|
Attention: Year 2009 is here
Wishing a very Happy New Year to all members of FFI. Our new and improved site is ready. To visit main site, click at faithfreedom.org and to visit our new forum, click at forum09.faithfreedom.org and register again. Do not worry about your old forum posts and PM, everything is saved here till 31st December, 2008 for future references.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Love_Peace
Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Posts: 41
|
 Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| IandonlyI wrote: |
Seonc thing here is human penis and vagina(no joking here). This one cell turned from semi-living to living, from living to plants and animals, from animals to males and females. From males and females to multiple species allt he way to monkeys. But how did males and females evolve so collectively? I mean the fact that females have a a organ that can hold male's organ to get the job done and they both knew on its own is very hard for me to believe. I mean why diddn't males and females both evolve with vagina or a penis? How come it diddnt happen? |
CC please explain this by your evolution theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crazy canuck
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 6391
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Love_Peace wrote: |
| IandonlyI wrote: |
Seonc thing here is human penis and vagina(no joking here). This one cell turned from semi-living to living, from living to plants and animals, from animals to males and females. From males and females to multiple species allt he way to monkeys. But how did males and females evolve so collectively? I mean the fact that females have a a organ that can hold male's organ to get the job done and they both knew on its own is very hard for me to believe. I mean why diddn't males and females both evolve with vagina or a penis? How come it diddnt happen? |
CC please explain this by your evolution theory. |
Yes in nature there is phenomenon called hermaphroditism where organism has both organs. They get double fun out of screwing but procreation has to be sacrificed.
As you go lower down the ladder to amphibians and fish, no copulation like mammals , male enetering female organ takes place. in many fish species, female deposits eggs outside anfd male sperm fertilise it outside. Now those larvae try to survive as best as they can.  One species of fish is known to change from male to female when procreation dictates. Many time species can survive without even male fertilising. But exchange of male female chromosome has distinct advantage for vertebrates. Thsi is the reason many of phylum chordata switch to one way screwing.
Mammals evoled different strategy and clear male female distinction evolved. Parental care of offspring and more enjoyment derived from screwing may be reason for this clear cut sex evolution. Again there are exceptions . Marsupials are lot different than mammals. There can be mammals laying eggs and reptiles giving birth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreePower
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 564
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know, I do not hold any particular stance in regards to evolution. I am neither for it or against it. But If evolution is true then why is everything in a pattern, without counting insects. Animals and humans have two eyes, a nose and a mouth. I believe if evolution really happened we would see all kinds of different mutations, animals without a standard face. Yet it seems everything in nature holds a specific pattern that is like the other in some way or another.
_________________
The Meeting House - What convinced me - www.themeetinghouse.ca - Irreligious Christians
“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IandonlyI
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 2884
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crazy canuck wrote: |
| Love_Peace wrote: |
| IandonlyI wrote: |
Seonc thing here is human penis and vagina(no joking here). This one cell turned from semi-living to living, from living to plants and animals, from animals to males and females. From males and females to multiple species allt he way to monkeys. But how did males and females evolve so collectively? I mean the fact that females have a a organ that can hold male's organ to get the job done and they both knew on its own is very hard for me to believe. I mean why diddn't males and females both evolve with vagina or a penis? How come it diddnt happen? |
CC please explain this by your evolution theory. |
Yes in nature there is phenomenon called hermaphroditism where organism has both organs. They get double fun out of screwing but procreation has to be sacrificed.
As you go lower down the ladder to amphibians and fish, no copulation like mammals , male enetering female organ takes place. in many fish species, female deposits eggs outside anfd male sperm fertilise it outside. Now those larvae try to survive as best as they can. One species of fish is known to change from male to female when procreation dictates. Many time species can survive without even male fertilising. But exchange of male female chromosome has distinct advantage for vertebrates. Thsi is the reason many of phylum chordata switch to one way screwing.
Mammals evoled different strategy and clear male female distinction evolved. Parental care of offspring and more enjoyment derived from screwing may be reason for this clear cut sex evolution. Again there are exceptions . Marsupials are lot different than mammals. There can be mammals laying eggs and reptiles giving birth. |
CC sorry, that explanation raises more questions than it answers. I asked you one question and now I am stuck with 10. But let me tell you why you are wrong.
1) Science is being contradictory when it comes to Evolution: You know there was a scientist who long ago said that Africa and South America were once connected(forgot name and everything but remember the substance). He came up with that theory and he was pretty certain of it but rest of the scientists in the world at the time totally discarded his theory. You know why? Because he could not prove it. And you know why he could not prove it? Because of lack of the ease of transportation we have today and nobody wanted to invest in that because there is nothing to gain. This was proven later on anyway. However, when it come sto evolution the same science wants us to believe in million theories based on few fossil finds.
So that is the base of any science. Anything you say needs to be proven otherwise it should be discarded. So untill you can prove it all I discard it
2) But let's say that we should believe in those theories but then you tell me What is difference between science and religion then? The fact that science wants to you believe in so many non-proven things and the same is with religion then what is the real difference?
Now, going back to your answer. Please look at the question and then look at your answer. It just answers nothing about the question which was. How did they evolve seperately but so perfectly?
Again, I expect better from a Doctor(I think you are a doctor or am I dreaming?)
Come on athiests and evolutionists. You come thumping your chests and now cant say anything that makes sense? Please!!!
_________________
If you cannot see god in all, how can you see god at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rat_bytes
Joined: 22 Apr 2008
Posts: 539
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| IandonlyI wrote: |
CC sorry, that explanation raises more questions than it answers. I asked you one question and now I am stuck with 10. But let me tell you why you are wrong.
1) Science is being contradictory when it comes to Evolution: You know there was a scientist who long ago said that Africa and South America were once connected(forgot name and everything but remember the substance). He came up with that theory and he was pretty certain of it but rest of the scientists in the world at the time totally discarded his theory. You know why? Because he could not prove it. And you know why he could not prove it? Because of lack of the ease of transportation we have today and nobody wanted to invest in that because there is nothing to gain. This was proven later on anyway. However, when it come sto evolution the same science wants us to believe in million theories based on few fossil finds. |
You're not making any sense. On the one hand you want us to believe in something like intelligent design, which carries no evidence to support it, and then you turn around and claim that the fossil record is inadequate. What part of it is inadequate? Have you even read anything about the fossil record or are your opinions all based on what others have told you? Please point out just what proof of evolution is lacking, and I will direct you to multiple sources to answer your questions.
| IandonlyI wrote: |
| So that is the base of any science. Anything you say needs to be proven otherwise it should be discarded. So untill you can prove it all I discard it |
The proof you want is inconsistent with the scientific process. You will accept nothing more than visually watching one species evolve into another, something that is impossible as it takes many lifetimes. What kind of proof would it take to convince you of evolution's accuracy, and why do you not hold the same skepticism for ID?
| IandonlyI wrote: |
| 2) But let's say that we should believe in those theories but then you tell me What is difference between science and religion then? The fact that science wants to you believe in so many non-proven things and the same is with religion then what is the real difference? |
Everything you have claimed is "non-proven" IS proven, it's just not proof according to your narrow interpretation of the word. I'm not really surprised about this, since you don't even seem to understand the meaning of the word "theory".
| IandonlyI wrote: |
| Now, going back to your answer. Please look at the question and then look at your answer. It just answers nothing about the question which was. How did they evolve seperately but so perfectly? |
What makes you think they evolved seperately? What makes you think they evolved perfectly? Do you know the difference between the X and Y chromosomes and what their functions are?
| IandonlyI wrote: |
Again, I expect better from a Doctor(I think you are a doctor or am I dreaming?)
Come on athiests and evolutionists. You come thumping your chests and now cant say anything that makes sense? Please!!! |
It's not making sense because you are covering your ears and singing "la la la not listening!"
_________________
The world holds two classes of men - intelligent men without religion, and religious men without intelligence. - Abu’l‐Ala al Ma’arri |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy canuck
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 6391
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2008 6:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="IandonlyI"]
| crazy canuck wrote: |
| Love_Peace wrote: |
| IandonlyI wrote: |
Seonc thing here is human penis and vagina(no joking here). This one cell turned from semi-living to living, from living to plants and animals, from animals to males and females. From males and females to multiple species allt he way to monkeys. But how did males and females evolve so collectively? I mean the fact that females have a a organ that can hold male's organ to get the job done and they both knew on its own is very hard for me to believe. I mean why diddn't males and females both evolve with vagina or a penis? How come it diddnt happen? |
CC please explain this by your evolution theory. |
Yes in nature there is phenomenon called hermaphroditism where organism has both organs. They get double fun out of screwing but procreation has to be sacrificed.
As you go lower down the ladder to amphibians and fish, no copulation like mammals , male enetering female organ takes place. in many fish species, female deposits eggs outside anfd male sperm fertilise it outside. Now those larvae try to survive as best as they can. One species of fish is known to change from male to female when procreation dictates. Many time species can survive without even male fertilising. But exchange of male female chromosome has distinct advantage for vertebrates. Thsi is the reason many of phylum chordata switch to one way screwing.
Mammals evoled different strategy and clear male female distinction evolved. Parental care of offspring and more enjoyment derived from screwing may be reason for this clear cut sex evolution. Again there are exceptions . Marsupials are lot different than mammals. There can be mammals laying eggs and reptiles giving birth. |
| Quote: |
| CC sorry, that explanation raises more questions than it answers. I asked you one question and now I am stuck with 10. But let me tell you why you are wrong. |
I am no more interseted in teaching you about sex in birds and bees. But first you ask about sexes and then you go back to who did it???
I know what was your question?.Who determined? and who created first male female? You know the answers . Dont be coy!! God did it!! You show me how he did it. Go to garden of Eden and you will get all answers. Jews are there to explain what happned.
was explaining all those sex differentiations from evolutionary view point.In beginning there were no sexes. Natural selections caused evolution and in case of vertebrates natural selection dictated .C.C.
| Quote: |
| IND:1) Science is being contradictory when it comes to Evolution: You know there was a scientist who long ago said that Africa and South America were once connected(forgot name and everything but remember the substance). He came up with that theory and he was pretty certain of it but rest of the scientists in the world at the time totally discarded his theory. You know why? Because he could not prove it. And you know why he could not prove it? Because of lack of the ease of transportation we have today and nobody wanted to invest in that because there is nothing to gain. This was proven later on anyway. However, when it come sto evolution the same science wants us to believe in million theories based on few fossil finds. |
Science is not contradictory when it comes to evolution. There are no million theories. Just theory of evolution by Darwin where natural selection is corner stone.Abiogenesis explains how primitive life came into being from inorganic molecules.
I know you are tallking about Wagner theory of continental drift. There were critics of this theory.Main problem was rigidity of sialic crust.Later plate tectonics overcame many physical difficulties. Moral of the story is science does not accept any thing blindly.
Evolution is not holi grail of science. Rightnow it can explains from fossil records to microevolution of bacteria to propagation of many diesase. If some one gives better theory than evolution, it will be discarded.
| Quote: |
Just because in past science has to modify its theories that does not mean all present theories are suspect and should be discarded.
So that is the base of any science. Anything you say needs to be proven otherwise it should be discarded. So untill you can prove it all I discard it |
Thats right but dont discard it till you find some better theory . Give some alternate theory whether its magnetism in rocks or fossil record. Again dont bring who did it or keep on going back to big bang without understanding planet earth.
.
| Quote: |
| ind: 2) But let's say that we should believe in those theories but then you tell me What is difference between science and religion then? The fact that science wants to you believe in so many non-proven things and the same is with religion then what is the real difference? |
No you dont have to belive in any theory . you can discard any theory of science even e= mc2 if you can prove that it does not work.Only one condtion :use method of science, not religion or dont postpond it to one dozen big bangs!! or Ask qusetion like whodonit.
| Quote: |
Now, going back to your answer. Please look at the question and then look at your answer. It just answers nothing about the question which was. How did they evolve seperately but so perfectly?
Again, I expect better from a Doctor(I think you are a doctor or am I dreaming?) |
Your question is asking deterministic answer. You know the answer. GOD.
As I said species evolved separately from common ancestry ? Why? natural selection, environmental factors, competetion for resources, geographic separation made them separate. Man living in African bush is different than man living near north pole.
| Quote: |
| Come on athiests and evolutionists. You come thumping your chests and now cant say anything that makes sense? Please!!! |
I am not thumping chest.You are the one who ask who determines? Who did it? I am just telling you how male & female sex difference evolved. TWorld was unisex or no sex in the beginning. May be it was pleasure thats why we have sex differences. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IandonlyI
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 2884
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
CC wrote:
| Quote: |
| Thats right but dont discard it till you find some better theory . Give some alternate theory whether its magnetism in rocks or fossil record. Again dont bring who did it or keep on going back to big bang without understanding planet earth. |
CC, I have never discarded science and I will never support such move. I dont know how many times do I have to say this but NO I AM not anti-science. I do not denounce physics or medical science But many theories that exist within evolution part of science are purely based on. Oh we found this fossill and since this is the oldest fossill found so far and has 4 legs, let's discard the second oldest one as the parent of all four legged animals. You see? That is how far we are in proving anything in the theory of evolution.
I know about Darwin's theory of selection. Did I disagree with that? I can see it with my eyes. The stronger wins. I have seen dogs fight over food and the one wins takes the food and lives longer. Who disagreed with that?
But now let's take Darwin's theory with what we are talking about here? Tell me honestly what does that have to do with intelligence?
Anyway, let's say that Natural selection created males and females and let's go back to that question. How did the cells in female vagina know the size of male penis and set itself up so "Perfectly" so if in case there was an intercourse(without condoms ofcourse) there will be a child. So the cells in female vagina knew exactly what was expected from them right? Is that what you are telling me?
You and the RAT keep saying that things I mention are not really perfect. Let me ask you something, unless both of you are fourty years old virgins, do you tell your wives or GFs that hey we cant have intercourse as your vagina cannot possibly hold my penis because my penis is fourty inches in diameter when erect? Do you really have problems have intercourse with some women from anywhere on this planet? Do you? I HOPE NOT. So when I say perfect that is exactly what I mean, perfect for us. I did not say that you can go and have ses with female rat. No that does not happen. I hope you are not trying also.
So you want me to believe that evolution caused cells of female vagina to set itself up perfectly so male can do its thing? Yes you can probably say it happened over 1 million years but DUDE in one million years if female Vagina diddnt know what it was doing no animal would've survived.
I see what you are saying evolution is. You are saying that when males and females have intercourse the penis and vagina talk to each other right?
Penis: Hey I am not fitting in.
Vagina: Okay give me about million years, I will set myself up right for you.
Penis: Cool babe. But we still gotta reproduce
Vagina: Okay, so let's decide what is expected from both of us. You have to do something, you know?
Penis: Okay I will do this much. Deal?
Vagina: Deal.
Penis: Okay let's go back to the time frame. You gotta do thigns faster.
Vagina: okay how about 500,000.00 years?
Penis: Okay I will get back to you after talking to my beholder if he can survive for 500,000.00 years without reproducing.
Vagina: Okay I will do the same with mine. See ya untill next time.
Penis: See ya.
And granted, even above is possible upto a point. For example, if you keep doing hard physical work for 8 hours a day for a year the cells on your hand will be like a rock as they are adopting. If you do that your whole life, you will possibly pass it on to your son a little harder hand than what you were born with. So it is possible if something is done repeatedly for long time but how many hours a day did animals have sex? Like 8 hours a day for their entire life? And that only fixes the size issue. I still dont know how did they decide on what part they will both do to really reproduce.
Another point of yours about believing and non-believing in any theory. There is no disbelieving. But I am a sceptic. I will believe when they can prove it. Period. Evolutionary sciece has more pending questions than answers, like 1/100 ratio.
And now science wants to tell us that we are evolving faster which disproves a belief in science itself which said that evolution has stopped(oh man science believed that evolution stopped? and that too modern science?). Not only that, they are saying technology cant determine anything over 2000 years ago. HAHAHAHA. So science wants to BELIEVE in everything beyond that but evolution took 4.5 BILLION years, right? If let's say that evolution took 7 million years to give human eye an birth, do you know that in two thousand years you cant even see a THING change to your eye? But they are still seeing evolution happen right?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7132794.stm
And guys, just so you know carbon dating is not perfect. Even in things that are 1000 years old there is difference of many years with carbon dating so for a fossill found that is 100 millioln years old it could not be totally off, right?
You know what I say to all this? I say "Get the F outta here"
Lastly, I dont need to prove anything. I have seen the athiests and evolutionists too radicals in their belief so I am just countering. Since you are so sure of your belief, bring it on. And all I am doing is holding the science you believe in agaisnt you. Prove it, damn it or shut up untill it is proven. All parallel theories and beliefs need to be kept on untill they are disproven.
Leave the believers alone untill you know what you are doing. sh!t, you cant even make medicine that works for all. Hey tylenol works for me but the guy next door gets kidney stones from it. LOL.
_________________
If you cannot see god in all, how can you see god at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy canuck
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 6391
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let someone else explain about organ fitness issue!!
I dont know whats your question. In mammals ( we are mammals) natural selection has dictated certain traits.In many species female makes selection who to mate with. There is no dialog.Only himan species has dialog and became lot more pickier. After all its has brain and culture. Other species dont waste their time on those questions. Before mating season is over, females must get pregannat otherwise species become extinct. Ultimately any male of species would do.
| Quote: |
| Ind:But now let's take Darwin's theory with what we are talking about here? Tell me honestly what does that have to do with intelligence? |
Evolution has explanation for intelligence. Mammal with bigger brains ( vs body weight)are lot more intelligent. If bigger brains were not evolved we wont be asking those dumb questions.
| Quote: |
| And guys, just so you know carbon dating is not perfect. Even in things that are 1000 years old there is difference of many years with carbon dating so for a fossill found that is 100 millioln years old it could not be totally off, right? |
.
I will explain about radioactive isotope age dating which I can talk with some degree of confidence.
There are many radioactive elements used for age dating. Uranium, Carbon, Potasium, Plutionium , lead etc. Its accuracy depends on nature of decay, contaminants, half life etc.
Its all based on radioactive decay of radioactive isotops. or How many years it takes to completely decay that radioactive element. When half is decayed the years take is called half life.
Carbon has half life of about 5000 years. Equation is expressed in log form.About 18000 yaer old specimen can be age dated. It has accuracy of + or - 30 years. Age dates are varified with known data like tree rings, archeological data, magnetic reversals etc.
uranium radioisotops has half life of few hundred million years. Its accuracy is about 10 to 20 million + or minus.This dating is not used for fossils its used for igeneous rocks.
Geologists are interested in comparative age of specimen not absolute age. Thats the reason error within certain limits are tolerated.
Fossils are not age dated by radioactive means. Their absolute age cant be determined. For absolute age one has to age date igneous rocks above and below. Igeneous rocks are found all over the world and their absolute dates can be detemined for youngest to oldest rock.For youngest K-Ar age dating is used ( half life of few hundred thousand years) for oldest ( 4-5 billion) Uranium lead isotopes are used. Ofcourse older the rock more approximation. Still data has merit when compared with numerous oldest rocks found on all continents. It has valid theory of nuclear physics behind it.
Adverse effect of drugs are well understood. I dont know what was your point about kidney stone & tylenol. Every drug can have adverse reaction in one person out of million or so. Body chemistry is not perfect. Not same for every one. Evolution can explain but Idesign talks mumbojumbo.
C.C.
Last edited by crazy canuck on Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:01 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Popeye
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 504
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is amazing how believers never apply the same "nit-picking" questions to their God theory.
Why is it that they are willing to accept the existence of a Supernatural being without applying the same standards to which they demand others to be held.
Why do you do not ask your God to reproduce the creation of life from raw materials for your observation before you accept Him ?
Long on dogma and faith but zero on evidence and logic.
_________________
Surtout, pas trop de zele. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IandonlyI
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 2884
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Popeye wrote: |
It is amazing how believers never apply the same "nit-picking" questions to their God theory.
Why is it that they are willing to accept the existence of a Supernatural being without applying the same standards to which they demand others to be held.
Why do you do not ask your God to reproduce the creation of life from raw materials for your observation before you accept Him ?
Long on dogma and faith but zero on evidence and logic. |
Because belief does not require logic or reasoning, it requires faith. While Science requires proof. Belief does not ask for proof but science does. Is it hurting you all because your science cant stand up to its own standards?
Science and belief are two different things. And mind you, in my book even athiesm is welcome but I am just speaking out because you athiests are too intolerant and radicals.
In either case, science is all good and welcome but if you are going to be intolerant and radicals in your athiest/scientific belief then I hold you to your own standareds. Which is provide proof of everything you are saying. Since you believe in science and science requires proof, provide proof damn it. No religion asks for proof but it asks for faith and believers have faith. Simple.
Is that very hard to understand popeye boy?
_________________
If you cannot see god in all, how can you see god at all?
Last edited by IandonlyI on Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IandonlyI
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 2884
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CC wrote:
| Quote: |
Let someone else explain about organ fitness issue!!
I dont know whats your question. In mammals ( we are mammals) natural selection has dictates certain traits.In many species female makes selection who to mate with. There is no dialog.Only himan species has dialog and became lot more pickier. After all its has brain and culture. Other species dont waste their time on those equetion. Before mating season is over females must get pregannat otherwise species become extinct. Ultimately any male of species would do. |
You keep revolving around same thing over and over again without answering the question on the generation of intelligence my friend. ALL THE PHYSICAL CHANGES ARE POSSIBLE BY EVOLUTION, I WANT TO KNOW INTELLIGENCE'S GENERATION. WHERE DID IT COME FROM.
You all need to quit teaching me evolution. I already know how much evolution knows that is why I am holding you by necks.
| Quote: |
| Evolution has explanation for intelligence. Mammal with bigger brains ( vs body weight)are lot more intelligent. If bigger brains were not evolved we wont be asking those dumb questions. |
Oh wow, science figured that out huh? Dude let me tell you, let's get a stupidest person on this planet put him in front of MRI machine and tell him to scan the brains of every animal on this planet and even he can come to that conclusion. So anybody can observe, is that a big feat in your book? Not in mine.
_________________
If you cannot see god in all, how can you see god at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy canuck
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 6391
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Indonlyi:You keep revolving around same thing over and over again without answering the question on the generation of intelligence my friend. ALL THE PHYSICAL CHANGES ARE POSSIBLE BY EVOLUTION, I WANT TO KNOW INTELLIGENCE'S GENERATION. WHERE DID IT COME FROM.
You all need to quit teaching me evolution. I already know how much evolution knows that is why I am holding you by necks. |
My thesis is all physical changes in brain over few hundred thousand years lead to change in intelligence. There is nothing supernatural or unique about human intelligence and human brain. There is whole spectrum of no brain to small brain to very big brain. Same true about intelligence.
Ok you now explain to us how and why intelligences generated. Where it came from?
Lets restrict it to human intelliigence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
IandonlyI
Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Posts: 2884
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crazy canuck wrote: |
| Quote: |
Indonlyi:You keep revolving around same thing over and over again without answering the question on the generation of intelligence my friend. ALL THE PHYSICAL CHANGES ARE POSSIBLE BY EVOLUTION, I WANT TO KNOW INTELLIGENCE'S GENERATION. WHERE DID IT COME FROM.
You all need to quit teaching me evolution. I already know how much evolution knows that is why I am holding you by necks. |
My thesis is all physical changes in brain over few hundred thousand years lead to change in intelligence. There is nothing supernatural or unique about human intelligence and human brain. There is whole spectrum of no brain to small brain to very big brain. Same true about intelligence.
Ok you now explain to us how and why intelligences generated. Where it came from?
Lets restrict it to human intelliigence. |
About giving you explanation I guess you diddnt read my reply to Popeye but here it is again. About intelligence please see the paragraph in bold
About giving you explanation, let me repeat again CC. I told you I am debating with you from the stand of belief and belief does not ask for proofs, it asks for faith, so I dont have to provide any explanation or proofs. I have faith in God if you can see my faith in God good for you, my faith says "God did it". But your science requires proof so provide proof for everything.
About intelligence, are you positive that intelligence due to size/weight ratio came about in last few hundread thousand years? Are you also positive that without such condition intelligence is not possible? Because if that is true the news for you is that reproductive organs which we were talking about came before the big brains. So who had higher size/weight ratio then? Who gave shape to so much intelligence before?
Your turn.
_________________
If you cannot see god in all, how can you see god at all? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FreePower
Joined: 27 Mar 2008
Posts: 564
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FreePower wrote: |
| You know, I do not hold any particular stance in regards to evolution. I am neither for it or against it. But If evolution is true then why is everything in a pattern, without counting insects. Animals and humans have two eyes, a nose and a mouth. I believe if evolution really happened we would see all kinds of different mutations, animals without a standard face. Yet it seems everything in nature holds a specific pattern that is like the other in some way or another. |
Can someone answer my question?
_________________
The Meeting House - What convinced me - www.themeetinghouse.ca - Irreligious Christians
“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crazy canuck
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 6391
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 23, 2008 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FreePower wrote: |
| FreePower wrote: |
| You know, I do not hold any particular stance in regards to evolution. I am neither for it or against it. But If evolution is true then why is everything in a pattern, without counting insects. Animals and humans have two eyes, a nose and a mouth. I believe if evolution really happened we would see all kinds of different mutations, animals without a standard face. Yet it seems everything in nature holds a specific pattern that is like the other in some way or another. |
Can someone answer my question? |
Dear Freepower,
I dont know what kind of pattern you are talking about.
even snow flakes has symmetry, even tiny leaf on plant has symmetry.
You are excluding insects and invertebrates. They also have some pattern and symmetry. Even corals, sea urchins or sea shells have pattern and symmetry.Patternless organisms can be found in bacteria , fungus primitive organisms called prokaryotic cells. No organella, no neucleus , no paired chromosoms, no mitochondria. They are the one without any symmetry any shape and any organisation.Shape changes all the time .
All other organism like unicellulars( amoeba ) are eukaryotic with some organisation and later some symmetry achieved.All later invertebrates have some symmetry, organisation, shapes. Bilateral symmetry of vertebrates look pretty obvious but other tiny invertebrates living on land have pattern and symmetry.
I am not sure but once organisms got paired chromosomes and complexity increased nature favored bilateral symmetry and some redundency meaning if one side of organs damaged, other side took over. I admit its speculation or working backward after watching winners!!  But bilateral symmetry of numerous invertebrates goes back to Burgess Shale organisms some 500 million years ago.
C.C. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
