Your arguments, soundly put to rest.gummibear76 said:... why do I have the sneaking suspicion that you are just linking articles with a headline that supports your ideals without actually reading them?RedEyesBlackGamer said:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_flagellagummibear76 said:The majority of scientists in the field though the world was flat, tomatoes were poisonous, and the sun revolved around the earth at one time or another.RedEyesBlackGamer said:What do the majority of scientists in the field know, anyway? Clearly, you know better. I'll compromise: give me one example of irreducible complexity and I'll stop quoting you.
and I think I'll help out the person your quoting, so heres your answer: The Angler Fish
...and the chicken egg
...and the bacterial flagellum
...and the mouse trap (alright, alright, its not an animal, but its a good demonstration of the concept)
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/10/58
The egg question is irrelevant.
The mousetrap makes a decent tie clip by removing a couple of parts.
Regardless:
1) It seems to me that they only discovered a "less adapted" species of angler fish, one that still had all the parts needed to function. This does not prove it is not irreducibly complex. Find a link between the angler fish, and a prehistoric bacterium and I may believe you. (Fat chance)
2)so basically you say its an evolved cilium? Well, there is a small problem with that: as the cilium evolves, it would become a burden on the organism. It would become thicker and longer, but without the motor system to be able to move it, it would greatly hinder the organism. it would be like having an extra arm hanging in front of you that you couldn't move.
3) Oh, but it is. The chicken eggs required a protien produced by (yes, you guessed it.) a fully functional and developed chicken. Therefore, chickens could not have evolved from an older species, since if the chicken, dinosaur combo existed, it would lack the necessary protien to carry on the chicken evolution.
4)but if you add a spring, or the wooden board to the "tie clip" it becomes too heavey and falls out. thus making it useless.
http://myfacewhen.com/64/Phlakes said:I won't say there is no god, but you can't just take the ludicrous amounts of evidence supporting evolution and call it all coincidence. There's having an opinion and then there's being completely unreasonable.
i have newfound love in you, also i like how it determines what you believe in comes out in the statement. on this website its always saying how christian need to stop putting fingers in their ears and listen... OK i did but your saying that this science is true.TheYellowCellPhone said:And biased thoughts can stop realistic thoughts...JuTheTo said:A strong belief can even stop logical thought.
Ah, this old chestnut. This is my favourite anti-science argument I've ever heard.gummibear76 said:The majority of scientists in the field though the world was flat, tomatoes were poisonous, and the sun revolved around the earth at one time or another.
/facepalm.gummibear76 said:3) Oh, but it is. The chicken eggs required a protien produced by (yes, you guessed it.) a fully functional and developed chicken. Therefore, chickens could not have evolved from an older species, since if the chicken, dinosaur combo existed, it would lack the necessary protien to carry on the chicken evolution.
*sighCakes said:http://myfacewhen.com/64/Phlakes said:I won't say there is no god, but you can't just take the ludicrous amounts of evidence supporting evolution and call it all coincidence. There's having an opinion and then there's being completely unreasonable.
Mfw you think evolution disproves G-d (??????????)
Mfw you act like there's only one concept of G-d, ever
Mfw motherfucking Saint Augustine would like to have a word with you
Actually, no, the Earth was proved to be round before religion became entrenched in doctrine. When not everyone believed in the same gods, and the ones that more or less did didn't believe in them the same way, there's nobody big enough to yell at philosophers for measuring shadows.SillyBear said:It is because of religion that the human race thought the world was flat for so long. They executed anyone for daring to do any research on it whatsoever. Oh yes, stupid science! /facepalm. This is like laughing at a Chef for not being able to prepare a meal in under thirty minutes whilst knocking the pan off the stove every time he tries to cook.
It's well on the way. I'm frikkin' psychic, baby.evilneko said:The topic of "evolution vs. creationism" is only controversial among laymen.
Among scientists, there is none. Evolution is the very foundation upon which modern biology is built. As one put it, "Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution."
Nevertheless this thread will probably grow to monstrous proportion... much like the other one which is still on the front page...
/sigh. Here we go again.
I have a feeling that no one actually reads the damn threads before posting. How many times and on how many pages did we have to keep correcting people on the use of the word "theory"? And the arrogance of some of these ID proponents. Do you have a degree in any field related to evolution? Have you done research on the subject? No? Then your opinion doesn't matter. I'm not trying to be harsh, but it is true. Aesmodan summed it up best:evilneko said:It's well on the way. I'm frikkin' psychic, baby.evilneko said:The topic of "evolution vs. creationism" is only controversial among laymen.
Among scientists, there is none. Evolution is the very foundation upon which modern biology is built. As one put it, "Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution."
Nevertheless this thread will probably grow to monstrous proportion... much like the other one which is still on the front page...
/sigh. Here we go again.
Funny how some people think science is a matter of personal opinion
Sorry, I should have been able to magically infer that. Speak clearly.Phlakes said:*sighCakes said:http://myfacewhen.com/64/Phlakes said:I won't say there is no god, but you can't just take the ludicrous amounts of evidence supporting evolution and call it all coincidence. There's having an opinion and then there's being completely unreasonable.
Mfw you think evolution disproves G-d (??????????)
Mfw you act like there's only one concept of G-d, ever
Mfw motherfucking Saint Augustine would like to have a word with you
Give me a second to put a huge-
This statement directed at people who believe in the popular Christian version of intelligent design
I thought it wasn't necessary. How silly of me, I keep accidentally assuming people can use basic judgement.
The study and understanding of evolution has produced countless benefits in many areas, especially medicine.InfiniteSingularity said:I believe we intelligently evolved.
Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck about this debate. Where do we come from? Who fucking cares? Knowing isn't going to make us happier or more enlightened. And thus, I do not care enough to get involved in the debate.
Well, if you checked others, e.g. the stick insects [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/science/29evol.html] or the mouse [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyJGA_1_v8A], you would have found examples where the specimens were known to be without the trait that later appeared.gummibear76 said:From the one link off that page I checked, (it was an example of an armored fish that "de-evolved")
It's also important because we shouldn't allow people to spread false knowledge and outright lies as scientific fact.evilneko said:The study and understanding of evolution has produced countless benefits in many areas, especially medicine.InfiniteSingularity said:I believe we intelligently evolved.
Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck about this debate. Where do we come from? Who fucking cares? Knowing isn't going to make us happier or more enlightened. And thus, I do not care enough to get involved in the debate.
Creationism/Intelligent Design, not so much. Nor will they ever.
That's why it's important.