Poll: Creation vs Evolution

[Babbles]

Well, had to skip a few pages in reading this, but I got the general idea here.

First, guess to be blunt evolution happens and is a fact. Anybody that doesn't think so and probably most of you all that do think so more than likely don't even understand the more technical definition of evolution anyhow. I noticed a few people tried to quote a dictionary on the term evolution; ha, come on a layman's dictionary to define a scientific prinicpal? If it were only that easy we would have way more unemployed biologists.

If you don't think evolution happens, ask yourself why we haven't found a way to kill HIV, or why do doctors prescribe antibiotics such as amoxicillian and azrithomycin instead of good ole penicillian (or at least as much as they used to).
What the hell do you think bacteria resistance to drug therapy is?

If you all want to learn more, go to your local college and enroll in some biology classes. It takes more than just a thread or two to explain an entire scientific principal.

Religion and science are mutually exclusive and to combine the two only screws things up.

 

[Halogen]

yep he's right

that germs being resistant to anti biotics thing is called 'mutation' and mutation is a part of evolution just like natural selection

it's really a shame that it is illegal to have that stem cells research i really would have liked to see Michael J Fox return to show bizz, i liked his work

i can't wait for the president to get parkinson's then have the nation laugh right to his face because he denied research to the cure of his own disease.....

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

For those who want to know- embryonic stem cells have limited use. Now those of adults can be made to do lots of tricks. I have no idea why this isn't brought up in the press. Perhaps it's not contraversial enough.

 

[Halogen]

i don't understand why people are so stupid. believe whatever the media wants them to believe

a few years back the media was getting all hyped up over some chemical which they claimed to be the 'most dangerous substance known to man' but it was only dangerous as a carsinogen (causes cancer) when burned at very low temperatures. you had a higher risk of dying from inhaling osbestos than from actually drinking this substance
once there was a spill of this stuff and the media jumped on it so the government HAD to get a CDC like group to contain it even though a deisel spill on the highway is 100x more dangerous.....

all the media does it hurt people.

 

[StUdMaN]

<< questioning everything is just as stupid as questioning nothing >>



you do not deserve to live in the modern world, WTF DO YOU THINK SCIENCE IS?!?!?!
you are on a computer yet you are dead set against research to develope science in any way, you are such a total hypocrit! stupid idiots who hate what they use but insist on using it should be killed

WTF are you talking about?I am just saying that either way of thinking imposes self limiting beliefs
I think you are confusing me with someone else

 

[busmaster11]

<< yep he's right

that germs being resistant to anti biotics thing is called 'mutation' and mutation is a part of evolution just like natural selection >>



Once again people... We haven't been able to kill HIV because it ADAPTS... It's like Halogen hitting himself over the head with a brick... Sooner or later he figures out it hurts and will stop doing it. He's ADAPTING. Call it evolution if you want. But HIV is still HIV... it won't someday turn into the cold virus.

As for evolution, we're interested in what, how, and if any species can evolve into a different species, and whats necessary for that to occur... And despite what any of you can say, I challenge you to come up with ANY evidence that geneticists won't dispute. And no, The Origin of Species doesn't have anything to do with its title, instead its all about natural selection, which, by the way, is doing exactly what you LOVE to describe, Halogen, which has nothing to do with SPECIES evolution, and just hovers around the periphery of it.

Science is a great thing. But science is not God, and will never be God. We can live without science, but science cannot live without God.

 

[petrek]

Babbles, please read ALL previous posts prior to posting.

Thanks
Dave

 

[exp]

LOL This thread just refuses to die...I thought it was gone weeks ago but here it is again, like a bad cold.

 

[exp]

BTW, technically HIV is not really a living organism so it probably is not the best example of why evolution does or does not occur. Bacteria? Yes. Viruses? No.

Now I'm off before I get sucked back into the quagmire of this discussion.

 

[Mangos]

Evolution doesn't exist? Ready?
Sugar, including ribose can be made from formaldehyde (HCHO and CH3OH in water) exposed to alkaline solution or ultraviolet.
Hydrogen is pretty common, same with Carbon and Oxygen.
Fatty Acids can be produced by exposing CH and C(2)H(4) to 1000-7500 lb/in^2 of pressure.
Ever hear of a volcano, or an ocean? A lot of pressure + Common things (Carbon and Hydrogen).
Phospholipids can be produced by heating glycerol and inorganic phosphate to dryness at 65 degrees Celsius.
Purine, a mixture of CH(4), NH(3), and H(2)O exposed to electron beams.
Lightning + common stuff.
Pyrimidine comes from Exposing Urea to Cyanoacetylene at a high temperature.

In thermo-vents in the deep sea, there exist organisms that resemble organisms from 3 million years ago. The changing of the earth causes the changing of these organisms. These organisms eventually evolve into more complex, more versatile beings.

Is that enough evidence?

Here's where I think a supernatural being or some sort of religious figure comes in:
Consider the universe to be a canvas. We have all of these beautiful colors on the canvas (the earth, the sun, all of the stars, galaxies, etc.). Where did the canvas come from? It's kind of hard to imagine, but think about it. We have this "vast" universe and all of these galaxies, but what is space? For all we know, we're just one of those little snow globe's in another person's house. A realllllly big person, though.

 

[Halogen]

yeah i always wondered that too.
[edit] hey how do i rate people? [/edit]

 

[Babbles]

<< BTW, technically HIV is not really a living organism so it probably is not the best example of why evolution does or does not occur. Bacteria? Yes. Viruses? No.

Now I'm off before I get sucked back into the quagmire of this discussion. >>



I know of a handful of viriologists, pathologists, MDs, and many other folks that would laugh at the fact that you would not consider viruses able to evolve.

Evolution is the reason why drug therapies are not that successful in combating HIV-1 and HIV-2. When those affected with AIDS do take those treatements they have to take a dozen drug 'cocktails' to make sure they cover the general basis. Else, if evolution did not happen in viruses then AZT, or some other protease inhibitor or reverse transcriptase inhibitor, would be the wonder drug and kill the HIV virus.
Move away from HIV and look at some little virus called influenza. Wonder why we don't have a cure-all for the flu? Called evolution.
You know how they make a flu vaccination? Scientists literally have to guess what they think inluenza will mutate (ie. evolve) into over the course of the next year and make a vaccination to fight that particular varient.

I dug out one of my old textbooks on Evolution and found a more precise definition than one would find in a simple dictionary:

* As a result of mutation creating new alleles and segregation and independent assorment shuffling alleles into new combinations, individuals within populations are variable for enarly all traits.

* Individuals pass thier genes on to their offspring intact and independently of other genes

* In most generations, more offspring are produced than can survive

* The individuals that survive and go on to reproduce, or who reporduce the most, are those with the alleles and allelic combinations that best adapt them to their environment.


{Freeman, S and Herrron, J.C. 1998. Evolultionary Analysis. Simon & Suchuster, New Jersey}

 

[Halogen]

sure puts to shame those llamas who say there is no proof of evolution haha

 

[tarzanx]

<< We have this "vast" universe and all of these galaxies, but what is space? For all we know, we're just one of those little snow globe's in another person's house. A realllllly big person, though. >>



LOL, yes that's exactly what I figured too!
I believe I read something like this in Murray Gell-Mann's "The Quark and the Jaguar": "The wisest man is not him who knows that he knows everything but the ones who knows that he does not know anything" sorry about the bad translation
Some of the wisest words I have ever heard and said by "the Einstein of the late 20th Century".

That's why I'm SO tired of hearing religious fanatics claiming that they just know it all. That's why we have wars. That's why people fly planes into large buildings.
In stead we should try wondering about all the things we don't have a clue about. Like how the universe was created. And yes, maybe by a supernatural being. Highly unlikely I think, but there is just no way of knowing. As I said before it's all behind the event horizon of the Big Bang. I just read a book by Stephen Hawking describing something like this. And he's a man that I trust. Unlike the religious peple with the socalled scientific facts against everything that doesn't fit their narrow minded worlds.

In Scandinavia there aren't many people back who literally believes in God (that's my feeling). A 100 years ago most people did (also my feeling). F.x. my grandma and most other people her age. But today people are informed and know better. I have read books by prominent scientists like M. Gell-Mann, S. Hawking or R. Kurzweil and they (of course) all support evolution.

Friends (and myself), which I have shown this thread to, were all extremely surprised that 20% have actually voted that they believe in Creation. But I think it's because the US is a bit more religios as a whole than Scandinavia.

MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYBODY!! (even though I don't believe in in some supernatural god creating us, I still celebrate Christmas )

 

[petrek]

Babbles, Halogen, and Mangos READ ALL PREVIOUS POSTS PRIOR TO POSTING.

 

[petrek]

Exp, it's unfortunate that rather than responding to my previous email wherein it was proved that in light of the facts, faith in evolution is absurd; you chose instead to scoff at the fact that this thread is still here.

"Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, the Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain." 1 Corinthians 3:18-20

 

[petrek]

Tarzanx, please respond to my previous post to you.

Thanks
Dave

 

[Jejunum]

<< This poll sucks, the questions are loaded, and it is impossible for me to answer accurately. >>



u have to be christian or athesist to really answer ur poll..wtf


lots of other religions have had concepts like evolution longer before it was ever discussed scientifically...

 

[patsun123]

i didnt read this thread except for the 1st and last page... so forgive me and please dont flame me if i am saying something that has already been said.

I am a practicing christian, i also think that creation and evolution can somewhat co-exist. There used to be many that support Darwin (scientists...) but even Darwin concluded at the end that he couldnt explain how the eyeball had evolved. There's also a step theory on evolution now... that instead of what Darwin said (of how evolution went in a straight line like a y=x curve... it now goes like steps do...)

but anyways. How is it ANY more believable or unbelievable that God created man, then the universe being created by a big bang? So... a bunch of a materials and particles come together... a big bang occurs... and eventually things just appear? We just so happen to have an ozone layer that would protect us from the sun, an atmosphere that is conducive to life... and millions of other things on this planet that just HAPPEN to work out the way that they do. And if just one little thing were to go off balance, things wouldnt be the way they are... (see anthropic principle).

I'm not going to say that the Creation route is totally infallible. I'm not here to defend Creation... there's plenty of other AT'ers who have already posted what i would say. I'm not totally going against evolution either. Its just that maybe sometimes its good to understand why the other side is TRUE as opposed to just seeing why its FALSE when arguing. That, and maybe using a little less hyperbole when speaking... (really... a billion muslims?? they really compose 1/6th of the world's population? i didnt know that.) Maybe before claiming a bunch of people ignorant because their science teacher last year said so, we should do our own research instead of taking it straight from the horse's mouth? The only ignorant people in this world are those that refuse to even glance at the other side... while that does not EXCLUDE religious people... it also INCLUDEs many non-religious ones as well.

there's no reason why threads like these have to be deemed "locked" upon arrival. If you dont want the thread, dont read it, dont respond to it. IGNORE it.

but. thats just my humble opinion.

also... didnt the sun use to revolve around the earth, and earth used to be flat?

 

[PistachioByAzul]

There used to be many that support Darwin (scientists...) but even Darwin concluded at the end that he couldnt explain how the eyeball had evolved.

Why would you expect one man to be able to explain everything?

Both sides are plagued by a god complex; the notion that there is a single all encompassing answer to our existance. Maybe it's time to start looking past our own limited understanding.

The meaning of life....who cares? Life doesn't have to have meaning other than what you make of it.

 

[Babbles]

The first time looking at this thread I read the first 3 pages before I started to zone out from all the rhetoric. So, I decided to follow petrek's advice and read all of the posts. Again about halfway thru page 4 I found myself starting to drift away but I stuck with it.

Something that I am reminded about this thread are certain topics on the internet that will never go away: losing a kidney in a bathtub, forward Bill Gate's e-mail and win a trip to Disneyland, 'ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US', and Evolution vs. Creation.

I did find and was suprised that somebody mention the book "Darwin's Black Box . . ." That guy is a laughing stock amongst most scientists. When I was an undergrad he visited our university campus to give a speech and what not. Hell even undergrads were able to stump and confuse him much less what the researchers and professors could say.



<< A few scientists go along with the theory even though they know it's false, the rest are just victims of indoctrination.

No, they're just blind due to indoctrination. >>



How is that for irony, saying that scientists are blind with indoctrination . . .




<< as mentioned above, the word evolution has more than one meaning, and one defined meaning is "Organic evolution as opposed to belief in the special creation of each individual species as an immutable form, conceives of life as having had its beginnings in a simple primordial protoplasmic mass (probably originating in the sea) from which, through the long eras of time, arose all subsequent living forms." Encyclopedia.com
>>



Man, I love you, I really do; you are a relatively smart person. But being a smart person the last thing you need to do is use an internet based dictionary to define scientific principals. You lose points there bud.

Petrek, I have provided examples of evolution so is their still debate that it does not happen. Heck, think I read somebody mention the panda's second thumb thing. That is evolution in progress. If anybody doesn't know what I am talking about just say so.

Also, it seems that many people didn't understand why sexual reproduction would be favorable over asexual reproduction. Well asexual species can accumulate 'bad' mutations and if they continue to reproduce asexually those 'bad' mutations will always be present in the offspring and following generations. So, thru this Gentic Drift (change in frequency of alleles in a population) you get a ratchet effect in that you once a mutation happens it will always be present. This is called Muller's Ratchet (Mull, H.J. 1964. The Relation of recombination to mutational advance. Mutation Research 1:2-9)
Sexual reproduction breaks that ratchet effect and introduces a variety of genes for the offspring. However, the population in a sexual reproducing community would be much smaller.

And, argh, amongst other things that gets misquoted and misunderstood is that Entropy thing. Yes, in a closed system things tend to get more dis-ordered because they would be more stable. But, that is one thing many people miss, chemicals want to be stable. You will never (well practically) find a single atom of Nitrogen in the atmosphere, you will always find N2. But, wait N2 is more complex than N so that breaks the law of entropy however it is more stable.
That and practically nothing in life works in a closed system.

 

[busmaster11]

<< Evolution doesn't exist? Ready?
Sugar, including ribose can be made from formaldehyde (HCHO and CH3OH in water) exposed to alkaline solution or ultraviolet.
Hydrogen is pretty common, same with Carbon and Oxygen.
Fatty Acids can be produced by exposing CH and C(2)H(4) to 1000-7500 lb/in^2 of pressure.
Ever hear of a volcano, or an ocean? A lot of pressure + Common things (Carbon and Hydrogen).
Phospholipids can be produced by heating glycerol and inorganic phosphate to dryness at 65 degrees Celsius.
Purine, a mixture of CH(4), NH(3), and H(2)O exposed to electron beams.
Lightning + common stuff.
Pyrimidine comes from Exposing Urea to Cyanoacetylene at a high temperature.

In thermo-vents in the deep sea, there exist organisms that resemble organisms from 3 million years ago. The changing of the earth causes the changing of these organisms. These organisms eventually evolve into more complex, more versatile beings.

Is that enough evidence? >>


As with all scientific materials, your first part is fine, are facts observed from nature, and isn't something people normally question. But if the second part had even a remote relavance to your first part, which it dosn't, you *MIGHT* be able to say its an enormous stretch to conclude what you did... BUT HEY, AS LONG AS IT ALL SOUNDS GOOD!!!



<< Here's where I think a supernatural being or some sort of religious figure comes in:
Consider the universe to be a canvas. We have all of these beautiful colors on the canvas (the earth, the sun, all of the stars, galaxies, etc.). Where did the canvas come from? It's kind of hard to imagine, but think about it. We have this "vast" universe and all of these galaxies, but what is space? For all we know, we're just one of those little snow globe's in another person's house. A realllllly big person, though. >>


There are days when I wish I had some of whatever you're on, so I can just get away from it all...

 

[AlastorX82]

The majority of anandtech forum members are atheist. On average, an anandtech forum user is smarter than a non user. You figure it out.

 

[exp]

<< BTW, technically HIV is not really a living organism so it probably is not the best example of why evolution does or does not occur. Bacteria? Yes. Viruses? No.

I know of a handful of viriologists, pathologists, MDs, and many other folks that would laugh at the fact that you would not consider viruses able to evolve. >>



Would they be too busy laughing to read my post carefully and accurately? I NEVER said that viruses do or do not evolve.

Relax, Babbles, and go back to look at my posts earlier in this thread...I am on your side here. My only point was that you are dealing with fanatics here...if you give them any opening (real or perceived) they will try to take it and escape with their premises intact. I have no doubt that if you were to provide ironclad evidence of HIV evolution the so-called "creationists" would desperately try to wriggle free on the grounds that viruses are not alive (yes, I know there is not a consensus on that). You might save yourself some trouble by starting with bacteria instead of viruses...or better yet, save yourself some time by not arguing here in the first place.

 

[petrek]

Babbles, thanks for taking the time to read the previous posts, much appreciated. While I have not taken as much time pondering your post(only a few hours) as I would have liked, I have choosen to respond anyway in the hope that we could carry on a intelligent discussion.

On the subject of indoctrination (brainwashing), here are two statements:

a) the dinosaurs died out millions of years ago.

b) according to individuals who adhere to the theory of evolution, the dinosaurs died out millions of years ago.

Statement a is false, statement b is true. Statement a exemplifies indoctrination.


In re "the last thing you need to do is use an internet based dictionary to define scientific principals."

Yah I know, I expected someone to call me on it earlier, as I did not like the idea myself. However, before deciding to use an internet definition, I pondered the validity of dictionary definitions in general, and concluded it was a valid definition. (Keep in mind that that is not the only dictionary definition I quoted and if you look back at the debate Elledan and I had, you will notice that he basically said the same thing.)

In re "Petrek, I have provided examples of evolution so is their still debate that it does not happen."

On page two of this thread I made this statement:

"As I stated in an earlier discussion on this topic, even though I fundamentally believe the King James Bible is the literal word of God, I have no trouble believing in evolution, if by evolution you mean:

A)"The gradual process of development or change" as in I am different from my parents"

and on page 6 of this thread I said this:

"As I have stated before in this thread, I fundamentally believe the King James Bible is the literal word of God, and as such I believe in evolution, if by evolution you mean a change in the gene pool."


On the "panda's second thumb thing."

a) the "panda's second thumb thing" is "evolution in progress".

b) individuals who believe in evolution, believe the "panda's second thumb thing" is "evolution in progress".

once again statement a is false, and statement b is true.

Dave