commit fraud, more likely sloppy. In the first edition of his book 3 different embryos were illustrated with the same wood cut. When attention was called to this he admitted the error and corrected it. The book went through 5 editions with the illustrations becoming more refined along the way. If people were to look at the 5th or even 4th edition it would be clear that there was no intent to defraud. More detail than most are likely to care about can be found in Robert J. Richards book, The Tragic Sense of Life: Ernst Haeckel and the Struggle over Evolution. Here is a PDF containing much of the history of the illustrations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
One example is the persistance of soft tissue in T Rex bones. Soft tissue means proteins and proteins are chemically active. The scientist who discovered soft tissue in T Rex bones still believes it to be 70 million years old. This is impossible. Proteins cannot exist that long without being degraded.
What is the basis of your claim that it is impossible? Paleontologists believe that this suggests that there is still much that we don't know about decay.

Mary Schweitzer, the scientist in the middle of this, is a self-described complete and total Christian and does not believe that it suggests a young-earth. In fact, referring to young-earth Creationists for a story with Smithsonian Magazine she said, "they treat you really bad... they twist your words and they manipulate your data."

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 00:04   #96
427
 
427's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: KUMSC
Posts: 7,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
There is just not much evidence to prove evolution. Evolution is rather a philosophy that they fit the facts into.

I am an inventor and I look for anomalies. Often an anomaly can be useful and leads to a better understanding if the truth is found out about it. When an anomaly is found the evolutionists disregard it because it doesn't fit their model.
It seems that your version of creationism is a philosophy that you try to make your facts fit.

Despite the evolutionary evidence in our very bodies of vestigial organs and behaviors, your best explanation is that its because of damaged/missing genetic information. Then, you claim that rivers flowed uphill, yet physics hasn't changed at all. Then you say that you doubt that it flowed uphill and its just because of the topography. Why? Was it because water doesn't flow uphill didn't make sense?

It also never rained until the flood.

I'm sorry, but it's getting more an more difficult to take you seriously. I do look forward to your posts, though!
__________________
Death twitches my ear. "Live," he says, "I am coming."
Virgil, Minor Poems

Enjoy yourself. It's later than you think.
427 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 00:22   #97
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,957
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
There is just not much evidence to prove evolution.
Evolution is among the best supported theories in science. The fossil record alone demonstrates life evolving beyond a reasonable doubt. Add to that the DNA, embryonic, microbiology and biogeography and it is almost impossible to imagine that "life evolved" will ever be overturned. Are there current understandings in evolutionary biology that will be discarded, or refined (perhaps current study of hox genes will demonstrate that change can occur faster than generally thought)? Almost certainly. "Live evolved" being overturned? Almost certainly not.

Your earlier mention that science has not provided missing links demonstrates that you don't have even a basic understanding of evolution. Missing links would suggest that evolution is progressing up rungs on a ladder. A basic understanding of evolution and speciation would make it clear that it is branching, like a bush, not linear like rungs up a ladder.

Even if evolution progressed like rungs up a ladder (which it doesn't, I mentioned that, right?) any provided missing link would raise twice as many questions as it would answer. You want a missing link between species 1 and species 2. Species 1.5 is offered up, then 2 questions arise. Well, then where is species 1.25 (between 1 and 1.5) and species 1.75 (between 1.5 and 2).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic Hays View Post
Evolution is rather a philosophy that they fit the facts into.
Do you actually read any scientific texts written by researchers in their field of study, or just accept the abuses of science spoon-fed by Creationist sites/organizations?

It just strikes me a bit odd that you can ignore the fossil, DNA, embryological, cellular and biogeographical evidence for evolution and at the same time think that it "makes sense" that prior to 2500 BC man was living for hundreds of years and "might gene splice to grow food and produce animals for warfare. This would be a good reason for the dinosaurs to be left off the Ark." because after all "the antediluvians lived hundreds of years and were probably more advanced scientifically than we are today" without a bit of evidence to support this. It just appears that evidence isn't that important to you.

-ArtificialGrape
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 00:35   #98
Roering
Sorting nuts
 
Roering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Animal Mother View Post
Except it has been. It has been observed, and what happens over tens, hundreds, thousands of generations also happens over 2 or 3 at a smaller scale and all those changes can be and have been observed. I'll ask again, what other proof could you possibly want?
I want to see a single celled amoeba come into existence out of nothing and when it reaches adulthood grow arms, legs, a tail, teeth, and fur. Then as it gets older I want to see it develop higher brain functions including some form of ability to communicate with other single celled amoeba's through the use of body language or sound. If I could witness all this I'd say you have proof of evolution. If not, then the best you have is a theory.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
Warranty voiding

Never buy vegan tacos from a chick with longer armpit hair than yourself. - Woofie

Last edited by Roering; 02-22-2012 at 00:37..
Roering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 00:43   #99
Vic Hays
Senior Member
 
Vic Hays's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: My home is in heaven
Posts: 11,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by 427 View Post
Then, you claim that rivers flowed uphill, yet physics hasn't changed at all. Then you say that you doubt that it flowed uphill and its just because of the topography. Why? Was it because water doesn't flow uphill didn't make sense?
Check out The River that Flowed Uphill

http://www.forumterrace.com/Question...%20Formed.html

" Every year, vast multitudes visit the Grand Canyon. The grandness of this chasm invokes wonder and awe in all who behold it. It stretches for over 270 miles through the Colorado Plateau. The multi-colored layers of the canyon walls are visible from great distances as one’s eyes move from the winding river bed to the flat plateaus.
From an early age, every American child learns about this great national landmark. In science textbooks, the Grand Canyon is used as “Exhibit A” for evolution: uniformity and billions of years’ change. Evolutionists believe it originated by way of gradualism. The layers of the canyon were laid down one particle at a time over billions of years. A river began to run through the area eroding part of it away. The whole area of the canyon slowly uplifted over 70 million years while the river continued to slowly cut through the rock layers to form the Grand Canyon.
At first, the theory of gradualism is hard to believe when you consider that the Colorado River is cut over a mile into the earth and at some places the canyon is miles and miles wide. The source of the river is found about twelve thousand feet up in the Rocky Mountains of western Colorado. The elevation of the head of the Grand Canyon is about 3000 feet. The surrounding rim of the Canyon is 8000 feet high. Normally, a water takes that course of least resistance and by no means does it flow up hill when there is a lower elevation in which it can flow. How can a river travel almost a mile up hill for 70 million years and carve out a canyon one particle at a time? The truth is: it cannot!
If the Grand Canyon was created by gradual erosion over millions of years, where is all the river sediment? We are talking about 70 million years of sediment. Before the Glen Canyon Dam was erected on the Colorado River it would carry an average of a half a million tons of sediment per day. When you do the math for that kind of erosion rate, the river should have eroded a layer more than five miles thick off the entire drainage area. So, where did all the sediment go?
On the other hand, if the Grand Canyon was not formed by uplift and gradual river erosion over 70 million years, just how did it form? There is another theory. It is far older than the evolutionary theory of gradualism. It is the theory called catastrophism. According to this theory, the Grand Canyon was formed by a massive amount of water moving across this area over a much shorter period of time and carving out the canyon within a matter of years or decades and not millions of years. This view is actually contained in the legends of the Havasupai Indians, who live today in villages within Grand Canyon. The Havasupai claim, according to the traditions that have handed down from generation to generation that the Canyon was formed just after the entire world was covered by a great flood. This global flood story is just one of 270 such stories found around the globe."
__________________
Vic Hays

John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Last edited by Vic Hays; 02-22-2012 at 00:54..
Vic Hays is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2012, 01:06   #100
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,957
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
I want to see a single celled amoeba come into existence out of nothing and when it reaches adulthood grow arms, legs, a tail, teeth, and fur. Then as it gets older I want to see it develop higher brain functions including some form of ability to communicate with other single celled amoeba's through the use of body language or sound. If I could witness all this I'd say you have proof of evolution. If not, then the best you have is a theory.
Yes, that is exactly how evolution works, and not at all a strawman

How about you show me where the Bible clearly explains how the combustion engine works? Until then the best you have is a book of mythology written by a bunch of sand-strewn men who would have thought the wheelbarrow was pretty cool technology.

-ArtificialGrape

BTW, you do know that the Pope allows Evolution Lite, don't you?
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 15:36.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,140
358 Members
782 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31