Topic awaiting preservation: Still don't believe in Evolution? (Page 1 of 1)

For those looking for evidence of evolution, well, here is some here.

See? Very good...just chipping away, at creationism here...hehe...



[This message has been edited by WebShaman (edited 12-11-2002).]

Here.

That's amazing. If they can develop a form of natural immunity/protective mutation, and their environment can be recreated in order to spawn this type of mutation, the medical benefits would be huge. Third world countries wouldn't have to live in such fear. However, their condition may be hard to duplicate. If it is indeed a random event, there is a very low probability of finding a suitable environment in which to create the same event. I wouldn't count the chickens just yet, but the potential is amazing.



edit: Not being a Mad Scientist, I couldn't fix your link, so I made a new one. RN3

[This message has been edited by Rameses Niblik the Third (edited 12-11-2002).]

You know, this illustrates an important issue facing health care providers that not many people are aware of.

Take, for example, a cough. This is the body's natural response to foreign matter in the lungs or airway. Most of the time, it's brought on my minor irritations in the throat and whatnot, but sometimes it is a serious effort by the body to remove harmful substances. However, there is a proliferation of over the counter cough suppressent drugs available today. Now, the danger is that in treating the symptom we are interfering with the body's natural responses to biological threats and hindering the evolution of our own immune system.

It's based on the smoke detector principle. Now, a smoke detector is very sensitive and if you accidently burn your toast it will go off. Sooner or later, you just take the battery out to prevent the annoyance. But, if there's a real fire, you're shit out of luck.

And now, they've reported a naturally occuring mutation which helps prevent one of the vectors of malaria. Food for thought.

Misread Silence's post. Sorry....

GrythusDraconis
I admire a man who can budget his life around his pint of Guinness and I envy a man who's wife will let him. ME, inspired by Suho1004 here.

[This message has been edited by GrythusDraconis (edited 12-11-2002).]

Heh heh heh, I love the fact that your thread title suggests one has to believe in evolution.

. . : slicePuzzle

Bugimus - I have faith in evolution

I agree with Bugs here, that seems more like adaptation to your enviorment, not evolution. You could be the most brilliant defender of creationism and not find fault in that article, except that they attribute the change to evolution.

It's not evolution, it's adaptation.

I was really hoping that this would be hard proof, but the most that I learned about was the writer was an evolutionist and that scientists are developing new ways to combat Malaria. I don't know if that was the purpose, but I am still boggled as to why that proves the theory of evolution to be true.

Well...what is Evolution, but adaption on a bigger scale? I guess that is the point. And I mentioned belief, because despite the factual evidence, and the smaller scale models, many choose not to accept that. So, belief...whatever.

"It's not evolution, it's adaptation."


Well.....evolution is simply adaption passed on to your offspring. The whole point of evolution is that it is adaptation, no?

From what I understand, the theory of evolution encompasses how species change into new species to the point of (now), us humans. What I beielve is that God created us, but that we adapt to your enviorments on a small scale. Not everything is a fractal, you know.

damn when I just moved to this tropical island I had the same disease......shit you dont wanna know how it feels!

Hold on there a second, CFB. Don't assume I was saying that. While I agree the theory of evolution has some serious problems, I am not aware of a better explanation at this time. The scientific method dictates that we come up with a theory to explain something and then test the heck out of it to see if it matches the data. Well, it's not possible to actually observe one species "evolving" into another in the laboratory. Unless you have a few million years to work on it.

I believe God created this world of ours and now it is up to us to actually learn more about how it actually works. I have no doubt that if the Lord continues to tarry in his return that our technology and understanding of the physical universe will grow exponentially. I have a feeling that the truth lies somewhere close to the current theory of evolution but with some major components that we just can't understand yet.

. . : slicePuzzle

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 12-16-2002).]

I haven't really followed these discussions, so forgive me if this has been said/refuted.

Why can't there be room for both? IMHO, both creationists and evolutionists are looking at a timescale that's much too short and recent. It's like arguing the roots of democracy by examining the Dubya administration.

To find the roots of democracy you have to go back many thousands of years, long before Dubya or even the US. I'm of the opinion that the roots of creation go back much further than this Earth and solar system. Evolution is simply a manifestation of things put into motion at an as yet undetermined point and by an as yet undetermined method of creation many billions of years ago.

Looking only at the short term argued by most, why can't the accreation of our Earth and solar system and the subsequent evolution of species be the unseen hand of God (or Dog) in action--a metaphor for spiritual growth?

If you're a fan of the Big Bang, what came before? If you feel string theory is closer to the mark, who made the strings? If you feel God is the creator, what makes you think s/he started only 8,000 years ago?

*sigh*

The theory of Evolution is just a scientific theory...an attempt, by using evidence that we have, to explain how life-forms have come to be how they are...based on current knowledge. This doesn't mean that it won't change...all theories are subject to change, when new facts become known. As Bugs has pointed out, at present, the theory of Evolution best fits the current evidence. And small-models support this, as well (the virus, bacteria, etc).

This, of course, directly bangs heads against creationism...at least, the biblical version of creationism (when directly translated - or taken directly).

Now, it could be, that a creator exists...yes, could be...however, there is no supporting evidence for this at present. It is also possible, that this 'creator' set everything in motion...but at present, we cannot prove this.

To PT - I don't know what came before the Big Bang...assuming that the Big Bang really happened. This is, once again, the current theory that the available evidence best supports...not meaning, that is fact, set in stone. I'm sure that it will also change, as new evidence becomes apparent. And because our current models of time are in their infancy, it is hard to say what, if anything, came before the Big Bang.

You see, it's like this - somehow, the Universe came into existence. Of that, we are certain. And somehow, it got to this point. Of that, we are also certain. Whether or not the human mind can accept that, is another thing. Trying to explain how all this came to be, is what the question is about. And currently, Science has a much better method of showing this, than Religion does (or ever did). In Religion, it is stated that a Creator made everything. Point. Nothing on how, why, or when. Just that it happened. Without supporting evidence whatsoever. There are no facts. No proofs. No theories. Just a statement.

And until we know, for certain, it will remain that. Of course, I can also say how I think it all came to be...what makes it right? What makes it wrong? Without evidence, or support, it's just fantasy, despite what I might, or might not, believe. Even should millions, or all, humans believe it...without knowing why, how, and when, without evidence, it's still just that...fantasy.

Now, Science is trying to find out the how, the why, and the when (and supply evidence, and support). What Religion can't, Science can.

Because Religion is biased. And because it is biased, it can't accept fact, esp. should this fact dispprove the religion. Science is not biased, though many scientists are. Bias is a human trait. Science is just a method, nothing more. In and of itself, it is not biased. This is the big difference between the two systems.

Now, I'm not making the case that the theory of Evolution, as it now stands, is set in stone. That, namely, would be a biased viewpoint. All that I am saying, is that according to the present evidence that we have, it is the best explanation. It makes more sense, from the evidence, than creationism.

Now, you've raised the point of combining the two...ok, then, I would like to see your evidence of this...not just your opinion, or belief, but your supporting evidence. Because that is what is being discussed here...evidence.

quote:

---

In Religion, it is stated that a Creator made everything. Point. Nothing on how, why, or when. Just that it happened. Without supporting evidence whatsoever. There are no facts. No proofs. No theories. Just a statement.

---

Wow, ya know... I've given this subject much thought and it really never changed my opinion that none of it matters to me, but that specific point right there gives me reason to favor creationism.

Isn't simplicity grand?

Aussie scientists have done it again...and again...and again...need I go on?

Evolutionary Creation

Aussies come up with solutions, American steal solutions and claim to be their own.

=)

uh..yeah, whatever.....