Evolution vs. Creation

Posted in the Offbeat Forum

Read

85,560 Comments

Add to my Tracker

More Offbeat Discussions »

Comments (Page 1,329)

Showing posts 26,561 - 26,580 of85,560

< prev page

next page >

Go to last page| Jump to page:

KittenKoder “I Am No One Else” Level 6 Since: Apr 12 19,231 Seattle	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27418 May 21, 2012 The Nerd wrote: <quoted text> I don't know about all of this, the other atheist above you says they are different species. Which one of you guys are right? Atheists are not scientists, so ... the one that is right is the one that scientific evidence supports.
DanFromSmithvill e “You know me the snakebite kiss” Level 8 Since: Jan 11 8,548 Devil's grip, the Iron Fist	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27419 May 21, 2012 Species are normally separated by a barrier or barriers to interbreeding. These are not just confined to anatomical barriers, but also ecological, biochemical, immunological, geographical and temporal and more I probably haven't thought of. Even species that are physically able to breed together do not normally have an interest to. There are chemical, behavioral and visual cues that various species use to signify interest in or ability to mate. So by and large, the majority of species cannot interbreed.
The Nerd Level 2 Since: May 12 245 Smyrna, GA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27420 May 21, 2012 DanFromSmithville wrote: <quoted text>I don't think what I said reiterates your point. Unless I am mistaken, you are trying to make it sound like it is a common occurrence in nature and it is not. I wasn't trying to make it seem that way and if that's what you took from my point then that's my bad for not elaborating further. My point was a simplistic one, referencing the fact that it is not at all impossible for 2 distinct species to reproduce fertile offspring. which species is held in captivity or whatever is irrelevant.
The Nerd Level 2 Since: May 12 245 Smyrna, GA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27421 May 21, 2012 KittenKoder wrote: <quoted text> Atheists are not scientists, so ... the one that is right is the one that scientific evidence supports. Is not, Brian Cox a scientist and an atheist?
KittenKoder “I Am No One Else” Level 6 Since: Apr 12 19,231 Seattle	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27422 May 21, 2012 The Nerd wrote: <quoted text> Is not, Brian Cox a scientist and an atheist? Yes, your point? You are treating the two as synonyms, and they are not. Would you be surprised to know that a majority of scientists are christian? Many evolutionary biologists are christian, some are even Muslim, there are a lot of Jewish as well. But there are a lot of people on the planet, the vast majority of all types of beliefs, that are not. The difference in atheists is that instead of reading the same scripture over and over again, we learn science more often, understand scientific knowledge does not make you a scientist, it just makes you smart.
Langoliers Since: Apr 12 4,126 Location hidden	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27423 May 21, 2012 KittenKoder wrote: <quoted text>Atheists are not scientists, so ... the one that is right is the one that scientific evidence supports. Only about 2 percent of these scientists identified as evangelical Christians. Far more reported themselves as Jewish, but defined more by tradition than theistic belief. She writes that "it is virtually impossible to find a group of Americans who do not believe in God," but she concedes that only 36 percent of these elite scientists "have some form of a belief in God." That would seem to leave 64 percent without any such belief. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/growing-number...
Maccoat Erie, PA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27424 May 21, 2012 All atheists beleive in evolution, but not all who beleive in evolution are atheists.
KittenKoder “I Am No One Else” Level 6 Since: Apr 12 19,231 Seattle	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27425 May 21, 2012 Langoliers wrote: <quoted text> Only about 2 percent of these scientists identified as evangelical Christians. Far more reported themselves as Jewish, but defined more by tradition than theistic belief. She writes that "it is virtually impossible to find a group of Americans who do not believe in God," but she concedes that only 36 percent of these elite scientists "have some form of a belief in God." That would seem to leave 64 percent without any such belief. http://www.opposingviews.com/i/growing-number... So to you, only evangelicals are christian? That's pretty bigoted of you.

Aura Mytha “Aura , Savior of the Universe!” Level 7 Since: Dec 10 16,904 Location hidden	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27427 May 21, 2012 thewordofme wrote: <quoted text> So you are trying to say that Neanderthals are nothing but humans that grew up in a different neighborhood?? Did I say that... or is that what YOU said? I said Neanderthals are a extinct race of human beings that passed a little bit of what they were into non African Homo Sapiens Sapiens. A tiny bit even 1-4%
Nuggin Level 7 Since: Sep 07 20,923 Winnetka, CA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27428 May 21, 2012 The Nerd wrote: <quoted text> How does Genesis contradict the existence of hominids? Because even the most recent hominid fossils are older than 6,000 years. Further, the DNA shared between hominid groups and the genetic diversity of humans demonstrates that the idea of "one man and one woman who is genetically identical to the man" is not the basis for our gene pool. Where did you get the idea that they do? Tools, fire, trade, clothing, culture, language... these are not things you associate with non-human groups. How many whales or octopus's have you seen engage in abstract thought, create a musical symphony, plant flowers on a beautiful day, decorate homes to their specification, put in place on walls the beauty of thought provoking art. Create thought-provoking art, Engage in complex mathematics, make the choice by reason to go against "inherent personality" and "basic instincts". Let's take your claims one at a time. Music - Whales REGULARLY engage. Plant flowers - This is an activity that can not occur aquatically, not without the assistance of thumbs. Additionally, it would serve no purpose. This does not equate to "intellect". In fact ANTS maintain gardens and no one is claiming that they are intellectual. Decorate homes - Whales don't live in homes, however octopi do create dens which they do decorate. Art - Octopi and squid are regularly seen engaging in body morphology and light pattern manipulation producing extraordinary displays. In fact, any given octopus can out perform any given human in these fields every time. So, basically, you've got nothing. Be completely aware of mortality and reason what happens after one dies. How many whales have you seen engage in any of these complex cognitive abilities? Whales are perfectly aware of mortality and have a better understanding than you do about what happens after death. After all, you believe a Jewish Wizard collects you and brings you to a city of clouds after you die. That's just foolish. Why can't God's Image be a non-physical representation? Because the Bible doesn't say non-physical. you can't have it both ways. It can't be literally the word of God AND not literally the word of god. Either/or
Aura Mytha “Aura , Savior of the Universe!” Level 7 Since: Dec 10 16,904 Location hidden	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27429 May 21, 2012 thewordofme wrote: <quoted text> "Researchers have also studied ancient DNA from anatomically modern Homo sapiens from Europe dating to the same time period as the Neanderthals. Material from two Paglicci Cave, Italy individuals, dated to 23,000 and 25,000 years old, was sequenced. The Paglicci Homo sapiensmtDNA sequences were different from all Neanderthal mtDNA sequences but were within the range of variation for modern human mtDNA sequences (Caramelli et al. 2003). Mitochondrial DNA from the Paglicci specimens as well as other ancient humans fit within the range of modern humans, but the Neanderthals remain consistently genetically distinct. This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens were not very different genetically from current modern humans, but were still different from Neanderthals. Though this evidence does not disprove the idea of Neanderthal and modern human admixture, it shows that moderns and Neanderthals did not have more genetic similarities during the Pleistocene that were subsequently lost. If interbreeding did occur, Neanderthal mtDNA sequences could have been lost due to genetic drift. After successfully sequencing large amounts of DNA and devising strategies to deal with potential contamination, a team led by Svante Pääbo from the Max Planck Institute, reported the first complete mtDNA sequence for a Neanderthal (Green et al. 2008). The 0.3 gram sample was taken from a 38,000 year old Neanderthal from Vindija Cave, Croatia. Complete Neanderthal mtDNA sequences give researchers more information about the relationship between modern humans and Neanderthals, as well as information about Neanderthal population size. The complete mtDNA sequence shows that Neanderthals were outside the range of modern human mtDNA variation. Researchers compared the mtDNA sequence with that of modern humans. They compared sequence changes that resulted in nonsynonymous amino acid changes with synonymous changes. They found a larger number of nonsynonymous changes in the Neanderthal lineage, possibly implying that Neanderthals had a small population size with weaker purifying selection (Green et al. 2008). Again showing that humans and neanderthals were not the same genetically. This is recent work on the part of the Smithsonian...they are interpreting Svante's work. Again, you are not arguing with me, you are arguing with the scientists behind this work You keep citing Mitochondrial DNA, of course the mother ONLY carries that and passes it through her , but the father passes genes too. The fact that we carry no Mitochondrial DNA from neanderthal was explained to you because we have no neanderthal mother. But we do carry 1-4% of the Y chromosome from the Neanderthal father. IN simple English.. no living human is a descendant of a descendant who was born from a neanderthal mother. But all non Africans carry the neanderthal males genes .
Aura Mytha “Aura , Savior of the Universe!” Level 7 Since: Dec 10 16,904 Location hidden	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27430 May 21, 2012 The Nerd wrote: <quoted text> I don't know about all of this, the other atheist above you says they are different species. Which one of you guys are right? The discovery that humans and neanderthal did in fact interbreed reclassifies them as a subspecies there name scientifically is Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis .
Nuggin Level 7 Since: Sep 07 20,923 Winnetka, CA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27431 May 21, 2012 The Nerd wrote: <quoted text> I don't know about all of this, the other atheist above you says they are different species. Which one of you guys are right? It's irrelevant. The term species is outdated and is only used to facilitate communication between two humans. There is no such thing as a "species" in reality.
thewordofme “Douglas Adams was right” Level 9 Since: Jun 11 4,418 Israel	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27432 May 21, 2012 Aura Mytha wrote: <quoted text> Did I say that... or is that what YOU said? I said Neanderthals are a extinct race of human beings that passed a little bit of what they were into non African Homo Sapiens Sapiens. A tiny bit even 1-4% They were not human. DNA was different
thewordofme “Douglas Adams was right” Level 9 Since: Jun 11 4,418 Israel	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27433 May 21, 2012 Aura So essentially you are disputing the Smithsonian scientists when they say: "The complete mtDNA sequence shows that Neanderthals were outside the range of modern human mtDNA variation. Researchers compared the mtDNA sequence with that of modern humans. They compared sequence changes that resulted in nonsynonymous amino acid changes with synonymous changes." And "This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens were not very different genetically from current modern humans,*but were still different from Neanderthals."* My emphasis
The Nerd Level 2 Since: May 12 245 Smyrna, GA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27434 May 21, 2012 KittenKoder wrote: <quoted text> Would you be surprised to know that a majority of scientists are christian? Please produce the source to this claim.
The Nerd Level 2 Since: May 12 245 Smyrna, GA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27435 May 21, 2012 Nuggin and Aura I'll reply to your comments later, I'm going to catch some ZZZzzzzz...
ARGUING with IDIOTS United States	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27436 May 21, 2012 Aura Mytha wrote: <quoted text>The discovery that humans and neanderthal did in fact interbreed reclassifies them as a subspecies there name scientifically is Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis . Can you tell us what the definition of "scientific evidence" is in your view?
Nuggin Level 7 Since: Sep 07 20,923 Winnetka, CA	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27437 May 21, 2012 1 thewordofme wrote: Aura So essentially you are disputing the Smithsonian scientists when they say: "The complete mtDNA sequence shows that Neanderthals were outside the range of modern human mtDNA variation. Researchers compared the mtDNA sequence with that of modern humans. They compared sequence changes that resulted in nonsynonymous amino acid changes with synonymous changes." And "This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens were not very different genetically from current modern humans,*but were still different from Neanderthals."* My emphasis I've only been looking at your discussion with Aura in glances, as I have been in my own discussion. It seems to me the problem here is that you don't understand the difference between mDNA and DNA. mDNA, or mitocrondrial DNA, is not DNA which is part of your personal genetic code. In other words, there are no genes in mDNA which comprise "you". mDNA is part of the inner working of the cell. The mDNA is provided by the egg. No mDNA travels with the sperm, because the sperm is not a "cell", but rather a DNA delivery system. Every single person gets 100% of their mDNA from their mother and 0% from their father. As opposed to regular DNA which is basically 50/50. Neanderthals had different mDNA than modern humans. That's because Neanderthals descended from a group which left Africa LONG before H. Sapiens snuck out. However, there is no mDNA in modern human populations. That means one of three things: 1) H Sapiens and Neanderthals never interbred. 2) H Sapiens and Neanderthals bred, but always male Neanderthal to female H Sapiens (possibly rape) 3) H Sapiens and Neanderthals bred in all combinations but all female strains carrying mDNA died out along the way. Now, since we can do a regular DNA comparison to see that humans out of Africa carry Neanderthal DNA while those in Africa do not, that tells us that 1 is wrong. H Sapiens emerging from Africa interbred with Neanderthals almost immediately, and prior to splintering into the groups that went off to India, East Asia, Australia, Europe, etc. 3 is still possible but unlikely unless the number of female neanderthals were few enough that their lines could die off rather than propagate. So, 2 is most likely. There is an additional possibility. It's possible that Neanderthals and H. Sapiens were divergent enough that certain combinations could not work. In other words, male H Sapiens could not get female Neanderthals pregnant with offspring which could later reproduce, while the reverse combination did succeed. I haven't seen any evidence to support that claim, however it is a viable explanation. If I had to bet money, I'd say that in a few instances a couple of male Neanderthals caught and raped a few H Sapiens. Those children survived.
Aura Mytha “Aura , Savior of the Universe!” Level 7 Since: Dec 10 16,904 Location hidden	Reply » \| Report Abuse \| Judge it! \| #27438 May 21, 2012 thewordofme wrote: Aura So essentially you are disputing the Smithsonian scientists when they say: "The complete mtDNA sequence shows that Neanderthals were outside the range of modern human mtDNA variation. Researchers compared the mtDNA sequence with that of modern humans. They compared sequence changes that resulted in nonsynonymous amino acid changes with synonymous changes." And "This shows that early anatomically modern Homo sapiens were not very different genetically from current modern humans,*but were still different from Neanderthals."* My emphasis I agree they were not homo sapiens sapiens , they were homo sapiens neanderthalis and archaic humans.
Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required) Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 26,561 - 26,580 of85,560

< prev page

next page >

Go to last page| Jump to page:

Type in your comments below

Earn 20 points when you post a comment.

Name
(appears on your post)

Comments

Characters left: 4000

Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

568 Users are viewing the Offbeat Forum right now

Search the Offbeat Forum:

Topic	Updated	Last By	Comments
1 'Double Letter S'	1 min	KissandTell	172
1 There goes the neighborhood!	4 min	Sublime1	1,304
1 Tell me a TRUTH	4 min	__Quintessence__	738
1 The "I love chocolate" clique (May '12)	4 min	Proud To Be Trina	162
1 Chain Link Game! (Apr '12)	4 min	KissandTell	3,624
1 ~`*`~ Create a sentence using the 'letters' of ... (Oct '12)	4 min	Hoosier Hillbilly	1,079
1 Favorite T-Shirt Sayings	6 min	thatguy93550	1,323
1 What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10)	6 min	__Quintessence__	3,759
1 Teen arrested after cops say she bit man's penis	8 min	MeanandNasty	69
1 What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08)	24 min	Sublime1	100,184
1 Which O/B lady would you want to be stranded on...	47 min	Proud To Be Trina	251