my friend told me this joke. I don't know who Carl Sagan is...
Anyone up for a 300 comment evolution debate?
NO. WE SHOULD BE HAVING A 300 COMMENT CREATION DEBATE.
That is fine with me.
Only 296 comments to go...
This is a funny post for both creationists and evolutionary theorists. Don't be a dick.
why would you want to debate facts?
Carl Sagan died too young. :(
Kent Hovind has a standing offer offering two hundred thousand dollars to the one who proves evolution, or at least that the universe started with no god, life formed, which became us. Two hundred thousand dollars.
Evolution is not fact, evolution isn't even close to fact. It has no real science at all. Science is the observation of something testable and repeatable. Are we able to witness something (supposedly) before our time?
It's funny how that is nearly everyone's response. "Oh well evolutions been proved."
No it hasn't. And anyone who says it is is a joke.
It's $250000, and that offer is ridiculous. He doesn't even have real scientists judging the proof. He determines it himself. So that argument is flawed.
Secondly, and most importantly, evolution does not example the origin of the universe or the origin of life. That's a different theory which doesn't have enough proof...yet. Evolution explains the origin of the different species on earth. That's something Creatinists never understand. So if you're going to debate evolution, stick to that and only that.
Now, on the proof of evolution. Well it's an undeniable fact that microevolution occurs (even Creationists except that). The fossil record (in my opinion) the strongest proof to macroevolution. If you look at the fossil record it clearly shows that simpler creatures existed long before more complex ones. The large amount of transitional fossils that have been discovered, the similarities between all living creatures,
the similarity between related species (horses and donkeys can even mate), the vast differences between species, etc, that all says to me that we must have evolved from simpler animals.
It has been proved. So much so that most scientists say it's a fact.
I know what the cost is. And I know it isn't fair. That doesn't change the fact that if it were proved, he'd have lost that. It hasn't been proven.
Actually the theory of evolution incorporates the start of the universe and abiogenesis. However, none of that is scientific in the least.
What you don't seem to get is that there is no logical order to the supposed "fossil record." The scientists just constructed it based on looks alone. They've been called out several times, and had to alter it. The fossils found were out of order In the strata. Explain why that is.
Similarities can also mean a common creator. Every ford car has the ford emblem. Does that mean the F-150 evolved from the Taurus? No it doesn't.
Did you know we have the same correlation to a chicken. Supposedly we are 97% the same as a chicken. Funny, eh?
What is funny, is that you're so quick to scrutinize evolution when religion has even less proof. Actually, it has no proof, just faith. If people demanded as much from their religion as they do from science, then no one would believe in a god.
Well your last point isn't unfounded and biased....
Actually he has a board, but he appointed each member specifically.
Do you know what science is? According to dictionary.com, it's "systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation."
Observation or experimentation. Tell me, can they observe abiogenesis or the big bang? Can they observe species evolving into Another species? No? It isn't science; it's theorizing.
Actually, they "do" just construct something. Did you know that 80% of scientists admitted to maybe fudging the results on an experiment if it doesn't support evolution? Did you? That's critical. Scientists aren't some noble assortment of people. They're smart, but they're also sly.
The fossil record doesn't exist, period. That's one more thing used to trick little boys and girls like yourself.
Actually, didn't we supposedly split from chickens some 200 million years ago? And we're mo...
He appointed each member. That presents a conflict of interest. He needs an entirely neutral board (which is impossible).
They observed the expanding universe and speculated that it must have come from one point and is expanding because of a big explosion that happened billions of years ago. They did experiments that recreated the conditions on earth billions of years ago and found that organic molecules were spontaneouly formed. And I know this doesn't prove it happened but it does prove that it's highly possible. And yes; the evolution of microorganisms has been observed.
Did you know 60% of statistics are made up on the spot? Show me a study on the claim you made. Scientists are just trying to understand the world like everyone else.
We didn't evolve from chickens (or apes), we had the same COMMON ANCESTOR.
By the way, you're extremely condescending. I think I've been more than respectful of your opinions and it's not too much to ask you to do the same.
Okay, you say my point is unfounded and biased. Use observation and experimentation to prove god exists or any of the claims in the bible are true?
Show, scientifically, how a man can be dead for 3 days and then rise again like nothing happened. Explain how a man can survive in the stomach of a whale without being digested, or overcome by the smell or lack of oxygen. Explain how one man can kill an army with the jaw bone of an ox. Or how walking around a wall while blowing trumpets will cause it to fall down. Or how a grown woman can be spontaneously turned into a pillar of salt. You can't. You need faith to believe that any of that happened.
We have a winner! :)
Although, I still believe God got it all kick started and helped it along the way. That just makes more sense to me than everything just coming out of nowhere, even if that does mean God came out of nowhere...
Well God didnt come out of nowhere.. he was always there. which is very hard for the human mind to grasp.
No, no, no. My point is, if he's the only one judging the proof, then he can just dismiss any proof he wants.
I'm still not convinced on that. To me, they are 3 separate theories explaining how life today came about. But abiogenesis and the big bang are scientific. They are the best 'guess' that scientists could come up with based on things they've observed. Like the fact that the universe is still expanding. But the proof is not as solid as evolution.
That's very insulting to scientists. They don't 'just' construct something. They study it for years and make conclusions based on these studies. And of course as technology improves, they'll find that they need to make small alterations to the fossil record. And I can't explain that because I'm not a scientist.
That proves evolution even more. If a chicken has small, favourable genetic mutations over millions of years that change it's genome by only 3% it would be a human.
i was expecting a 300 comment debate but he ran away after 10 :/
i used to too. But then i sought and i didn't find anything so yeah. My theory is if he does exist, he's nothing like the abrahamic god.
haha. Something you should learn about people on the internet. When you start proving them wrong...they ignore you.
Sometimes I wonder if you're really 13 :).
haha. I'll take that as a compliment (:
I don't get it