Evolution VS Creationism

[The Kingpin]

As I said, that's how I see it. Also, keep in mind that just a portion of scientists are Athiests. Regardless, the Athiests see pure science. the Religious ones see the same thing [though not always, unfortunately, as they tend to ignore the science behind it], but also see links religiously. I'm not talking about what was written in a book or said by a prophet. I'm saying that the essence itself can be seen there. And of course, my terms were directed at those who see my point of view to a degree. I'm just showing another angle. Nothing more and nothing less. I never said that you were forced to see it that way, and, as such, an aggressive tone isn't needed, and is also discouraged. Honestly, I think it's pointless. Regardless, that's not the topic here. In case you didn't see past the simple examples, I'll put it down in detail as to the way I see it. My opinion is that in the start, Micro Organisms were created, through the elements needed to create life and the processes, forming the life forms. After they were actually brought into existence, they began to evolve to become more effective in their environments. This went on for billions of years, until it reached where it is today. Various branches from those same, original life forms. Cells form organs, organs form systems, systems form bodies. Back then, life was really small, as were the organs and systems within the bodies that lived in that time. Bodies grew bigger and bigger as the environment became able to sustain it over time, as you can see in pre-history, until it eventually hit a peak in the era of the Dinosaurs, which is why some have been recorded in the 100 meter range. It then went downhill with the extinction and eventually, through fluctuations in the environment's atmosphere, and changes in sizes and forms of life and ways of living, turned into what we see today. It's obvious for people who see it that way. And people who don't, have their own points of view. As for proving creationism or evolution, that's one and the same. I honestly don't see the argument. It's like a guy arguing with himself over whether one of his teeth are chipped or whether he chipped one of his teeth. Same thing, different way of seeing it. Creationism is a point of view ignoring any possible scientific explanation behind it, while evolution is ignoring any possible religious link to it all. Both essencially lack eachother's contributions to the whole process. I won't go into depth with religion because the last time I did that, I sent the topic I was talking in so far off track it had to be deleted. But my opinions on that side of it are a topic all their own...


Now, I think I've made my opinion of it very clear, and very simple for someone who can think well with technical situations. I don't think I need to elaborate anymore on the topic, but if I need to, I won't deny anyone the right to ask for it...

[Raptor Llama]

I beilive in certain aspects of evolution. Like minor changes in a beak. Minor changes. Not that the bird turns into a fish or dinosaur, or vise versa. It's called natural selection. Darwin thought it could apply to not only minor changes, but the creation of new species and the beggining of life. I don't. I only beilive in minor changes. I beilive there are places were it applies and were it dosen't.

[C S]

thats not evelution RL, thats a species changing it's genus to become another O_O

[TyrantTR]

You know, I have been thinking about this for a bit today, because time and time again this argument shows up in my school. And this doesn't seem to just be an evolution vs. Creationism debate, this is practicly a religous debate.

Look, who on earth can say for sure that someones religion is right, Greeks killed people for there gods, and we read the stories about there gods these days for fun, not to practice the religion. It's all a matter of perspective, Zeus was real to them, and you know what, god is real to half all of you guys. And thats cool. But on the evolution standard, it is science. THere will be atheists who resort to more logical awnsers than mythical awnsers, and you know what? I bet some time in the distant future, mankind's next generation will be reading the bible, and god's stories for fun, just like what we do with the greek and egyptian and norse myths. Because it is all in perspective, will there still be christians in the future? or will we have figured it all out? But so far the creation of the universe has ranged from religous to scientific, and you know what mabye atheists have it right, mabye science has to do with everything. Or mabye there is a bit more magic involved. But I don't know.

But what I do know is that the world is run on knoledge, knoledge is power, science is knoledge, you get the flow. God won't be there for you when you need to pass High school to get to college, it all depends on how much you know, and the world as a community will not care if your budist, or christian or atheistic, your a mainly judged on how much you know. (unless your a preist) so thinking about that, what is the most scientific theory of the creation of the planet? Natural selection? no. Creationism? no. Evolution? there you go. Eveolution will always be accepted by the community of mainstream science becuase it is science and because no god is involved and that is that.

[dinoman666]

RL: You know how dinosaurs eventually evolved into birds? Minor changes. They didn't just randomly transform, they had minor changes affect them over time. For example, protofeathers. Then came Archaeopterx, and later on modern birds.

There's obviously a lot more to it than just that, but we just haven't discovered it yet.

[Raptor Llama]

Archaeopterx is a bird. Nothing more, and nothing less.

A wing is not a minor change. A wing's genetic material is not inside dinosaurs. They don't have the material for wings. Maybe feathers, being feathers is basicly a form of scale, but not a wing. On top of that, why would a raptor or rex even need wings? Natural selection only takes place when it's needed. Birds are specificly designed for flying, dinosaurs are not. They are meant to walk. A compy with wings wouldn't last very long. Now penguins use their wings to swim. And Ostriches and Emus, well, I'd have to do some research and get back to that. Possibly the same reason rexes have that. WAIT! Emus are NOT evolved rexes. They look nothing alike, and the rex would mainly be losing features instead of winning features. Raptors are supposedly evolved rexes, but that can't be, because they actually use their claws on their arms.

[TyrannoTitan]

There are no birds in the age of dinosaurs you twit. Archaeopterx is a D-I-N-O-S-A-U-R. With W-I-N-G-S.

Look at Microraptor. Protofeathers + the ability to glide. Sounds like a bird to me.

And raptors ARE NOT evolved Rexs for God's (Irony!) sake. They come from a different evolutionary chain. Yes, they evolved from, say, things like Coelopysis. Dilphosaurus into Ceratosaurus and Allosaurus. Allosaurus into Gigano and T-rex, etc.

[Raptor Llama]

There's no proof of Archaeopterx being a dinosaur. And for birds living during dino times, it depends on your theory.

And I never said raptors evolved from rexes. I said neither rexes nor raptors turned into emus.

[TyrannoTitan]

How about the fact its bone structure is very similiar, if not nearly exactly the same as dinosaurs such as Microraptor and Compsognathus.

And don't say they aren't, because SCIENTISTS have compared the two, and came to this assumption. This only means 2 things: Archaeopterx is a dinosaur, or Dinosaurs evolved into birds (Judging by your Archaeopterx = bird theory).


So ya. Take your pick.

[Legendary Elite]

TT is right, even I've read enough books relating to this (and myths relating to Arcaheopteryx and any of its other relatives being "phoenix's". Archaeopteryx was pretty much one of the first "relics" of what our dinosaurs would be after the Cretacious. Dinosaurs were descendants of birds. It wasn't just Archaeopteryx, though, there was Iberomesornis (the bird-like creature from WWD when the Ornithocheirus was flying toward the mating site, the creatures swarmed him to get him away from their nests). Plus due to the atmosphere and environment towards the Cretacious, it was changing dramtically. Jurassic and Triassic weren't very different except for the rise in temperature and changing of the environment. During the Cretacious more bird-species began to show, especially water birds like Hesperonis and a few early penguin species as well.

RL, remember also how close the Raptors resemble the birds especially. Not to mention recently a few years ago (I saw this on the news as well) that they notice small feather membranes in T-Rex along his head and spine and along the neck as well, small but enough evidence to proove that even the largest carnivores were evolving as well and the raptors were already changing towards the end of the Cretacious too. Archaeopteryx was possibly an evolved form of a pterosaur from the Triassic (e.g. Peteinosaurus for example as Raptors weren't around at this time and the large carnivores were rare too) and see how close it was to a striking resemblance to Compsognathus and other small carnivores. The small jurassic carnivores like Ornitholestes (although there have been a few raptor species towards the end of the Late Jurassic discovered in Australia) and Edaphosaurus evolved into the raptors.

The Prosauropods and Sauropods were evolving into the Theriznosaurs who were like larger forms of the Ornithosaurs (Struthiomimus, Gallimimus, Ornithomimus etc). Heck there was a lot of carnivores in Mongolia that were bird-like and coming towards that stage.

[Warlock93]

Creationists respond to everything they don't understand as "the creator did it".

Why can't god create planets? You say because he's god? WONDERFUL answer! WAIT! Theres something missing...something called FACTS and his friend LOGIC.

Plants and Animals didn't decend from eachother, they are two VERY DIFFERENT living things that came from cells. Bacteria was the first things to exist on this earth, and from it cells mutated and adapted, and eventually formed into simple creatures. Bacteria and the like did come from the mixture of chemicals on a molecular level. See? I have FACTS we actually KNOW HAPPENED. Not some bullsh*t you blame on some creator we will never in our lives know even existed (In our LIVES, doesn't include death).

The earth wasn't formed in seven days. Astronimers see the process of planets forming every damned day. It takes alot more then 7 days, and there is no giant human standing beside it making it, so there goes your theory. And dude, we aren't the only intelligent things out there. There are BILLIONS OF PLANETS; if you think there aren't other beings as intelligent as us, you are a very shallow person.

Adam and Eve? Does the f*cking phrase "inbreeding" mean anything to Creationists?! I don't even need to explain.

The ark. WE DISCOVER SPECIES EVERY YEAR, there is NO WAY some random old dude collected EVERY species in the world before some magical flood that happened for no damn reason.

The bible is stories meant to teach morals, not to be taken as truth. I, too, believe in god, but I believe he created the template to the universe and let life find a way. He had nothing to do with our creation or the creation of earth, in my theory.

F*cking hate Creationists...Sorry RL, but these two (Mentioned earlier in the topic) friends at school used to torment me about not believing in this unexplained bullsh*t, and I get pissed easily now. No offense meant.

This all really bothers me. I know and repsect you have your own opinion, but I think you're being a little...well...ignorant. For example, if God is real and all the things in the Bible happened(which I believe), they're taken too literally. Adam and Eve were the FIRST people God created. Never said they were the ONLY ones. And the 7 days thing? Could've also been an exaggeration. Another point? God is NEVER described as a "giant human" who stands next to the Earth. EVER.
Next, I go to Noah and the Flood. While this story sounds ridiculous, it's not complete bullcrap. SCIENCE can prove that the Earth, a LONG time ago, had a layer of superdense water vapor surrounding it. Enough water vapor, that, if it condensed and precipitated, could flood the entire planet. The Ark? Also sounds ridiculous, but still. It's my personal belief that Pangaea ceased to exist after the Flood. So, before the Flood when there still WAS one supercontinent, the animals could've made it to one place. Unlikely, but it could happen. Noah? I personally don't think him, alog with other figures in the Old Testament of the Bible, were really people. I think they are figures that represent groups of people, or commoin beliefs. The ACTUAL reason many Creationists/people who believe in a god, is backed up by SCIENCE. The Earth, before a certain point, had a heck of a lot more nitrogen in the atmosphere(before the flood). The dinosaurs had EVOLVED(yes I do believe in evolution, just after Creation like KP.) to have nasal passages that needed nitrogen rich air. When they ran out of nitrogen, they couldn't breathe.
Once again, I will use SCIENCE to back my belief. In the Bible, God stops the Earth to help the Israelites win a battle. This group of scientists developed a device that could basically go back in time and see what happened with the planets and alingment...things like that. When they punched in some numbers, there was a hole. Nothing. So, the Christian scientist of the bunch told them about that battle and when they made the adjustments, it worked. Call in random probability or divine intervention , I really don't care.

I've got only a couple more things to say, so here goes.

I commonly have debates with my atheist friends. They're friendly for the most part, and are sometimes almost fun. But, I've basically only got one more argument that they'll actually listen to. Bear in mind, I'm pretty sure it only relates to Chrisitanity, so no offense to anyone.

If you're right, there is no God, and when we die, we die...I'M still ok. Whatever. Even though I was wrong, therell be no paradise, I still was a good person. No real loss for me.

What if I'm right?

Next: Evolution. Sure, it's been "proved" but it has a TON of holes to call it the base for everything. Things won't evolve what they don't need, right? Well, there was a study done on cells. If they evolve their flagellae, well...they can't. They would have to evolve it in pieces...pieces that have no purpose unless one thing. So, there's just NO WAY evolution could've started everything. There had to be something else. No way that when everything goes from order to chaos that evolution can go from complete chaos to order. I want to make it a point that I DO believe in evolution, but not as the basis for life.

In the words of a simple man, "That's all I have to say about that."

[Doc 42]

Once again, I will use SCIENCE to back my belief. In the Bible, God stops the Earth to help the Israelites win a battle. This group of scientists developed a device that could basically go back in time and see what happened with the planets and alingment...things like that. When they punched in some numbers, there was a hole. Nothing. So, the Christian scientist of the bunch told them about that battle and when they made the adjustments, it worked. Call in random probability or divine intervention , I really don't care.

Your confuseing Science with.... I dunno what it is... Closest thing I can think of is a crappy paper back science fiction novel. You know, the type that sells 4 copies and then never sees the light of day again.

Some device that looks back in time? Well thanks for telling me about that. I was wondering where that enourmous rip in the fabric of reality came from.

[TyrannoTitan]

Well Warlock, you just threw yourself into the lion's den (No pun intended...wow, lots of bible jokes in here...)

First of all, lets get one thing very clear: Despite the fact that I think most of the stories in the bible are nothing but fairy tales, I DO believe in god, Jesus, and even Reincarnation and Muhammad. I really don't have a set religion, and I just believe it the things from religions that make sense to me.

Which doesn't include the bible's stories.

Adam and Eve were the first of their kind...and they pissed off God and he cast them out of the garden. Ya, I know the story. Why the HELL would he give them ANYTHING after they pissed him off like that? So, therefore, your theory doesn't work.

The giant human thing, was indeed a joke. Not to be litteral.

...Your joking? Pangaea - Ice Age - Modern Times. In the bible they do not describe the Ice Age after the flood, and we KNOW IT HAPPENED, so ya. You'd be skipping a whole section of history right there.

Backed up by science? Bullsh*t. Adam and Eve: Science says inbreeding would cause deformities. Noah and the Ark: There is no record of a flood or the Ark itself, and if he didn't collect ALL the animals, how do we discover new species every day? Science is the exact OPPOSITE of religion, be sure to learn that.

...Wtf? SCIENCE says the air back then had alot more O2, thats it. When the meteor, volcano, or whatever killed them, the atmosphere changed.

Dude...a time machine is impossible. If your talking about any MODERN people who did it, then you need to have your brain exaimed. If in the bible? Then that just proves my point that all the stories are bullsh*t. Time is the most powerful thing in the universe. Probably more complex then God (Again, I believe he's real). If we f*cked with it, it would cause the entire universe to collapse. Besides, we are BARELY developing lasers, theres NO F*CKING WAY we had TIME MACHINES. Get real.

Why couldn't it? Particles in space start to form suns, plants form over millions of years, it could've all started as soon as the right materials developed via evolution or just that they were there from the start. It CAN be the basis of life, its just some people refuse to believe it can.

[Warlock93]

It wasn't a time machine, was a recorder of alignments or some other crap.
I just wanted to make sure ther's no hard feelings, your use of censored f-bombs is kinda giving me a bad vibe. That Is mjust my opinion, and it may look like I'm an idiot, but I probably didn't get things out how I wanted em to, but I'm not going to correct myself because I don't want conflict.

[TyrannoTitan]

No, no, no, no, no. Its a debate topic, its MEANT for conflict

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but if you post it here, its ganna get mauled. The F-bombs are just my way of debating

No hard feelings of course.

[Raptor Llama]

Noah didn't get every speices on the ark. That's the point.

Sure they discover a new speices every day, but they don't discover a whole new genus every day. He took two of certain genus. Ex: He didn't take 2 brachiosaurus and 2 Diplodicus, he took one of each, which could breed and their offspring would eventually be every speices of that genus (and since bracs were too tall for the ark, younglings or eggs could be brought on instead.)

He didn't take any marine animals, they were fine in the water. No bugs, they burrowed. so now you don't have too many animals. Remember: the ark was made by amatuers. The titantic was made by perfessionals.

And this is also were natural selection comes in. One type of Dromiasaur, if put into another Dromiasaur's enviornment, could infact get the traits of that Dromiasaur. But it won't be becoming a bird anytime soon, unless the bird is a Dromiasaur.

Oh, and evidence of dinosaurs having feathers, you know what, that's great. Are we going to assume now that everything with fur evolved alone that line, or everything with scales? Are we going to assume a bumble bee's ancestor is a cat? No! And who knows, maybe dinosaurs are a type of large, carnivorious bird. Or at least some types. And other are reptiles. Or maybe reptiles and birds are of the same class! But if dinosaurs had feathers, it dosen't change anything.

And I don't think the world is Billions and Billions of years old. Infact, if it were, the ocean would probably be dried out by now. It's in my eyes around 10,000 years old, I beilive? And if Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, how on earth is a peice of tissue still going to be around? And I'm not talking about Cleanex, in case your wondering.

[Doc 42]

In evolution, random things dont happen. Dinos dont turn into birds because they feel like it. Changes that happen, happen because they are the best routes to survival. Birds evolve through animals developing lighter bone structures, allowing them to jump further, maybe glide depending on if they have wings or not. Flying is just another step up the line.

And Rl, Tar pits my freind, Tar. It can keep peserve things for thousands of years. MILLIONS of years even. Things decompose because of micro organisims feeding off them. What if there are no micro organisims around? it doesnt decompose.

[TyrannoTitan]

If you don't think the Earth is 65 Millions years or older, you have mental issues. Maybe I'm being too angry, but its just common knowledge.

1: HUMANS AND DINOSAURS WERE NEVER IN CONTACT WIHT EACHOTHER.

2: SCIENTISTS found that the Earth was in layers (deep), hence how they find a dinosaur bone is from Jurassic, etc. They KNOW the earth is billions of years old. If you can't accept that, then your arguement is invalid and makes no sense.

Dude, we are STILL FINDING SPECIES!! That means that Noah would've HAD to bring EVERY animal. It makes no sense.

Ok, dinos had feathers. I can understand how you can say they are unrelated. BUT WAIT! Their BONE STRUCTURE IS THE SAME AS BIRDS. Coincidence? Nope. Once again, your arguement is invalid and is backed up by nothing but wishful thinking.

Try again.

Doc says: Chilax people, any other insults and warnings will be dished out to those involved.

[Raptor Llama]

Are you even listening to anything I'm saying, or are you just skimming through it quickly?

Read my post. Again. And you will see a few of your questions will be answered.

1: Just the statement Dinosaurs and humans never say each other? I was hoping for something a little more scientific. Your always saying how creationist have the exuse god made it. Turns out were not the only ones here.



Now I think this is fake, but I remember seeing a real one that looked slighly less distinct and had someone riding it with a whip.

Now when Marco Polo visited the Chinese, he described seeing dragons. The word Dinosaur wasen't invented then, so that was the closest thing. No one knows this because it was quickly rejected. Which brings we to another subject: Dragons.

The idea of Dragons has been around long before the descovery of dinosaurs. So if dragons are like dinosaurs, how come dragons have wings, powers, ect? Two things: Bad story telling and the tellephone game. And the Chinese are said to have found dinosaur bones and call them dragons. Could this be the orgin? Yes, and it probably is. But the definition of dragon to everyone was something big, with teeth and with scales. Dinosaurs!

2: I already said this. You want to know how they find out the ages of these layers? I think it has to do with radiation, but I'm not sure. However, I do know creationist have used it more than evolutionist. And guess what they found? On the same layer of rock, there's always a different result! Sounds reliable to me!

For the rest of your post, you need to read my post again, because you obviously weren't paying attention.

[TyrannoTitan]

The first mammals bigger then badgers appeared millions of years after the dinosaurs. Again, its common knowledge. The appearence of dinosaurs stopped any other type of creature from evolving very much, hence why they were left in the dust compared to the dinosaurs, but also saved them when the extinction event occur. By the way, we know something happened that killed the dinosaurs. We know something happened to cause a mass extinction before the Triassic period, also. So if your theory of man and dinosaur living together is true, shouldn't have we died out when they did? I think so.

Dragon is from the Greek word "drakōn", "a serpent of huge size, a python". Do dinosaurs look like serpants? At ALL? No. It is a mystery how the mythology of dragons spread without much contact between the early cultures, but its very different from dinosaurs.

Also, this renders your second arguement false. They have proven time and time again, that the Earth is billions of years old, and have created a Geologic Timescale of almost purely fact. Its billions of years old.

Read your post again? I stated what didn't make any sense. If he didn't get every species, how come more are being found after the supposed event? It would either mean: A) It didn't happen, or B) You just said evolution was the explaination.