does anybody care?

Originally Posted by: SPLAlrighty then. Just putting it out there...

Good work soldier.

All probability and research aside, it basically comes down to this:

A higher being created humans.

.............OR.....

Humans evolved naturally.

The way I see it, there are two options, hence a 50% chance for either one. Each theory has its strong and weak points. It can't be resolved. Or at least it can't be yet. Even if someday someone proves there is a God, I'm pretty sure there will be people who don't believe in it. And vice versa. The end.

if there is a God, he, she or it is a scientist......a little mad....but a scientist. he created us gt forum freaks, so madness is not in doubt.

my theory is the "time loop" theory, humans evolve all over the universe, get a little nutty, cause a big bang somehow and it starts over again. ;)

i believe aliens are a highly evolved form of humans that came back to their past to visit us...

totally off topic but wat the hell

we have been off topic for 20 or more pages so don't stress on it :D

Originally Posted by: jeffhxi believe aliens are a highly evolved form of humans that came back to their past to visit us...

totally off topic but wat the hell

Nothing's ever off topic here at GT.

the title of the thread is "does anybody care?" ......so i think were right on topic now that i think of it :D

Originally Posted by: earthman buckAll probability and research aside, it basically comes down to this:

A higher being created humans.

.............OR.....

Humans evolved naturally.

The way I see it, there are two options, hence a 50% chance for either one. Each theory has its strong and weak points. It can't be resolved. Or at least it can't be yet. Even if someday someone proves there is a God, I'm pretty sure there will be people who don't believe in it. And vice versa. The end.

Well, there you have it. The end. I guess your all dismissed now.

Originally Posted by: z0s0_jpthe title of the thread is "does anybody care?" ......so i think were right on topic now that i think of it :D

Well said. Rep points for you.

Regarding vestigial structures. First off, scratch appendix off your list. That has been found to play a role in the immune system. Just by the time youre an adult the immune system is strong enough that it can battle most sickness itself. Second off, they cant prove that nothing has a function. Thats a battle that cant be won to be honest.

Anyways, theyve never found a creature to form something that has not already been coded on its DNA. Nothing has sprouted wings, legs, or anything else if it wasnt already information contained on the DNA. Why would we make the assumption that this wouldve happened if its never been observed and the fossil record does not prove it?

People like to use the example of the eyeless fish in caves and the wingless beetles Darwin had observed while writing Origin of the Species. Please take note that no new structures were formed. Only a loss of information here. People also like to conclude with Darwin's finches that he was famous for, that this was Evolution. Not at all. Just survival of the fittest at its best through genetic variation. These finches didnt gain any information on their genes that they hadnt previously had, but just varried in beak size, and then the unfavorable beak type was soon lost after the different beak became more favorable to the environment.

The Cambrian Explosion was still an explosion of life. Evolution should not have taken place that fast. When the flood waters settled, these microscopic algaes and such found in the PreCambiran layer were just the things to settle first. Doesnt contradict Genesis whatsoever, its still in favor of a Great Flood.
They actually found a well preserved Crustacean fossil from the early Cambrian, which is a huge setback on Evolution.
Now the hunt for life in the PreCambrian begins to explain that.

Please explain to me HOW the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics arent relevant to Evolution. Becaues its not a closed system? Even so, the only energy put into this "unclosed system" is sun in the form of UV Rays and meteorites that have never been found to carry the essential materials needed for producing life. And even if a meteorite did carry the materials needed, they would still have to arrange in the sequences needed for DNA, which has never been found to happen.

u guys reckon aliens exist? seriously... i really think they are how we're gonna look like in the FAAAAARR future...and i guess they get curious abt us being their ancestors...

okay im high on alcohol now...i need a good whack in the face

Originally Posted by: jeffhx
okay im high on alcohol now...i need a good whack in the face

*smiles benevolently, whacks Jeff in the face* Enjoy yourself, mate :)

MOREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

u cant keep a good drunk down

not for long at least

unless u shoot em

Originally Posted by: jeffhxMOREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

*WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS JEFF IN THE FAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEEEEEEEEEEEE!*

i need a melbourne jam mate... i have nobody...thus the ridiculous replies..

cheers

Originally Posted by: z0s0_jpoh yea ....i care 6strngs.

thanks!

I just spent the last hour and a half or so reading all the replies from the last 2-3 days that I haven't read any of this thread. I must say, these debates are much more interesting when it's more than just two people involved. I feel kinda sorry for stackny being the only one with any real argument in favor of creationism though. the poor guy must feel like we're ganging up on him! :o

Pony, I dont care who you are or what scientists youre reading from, DNA does not arise in a primordial soup. Period. It took us like 20 years to even figure out what a strand of DNA was, let alone something that complex just randomly forming in nature.

I thought Evolution was based on observations. Apparently not being that DNA has never been observed to form in nature, Abiogenisis has never occured, and a billion other assumptions this ridiculousl theory is based on. Thats where it hits a brick wall.

I still disagree with you on the Thermodynamic Laws. Though the Earth is not a closed system, sunlight would do more harm than good in the case of generating life. There has never been a case where a life has become more complex, yet this is what the theory is proposing. Another assumption, if that can even be considered an assumption, that this theory is based on.

We're not gonna see eye to eye on that one, so we midas well agree to disagree.

Anyways Pony, Ill let this go if you will. Its been fun and Ive learned quite a bit from this.

PS-6strngs, thanks for your sympathy. I know when I get into these things that Im a minority in my beliefs, but its still fun, especially on this site where people dont call you stupid or wrong for your beliefs.

I don't mean to keep the debate going, but this struck me as odd. you use the laws of thermodynamics:

Originally Posted by: The First Law of Thermodynamics: The total sum of all matter and energy in the universe is constant, it is not now being created nor destroyed.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics: All matter and energy go from a state of order and complexity to a state of less order and less complexity.

to try to disprove evolution. but wouldn't God making the earth out of nothing also defy the first law of thermodynamics? You have tried to explain how God uses science to perform the things he does in the past. So why would he do some things using science to achieve them, and others he just does out of the blue?

also, sure, the chances of life happening may be 1 in 10 to the 250th power, but if life were given an infinite number of chances, then eventually it had to happen. I mean, over the course of billions, trillions, maybe zillions of years, it had to happen at least once. And also, maybe we weren't the first try, and it took several attempts before life was given the perfect settings to exist. but it's definately a possibility. winning the lottery is improbable, yet possible, and it's not like nobody has ever won the lottery. if I were to go buy a lottery ticket today, I probably wouldn't win. but if I bought a lottery ticket once a day for a billion years, I would probably win it at least once.

Originally Posted by: 6strngs_2hmbkrsI don't mean to keep the debate going, but this struck me as odd. you use the laws of thermodynamics:

to try to disprove evolution. but wouldn't God making the earth out of nothing also defy the first law of thermodynamics? You have tried to explain how God uses science to perform the things he does in the past. So why would he do some things using science to achieve them, and others he just does out of the blue?

also, sure, the chances of life happening may be 1 in 10 to the 250th power, but if life were given an infinite number of chances, then eventually it had to happen. I mean, over the course of billions, trillions, maybe zillions of years, it had to happen at least once. And also, maybe we weren't the first try, and it took several attempts before life was given the perfect settings to exist. but it's definately a possibility. winning the lottery is improbable, yet possible, and it's not like nobody has ever won the lottery. if I were to go buy a lottery ticket today, I probably wouldn't win. but if I bought a lottery ticket once a day for a billion years, I would probably win it at least once.

Hahahahaha, now youre confusing 2 things. God and science, in the sense that youre using it, dont mesh. You cant scientifically explain how God created everything. Physics doesnt apply. However, after God made everything, then physics and science can be applied. Creation can not be scientifically explained.

You say it wouldve eventually happened: First of all, the first thing you need to address is where did the materials needed for life come from? Theyve never been found in meteorites. Second of all, by what forms of energy did they use to form DNA? Sure as heck wasnt sunlight with UV Rays without the Ozone, or we'd have a delicious fry on our hands. If there was the Ozone, then everything undergoes Oxidation and become simpler substances. Third of all, you need a living cell to carry out the functions of DNA and replicate. This is where the whole Law of Biogenisis kicks in. Life has never been found to come from non-life. It just doesnt add up.