Muslim Soldier
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,259
- Reaction score
- 32
- Religion
- Islam
Creationists dealt a blow
- Thread starter root
- Start date
- Replies 395
- Views 60K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | vBulletin 4 php 8.0 patch
- Status
root
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,348
- Reaction score
- 73
Taken from the first part of the "evidence" against evolution from the Harun Yahya site. So he thinks that no conclusive comparison between human and chimp genomes have been completed.
Well, he is wrong the full genome of Human and Ape has been decoded.
Source:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9136200/
And you would be well advised to further consider that your DNA will not match my DNA 100%.
What a load of misrepresented gibberish that site is, his first point is already proven wrong.
Among the highlights from the analyses:
Small but crucial differences:
The researchers said the results confirmed the common evolutionary origin of humans and chimpanzees. Out of the 3 billion base pairs in the DNA coding for chimps and humans, about 35 million show single-base differences, and another 5 million DNA sites are different because of insertions or deletions of genetic code. Waterston estimated that 1 million of those coding changes are responsible for the functional differences between humans and chimps — thus defining our humanness.
Six new genetic frontiers:
Scientists identified six regions of our DNA that appear to have evolved dramatically over the past 250,000 years — including a "gene desert" that may play a role in nervous system development and also has been linked to obesity. They said a seventh region that showed notable change contains the FOXP2 gene, which already has been linked to speech in humans.
Brain genes key:
A comparison of gene expression in various tissues indicated that most of the genetic changes occurring during the evolution of chimps and humans had neither a positive nor a negative effect. However, the testes in the males of both species showed strong evidence of a positive effect. Also, genes active in the brain showed much more accumulated change in humans than in chimps — suggesting that those genes played a special role in human evolution.
Primates' risky business:
Scientists compared the chimp and human genomes with those of mice and rats, and found that both primates carried a greater amount of potentially harmful genetic coding. They speculated that such coding may have made primates more prone to genetic diseases, but also more adaptable to environmental changes.
Clues to diseases:
The genomes contained hints that the chimpanzee genetic code has been attacked more frequently than humans by retroviral elements — such as those present in the HIV virus. Scientists also noted key differences between the genomes that may affect susceptibility to viruses, the workings of the immune system and the progression of diabetes and Alzheimer's disease in humans.
Last edited:
Fossil evidence for what? Do you agree that there was a time when there were no dinosaurs that could fly? Do you agree that the world now is full of bird species that can fly? Would you agree that the fossils of the dinosaurs they find in China with feathers show a transition from non-flying dinosaurs to flying dinosaurs and hence birds?
Of course, they do their job which is to interpet the evidence in the light of modern science. As opposed to Theists who do what? Deny that these fossils exist?
Well Dawkins is a little combative but most scientists love a god debate and have no problems with questions. Ask a few.
Care to give an example of this that you have not cut and pasted from the internet? There is no good evidence to suggest that evolution is wrong. If there were I am sure that everyone would love to see it, talk about it, debate it. This is what scientists do for a living.
Where did Charles Darwin say his theory would not be right? Darwin was a modest man and a man of science. He did not go about boasting much or claiming more than his evidence would support.
Muslim Soldier
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,259
- Reaction score
- 32
- Religion
- Islam
Read what I write clearly!
The same way the first dinosaurs appeared, is the same way the other species appeared.
the theory of organic evolution can not explain where the first cells came from. When you explain to me how that happened is the time I will believe your crap!
Muslim Soldier
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,259
- Reaction score
- 32
- Religion
- Islam
I would advise you to read History before posting nonsence. Yes you read right nonsense
Darwin was an ametuer "biologist" and suddenly on one of his trips he thought hey how about this!
And that is evolution. It came out of the blue
I did.
But in the meantime would you agree that the fossil record shows a long time ago there were no invertebrates that could fly properly. Then some dinosaurs developed feathers and wings, and then there was an abundance of bird species? Is this, in fact, what the fossil record shows no matter what the cause is?
Evolution can't but science is working on it. For instance,
Experimental demonstration
In the early 1950s at the University of Chicago Stanley Miller demonstrated the primeval soup model for the origin of life on Earth. He passed a spark of electricity through a glass chamber filled with water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen (meant to simulate conditions on the young earth). A week later, paper chromatography showed several amino acids and other organic molecules had formed. The model for the origin of life said these molecules were formed in the atomosphere, rained into the ocean, then combined to make proteins, nucleic acids and the other molecules of life.
In the early 1950s at the University of Chicago Stanley Miller demonstrated the primeval soup model for the origin of life on Earth. He passed a spark of electricity through a glass chamber filled with water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen (meant to simulate conditions on the young earth). A week later, paper chromatography showed several amino acids and other organic molecules had formed. The model for the origin of life said these molecules were formed in the atomosphere, rained into the ocean, then combined to make proteins, nucleic acids and the other molecules of life.
The early atmosphere of the Earth, before life evolved, was thought to be made up of water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen. It was hot. If there was a lot of lightening around, conditions in Miller's lab would have looked a lot like the early Earth.
I think it is likely to be a mistake to lecture me on my ignorance of any historical subject or any branch of science except Islam unless I admit to being ignorant. Even then I think the clever thing would be to give me the benefit of the doubt.
Indeed. What is your problem with that?
Muslim Soldier
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,259
- Reaction score
- 32
- Religion
- Islam
for the record, Miller didn't get any meaningful amini acids. All he got were useless strands!
And later on Miller's experiment was considered to be noid due to the fact that with the water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen, Miller also put a strand of amino acid ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Trumble
IB Expert
- Messages
- 3,275
- Reaction score
- 389
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Buddhist
It neither has to explain where life originated, nor does it attempt to explain it. A great many people, including several of the most prominent believers in "intelligent design" believe it originated with God. That has no relevance to subsequent evolution, the whole process of which (they would say) is designed by God too.
More or less. What's your point? He came up with the original theory of evolution by natural selection based on the evidence he saw on his travels. The very fact that it is still around, albeit in a rather different form, demonstrates the man's genius. I'm not sure what the "amateur" has to do with it. Descartes was an "amateur" mathematician and philosopher... Cartesian co-ordinates cane "out of the blue". Newton was an "amateur" physicist and mathematician. The Newtonian laws of motion (including gravity) "came out of the blue". At the time of his most significant work Albert Einstein was working as a patents clerk.. the Special Theory of Relativity came "out of the blue". A collection of college degrees is no substitute for genius.
It took the Earth 4.5 billion years to come up with what it has got. It took a billion years or so for the first life to appear. You expect Miller to do that well in a few days? Come on, give the guy a break. That he got amino acids at all was impressive.
Says who?
Anyone can repeat this experient. People have. It works sort of.
Muslim Soldier
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,259
- Reaction score
- 32
- Religion
- Islam
trumble said:
The theory remains because it denies the existence of Allah (swt) hence people can do what they like. the theory is against religion! people with religions should not accept this theory!
How does it deny the existence of God? Darwin, a former student for the priesthood, did not believe much himself, but I don't think he ever came out and denied the existence of God. Besides, science should be followed wherever it goes. So you can't say "If it does not agree with my Beliefs it is wrong". You have to say "If it is true then God wanted it that way".
Besides, Darwinian theory rests on the same three basic premises:
1. The Earth is very old
2. Children look like their parents.
3. Those that do better in the world are more likely to have more children.
Which is these three do you refuse to accept is true?
The Cambrian explosion refers to the geologically sudden appearance of complex multi-cellular macroscopic organisms between roughly 542 and 530 million years ago (mya). This period marks a sharp transition in the fossil record with the appearance of the earliest members of many phyla of metazoans (multicellular animals). The "explosive" appearance of this adaptive radiation results both from rapid evolutionary change and the limits of previous technology to appreciate microfossils which formed the foundation of the fossil record before this time.
Causes of the Cambrian explosion
There is no universally accepted cause, and the matter is the subject of ongoing debate within the scientific community. A wide range of biological and geological factors have been proposed as possible triggers for the explosion. These range from ecological competition, hox genes and the breakup of Rodinia. Recently scientists have suggested major climatic changes, including a near-global glaciation, may have played a role.
The Cambrian explosion may have been precipitated by several environmental changes occurring in and just before this period. First the Varangian glaciation gave rise to a Snowball Earth in which all, or nearly all, of the oceans are covered entirely with ice. This was followed by a deglaciation and rapid global warming just before the beginning of the explosion itself. In modern Arctic environments, single-celled organisms often form mats on the underside of ice sheets in order to maximize their exposure to sunlight. It is possible that adaptations useful to the maintenance of such colonies also assisted in the formation of the first triploblastic animals estimated to be 570 million years of age (Xiao et al. 1998). In addition, the Snowball Earth environment would have given rise to relatively few ecological niches, so the subsequent deglaciation and global warming may have provided an impetus for rapid evolution to fill many new environments.
Rising levels of atmospheric oxygen during the Ediacaran may have played a role in the emergence of large metazoans which require oxygen for respiration. Recent work has linked this increase in atmospheric oxygen to changes in global soil weathering patterns following the Cryogenian and the possible emergence of a primitive terrestrial Biota (Kennedy et al. 2006).
[edit]
Diversification
Of the 20 metazoan phyla with extensive fossil records, at least 11 first appeared in the Cambrian. Of the remainder, 1 is known to Precambrian and the other 8 first appear more recently (Collins 1994). An additional 12 soft-bodied phyla have poorly defined fossil records, but it is speculated that a significant number of these may also be Cambrian in origin.
Though this period is definitely of special significance in terms of rapid diversification and the emergence of new forms, some of that significance is likely to be overstated by the focus on macroscopic forms in the ways phyla are observed and defined. Molecular evidence suggests that at least six animal phyla had established themselves as distinct evolutionary paths during the Precambrian (Wang et al. 1999).
The sheer variety of forms found in the Burgess shale and other sites, has made some skeptical that single period of ~10-15 million years could have been long enough to give rise to such diversity. An emerging view is that the Cambrian explosion is the macroscopic conclusion to a prolonged period of evolution begun ~30 million years earlier with the innovation of multi-cellular organisms.
Causes of the Cambrian explosion
There is no universally accepted cause, and the matter is the subject of ongoing debate within the scientific community. A wide range of biological and geological factors have been proposed as possible triggers for the explosion. These range from ecological competition, hox genes and the breakup of Rodinia. Recently scientists have suggested major climatic changes, including a near-global glaciation, may have played a role.
The Cambrian explosion may have been precipitated by several environmental changes occurring in and just before this period. First the Varangian glaciation gave rise to a Snowball Earth in which all, or nearly all, of the oceans are covered entirely with ice. This was followed by a deglaciation and rapid global warming just before the beginning of the explosion itself. In modern Arctic environments, single-celled organisms often form mats on the underside of ice sheets in order to maximize their exposure to sunlight. It is possible that adaptations useful to the maintenance of such colonies also assisted in the formation of the first triploblastic animals estimated to be 570 million years of age (Xiao et al. 1998). In addition, the Snowball Earth environment would have given rise to relatively few ecological niches, so the subsequent deglaciation and global warming may have provided an impetus for rapid evolution to fill many new environments.
Rising levels of atmospheric oxygen during the Ediacaran may have played a role in the emergence of large metazoans which require oxygen for respiration. Recent work has linked this increase in atmospheric oxygen to changes in global soil weathering patterns following the Cryogenian and the possible emergence of a primitive terrestrial Biota (Kennedy et al. 2006).
[edit]
Diversification
Of the 20 metazoan phyla with extensive fossil records, at least 11 first appeared in the Cambrian. Of the remainder, 1 is known to Precambrian and the other 8 first appear more recently (Collins 1994). An additional 12 soft-bodied phyla have poorly defined fossil records, but it is speculated that a significant number of these may also be Cambrian in origin.
Though this period is definitely of special significance in terms of rapid diversification and the emergence of new forms, some of that significance is likely to be overstated by the focus on macroscopic forms in the ways phyla are observed and defined. Molecular evidence suggests that at least six animal phyla had established themselves as distinct evolutionary paths during the Precambrian (Wang et al. 1999).
The sheer variety of forms found in the Burgess shale and other sites, has made some skeptical that single period of ~10-15 million years could have been long enough to give rise to such diversity. An emerging view is that the Cambrian explosion is the macroscopic conclusion to a prolonged period of evolution begun ~30 million years earlier with the innovation of multi-cellular organisms.
root
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,348
- Reaction score
- 73
I am sure he means "The Cambrian Period":
The Cambrian Period marks an important point in the history of life on earth; it is the time when most of the major groups of animals first appear in the fossil record. This event is sometimes called the "Cambrian Explosion", because of the relatively short time over which this diversity of forms appears around 543 to 490 MYA
The Cambrian Period marks an important point in the history of life on earth; it is the time when most of the major groups of animals first appear in the fossil record. This event is sometimes called the "Cambrian Explosion", because of the relatively short time over which this diversity of forms appears around 543 to 490 MYA
Trumble
IB Expert
- Messages
- 3,275
- Reaction score
- 389
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Buddhist
As HeiGou said it does absolutely nothing of the sort. It remains because it, or at least its modern equivalent, is the theory that still best fits the facts.
Again, not true. It is just not compatible with the creation myths that the majority (but by no means all, granted) of Christians and Jews (I don't know abourt muslims) accept are just that - myths. As I said before, the Catholic Church, among others, accepts evolution, which hardly suggests it denies the existence of God! The conflict you suggest just doesn't exist.
Last edited:
Ansar Al-'Adl
Jewel of LI
- Messages
- 4,681
- Reaction score
- 922
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Second time around and you still don't get it. I'm not arguing over whether creationism is theory or not - my point is that if you claim it is NOT a theory, then no amount of evidence can falsify it. Evidence only supports or falsifies scientific theories.
In which case your entire post is off-target; evidence for evolution is not evidence against creationism, unless you consider both to be scientific theories.
Trumble
IB Expert
- Messages
- 3,275
- Reaction score
- 389
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Buddhist
That simply doesn't follow. Evidence for a scientific theory or explanation is frequently evidence against a non-scientific explanation. Sufficient weight of evidence may even result in what was once a "scientific" theory no longer being one - such as believing the Sun circles a stationary Earth, or that the Earth is flat.
Creationism is not a scientific explanation for how we came to be here, but it is nonetheless an explanation. Evidence supporting a mutually contradictory explanation must therefore be evidence against it.
I'd point out, again, that creationism and "intelligent design" are NOT one and the same thing, however much some people may wish they were. It is perfectly possible to "believe" in both ID and evolution, and indeed many people do.
Last edited:
- Status