Creationism or evolution?

ProphetSmurf said:
"And many scientists who accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution are also theists"

Present this evidence. It does not exist. I first want to see the fossils of a SLIZARD. Then I wish to see the millions of fish with legs fossils. What, none found? Repeat that? THERE ISNT ANY?? Ahh but you say overwhelming? DNA is against the THEORY, so is "Survival of the fittest". Mutations have never been good, although inevitable, in all species. Evolution is and always has been, a theory. If man has evolved it has been for the worse. Our ancestors lived hundreds of years, today we get lucky to have Willard Scott say hello to us at 100. So bring me these overwhelming species!!! I await!!!!:D

Coelacanth. It is not only a fish with "proto-legs", it is a alive today. It is considered to be over 400 million years old as a species.

http://www.dinofish.com/

It also has prototype lungs, not an air bladder.

Platypus. The platypus has a flat, streamlined body. They have a muzzle shaped like the bill of a duck, webbed feet, and a tail like that of a beaver. The bill is not hard like that of a bird. It is actually an elongated muzzle covered with a leathery skin. The bill and feet of a platypus are black while the fur is usually a dark brown color. The platypus also possesses a spur on it hind legs that can be used to inject venom into another creature. In man this usually causes agonizing pain but can be fatal to smaller creatures. The platypus forages for food by diving underwater for up to 1.5 minutes and searching for food. While underwater, it stores any food it finds in cheek pouches. On surfacing, it sorts out what it found and eats it. When searching for food, the platypus is relying solely on its electrically sensitive bill to find food. The bill of a platypus can detect small electrical currents put out by the creatures that it eats. The platypus is a strong swimmer though not very fast. It swims by alternating movements of its front feet only. When out of the water, the webbing folds between its toes. The fur of the platypus is some of the most waterproof in the animal kingdom and the tail is used to store fat.

The platypus is one of only two mammals that do not give birth to live young but lays eggs instead (the other is the echidna.) After birth, the young live on milk provided by the mother. However, the platypus does not have nipples. Instead, glands along the side of the mother secrete milk and the young platypus will lap it up. After six weeks the young have fur and may leave the nest for short periods. They are weaned by five months old.

Chinese Snake head fish. Can walk for miles from one pool of water to another, currently a bain in the United States East Coast waterways, due to its aggresive nature.

Mud Skipper. Can walk for miles and remain alive for days out of a pool of water.

v/r

Q
 
Last edited:
Not sure what is meant by "slizard," but snakes have residual legs and hips. There is even a species of snake with two short front legs.
 
Quahom1 said:
Coelacanth. It is not only a fish with "proto-legs", it is a alive today. It is considered to be over 400 million years old as a species.

http://www.dinofish.com/

It also has prototype lungs, not an air bladder.

Q

Sorry, Q I don't mean to disrespect you in any way but the Dino fish thing seems like the biggest and most desperate attempt to sell T-shirts that i have ever heard.
But, back to the topic, I do not belive in evolution 1st of all because of my religion but don't get me wrong I am open minded, 2nd as far as I have read on Evolution vs. Creation etc. every person for evolution starts out with a semi good opening mind set and idea and then usually USUALLY not always, creationists discredit the source of back up or find evidence against it then instead of trying to push evolution forward evolutionists start to attack creation they try to find everything against creation instead of finding evidence that supports their ideas, but thats only what I've read. And i read them at a Christian school so bias may have been added, but i have to say i belived it.:confused:
 
stevemb88 said:
Sorry, Q I don't mean to disrespect you in any way but the Dino fish thing seems like the biggest and most desperate attempt to sell T-shirts that i have ever heard....:confused:

That's ok. I for one do not discredit either theory. In fact I bet it's a bit of both. The evolution theory or the creation theory isn't what causes conflict. It is the intent of some people that use such theories for what ever purposes they wish to advance, that causes conflicts.

Personally, I think it is nice to try to know one's past, but I have no intention of living their...:D

v/r

Q
 
By evolution it all depends on what one means. If you are saying that some things have evolved I can understand that. If you are saying things popped out of the primordial soup through "Spontaneous Generation" with no help then I would like to see any evidence of that also.:)
 
Dor said:
By evolution it all depends on what one means. If you are saying that some things have evolved I can understand that. If you are saying things popped out of the primordial soup through "Spontaneous Generation" with no help then I would like to see any evidence of that also.:)

Yep, that about sums it up!
 
Namaste Dor,

thank you for the post.

Dor said:
By evolution it all depends on what one means.

typically, it means that there are different allele frequencies in a genetic population.

If you are saying that some things have evolved I can understand that.

only biological things. often the term is used in other disciplines, though.

If you are saying things popped out of the primordial soup through "Spontaneous Generation" with no help then I would like to see any evidence of that also.:)

nope... no spontaneous generation at all.

metta,

~v
 
More harmony needed between science & religion:

I think this issue of creationism or evolution has roots in the historic controversy between religion and science in Europe and the US/Canada.

The issue in education in some areas is that creationsim or a divine design should be taught alongside classic darwinian evolution in schools or that one or either should be dropped..

I don't see such an issue in scientific circles though, that is with the exception of a small group or minority of scientists who support maybe a creationism.

Baha'is are generaally in between or betwixt in this issue. We don't agree with classic creationists or a short lived universe anyway say that's about six thgousand years old. We believe man has been aroiund for millions of years and is very ancient...We also agree that the shape and form of man has changed in much the same way the embryo to the later foetus has changed in form but we believe man has always been in potential man rather than say a ape or monkey ..that man is a separate specie even though he may have an appearance say of other primates.

We also believe there should be more harmony between science and religion and that religious people can benefit from a more scientific attitude and scientists can benefit from a more spiritual attitude.

We accept I think the role of science and respect it's findings.

- Art :)
 
Back
Top