-
BG631 said...
because they branch off, it's just like how there are different types of dogs or fish or monkey, etc. . . The ones that were living in a certain area and surviving just fine, never had any reason to have to evolve. . . Others that might have wandered away (obviously over many many years, not like over night) had to come up with ways to survive, and there bodies naturally change and adapt over time. . .
Different locations cause different needs. . . .
-
JawJacker said...
What exactly, are the conditions, that would force a monkey to become a man? We seem to share the same atmosphere and climate changes now together just fine. Do they see a hot human woman and say "to hell with this monkey butt, I wanna piece of THAT, so I'm changing into a man." ??? Just wondering.
BG631
- 5 stars Rating: 81
518 votes total - Brad G
- (6310)
- 32 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
BigBlue4Life
- 3 stars Rating: 47
743 votes total - (3680)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 3 stars
-
Warmother51
- 5 stars Rating: 94
311 votes total - Eric Fulks
- (7704)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
BigBlue4Life
- 3 stars Rating: 47
743 votes total - (3680)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 3 stars
-
cat in the hat
- 5 stars Rating: 97
114 votes total - (259)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
cat in the hat said...
Evolution is a very interesting topic, and no one really knows for sure the degree to which it has influenced life over the history of time. I believe in evolution in terms of adaptation. But it doesn't happen as described in this thread. There isn't some unmet need that forces a fish to grow legs. That's not how evolution works. Evolution happens through random gene mutation. The vast majority of gene mutation isn't worth anything so it is not perpetuated. However, when a gene mutation provides an advantage it is replicated because the individual with the mutation survives and breeds. It's the natural selection of random gene mutations.
My problem is with how far some carry this process. For example, take the idea that man evolved from lower species. I can't say for sure that we didn't, but I have doubts about it. If you think about how evolution and natural selection work, I would think that statistically there would be other highly evolved species other than man if it were an evolutionary process. We are far and away the most intelligent and creative animal on earth. I would think over millions of years of evolution there would be others at least somewhat close to us.
Lets also look at the idea that all life started from simple cell animals created in some ooze that was struck by lighting. Then through the process of evolution higher life forms came into being. There are some basic issues with this that I'm just not comfortable with. For example, for any organism to survive it must be created with some basic functions. It must have the ability to consume and process energy, or eat, if you will. It must also have the ability to replicate or reproduce. This could be something as simple as cell division or some sort of sexual reproduction. Otherwise, its just an organism that lives very, very, briefly, then dies. I'm not sure it's reasonable to assume that these systems would automatically exist in some randomly created organism.
There are many, many similar questions that there are no good answers for. I just don't think evolution can explain as many things as some want it to. When we start talking about the origins of the universe and life, I'm not sure mans mind can grasp all of the possible scenarios. In other words, we are trying to explain something based on our limited scope of understanding. I think as time passes and our knowledge expands, some of today's theories will seem like child's play to the people who come after us. For example, I think the big bang theory is somewhat passe now. More sophisticated theories have taken its place based on knowledge we have today that was not available when it was developed. I just think at this point we can't even conceive of some of the possibilities. So I try to look at some of these things with a critical eye and healthy dose of skepticism.
-
cobbycobb said...
MMGW? Real, fake, or yet to be determined? I'm a skeptic. Perhaps one of the biggest skeptics and believe that it's nothing more than a boondogle ponsi scheme to rip off the wealthy nations and line the pockets of those in charge. Follow the money and look at who is invested heavily into the cap-and-trade companies and you'll see a plethora of Al Gore's and other officials. Many of the 'scientist' who support the theory are getting their funds from various governments to do their 'research' too.
What about the fact that NASA says that since 1998 the earth has not had warming?
-
cat in the hat said...
Evolution is a very interesting topic, and no one really knows for sure the degree to which it has influenced life over the history of time. I believe in evolution in terms of adaptation. But it doesn't happen as described in this thread. There isn't some unmet need that forces a fish to grow legs. That's not how evolution works. Evolution happens through random gene mutation. The vast majority of gene mutation isn't worth anything so it is not perpetuated. However, when a gene mutation provides an advantage it is replicated because the individual with the mutation survives and breeds. It's the natural selection of random gene mutations.
My problem is with how far some carry this process. For example, take the idea that man evolved from lower species. I can't say for sure that we didn't, but I have doubts about it. If you think about how evolution and natural selection work, I would think that statistically there would be other highly evolved species other than man if it were an evolutionary process. We are far and away the most intelligent and creative animal on earth. I would think over millions of years of evolution there would be others at least somewhat close to us.
Lets also look at the idea that all life started from simple cell animals created in some ooze that was struck by lighting. Then through the process of evolution higher life forms came into being. There are some basic issues with this that I'm just not comfortable with. For example, for any organism to survive it must be created with some basic functions. It must have the ability to consume and process energy, or eat, if you will. It must also have the ability to replicate or reproduce. This could be something as simple as cell division or some sort of sexual reproduction. Otherwise, its just an organism that lives very, very, briefly, then dies. I'm not sure it's reasonable to assume that these systems would automatically exist in some randomly created organism.
There are many, many similar questions that there are no good answers for. I just don't think evolution can explain as many things as some want it to. When we start talking about the origins of the universe and life, I'm not sure mans mind can grasp all of the possible scenarios. In other words, we are trying to explain something based on our limited scope of understanding. I think as time passes and our knowledge expands, some of today's theories will seem like child's play to the people who come after us. For example, I think the big bang theory is somewhat passe now. More sophisticated theories have taken its place based on knowledge we have today that was not available when it was developed. I just think at this point we can't even conceive of some of the possibilities. So I try to look at some of these things with a critical eye and healthy dose of skepticism.
BG631
- 5 stars Rating: 81
518 votes total - Brad G
- (6310)
- 32 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
ukwriter said...
The last ten years recorded the highest temperatures EVER. In fact, the earth has been warming since the Industrial Revolution and has increased rapidly with the arrival of vehicles. Cobby, why don't you really do some sound research into the idea and tell us what you find.
This post was edited by Deeeefense on 6/28/2011 at 12:34 PM
"Ignorance is constricted awareness" - Deepak Chopra
-
JawJacker said...
Why don't YOU do some sound research? There has been a "cooling" over the past decade.
How does it feel to be bass-ackwards?
This post was edited by cardkilla on 6/28/2011 at 2:32 PM
NASA - Despite Subtle Differences, Global Temperature Records in Close Agreement
Climate data multiple institutions supports NASA's findings: 2010 ties 2005 as the warmest year in the 131-year instrumental record.
www.nasa.gov -
BigBlue4Life said...
Are you thick in the head? You make this point 100 times a day and I've already answered it several times before. Can you not read? Ok. ONE MORE TIME. Watch and read carefully as it's the last time..... God it's like explaining something to a child. Climate changes slowly over years and years. This change has happened in a time range and degree that's unprecedented. It also "coincidentally" has happened during mans usage of fossil fuels.
cat in the hat
- 5 stars Rating: 97
114 votes total - (259)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
cat in the hat said...
Actually, the articles that I have read on the subject say scientists believe that during a warming cycle, temperatures can change very rapidly, perhaps over 2 or 3 decades, while cooling cycles leading to an ice age happen over very long periods of time. So a hot earth could very easily happen in a single lifetime, but an ice age would take much longer than a single life time.
-
cat in the hat
- 5 stars Rating: 97
114 votes total - (259)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
BigTyrone said...
How anyone could claim that climate change is a myth after the last 10 years is just beyond me. Arguing humanity's impact is one thing, but to claim it's not even happening? Seriously? This rant is directed towards those who would deny climate change is happening at all, not arguing the cause.
Look at ocean temperatures rising (the biggest indicator to me), look at average air temperatures, look at weather patterns, look at the increasingly intense / damaging series of weather incidents. None of the floods / tsunamis / earthquakes / hurricanes / tornado systems by themselves would be that alarming (beyond the immediate impact), but anyone who doesn't see a pattern there has already decided not to see a pattern.
And contrary to popular belief, climate change isn't significantly disputed in scientific circles. There are a few guys who probably legitimately believe everyone else is wrong, and there are a few guys (maybe a lot by now) who are bankrolled by special interest groups who disagree with the incredibly large majority.
-
cardkilla said...
Really? This is from NASA.May wanna check your facts. 4 different scientific readings on global temperatures show similar increases. First link is to the PDF on global temperatures.
This post was edited by JawJacker on 6/28/2011 at 11:55 PM
Cooler Earth: The Ice Age is coming... don't panic! | Mail Online
While climate change alarmists insist we are heading for meltdown, the truth is that the world has actually been getting cooler in recent years.
www.dailymail.co.uk
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Boards ▾
- Pages: 1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | Refresh
Global Warming/Climate Change