Creationism or evolution?

Quahom1 said:
Both are the same, just looked at with different eyes.

v/r

Q
Click to expand...
Quite right Q-the design seems pretty "intelligent" doesn't it?:) Take care, Earl
 
I kind of like what Sri Aurobindo said, that life was a process of involution and evolution.


Peace

Mark
 
Kindest Regards, Jeff!

Actually, we've gone over this subject ad naseum already, if you would care to take a look...

http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/showthread.php?t=877&page=1

There are a couple of other minor threads, but this one is pretty in depth, provided you are sincerely asking to find out. I think you will find a great deal of intelligent discussion from both sides, and many religious and non-religious perspectives. Happy reading!
 
Thanks for the link. This is one of my favorite topics to think and wonder about.

i beleive that evolution is correct, but i am still intriuged by other peoples opinions on this matter.
 
Awaiting_the_fifth said:
Maybe we think that we are evolving but we are actually just in the process of being created. We're not finished yet.
Click to expand...

What a profound statement...:cool: I like it!

v/r

Q
 
How old is Sherlock Holmes?
- about 40 years, the age of his character?
- about 120 years, since AC Doyle created him?

How old is the universe?
- about 13 billion years, its age according to scientists?
- about 4000 years, since Enlil, Enki and Inana created it?
To understand the beginning of the universe, it's necessary to see "time" in an entirely different way. "Time" is only 13 billion years old. The problem is that our brain can't imagine a reality if it isn't structured in time and space. Interesting literature: Stephen Hawkin: "A Brief History of Time".
 
Awaiting_the_fifth said:
Sorry, who, who and who?
Click to expand...

Enlil, Enki and Inana. They are Mesopotamian gods and the first chapter of Genesis is largely based on their creation myths. Genesis uses the word "Elohim", which is the plural of "El", another name for Enlil and his relatives.
It was only later that theologists decided that Elohim and YHWH are to be considered one and the same god.
Enlil and Enki are brothers, Inana is Enlil's wife. Enlil also caused the flud, but Enki saved Noah.
 
Why couldn't God use evolution to create the universe and the world? Why is their conflict between evolution and creationism? There is really no need, evolution is science, it does not mean to conflict religion, if people will open their minds it will actually work.
 
Silverbackman said:
Why couldn't God use evolution to create the universe and the world? Why is their conflict between evolution and creationism? There is really no need, evolution is science, it does not mean to conflict religion, if people will open their minds it will actually work.
Click to expand...

There certainly could be. And many scientists who accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution are also theists. But that's not what the controversy is about. The real issue is for those who read ancient texts as literal - treating Creation accounts as though they were scientific treatises. For that group, human knowledge and observation is juxtaposed against literal meaning of their Revelation and must be attacked regardless of the scientific method.

Science and Religion are in harmony. But in a fractured mind, the two can be made to appear in combat with one another.
 
Abogado del Diablo said:
Science and Religion are in harmony. But in a fractured mind, the two can be made to appear in combat with one another.
Click to expand...

Hi Abogado del Diablo,

I agree with this. If we go on the premise that God is in all things, we will see he is in both science and in religion. Creationism and Evolutionism.

Kelcie:)
 
what ADD said. the problem here is people not understanding the purpose and functioning of science as well as taking a daft approach to the sacred text.

and, moreover

They are Mesopotamian gods and the first chapter of Genesis is largely based on their creation myths.
Click to expand...
yeah, whatever. or the other way round, or whatever floats your boat. as far as i'm concerned, the complexity and subtlety of the genesis account is largely lost on those who think that everything jewish is some kind of anthropological rip-off.

b'shalom

bananabrain
 
bananabrain said:
as far as i'm concerned, the complexity and subtlety of the genesis account is largely lost on those who think that everything jewish is some kind of anthropological rip-off.

b'shalom

bananabrain
Click to expand...

I agree. Genesis is a sophisticated and beautiful expression of the human experience.
 
If it be permitted, I would like to duck in here quickly, and thank you all for seeing the scriptures in not only a metaphorical sense but also a mystical one as well. The collective unconscious is improved by the vision of persons such as yourself, and since no one else is going to say it, I will: Thank you!:)



Peace

Mark
 
"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
 
ProphetSmurf said:
"And many scientists who accept the overwhelming evidence of evolution are also theists"
Click to expand...

Smurfy said:
Present this evidence. It does not exist.
Click to expand...

it seems that you have a misuse of the term "theory". science, as you may know, has nothing more solid than a "theory"... like the Theory of Gravity, for instance. it also seems that, given your request for a "slizard" that you have a misconception of what the Theory of Evolution is saying. remember, that there have been significant advances in our knowledge since Darwins original proposal. thus, the debate in the scientific community on this issue is mostly geared towards the mechanisms of Evolution, not disputing the fact of Evoloution, per se.

do you dispute that gravity exists?

can you explain why DNA invalidates the Theory of Evolution?

you do realize that the process of fossilization is quite rare, yes? more to the point, the earth is large and humans are small. we have only explored a tiny bit of our world and, since we can't see underground, we have to have the fortune to be present when fossils are uncovered through geological processes.

nevertheless.... i shall present to you a partial list of observed instances of speciation for your researching pleasure:

General
1. M Nei and J Zhang, Evolution: molecular origin of species. Science 282: 1428-1429, Nov. 20, 1998. Primary article is: CT Ting, SC Tsaur, ML We, and CE Wu, A rapidly evolving homeobox at the site of a hybrid sterility gene. Science 282: 1501-1504, Nov. 20, 1998. As the title implies, has found the genes that actually change during reproductive isolation.
2. M Turelli, The causes of Haldane's rule. Science 282: 889-891, Oct.30, 1998. Haldane's rule describes a phase every population goes thru during speciation: production of inviable and sterile hybrids. Haldane's rule states "When in the F1 [first generation] offspring of two different animal races one sex is absent, rare, or sterile, that sex is the heterozygous [heterogemetic; XY, XO, or ZW] sex."Two leading explanations are fast-male and dominance. Both get supported. X-linked incompatibilities would affect heterozygous gender more because only one gene."
3. Barton, N. H., J. S. Jones and J. Mallet. 1988. No barriers to speciation. Nature. 336:13-14.
4. Baum, D. 1992. Phylogenetic species concepts. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 7:1-3.
5. Rice, W. R. 1985. Disruptive selection on habitat preference and the evolution of reproductive isolation: an exploratory experiment. Evolution. 39:645-646.
6. Ringo, J., D. Wood, R. Rockwell, and H. Dowse. 1989. An experiment testing two hypotheses of speciation. The American Naturalist. 126:642-661.
7. Schluter, D. and L. M. Nagel. 1995. Parallel speciation by natural selection. American Naturalist. 146:292-301.
8. Callaghan, C. A. 1987. Instances of observed speciation. The American Biology Teacher. 49:3436.
9. Cracraft, J. 1989. Speciation and its ontology: the empirical consequences of alternative species concepts for understanding patterns and processes of differentiation. In Otte, E. and J. A. Endler [eds.] Speciation and its consequences. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA. pp. 28-59.

Chromosome numbers in various species
http://www.kean.edu/~breid/chrom2.htm

Speciation in Insects
1. G Kilias, SN Alahiotis, and M Pelecanos. A multifactorial genetic investigation of speciation theory using drosophila melanogaster Evolution 34:730-737, 1980. Got new species of fruit flies in the lab after 5 years on different diets and temperatures. Also confirmation of natural selection in the process. Lots of references to other studies that saw speciation.
2. JM Thoday, Disruptive selection. Proc. Royal Soc. London B. 182: 109-143, 1972.
Lots of references in this one to other speciation.
3. KF Koopman, Natural selection for reproductive isolation between Drosophila pseudobscura and Drosophila persimilis. Evolution 4: 135-148, 1950. Using artificial mixed poulations of D. pseudoobscura and D. persimilis, it has been possible to show,over a period of several generations, a very rapid increase in the amount of reproductive isolation between the species as a result of natural selection.
4. LE Hurd and RM Eisenberg, Divergent selection for geotactic response and evolution of reproductive isolation in sympatric and allopatric populations of houseflies. American Naturalist 109: 353-358, 1975.
5. Coyne, Jerry A. Orr, H. Allen. Patterns of speciation in Drosophila. Evolution. V43. P362(20) March, 1989.
6. Dobzhansky and Pavlovsky, 1957 An incipient species of Drosophila, Nature 23: 289- 292.
7. Ahearn, J. N. 1980. Evolution of behavioral reproductive isolation in a laboratory stock of Drosophila silvestris. Experientia. 36:63-64.
8. 10. Breeuwer, J. A. J. and J. H. Werren. 1990. Microorganisms associated with chromosome destruction and reproductive isolation between two insect species. Nature. 346:558-560.
9. Powell, J. R. 1978. The founder-flush speciation theory: an experimental approach. Evolution. 32:465-474.
10. Dodd, D. M. B. and J. R. Powell. 1985. Founder-flush speciation: an update of experimental results with Drosophila. Evolution 39:1388-1392. 37. Dobzhansky, T. 1951. Genetics and the origin of species (3rd edition). ColumbiaUniversity Press, New York.
11. Dobzhansky, T. and O. Pavlovsky. 1971. Experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila. Nature. 230:289-292.
12. Dobzhansky, T. 1972. Species of Drosophila: new excitement in an old field. Science. 177:664-669.
13. Dodd, D. M. B. 1989. Reproductive isolation as a consequence of adaptive divergence in Drosophila melanogaster. Evolution 43:1308-1311.
14. de Oliveira, A. K. and A. R. Cordeiro. 1980. Adaptation of Drosophila willistoni experimental populations to extreme pH medium. II. Development of incipient reproductive isolation. Heredity. 44:123-130.15. 29. Rice, W. R. and G. W. Salt. 1988. Speciation via disruptive selection on habitat preference: experimental evidence. The American Naturalist. 131:911-917.
30. Rice, W. R. and G. W. Salt. 1990. The evolution of reproductive isolation as a correlated character under sympatric conditions: experimental evidence. Evolution. 44:1140-1152.
31. del Solar, E. 1966. Sexual isolation caused by selection for positive and negative phototaxis and geotaxis in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences (US). 56:484-487.
32. Weinberg, J. R., V. R. Starczak and P. Jora. 1992. Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event in the laboratory. Evolution. 46:1214-1220.
33. V Morell, Earth's unbounded beetlemania explained. Science 281:501-503, July 24, 1998. Evolution explains the 330,000 odd beetlespecies. Exploitation of newly evolved flowering plants.
34. B Wuethrich, Speciation: Mexican pairs show geography's role. Science 285: 1190, Aug. 20, 1999. Discusses allopatric speciation. Debate with ecological speciation on which is most prevalent.

Speciation in Plants
1. Speciation in action Science 72:700-701, 1996 A great laboratory study of the evolution of a hybrid plant species. Scientists did it in the lab, but the genetic data says it happened the same way in nature.
2. Hybrid speciation in peonies http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/061288698v1#B1
3. http://www.holysmoke.org/new-species.htm new species of groundsel by hybridization
4. Butters, F. K. 1941. Hybrid Woodsias in Minnesota. Amer. Fern. J. 31:15-21.
5. Butters, F. K. and R. M. Tryon, jr. 1948. A fertile mutant of a Woodsia hybrid. American Journal of Botany. 35:138.
6. Toxic Tailings and Tolerant Grass by RE Cook in Natural History, 90(3): 28-38, 1981 discusses selection pressure of grasses growing on mine tailings that are rich in toxic heavy metals. "When wind borne pollen carrying nontolerant genes crosses the border [between prairie and tailings] and fertilizes the gametes of tolerant females, the resultant offspring show a range of tolerances. The movement of genes from the pasture to the mine would, therefore, tend to dilute the tolerance level of seedlings. Only fully tolerant individuals survive to reproduce, however. This selective mortality, which eliminates variants, counteracts the dilution and molds a toatally tolerant population. The pasture and mine populations evolve distinctive adaptations because selective factors are dominant over the homogenizing influence of foreign genes."
7. Clausen, J., D.D. Keck and W. M. Hiesey. 1945. Experimental studies on the nature of species. II. Plant evolution through amphiploidy and autoploidy, with examples from the Madiinae. Carnegie Institute Washington Publication, 564:1-174.
8. Cronquist, A. 1988. The evolution and classification of flowering plants (2nd edition). The New YorkBotanical Garden, Bronx, NY.
9. P. H. Raven, R. F. Evert, S. E. Eichorn, Biology of Plants (Worth, New York,ed. 6, 1999).
10. M. Ownbey, Am. J. Bot. 37, 487 (1950).
11. M. Ownbey and G. D. McCollum, Am. J. Bot. 40, 788 (1953).
12. S. J. Novak, D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, Am. J. Bot. 78, 1586 (1991).
13. P. S. Soltis, G. M. Plunkett, S. J. Novak, D. E. Soltis, Am. J. Bot. 82,1329 (1995).
14. Digby, L. 1912. The cytology of Primula kewensis and of other related Primula hybrids. Ann. Bot. 26:357-388.
15. Owenby, M. 1950. Natural hybridization and amphiploidy in the genus Tragopogon. Am. J. Bot. 37:487-499.
16. Pasterniani, E. 1969. Selection for reproductive isolation between two populations of maize, Zea mays L. Evolution. 23:534-547.


New Genus
1. Muntzig, A, Triticale Results and Problems, Parey, Berlin, 1979. Describes whole new *genus* of plants, Triticosecale, of several species, formed by artificial selection. These plants are important in agriculture.

Vertebrate Speciation
1. N Barton Ecology: the rapid origin of reproductive isolation Science 290:462-463, Oct. 20, 2000. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/290/5491/462 Natural selection of reproductive isolation observed in two cases. Full papers are: AP Hendry, JK Wenburg, P Bentzen, EC Volk, TP Quinn, Rapid evolution of reproductive isolation in the wild: evidence from introduced salmon. Science 290: 516-519, Oct. 20, 2000. and M Higgie, S Chenoweth, MWBlows, Natural selection and the reinforcement of mate recognition. Science290: 519-521, Oct. 20, 2000
2. G Vogel, African elephant species splits in two. Science 293: 1414, Aug. 24, 2001. www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/293/5534/1414
3. C Vila` , P Savolainen, JE. Maldonado, IR. Amorim, JE. Rice, RL. Honeycutt, KA. Crandall, JLundeberg, RK. Wayne, Multiple and Ancient Origins of the Domestic Dog Science 276: 1687-1689, 13 JUNE 1997. Dogs no longer one species but 4 according to the genetics. http://www.idir.net/~wolf2dog/wayne1.htm
4. Barrowclough, George F.. Speciation and Geographic Variation in Black-tailed Gnatcatchers. (book reviews) The Condor. V94. P555(2) May, 1992
5. Kluger, Jeffrey. Go fish. Rapid fish speciation in African lakes. Discover. V13. P18(1) March, 1992.
Formation of five new species of cichlid fishes which formed since they were isolated from the parent stock, Lake Nagubago. (These fish have complex mating rituals and different coloration.) See also Mayr, E., 1970. _Populations, Species, and Evolution_, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press. p. 348
6. Genus _Rattus_ currently consists of 137 species [1,2] and is known to have originally developed in Indonesia and Malaysia during and prior to the Middle Ages[3].
[1] T. Yosida. Cytogenetics of the Black Rat. University Park Press, Baltimore, 1980.
[2] D. Morris. The Mammals. Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1965.
[3] G. H. H. Tate. "Some Muridae of the Indo-Australian region," Bull. Amer. Museum Nat. Hist. 72: 501-728, 1963.
7. Stanley, S., 1979. _Macroevolution: Pattern and Process_, San Francisco,
W.H. Freeman and Company. p. 41
Rapid speciation of the Faeroe Island house mouse, which occurred in less than 250 years after man brought the creature to the island.


indebted to Dr. P. Lucas for the concise list.

metta,

~v
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top