Johannesburg

Sunday

Widely scattered tstorms. Morning clouds. Mild.

14°C
28°C

7 day forecasts

Nico

South Africa
News24 User

Evolution 'makes sense'

by Nico
2009-10-27 13:01

To just say that evolution doesn't make sense without pointing to some of the Darwinists' leaps of faith leaves the argument hanging in the air.

What Evolutionists cannot explain is why there are no fossils of these transitioning species. All fossils ever found are of complete, functioning species. Those that supposedly didn't make it due to the selection process are nowhere to be found. That's the first point.

Secondly, imagine male and female varieties of species. A male and a female are totally different and yet, they had to evolve from the same gene pool under the exact same circumstances at the same location, or mud pool.

Not only should they be biologically completely different but they should be 100% compatible to be able to breed. They also had to be ripe for procreation at the same moment in time to actually mate and create offspring.

They had to develop different mating rituals and dances and learn them all so that the species could continue to exist. And, they had to get it right the first time or we would have found fossils of those who messed up.

If you look at the many thousands of species that are totally incompatible, breeding wise, and every single one of them developed a procreation regimen, by sprouting a male and a female, working with Swiss-clock precision from the get go, it's a much smaller leap of faith to accept an intelligent designer than this garbage. For those species-in-the-making that didn't make it, there is not a single fossil to illustrate the transition. That's the second problem they have.

It is physically and logically impossible for simplex things to combine and, without adding anything else, to form a complex thing. Technology, intelligence, knowledge, skills, other complex things, or whatever should still be discovered, have to be added for the simplex to arrive at the complex.

Even then, the final product can only be of lesser complexity than the most intelligent component. That means that man, for instance, cannot develop something that is more intelligent than himself. Nor can he develop something of equal intelligence because he will learn more during the design and construction process than the product he started making.

That things do evolve is certain, even Christians acknowledge that, but that evolution is capable of bringing forth new species is just not realistic.

Get published on MyNews24 by sending your letter, story or column to us.
Send us your news photos

Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.

Add your view to this conversation - comment below

Rate this story:

Comment on this story


Zane 10/27/2009 1:13:34 PM
hehehe.... I love your arguement and I agree with you..... my favorite statement is "if evolution and darwins theory were wholely correct, then why dont chimps still evolve in to humans today or humans into x-men mutants?

ID Critic 10/27/2009 1:15:21 PM
I can't believe that in the 2009 we are still having this debate.

Nico you need to study some biology, you obviously didn't study it in varsity. I would recommend actually researching the subjects like physiology/cellular biology/paleo-anthropology/anatomy/evolutionary genetics/genetics/social biology fields before you go about writing articles on what you learnt at church on sunday. If you actually do this you would see that not one peered reviewed scientific journal supports ID.

All your arguments/points have massive flaws...

dave 10/27/2009 1:16:00 PM
Oh dear, another evolution post. Why is South Africa heading the way of America in terms of willful ignorance? Evolution is fact. The fossil record will never satisfy these folks. Punctuated equlibrium, google it.

Mars 10/27/2009 1:16:01 PM
Another letter about a topic that the writer knows absolutely nothing about. Dude! Wake up this is the year 2009 AD.

chris 10/27/2009 1:16:38 PM
Well said Nico. Just remember creation means there is a God and that means we are answerable for our actions and peole don't want that. We tell our kids that eveything came from nothing and there is nothing to look forward to when we die and then wonder why the worlwide teenage suicide numbers are off the clock.

LSA 10/27/2009 1:19:54 PM
Not this again!!!!

ElvT 10/27/2009 1:21:03 PM
" ...the final product can only be of lesser complexity than the most intelligent component. That means that man, for instance, cannot develop something that is more intelligent than himself. Nor can he develop something of equal intelligence because he will learn more during the design and construction process than the product he started making." - Interesting. It reminds me of that movie Idiocracy...

morena 10/27/2009 1:21:59 PM
God put evolution in motion but never created monkeys that evolved in humans, scientist are talking crap out the big bang then afterwards we were here from small microorganism that had coincidence after coincidence to be where we are

The Dude 10/27/2009 1:25:13 PM
Crazy Xtians will be the end of us. Like Bill Maher said - "Faith means making a virtue out of not thinking. It's nothing to brag about."

Vic 10/27/2009 1:27:26 PM
if not evolution, then what? other theories have less proof.

KCH 10/27/2009 1:29:10 PM
Your on Drugs... You see want you want to see and see what makes you happy.. The theory of relatively is far more abstract than evolution but yet you religious nuts dont argue against it.. Why?? Cause it does not conflict with your pretty picture... Evolution has lots of evidence to give it a good foundation .. Your argument is weak. The End

Serendipity 10/27/2009 1:34:32 PM
good article. 5 stars my friend

Zuntino 10/27/2009 1:38:47 PM
Moron, you clearly don't understand the concept of 4 billion years do you?

@Zane - again, do you not understand the concept of 4 billion years??? Recorded history only goes back 5000-7000 years at best, but because a book written 2000 years ago says evolution is a sham, you agree... ever heard the story about the frog in boiling water??? (if not, I will elaborate) Do you really think in your 80 years (out of 4 billion) you gonna live to see anything evolve? Small minds....

Lucky Ralawe to Zuntino 10/27/2009 1:47:45 PM
Why throw tantrums and vloek instead of argue and dispel the arguments raised by author to back up the evolution theory you support? Sorry ouboeta, you have added no value here. Having read the author's article and yours, my vote goes to him. I was also interested to hear your frog in boiling water story. Let's read your elaboration

Cynical 10/27/2009 1:49:50 PM
Thanks for this great article - great for curing insomnia, that is. Please do send another such article again, just make it 10 times longer so that I can print it out to read at bedtime....zzzzzzz

LSA@Zuntino 10/27/2009 1:52:19 PM
Yes, tell us about the frog in boiling water theory!!!!

Neil 10/27/2009 1:52:46 PM
So, if simple organisms cannot create/evolve into more complex ones, who or what created god?

Trout 10/27/2009 1:52:54 PM
Nico = Idiot!!!! Talk for your self. I am a Christian and nowhere in the bible it says evolution exist. Everything was created so perfect that small minded people can not grasp the concept. From what did you evolve, from a rock? Ha-Ha

LSA@Lucky Ralawe 10/27/2009 1:53:26 PM
Where do you stay boet?? We must get together for a couple of beers

Zuntino@Lucky 10/27/2009 1:53:37 PM
no problem... if you put a frog in a cup of boiling water it will jump out, if you put a frog in a cup of water and slowly boil it, the frog will die... we can't see the change, our life span is drop in the ocean of earths history...

But please let's hear your theory?

Evolush!t 10/27/2009 1:56:26 PM
I agree, not evolution again, but I'll rather read this than another letter about Malema, the ANC etc etc. Hey, maybe we can get a letter about the evolution of the ANC, something in the line of "the ANC is considering the people of the country and they're elimating fraud etc..." (One can dream, can't one?)

GT 10/27/2009 1:58:06 PM
hmmm, I also didn't see another evolution vs creation discussion coming any time soon

but while we're all here again :)

A random (big bang) explosion that occurs from absolutely no energy or reaction whatsoever, is not and never will be proven scientifically. It's IMPOSSIBLE and any scientist will tell you that.

the theory of evolution remains just a theory. To some, it's their religion because it's what they choose to believe. I cannot bring myself to reason or find any logic with evolution, so I choose not to believe in this theory ...

Lucky Ralawe to LSA 10/27/2009 1:58:35 PM
Thanks for the lesson. My hand is extended for peace

O!...IC 10/27/2009 1:59:19 PM
Evolution must be true...the other day i forgot a peice of bread in my luchbox. Well it certainly evolved into a hideous beast.
On the other hand...If I were a once cell organism swimming in my pool with everything I need....Why evolve?

Max 10/27/2009 2:02:05 PM
In fact, YOU messed up!. Go back to your church and evolve into an angel

Max 10/27/2009 2:05:30 PM
Evolution is as much a religion as beleiving in a creator or that we are descendants of "starpeople". Religion is not God and the fossil record is not evolution.

Sambok 10/27/2009 2:08:22 PM
Nico - Please go to the Transvaal museum in Paul Kruger Street in Pretoria. In front of the building you will see the skeleton of a whale. Please study the pelvis. Look at the humerus, radius and ulna bones. That what you see my friend, is evolution in the making. A once "land based" mammal that is still evolving.

HANS 10/27/2009 2:09:04 PM
The question to ask if you are a product of evolution, then why should you worry about dying, if you believe by faith that you are a design of a greater Creator then that is worth living for.

Please give proof!! 10/27/2009 2:11:42 PM
The evolutionists are always quick to critisise and say "read books" bla bla bla...

Just damn well give some proper evidence! Don't tell us to go read the books - you haven't read them yourselves! Give proper, conclusive facts that support evolution, then we can start having a debate. Until then, accept the fact that evolution is based on faith. (evolutionists are only following the trend of the day anyway - pathetic)

moena 10/27/2009 2:12:07 PM
@frog in the dude, you serious i choose to believe a book that was writte 2000 years ago than blieve in someone book of 5000000 years ago offwich he edits time and again because he made some mathematical errors

Please give proof!! 10/27/2009 2:12:28 PM
The evolutionists are always quick to critisise and say "read books" bla bla bla...

Just damn well give some proper evidence! Don't tell us to go read the books - you haven't read them yourselves! Give proper, conclusive facts that support evolution, then we can start having a debate. Until then, accept the fact that evolution is based on faith. (evolutionists are only following the trend of the day anyway - pathetic)

LSA@Zuntino 10/27/2009 2:13:21 PM
Thanks for that brilliant theory, not!!! I read somewhere that the world is ending in a big rip, is that true. One day you will be braaing your meat and drinking some beers, then boom, the big rip will happen, then shall be nothing, just like there was nothing before the big bang. Could be anything from 1 day to 4 billion years. Nobody knows, maybe when Darwin returns, lol!!!!!

Lucky Ralawe to Zuntino 10/27/2009 2:13:45 PM
Alright, I understand the logic behind your story.

About my theory, I said I vote for the author.

From the referee's poiint of view, the score is still 1 - 0, the author still wins

Phily 10/27/2009 2:13:57 PM
Intelligent Design: Because it's easier to just read one book than a whole bunch of hard ones : )

trueblue 10/27/2009 2:14:16 PM
furthermore, the mathematical probability of the entire backdrop for life itself ie. earth rotating at perfect angle, the perfect distance from the sun, soil with right composition, the slight polarity of the water molecule, perfect amount of sunlight, perfect temperature etc etc coming into existence by pure chance is ZERO. There is such an interconnectedness to all of life that you have to be blind to believe in macro-evolutionary theory.

Zane 10/27/2009 2:14:31 PM
i still do not understand

@ Mars & KCH 10/27/2009 2:15:01 PM
Stop insulting, stop saying "it's 2009"...

Give proper evidence. KCH "Evolution has lots of evidence to give it a good foundation .. Your argument is weak. The End".

Show me the evidence KCH. YOUR argument is pathetic. Thats all you guys do: "there is evidence there is evidence" but when asked to produce you vanish...

bj 10/27/2009 2:15:42 PM
What Evolutionists cannot explain is why there are no fossils of these transitioning species - there are actually Mrs Ples etc, dinosaurs with feathers, discovered recently, these are complete as you say and transitionary fossils. It must be functioning to live and evovle further. We ourselves are transitionary species, we are/were all evolving. Bigger brains led to more sucess, the reason Neanderthals dissapeared from Europe the 'fittest' species dominated.

poor comments 10/27/2009 2:16:52 PM
Some very poor comments without giving any logical counter argunment against the points made by the reader...

Pharcide 10/27/2009 2:19:31 PM
Well said Nico. Only an idiot can believe that a one cell organism can change into a fish, into a crocodile, into a elephant which got wings and changed into a eagle which changed into blah blah blah and then they call their religion of evolution science. Oh yes, let's not forget all this happened by chance and no intelligence is allowed? Please. What man won't believe just to deny the existence of an Creator so that they don't have to believe they will have to answer to Him for their actions. You don't have to look into a science book, look around you evolutionists. FOOLS.

bj 10/27/2009 2:20:08 PM
Secondly, imagine male and female varieties of species. A male and a female are totally different and yet, they had to evolve from the same gene pool under the exact same circumstances at the same location, or mud pool - Not True, when talking of evolution most changes would havce been small (say bigger leg muscles). This would have been a mutation iin one individual. This individual had an advantage and so sucseesfully bred. By virtue there was a chance the mutation was passed on (basic biology half your genes come from your father and half from your mother). therefore some of the offspring had the advantage and so the slow process of evolution began.

its all in the numbers 10/27/2009 2:25:39 PM
Scientific Age of Earth - 4500000000 years (that's 4.5 billion)
The Age of the Bible - less than 4000 years

Most people cannot even comprehend 10,000 years... never mind a million... and here we talking about 4.5 billion...

and this age of 4.5 billion is been argued against by a book written less than 4000 years ago.

bj 10/27/2009 2:26:56 PM
Not only should they be biologically completely different but they should be 100% compatible to be able to breed. They also had to be ripe for procreation at the same moment in time to actually mate and create offspring - donkeys and horses mate to produce asses. they are not 100% compatible your arguemne tis flawed. Supposedly (a very big supposedly) your God created this so if so he allows cross procreation.

biobot 10/27/2009 2:29:20 PM
The same argument is constantly repeated by those who refuse to do read about genetic mutation and natural selection before arguing against their statistical feasibility: "It is too complicated for me to understand, therefore I shall opt for Stone Age mythology instead!"

The fact of the matter is that, unlike religion, science does not claim to have The Answer. It says: "Here is a hypothesis, a possibility, which we will test to see how probable it can become."

In science, if, at any stage, someone - anyone - comes up with experimental proof which refutes the hypothesis, then they award them a Nobel Prize and a million dollars.

In religion, if someone so much as doubts the veracity of the god myth, they are virtually burned at the stake.

See the difference?

user 10/27/2009 2:31:10 PM
has anyone paused to think that there can be evolution and creationism at the same time? God created the world in 7 days, perhaps this is a metaphor for the 7 millenia?

bj 10/27/2009 2:34:37 PM
your mind is made up and unfortunately you cannot/will use your logic to see that evolution although flawed essentially makes sense. More so then the mysticla man from upstairs

Lucky Ralawe to LSA 10/27/2009 2:41:47 PM
Gauteng, Johannesburg. You

Wisdom@evolutionists 10/27/2009 2:43:27 PM
Who said that the world is over 5 billion years old?

Skeptic 10/27/2009 2:44:00 PM
Check out IDtheFuture, Google it. Podcasts = win. Evolution is a dieing cow. Leave your religion at home when you do so.

LSA 10/27/2009 2:44:29 PM
This topic has been over written about. I think i will write one. Look out tomorrow morning for my article people

KCH 10/27/2009 2:44:46 PM
Hello someone asked for evidence well a good a start is going to a website called "Wikipedia" in there you will see a box in that box type "Evolution" and press enter. If you can read stuff without "thee" and "thou" you should have no problem. There are references throughout this web page referencing scientific studies. Go have look I dare you

Zuntino - @@ Mars & KCH 10/27/2009 2:45:37 PM
http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm

-- ZiX @ The Learned Nico -- 10/27/2009 2:49:21 PM
Yes, Nico.

Hundreds of years of scientific advancement by thousands of the greatest minds and millions of man hours of rigorous research, experimentation and peer review, yet all of this is counter-balanced by you simply having a "view" on the subject.

Your lack of understanding of the numerous scientific disciplines that has got evolution from hypothesis to theory (which is actually a fact in the realm of science) does not detract from the fact that exists and is quite, quite true.

Time to hit the books I think?

bj 10/27/2009 2:49:50 PM
I guess religious people ignore the facts so they do not have to focus on the truth. The real truth is there is no point to life. It is pointless yet absurdly wonderful. So my advise is stop wasting time wishing for a perfect afterlife and rather live this absurd, wierd and wonderful thing called life right now.

ID Critic 10/27/2009 2:51:42 PM
http://www.nature.com/evoeco/index.html

Go read through every article there, there is your evidence...sigh

@believers 10/27/2009 2:52:25 PM
I think true believers would kill themselves. i only see this in the islamic world. If God is so great and heaven so perfect why are you not in an absolute rush to join him. Fact is your probaly as scared of death as I am. Why hang on to life at any stage, just go to heaven in a hurry?

LSA@Lucky Ralawe 10/27/2009 2:52:25 PM
In centurion

Macburn 10/27/2009 2:52:27 PM
Have you actually read up anything on evolution? Your lack of understanding is huge. All you have confirmed is how ignorant you are about the topic. Go and find out about a subject before embarrassing yourself on a public forum.

gunny 10/27/2009 2:53:00 PM
http://www.eltabernacle.co.za/videos/Evolution%20message%20internet.wmv

LSA@evolutionists 10/27/2009 2:54:10 PM
Is the world going to end the way it started?? Enlighten us!!! Will it be "boom, bang, boom" and we all gone???

Just wondering 10/27/2009 2:55:13 PM
Lets talk science, the first law of thermodynamics states: Energy cannot be created nor destroyed..Mmmm.. maybe soup?? The second law of thermodynamics states: everything is in a state of entropy (downward spiral not upward) it is simple those who want to be descended from monkeys..let them, I am descended from God, made in His image...anyone want to join me? PS. go to you Youtube and search "the privileged planet" and tell me its all coincidence! the biggest religion on earth is the BELIEF in Evolution!!!

kokkewiet 10/27/2009 2:56:11 PM
there is no god.

Sevendust 10/27/2009 2:59:19 PM
Hey idiot: move out of your cave! Fossils of transitional forms have been discovered more than a 100 years ago! And there are thousands of examples!

Oneguy 10/27/2009 2:59:42 PM
Evolution exists ok, just look at the nation breeding itself into stupidity. Evidence of this is found all over goverment.

Trevor Gothan 10/27/2009 3:00:55 PM
Evolutionary theory does NOT conclude there is no God. In fact, the more you study the incredible rules which govern nature and our universe, the more respect you will have for our incredible Creator. Religion & science are coming closer together, but very slowly (at evolutionary speed?). With blinkers on, it'll take another thousand years I guess.

Frank Molteno 10/27/2009 3:02:22 PM
Its easier to believe than to think deductively. Thats how Malema gets his support. Read Richard Dawkins, even fools can understand his books if they are prepared to work at it.

Fredster 10/27/2009 3:02:39 PM
Anyone that believe we came from nothing that exploded and then became something and then for millions of years boiled in some form of broth and then...voala..here we are. BULL... people do not want to believe in a Creator because then they have to be accountable for their actions..

evolsh!t @ bj 10/27/2009 3:04:04 PM
hey Schizo, if there is no point to life, why call it wonderful??? Is life pointless or wonderful dude... My adviCe, stop wasting time posting stuff and sort your own absurd and weird mind...

duh 10/27/2009 3:04:09 PM
I cant believe that a all mighty God will come here and plant a bunch of trees, release some animals and think wow, thats great. You would really expect him to think about it and engineer a self sustaining and self repairing system like evolution that is more incredible than people think.

Aquila 10/27/2009 3:04:24 PM
Another ignoramus sprouting drivel from his little soap box. Please understand that evolution is an intensely complex (though beautifully simple) process that even some top scientists are hard pressed to fully comprehend. Clearly you have absolutely no knowledge on the subject and have little to no understanding of evolution. Your argument about male and female development is laughable and I shall submit it for nomination of an Ignobel award (look it up).
Spend a few minutes reading 'Climbing Mt improbable' by Richard Dawkins to get a clue. Although, I would question your reading capabilities.

janneman 10/27/2009 3:06:07 PM
The bible was written over 100's of years. from stories told over generations. - simple folklore. ffs. then you argue that man cannot come from a monkey because we where made in the "light(whatever) of god". funny how the simpelist of creatures also have 2eyes, 2ears, mouth, nose, paws(underdeveloped hands), brain, heart, etc etc. wow, humans truly are differant. ai

Ikabot 10/27/2009 3:07:31 PM
Nico, there are some fallacies in your argument here. There are loads of fossils of those organisms that didn't make it. Every species that is extinct today didn't make it. As far as simple systems producing more complex ones, read up on finite state automata. It's fascinating stuff. Ir's a mistake to suppress knowledge in the name of religion.

KIWI 10/27/2009 3:07:35 PM
Time is a concept that most people just don’t understand, the earth is 4.5billion years old, a lot can happen. If I am not mistaken, our world have been devastated 9 times already, destroying 99% of all life and from the remaining 1% life has evolved. Evolution is just another word for mutation, and that happens all the time, just look at the common cold, it can mutate into some devastating viruses.

We did not evolve from monkeys; both of us had the same ancestor.

Hennie 10/27/2009 3:08:19 PM
@KCH and the rest of you evolution and atheist nuts. I guess you will one day find out if the bible were correct when you die like the rest of us, and boy oh boy, you must hope that your THEORY that you compiled with your human brain is correct.

Zeke 10/27/2009 3:08:31 PM
@zane if we become mutants can i have get dibs on the power to control water and ice? then I could make it snow and rain and be polar oppisite to zuko and trap wolvoverine under an averlance while playing tag and what are you gonna be? ^_^

All in all I agree with Users thereory of 7 days being a metaphor for the 7 millenia and evolution and creationism are working together.


KIWI 10/27/2009 3:09:14 PM
Time is a concept that most people just don’t understand, the earth is 4.5billion years old, a lot can happen. If I am not mistaken, our world have been devastated 9 times already, destroying 99% of all life and from the remaining 1% life has evolved. Evolution is just another word for mutation, and that happens all the time, just look at the common cold, it can mutate into some devastating viruses.

We did not evolve from monkeys; both of us had the same ancestor.

zane 10/27/2009 3:09:15 PM
frogs and boiling water still does not prove that G-d does not exist.... Evolution can be proven but does not disprove the existance of G-d.... every single evolutionist here cannot disprove G-d and his existance, Evolution is scientific fact... and the big bang theory that matter came from nothing.... is more in line with religeous beliefs than a scientific one

Zuntino @ Trevor Gothan 10/27/2009 3:10:40 PM
Well said Brother, at last someone with an open mind...

evolutionist 10/27/2009 3:15:50 PM
I believe that God is the creator, he created man in his own image. Where would man be today if we had to survive against the dinosaurs? Extinct? Dinosaurs existed, fossils prove that clearly. It would not have been possible for man and dinosaur to co-exist at the same time.

KCH 10/27/2009 3:19:36 PM
@Hennie .. Yes I am an atheist I was once extremely religious then I realised that my whole religious belief was based on my FEAR of death . So I took an objective look at religion and I discovered that religion is in it self a "THEORY that was compiled by many human brains"

Themba 10/27/2009 3:20:40 PM
My favourite statement:


Problem with this logic is that it fails to answer the basic question of "who created the creator"
The idea that the Creator simply came into being is probably more ludicrous than one that says we are still discovering how this universe started out, but the theory is that life started from the most basic form.
I watched a National Geographic program where it counted down the largest storms in the universe, largest twisters, etc. It occurred to me that life is far more random that Christians or other fundamentalists would have us believe. On our earth alone, there are types of gherkos that have evolved that end up producing young without ever mating with a male partner. The produce other females who are exactly their clones, and since there is no mating, there is no fear of incest. The problem these animals face is that any disease would wipe out an entire population since there is no variety in the gene pool. This is another example of the randomness of our environment. Some animals have disappeared because their species could not adapt. One would think that if a creator created a kwagga, he would ensure that it survives. The fact that it did not survive perhaps is function of the survival of the fittest and perhaps bad luck, and does more harm to the belief that some god created chaos

Pieter 10/27/2009 3:20:41 PM
Ok then when we look at the earth, the universe and everything, at the plants, flowers, animals, everything must have been created yes?? Ok then if you choose to believe in a God that created these splendid things, then according to the same rule WHO created God...see the hypocrisy in those lines of arguments?

chops @ biobot 10/27/2009 3:20:53 PM
No biobot, evolutionists say it's a proven fact. See the first couple of comments. They never say it's just a theory. Only when they are pressed for proof/answers they always say, no... it's just a theory. Can you please tell me why evolution scientists don't want to debate evolution? When they do try they pretty much always lose the debate. Why is that? I'll tell you - it's because their arguments and theories are so weak it doesn't even warrant debate. Evolution is a religion for people who don't like the idea of a higher power. Your comments about religion and people burnt at the stake is small minded. Don't blame religion for the work of a few looney humans. Religion was often used to further political agendas.

Zuntino 10/27/2009 3:21:04 PM
Read Trevor's comment, the evolutionary theory does not disprove God! Why do you all create this rift between evolution and God? I don't go to church so please tell me why church goers and happy clappys think I'm gonna burn in hell for believing in evolution???

JJ 10/27/2009 3:21:55 PM
What you lot do not realize is that Evolution takes 1000's of years not a couple of hundred. Just think of the last 200 + yrs how things have evolved, maybe not much in years but check what happened just mentally . It's a HUGE change. And even physically if you think of say the Gladiators time, that were a total different species physically, What I'm saying is we live longer and are surely more intelligent (I Think) than them but they were much stronger physically as a lot more manpower were used in anything. So the result, our muscles change etc.

Shadwick 10/27/2009 3:23:19 PM
Poor argument - its a high-level attempt to skim over the basis of evolution - I agree wholeheartedly with ID Critic - do your research on cellular biology/paleo-anthropology/anatomy/evolutionary genetics/genetics/social biology and understand how ALL the pieces fit together before you decide to retire to the mentally comforting confines of a antiquated religious view that suggests an imaginary friend of yours is responsible for all of this – Religion ONLY exists within the boundaries of science – as such, religious believers will do their UTMOST of keep those boundaries as wide as possible – it’s a form of mental evolution in itself … religion is an utter crock but some people need it (I consider it a crutch) – the fact that you need to ARGUE it just to make yourself feel better about your choice says a lot on its own – keep your dictated religion – I’ll keep deductive logic, science and a bag full of “ha-ha told you so”

duh 10/27/2009 3:23:47 PM
@Hennie Its people like you that makes me ashamed to say I'm a Christian.

@Fraudster 10/27/2009 3:24:49 PM
@Fredster
You must be very clever. If it is improbable to believe that we could have come from nothing, what thing did your god come out?
A tadpole can become a frog, but you will never be intelligent

Lucky Ralawe to LSA 10/27/2009 3:25:10 PM
I used to live in Highveld, Centurion until about 5 years ago.

I would love to have a beer. Let's arrange that get together one of these days

Rich 10/27/2009 3:25:30 PM
Why can't people be a bit more accepting? Live and let live. An evolutionary perspective is all that can explain where we sit today on this earth. Don't you think that perfecting a creation over billions of years (something humanly inconceivable) is a godly act?

White Pride 10/27/2009 3:26:04 PM
The argument is not whether evolution exists. You can see it on a microscopic scale in different breeds of dogs that all evolved from "canis lupus" like creature. Look at breeds of cows that evolved to survive in africa eg Nguni. This is science. You are saying that a father xmas like figure created all creatures and the world in six days and the rested on the senth? why did he rest? cos he got tired? lunacy! I wont go into fairies and witches and demons and walking on water. Its the computer age! wake up, religion is poisoning your mind.

Johan 10/27/2009 3:27:22 PM
The Christian believes everything was created by God. Where does God come from the evolutionists ask? I ask where does your pick of dust come from that exploded. See… we all have a religion the Christian just agree that ours is religion and the evolutionists does not agree that they also have a religion because then it cant be teach in schools. You just believe your dust was there always we believe our God was there always. Please tel me I’m wrong with proof? Any takers???? Thought so……

Justin 10/27/2009 3:27:31 PM
Can News24 please stop publishing this garbage. There is no debate people. Evolution is a fact. The "arguments" above are based totally on propaganda spread by creationists. They are simply untrue. News24 is contributing to the spread of disinformation.
Please stop!

AW 10/27/2009 3:27:34 PM
I ask myself the question : Who believes in evolution? Answer : Highly intelligent ,successfull people believe in evolution. Who believes in an invisible person that lives in the sky, tortures his 'children' on earth everyday to test them and is a murderer who decides when you will die? Answer : VERY crazy people!

Zuntino@CHOP 10/27/2009 3:28:46 PM
again see http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm
Just read the first page and keep quiet...

Mrs Pless 10/27/2009 3:29:01 PM
@Nico. Have you visited museums recently, or even bothered to read. Just because you say something does not exists does not mean it does not exist.
Furthermore, it is scientists that have been busy trying to find fossils, while your religion has been denying just about everything.
@user
If 7 days is a metaphor, how does one decide which part is not a metaphor. for example, an eye for an eye maybe a metaphor as other instructions. It seems that people decide metaphors to be those parts they are not comfortable with. The rest is true

LSA@Lucky Ralawe 10/27/2009 3:29:14 PM
Sure bru. Anybody else wanna join us?? We can discuss evolution, malema, eskom etc over some beers. Oh, dont bring your firearms, in case we get too intense with our discussions!!!!

LSA@evolutionists 10/27/2009 3:30:06 PM
I'm still waiting for your theory on how the world is ending!!!!

chops @ KCH 10/27/2009 3:31:01 PM
Evidence - nah reading those website don't prove anything. I've been reading them for years trying to find this so-called "proof". It's just shaky theories and assumptions based on other theories and bad assumptions - none of which can be proven.

But go ahead and believe whatever you want. People tend to "prove" whatever they want to believe.

So no. Reading books and websites full of theories does not proof anything. Watch Kent Hovind debate evolutionists on Youtube and you'll see just how bad their theories are. If evolution is such a fact, why can't they win a scientific debate on evolution?

(Que someone telling me Kent Hovind is in jail for tax evasion - does that make his arguments any less valid?)

CTheB 10/27/2009 3:32:36 PM
So you've written a whole lot of stuff you've made up and you're claiming not to have left the argument hanging? Many may not spot the fact that all you've presented is some decent examples of specious arguments, unfortunately, but all you've done is a little bit of rewording of the same tired empty rhetoric that's been trotted out by creationists, intelligent design advocates, etc. for years. What you've written is pretty much just lying (which I was always taught was wrong).

If you choose to believe that the evidence supporting evolution isn't for you, so be it, but please, at least be honest.

LSA@evolutionists 10/27/2009 3:35:25 PM
Johan is correct!! What started the big bang. In order for something to explode, something must have caused it. Or where did the organisms come from that we evolved from? Could it be that one day, there was just an empty space and then boom, nothing collided with nothing and then nothing evolved into something, come on, tell us!!!

Johan 10/27/2009 3:35:29 PM
The Christian believes everything was created by God. Where does God come from the evolutionists ask? I ask where does your pick of dust come from that exploded. See… we all have a religion the Christian just agree that ours is religion and the evolutionists does not agree that they also have a religion because then it cant be teach in schools. You just believe your dust was there always we believe our God was there always. Please tel me I’m wrong with proof? Any takers???? Thought so……

Zuntino@LSA 10/27/2009 3:35:39 PM
Holy crap dude, just don't invite Juan or Glock, you may just get shot, would love to join julle, sounds like it could be interesting...

Mars 10/27/2009 3:36:29 PM
Oh please! There is so much evidence proving the evolution theory that it would take up too much space to write it down here. PLEASE guys don't comment on this when you don't know anything about it. Just go to the Origins Centre (WITS) or Maropeng (Cradle of Humankind). It IS the year 2009 and we don't have to prove anything it's been proven decades ago. (AND it's not necessarily ant-bible. God used evolution as a tool to create us.)

Winston 10/27/2009 3:36:56 PM
My biggest problem with religion is that it forces you to abandon reason and take it all on faith. Well, I am not a slave to any god... I feel very uncomfotable to think that there is actually someone out there that makes dicisions about my life without informing me... As Mr Hitchens so pointedly puts it, WE NO LONGER NEED A GOD TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS NO LONGER MYSTERIOUS. You people kan keep your faith, while the church keeps your money... wake up people ! we no longer need religion, today we have science. We still use the term 'theory of gravity' but we know it is a fact !!!

@zane 10/27/2009 3:40:13 PM
Actually Zane scientists don't know what happened before the big bang, no where do they propose that it came from nothing. You propose that. in fact the latest is string theory which proposes everyhting inter connected with no beginning and no end (I may be incorrect this is how I understand it) therefore eliminating the need for a creator at all. This appeals to me, why did there have to be a beginning and an end. An oscillating system is more prevailent in nature and would make more sense, i.e big bang expansion, contration big crunch, big bang expansio and so on. beginnings and ends are human creations. Nature love infinite. Blows my mind but is fasinating.

Hennie 10/27/2009 3:42:07 PM
@KCH. Sorry to hear that. Like they say, nobody's perfect...

Frank Molteno 10/27/2009 3:43:14 PM
Its easier to believe than to think deductively. Thats how Malema gets his support. Read Richard Dawkins, even fools can understand his books if they are prepared to work at it.

Rory 10/27/2009 3:43:24 PM
News24 stop publishing this crap. Its perpetuating stupidity. Evolution is fact.

BigAl 10/27/2009 3:43:52 PM
There you have it folks. Nico is the proof that the OBE curriculum is a failure.

bj@evolsh$t 10/27/2009 3:44:18 PM
Why can't life be pointless and wonderful. I can make a meaning in my life, much like religious people do they try to make a meaning, i just don't. My point is life is actually futile. You will die and that will be it. No afterlife, no big party with the white bearded judge, no nothing.. scary to think of hey.. i guess thats why you cling to fairytales. That does not stop me from seeing how wonderful the universe is or stop me from living my life, in fact I would argue it allows me to live a more fufilling life.

chops @ AW 10/27/2009 3:44:40 PM
Pure ignorance - but that is what scientists are always suggesting - that clever people believe in evolution so "normal" people don't question them. The real fact is that 100's of thousands of highly intelligent and successfull people DO NOT believe in evolution. Even scientists. I'm just one of the MENSA members who do not believe in evolution. Why not? Cause I choose to think and read up for myself and not just accept anything a scientist says as fact. Evolution has not been proven and the assumptions it is based on requires a leap of faith to believe in it. And by the way, adaptation is not evolution (sigh). Just shows you how much some of these clever pro-evolution posters really know.

Len van Heerden 10/27/2009 3:45:40 PM
@chris
I suppose it is better to tell your teenagers that they will burn in hell if they do not pray to some murderous god who is jealous, confuses people intentionally, kills people at a whim and has lost control of what he claims to have created in 7 days?
Yes, worry about the teenage suicide rates, because your version of life is bound to depress even Mother Teressa
@Chops
Not sure on what basis you generalise that scientists do not want to debate evolution. Please provide examples of your claims or even references, otherwise any idiot can create a statement and quote themselves
http://www.scienceandreason.net/evol.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html
There are many more such debates if you bother to use google or other search engine created by your god.
Another evolution is the fact that Paul did not use the internet. Now, he would be able to use.
The internet has evolved and people have evolved around the internet. The internet is only 40 years old, and yet it has created social change that takes years to make possible

Pieter 10/27/2009 3:46:37 PM
Nico yu say there are no evidence of transitional species... u need to do some reading dude, we have the fossils in the Karoo that are between reptiles and mammals, archaeoptrix which is a bird with reptile claws, living plathypus in Australia which is a mammal laying eggs. we have numerous plants which are interspecies, some plants that behave as animals, and even some humans that behave like animals...

Ryan 10/27/2009 3:46:57 PM
As a Christian I fail to understand why I am wrong to believe in Evolution. Accepting the scientific fact based on hard evidence does not mean that I am rejecting my Creator. In fact, it strengthens my faith and places me in awe of how He managed to create what He did. I believe that God created a few simple “rules” to keep the universal clock ticking with science, mathematics and physics at the very center of it.

Bunkum 10/27/2009 3:48:27 PM
I wasn't going to reply to some of this dribble written by one-celled morons.
Tabulated briefly whether you like it or not:
Man was created --NOT 6000 years ago but Millions of years ago. Bible punchers - Read Genesis correctly. God CREATED everything on earth AFTER IT's OWN KIND. Genisis "days" are not our 24hr days.- Darwin on his deathbed begged salvation and admitted he was wrong. Who do you think created DNA? or did that also "evolve"? from what? If you cant get past the first 4 words of Genisis 1v1 -- sorry, you have a big problem. Stop calling christianity a religion. It's far from one -- it's a way of life. You'll know a true christin by just having a conversation with him. -- By his fruit you will know him.-- FINIS.

The Spear 10/27/2009 3:48:44 PM
All lies! We were created by the Flying Spaghetti monster by his noodly appendage. You can't proof me wrong! We have ancient book that was inspired by the Flying Spaghetti Monster himself which confirms that!

Gerhard 10/27/2009 3:48:45 PM
@Hennie. "you must hope that your THEORY that you compiled with your human brain is correct. " Ai Hennie. So what if the theory is correct? Does that then prove that your bible is only a book? So you yourself are not so sure are you? Just shot yourself in the foot.

Religious Fool 10/27/2009 3:48:49 PM
Who needs faith when facts are so convincing?
Answer: Religious Fools

KCH @chops 10/27/2009 3:49:02 PM
Wow a YouTube video hmmmm is that best you can up with. But I will go have a look as I have an open mind.
Also do you realise how many scientific principles are theory's but yet they are used in our everyday life? So think about that before you climb on a plane? As gravity is only a theory? As to your statement "It's just shaky theories and assumptions based on other theories and bad assumptions" all I can really say is I disagree so do many other people... I guess it a personal choice

Mars@Ryan 10/27/2009 3:54:00 PM
Absolutely. Thank you Ryan!!! Well said.


Shadwick 10/27/2009 3:55:43 PM
BJ - SPOT ON!!!!!! you could not have said it better - however - I feel there is a point to the existence of everything - we just don’t understand how we fit into it - and I doubt we ever will - but point being: screw everything and JUST ENJOY THE RIDE - you religious fanatics that impose your beliefs on those who surround you are pathetic, tiresome and embarrassing (if you had enough logic to think past the word vomit you’re spewing you’d see the level of embarrassment you cause yourselves)

Paul 10/27/2009 3:56:36 PM
It's really sad to see intelligent people led astray by creationist misinformation and propaganda.

Nico, do yourself a favour and read 'The Greatest Show on Earth - The Evidence for Evolution', or any of the other fantastic recent books published by actual evolutionary biologists. You'll find that your shallow arguments have already been conclusively answered.

@Chops 10/27/2009 3:57:00 PM
hahahaha!! Kent Hovind!! Are you serious! He is a convicted Fraudster. And you referernce his crappy Youtube video. OMGIROFLMOA!! Go see the videos posted in resposne to his useless and uneducated views by people with real knowledge of what they are talking about.

duh 10/27/2009 3:58:49 PM
"It is physically and logically impossible for simplex things to combine and, without adding anything else, to form a complex thing. Technology, intelligence, knowledge, skills, other complex things, or whatever should still be discovered, have to be added for the simplex to arrive at the complex." What about a whole bunch of simplexes forming a complex, your body is made up of a whole bunch of cells which work very similar to simple organisms like bacteria, just more advanced, like a cpu today is more advanced than it was 10 years ago - no one added something, they just redesigned it.

Hennie 10/27/2009 4:00:34 PM
@gerhard - you obviously don't know what is written in the bible because you are missing the point. If his evolution theory is wrong, then he have a problem (but luckily its his problem...). I don't understand how you could come to your conclusion about my faith by reading 2 sentences..?

somebody1 10/27/2009 4:00:45 PM
supposed to have faith, and those who believe in God will get the answers to the questions none believers ask. I believe God made us :-) i wont judge those who dont believe, not my job. I wonder what my heart is made up of...,just saying. Sure the love of God. Where does emotion come from??...just asking :-)

Jules 10/27/2009 4:02:37 PM
LOLz Christians. You guys have a problem with us evolutionists saying that we developed from 'lower lifeforms' but you see no problem with your argument that 'we were created from dirt'????!?!

hloni@duh 10/27/2009 4:04:13 PM
My thoughts exactly...the more i read about evolution...the more i appreciate God's intelligence.

pie007 10/27/2009 4:04:46 PM
Winston are u stupid? Why do humans (except the ones believing in evolution) have an inherent need to worship a higher being. Even those not educated, in the most archaic places on earth feel the need to draw closer to a higher power? Science could not explain why there are 365 and a 1/4 days in a year, whereas religion or the Bible has the answer. Like someone noted it's an easy way out to accept that the is no God, and not be accountable for your actions. What then would make us different from the beast of the field and the birds of the sky? Religion does not force you to abandon any reason, if you had spent time reading anything else other sci-fi and Darwin, maybe you would have discovered that we are encouraged to test everything, even the things that are from God. So how can you not believe in religion...IDIOTS!

@ chops 10/27/2009 4:05:59 PM
One of his "proofs" is footprints of humans and dinosaurs next to one another in gray rock. Yet no cientist are allowed within 10 meters of the "proof". Other "proof" is rock paintings of humans riding dinosaurs, amazingly only to be found on his theme park in the good old USA nogal, and again no scientist may do test on the paintings.

Kent Hovind is a moron. He only debates with scientist of no importance. So many famous scientist challenged Kent Hovind and he just never reply. And yes I've got all Kent Hovind's DVD's. No wonder they give it away for free. A bunch of nonsence.

Hovind is in gail for $500 000 tax fraud, not bad for a "non-profit" organisation don't you think? His court case can actually be downloaded. He stated: "God do not pay tax, I'm a child of God, so neither shall I pay tax". And then there is still morons that believe the FBI framed him!!

GT@BUNKUM 10/27/2009 4:06:23 PM
Darwin did no such thing and in fact his book is only the basis for the exploration of the topic. Be careful about lying, you know what your loving god has in store for liars!

Point Blank@Wisdom 10/27/2009 4:07:42 PM
If you don't know how the planet can be so old then you have refused to educate and research the fact.

Point Blank@Lucky Bean 10/27/2009 4:08:26 PM
Gauteng is too far, come to Durban for a holiday!

@sambok 10/27/2009 4:08:47 PM
Wow, is that all I need to do, stare at the skeleton of a whale and eurika, the lights go on, "evolution is true", thanks, I will try that

the fact 10/27/2009 4:09:14 PM
These articles, comments, forums etc are all useless.

The only way to get to the bottom of this, is to have ALL the proof (note proof - not evidence) for evolution put into debate and have every instance accepted or rejected. There is no proof. Sure there is evidence, but evidence can mean whatever we want it to mean. At the end of the day the truth will be made known.

Hammertime@Hennie 10/27/2009 4:10:16 PM
Your such a plank!, us "non believers" have it covered, when we die we'll do what you sheep do and just say a few "hell mary's" and all will be forgiven.....then we'll all be one happy family again.....i must of missed where they talk about dinosaurs in the bible, why not?

Gerhard 10/27/2009 4:11:41 PM
I am a pathologist who studied in SA and USA.I studied evolution, big bang theory etc. To make a long story short,maybe there is adaptation of organisms (like getting darker when exposed to sunlight etc)but there is absolutely no proof of evolution.Space too short to put forward extensive facts...!!Lets try and stay acadamic and not insult one another in this discussion

Sage 10/27/2009 4:12:05 PM
Nico, I can see that this subject vexes you. Here is a small tip: DEAL WITH IT!!!!

Why oh why... 10/27/2009 4:12:38 PM
I've read Darwin's book, Dawkin's book and have done a lot of research. My brother believes in evolution and I am a Christian. He gets furious at me when I say the following: " I may not be able to prove God, but you can't PROVE evolution". People, evidence is only that - evidence. It is not proof. There is not proof. Until there is proof, I do not have to belief it, because my faith will not be placed in a bunch of bones some say are millions of years old.

You probably can be a Christian and believe in evolution, but people, please do some REAL research - from both sides, instead of just throwing mud.

Niki 10/27/2009 4:12:45 PM
I find a blind belief in creationism by anyone who can read and write incomprehensible. It should be obvious that the first human (Adam, if you like) looked more like a chimp than Eve like a rib chop - but then, there are people who would rather believe that there's a flying saucer hidden in the basement of the Pentagon than that huge fossil skeletons belonged to dinosaurs...

Stormin 10/27/2009 4:13:03 PM
The bible was written 4000 years ago, before the advent of modern science.
By people who simply didn't know any beter.
Now 4000 years later, with the evolution theory and modern science, we now know better.
Why then, do people still choose to beleive a 4000 year old book, that is nothing but folk lore?
It was written over decades, by people that weren't even around when "Jesus" was alive.
There are around 20 well documented historians, that were alive around the time that Jesus was said to be alive.
Why then does not a single one mention him? Surely his "miracles" would have warentd some sort of documentaion. And i'm not talking about the bible.
Everyone keeps going on about proof that evolution is true. Where is your proof that the bible is true. The only evedince is the bible itself. How can people blindly accept that a book, written by men, has to be true.
Hogwash, there is no evidence at all that the bible is true.

Adult Fairytale 10/27/2009 4:14:42 PM
I watched a national geographic documentary about how some land mammal was supposed to have evolved into a whale. What a laugh, I am sorry, but the lights just didnt go on for me, too many assumptions, in fact, to be more accurate, the whole thing was an assumption. Interestingly enough, I watched another documentary which said that the hippo actually evolved from the whale. So from land to sea to land, absurd!!!!!!!!!!

KCH 10/27/2009 4:16:49 PM
@pie007.. You asked why humans have a inherent need to worship a higher being. Well I think its just in our nature. Why do most mutually exclusive civilisations have one King.. because it in our nature to try to look up to the dominant human .. thus a higher being.. We evolved that way :-).. Just like a group of wolves have evolved the instinct to pick alpha male/female. So have us humans after all we are naturally pack animals

Dave 10/27/2009 4:18:55 PM
Nico, you know absolutely nothing about evolution. You said: "What Evolutionists cannot explain is why there are no fossils of these transitioning species". False, the fossil records support evolution enormously.

JustinD 10/27/2009 4:19:04 PM
WHO CARES!!!!!

ZION 10/27/2009 4:24:54 PM
God is the intelligence of the universe. Probably not some old man looking to the interests of a few billion huminoids on planet earth. All the energy in the universe was present at the "big bang" and under certain circumstances will be present at the big crunch. Evidence of transitional fossiles are around us in abundance: Take a look at the apes to modern man. quantum mechanics will indicate that energy can arise out of nothing. We see the results but cannot fathom that one out. Maybe god knows

MRG 10/27/2009 4:27:21 PM
...and i suppose you could also believe that the moon is made of green cheese

Winston 10/27/2009 4:28:46 PM
@pie007. Thanks for your reply. Actually, Im not that stupid... I make an effort to find the truth for myself... unlike you who probably believes everything that gets told to you, especially from the pulpit, without checking facts... propose I lived 10 000 years ago, how would I be able to explain thunder and lightning ? floods? earthquakes etc? even the sun rising everyday would have been a mystery to me... Did ancient civilizations not worship the sun ? it must have been a god to them, BECAUSE THEY COULD NOT EXPLAIN IT. Today we know better! Funny how the gods have become less and less over the years... today there is only 1 left. Go do a BIT MORE research and you will find that religion ( Judaism; Christianity; Islam) is just a continuation of very ancient believes that originated in ancient Sumeria. Go read the old testament again and then read the creation tales of the Sumerians, they actually left many records for us, by the way. While you at it, read the epic of Gilgamesh. Notice anything ? For the record, I do actually read the bible often as part of my research.

Neil 10/27/2009 4:29:23 PM
Reading your article says to me that you have taken the time to consider evolution and not just accept that the earth is 6000 years old and "God" just created it in 7(6) days. But unfortunately you do not have the full picture of evolution which actually makes a lot more sense that a designer when you look closely.

I encourage you , and any other reader, to look further into this and it makes so much sense when you understand a little more ( not that I am any expert - just someone who was interested and took the time to learn a little more) I recommend a book by Richard Dawkins called "The Greatest Show on Earth" He explains the basics in layman’s terms and has answered every question I had ever had on the subject to get a basic understanding.

Natalie 10/27/2009 4:30:12 PM
I gave up reading the comments. This is the most childish debate I have ever read on evolution vs creationism.
Firstly I would just like to clear something up (chops listen up) People who believe in evolution can also believe in God, evolution is NOT trying to disprove the existence of God (this is simple stuff chops, I hope you are following). Evolution explains how life forms have changed over millenia, NOT whether or not God exists. Evolution is not a 'theory' designed because scientist are afraid to believe in God: that is such a weak argument, as it just side tracks the issue.
Secondly how can you have fossil evidence of transition? What are you waiting for a fossil that changes before your eyes? They is plenty of fossil evidence of homonin species. Some died out and did not support later species ie australopithecines robustus, as well as clear transistional species such as Homo erectus.
Secondly organism do not evolve because they feel like it. They evolve out of necessity. Monkeys are adapted to their environment and their species is surviving (bar human devastation sorry I mean interference) Humans evolved because we needed to adapt to survive against changing climates and stronger predators. Surely you know that your brain is a muscle and the more you exercise it the smarter you get? (well maybe you dont, there doesn't seem like much evidence that you exercise your brain much) Well as hominins were faced with problems their problem solving skills got better, and their brains got bigger.
This is such simple stuff that I am embarrassed to even be saying it. but I hope that you consider that evolution is a multi- faceted process that happened over MILLIONS of years. Some religious dogma has you believing that God turned on a light and started playing with clay to make humans, but this just blinds you to the truly magnificence and beauty of life, considering that it is such a fragile thing. Science is a window through which to view God, not a door to close it against Him.

Slash 10/27/2009 4:31:55 PM
@Pieter - Ha ha ha - Dude, we even have some humans that behave like plants, pot plants to be exact - like the author of this idiotic article. The problem with these religious nuts, is that they are so small minded, that they can't see beyond their pathetic 2000 year time span, from when "the book" was written. Life is BILLIONS of years old. Evolution takes MILLIONS of years and it is a process. It has ALWAYS been happening and it always will. Do you think that we (humans) will still look and act the same in a million years from now (if we still exist)? You base your "faith" and your beliefs on a time period of between 2 and 5 thousands years. Don't you see that in the scale of life and the universe and nature, that is infinitely minute? It's not even a drop in the ocean of a drop in the ocean of a drop in the ocean compared to time from the start of all things.

bmpdragon 10/27/2009 4:39:50 PM
Did any of the religious zealots commenting on this topic actually contemplate the possibility that their so-called "spiritual feelings" and "religious sensitivities" are the result of evolutionary processes? Up to a certain point, religions serve an evolutionary purpose: that of group cohesion, life fulfilment and satisfaction, moral laws, etc. This does not mean that there is a god (or gods for that matter) — religions and spirituality are merely constructs of the human mind to alleviate the depression of reality (and thus increase human fitness). As Marx (a contemporary of Darwin's) so eloquently states, "Religion is the opium of the people..."

alan 10/27/2009 4:40:04 PM
The problem that creationists have with evolution is they have a simplistic understanding of the universe in which all things happen because it is "Gods Will". Fair enough. But they also happen according to strict rules that science has patiently uncovered over the ages. The thing that irks creationists is that they thought all life popped into being when God clicked his fingers. The sad thing is they dont have the imagination or the ability to realise that science doesnt actually disagree with them, other than He only clicked his fingers once - just before the Big Bang, after that its controlled by logic. Now the question is who created logic? Why is it so logical?

neil 10/27/2009 4:42:02 PM
Reading your article says to me that you have taken the time to consider evolution and not just accept that the earth is 6000 years old and "God" just created it in 7(6) days. But unfortunately you do not have the full picture of evolution which actually makes a lot more sense than a designer when you look closely. I encourage you , and any other reader, to look further into this and it makes so much sense when you understand a little more ( not that I am any expert - just someone who was interested and took the time to learn a little more) I recommend a book by Richard Dawkins called "The Greatest Show on Earth" He explains the basics in layman’s terms and has answered every question I had ever had on the subject to get a basic understanding.

Deez 10/27/2009 4:43:09 PM
The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the initial conditions and subsequent development of the Universe that is supported by the most comprehensive and accurate explanations from current scientific evidence and observation.[1][2] As used by cosmologists, the term Big Bang generally refers to the idea that the Universe has expanded from a primordial hot and dense initial condition at some finite time in the past (currently estimated to have been approximately 13.7 billion years ago[3]), and continues to expand to this day.

Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his "hypothesis of the primeval atom". The framework for the model relies on Albert Einstein's general relativity and on simplifying assumptions (such as homogeneity and isotropy of space).

and thats just the tip of the ice berg, if people insist on argueing about this i suggest RESEARCH for support and no the BIBLE does not count as a valid source, as someone else pointed out the theory of evolution is always changing to incorporate new findings, however the bible has also changed(or more like lost in translation) but whatever, life is ment to be lived and enjoyed by the people living it not to please some figment of some 2000 year old toppies imagination, then again who really knows, so beleive what you want

@Jules 10/27/2009 4:43:22 PM
The bible says that mankind is a triune being ie. has a body a soul and a spirit. I am surprised how evolutionists criticise believers for not knowing science while simultaneously demonstrating their own shockingly poor understanding of the bible.

jovie 10/27/2009 4:43:57 PM
Check out "The Arrivals" on You Tube.... Then make comments on where Darwin got his theory from... You will be totally GOBSMACKED!!!!

Graham@bunkum 10/27/2009 4:49:58 PM
YOU need to read Genesis correctly. It says that God created the earth in 7 DAYS, so how do you pronounce so confidently that a day was not a 24 hour day. Also, I once heard a very good preacher say, if you dont believe what Genesis literally says, then when do you actually jump on board. Is it Exodus, or mabey later. Dont change the words to make things more comfortable for yourself.

Andy 10/27/2009 4:50:05 PM
Right now all ID subscribers say that man was created in gods image, then explain why we all look so different - people from africa, people from south of Europe differ to people from northern Europe, people from India, People from the far east, people from antipods, south and north America, is your god a chameleon or did we perhaps evolve a little to suit our enviroment. makes more sense than some dude sitting on a cloud one day and deciding have a laugh.

AJ 10/27/2009 4:56:16 PM
Look, its not either or, it's neither. Both sides(Evilution + Creationism) has their problems. It is because humans tend to seek an answer that will satisfy their needs. Most of the time people will BELIEF what they want to(what suits them), be it evilution or a god or gods. I think the most honest one can be is to simply state the truth: I DONT KNOW. because no-one does, although almpost everyone claims to 'know' the only thing anybody can know for sure is that they exist. All else is conjecture of what input we get from our limited senses. the very definition of truth requires it to be falsifiable. eg. if i jump up and just keep floating, i disprove gravity(the law of gravity is falsifiable). to say there is a God is not truth, at best it might be partly true, but to assign human(or any) characteristics to him would simply be dishonest.

Chris@Len van Heerden 10/27/2009 4:56:22 PM
Seems to me you have never read the Bible. We condemn ourselves, God condemns no-one. My life is filled with joy as I know where I am going when I die. I have nio fear of dying tomorrow can you say the same.

yoggie 10/27/2009 4:56:31 PM
So if everything evolved from nothing... When did love evolve? Or what about mercy, grace, justice, anger, peace, truth, sadness, worship, passion, etc?
Maybe we should do a test - i will take a little bit of nothing and put it in a glass jar, then after a month we will see if anything has evloved...But then maybe an evolutionist would like to spend 15min a day reading a bible and asking GOD if He is real, for like a week or so...keen?

Grant Gordon 10/27/2009 4:56:46 PM
Hi Nico, it's a pity that you've bought into the typical creationist arguments that have been numerously and thoroughly debunked. It is very clear that you haven't got the foggiest idea about what Evolution by Natural Selection actually is. Otherwise you certainly wouldn't be making such preposterous suggestions like having to spontaneously evolve male and females of new species. It's most definitely no crime to not know certain subjects, but then to try and discredit and spread falsehoods of a topic of which you have no knowledge is dishonest. May I suggest picking up a book on Evolution and finding out exactly what it is you seem so opposed to? I suggest Jerry Coyne - Why Evolution is True or Richard Dawkins - The Greatest Show on Earth. Even if you still disagree, at least you will know what you are disagreeing with.

Andre 10/27/2009 4:59:12 PM
AMEN!

Matthew Bossenger 10/27/2009 4:59:20 PM
A few points - most living organsims breed asexually, not sexually. Bacteria, etc far outnumber people and do not breed sexually.

What are you expecting to see as a transitional fossil? Half a fish, half a cow? There are many lists of transitional fossils - the TalkOrigins website is a good starting point.

For those of you who continually say evolution is "just a theory", please read up on what a scientific theory is.

The second law of thermodynamics stats delta S(tot) > 0 for a closed system. This allows for areas in the system where S decreases as long as the overall S increases, and also, earth cannot be considered a closed system as there is an external energy source (hint - that bright light in the sky every morning)

For those who claim mutation cannot create greater complexity, please read up on gene duplication. Also, for those who claim mutation cannot produce new species, please look up a phenomena called speciation.

The big bang was not an explosion....

Lastly - did god create us in his image to pee and ejaculate through the same outlet?

Kamini 10/27/2009 5:04:01 PM
I see no conflict with worshipping the God that created me , and evolution...even the Catholic Church agrees with me..lol...in 2008 they formally acknowledged that evolution is actually part of their interpretation of the Bible - not that I'm Christian anyway...but really for you ppl who are so full of threats about God's vengence etc etc...my God is a God of love..your vengence is you - not God's - God does not need you to do bad PR on his behalf..love and peace to you all..

Hermann 10/27/2009 5:04:04 PM
I personally can not find any proof for evolution. Nico's e-mail is good and valid. Before Darwin no one believed in Evolution. Intelligent Scientists like Newton and Einstein believed in a God who created the Universe and man and all the animals. Just think about it.. even if most people today believe evolution is a fact they can be misled because they believe it is a scientific fact, which it is not. I personally believe it is brainwashing. Just rememeber that if you believe that something is absolutely right and it is in fact wrong than you are misled. Man can falter and do not have all the answers. God the creator has all the answers and we have to ask Him for the truth. Happy searching.. and remember a paradime shift is needed to find the Truth. God created everything and we are answerable to Him. We know that natural things can not come from unnatural things and we do not have any excuse before God if we do not believe him. God loves everybody and wants them to come to the Truth and to know His Son Jesus Christ who created the universe and man whith His words. If you believe in Him and ask Him he will reveal the truth to you.

evo 10/27/2009 5:07:54 PM
Some of Nico's post exhibits total lack of evolutionary biology education. I would love to write a full, proper reply, if possible. I just think that to write it here, as comment number 350 is a waste of time.

Heibrin@All 10/27/2009 5:12:32 PM
Has anyone ever entertained the thought that an amalgamation of both theories may be the right one? Like it has been commented, there is more than enough evidence for evolution. There is also, however, gaps in the theory. Serious gaps. Those, I personally believe, is filled by the Bible. What evolutionists (and a lot of Christians!) miss is that God states 'a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like a day'.... in other words time has no meaning for Him. So: who started the first spark? IMO God did. Who created the first animals? God did. Were they the same as those we have now? Nope, most likely not. They EVOLVED. Where does mankind come from? Perhaps God chose the closest animal to the end product that he wanted, and made that into man. After all, if you have a half working product, wouldn't you change whats wrong with it, rather than start from scratch? If you use ALL the pieces, the puzzle actually fits. All of it.

Jeff 10/27/2009 5:16:50 PM
He's RIGHT! If only members of the scientific community had the insight of this writer. OK, so I am being sarcastic. Only the most deluded people are willing to believe that the creation myth is more likely than a reasoned scientific theory. If people really need creationism for their faith then their faith is in deep trouble.

NvV 10/27/2009 5:31:13 PM
If you read this article and moan about the subject you obviously still need to evolve a little more to have enough sense to partake in this kind of discussion. Anyway, in theory the Darwin story is a potential solution to lots of problems in understanding where we come from. Problem is that there are more questions than answers and formulating new ideas and theories will always attract wannabe academics. I just cannot understand that if there was no intelligent design involved in evolution then who or what decided on what is fittest species to survive or evolve further. Before you say survival, please ask yourself why mating was chosen by evolution as a form of survival when it is probably one of the most venerable situations. Even Dawkins avoids this subject.

aajj 10/27/2009 5:33:52 PM
@bj 2:20. All those small changes over millions of years? many fossils has been found of certain species but nothing even resembling these small changes happening over millions of years how many of these slight variations do you think needed to live before a new species came to be? - before you say only few fossils survived why have we found so many fossils of the same type of animals but never (even for more recent species) a string that remotely ties different species together as you are describing it? There are many holes in evolution theory but atheist aren't comfortable to discuss it theyd rather just make some flippant insult about people not thinking, while ironically not being willing to question the proof just because clever people says it is so. On the whole theory issue - if a Christian says it is s theory. Then you are told it is theory as in gravity (which I can observe thank you) but when you point out holes stock reply is we don't have all the answers yet it is a working theory. Despite this don't dare question it because we are pretty darn sure.

Geneticist 10/27/2009 5:45:26 PM
Hie-hie-hie! And so we spend our days arguing about how dirt became MAN. I don't care if it was God or Energy or whatever you believe to be true - go out there and love someone, change someones life for the better and stop nagging about absolute nonsense! By the way I believe in the process of evolution and my God still loves me! :)

r@f 10/27/2009 5:46:02 PM
who cares were we came from.. lets focus on were we going

SP 10/27/2009 5:51:42 PM
I once read that for cells to evolve by themselves into a complex organ like an eye the probability is one in millions. Another thing that bugs me is why do only humans have a conscience? Could this not be linked to a spiritual side that animals don’t have? I believe in things evolving but I think something is guiding it along. Maybe God…

@Nico 10/27/2009 5:58:15 PM
I agree 100%. I am a believer in the Creation was a period of 6 days where everything was created. I cannot tell you where God came from and how long He has been in existence. I believe He created everything and that is my religion. Evolutionist believe that everything evolved from nothing although science they formulated states that nothing can be created from nothing and they want us to believe that it all started with a big bang from a spec of something the size of a period (.). This can not be proven so you have to assume or believe it did so, evolution is also a religion and not science. And by the way, before God created heavens and earth, there were no time!

truth 10/27/2009 5:58:18 PM
Creation and evolution are things you believe in. There isn't any real proof for them. Fossils = dead animals = flood or evolution.

So it comes down to faith anyway. Believe humans or God. You decide.


Robin 10/27/2009 5:59:56 PM
You have just displayed your own ignorance. Of course there are no fossils of those that didn't make, because they didn't make it! Duh!

Secondly, there evidence that they didn;t make it actually lies in the fossil record, because those fossils are of creatures that for the vast majority became extinct.

thirdly, evoulution is not as gradual as people think, in fact it is what we call "punctuated". In other words, things evolve slowly, if at all, when there are few or no significant environmental changes. Evolutio9n is at its greatest over short periods of time when strong selective pressures drive species evolution. These periods of evolutionary change occur over thousands of years, and when one considers the age of life on earth, its easy for a few thousand years to be lost in the billions. Not eveyr creature that dies becomes fossilised, therefore fossils are to a large extent quite rare considering the number of creatures that have died and the number that become fossilised.

And lastly, you just contradict yourself by saying that you agree evolutionary processes exist, but if so how can you state they do not result in "new" species? A new secies is one that differs from previous ones, and they occur through selective pressure resulting in changes where a species does not actually die, but it transforms over a period of time. Not all extinct species died out, they evolved and changed into modern day species.

Also, when a single species gets geographically seperated, the result is different races or subspecies, and given sufficient time of seperation, can eventually become seperate species that cannot bbreed. This is not theory, this is fact that has been proven and demonstrated even in our own time.

So not to believe in evolution is just plain simple stupidity and total ignorance.

In any case, who said God cant be the driver of evolution?

A I Kellerman 10/27/2009 6:01:32 PM
Many scientists are dishonest because they ignore the possibility of Intelligent design.They should explore all possibilities before they come up with possible answers.Fortunately many do and one should read more about their views.
To ignore the many problems in explaining evolution is not going to make it go away.

yawn 10/27/2009 6:03:13 PM
This is getting old. Evolution is a fact whether the lay man understands it or not.

Yawn 10/27/2009 6:04:25 PM
This is getting old. Evolution is applicable to everyday life whether the lay man understands it or not.

truth@@chops 10/27/2009 6:10:28 PM
http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm

bekkie 10/27/2009 6:19:06 PM
Why is the moon still in orbit?

Kyran 10/27/2009 6:19:11 PM
I actually give up on people like Nico... If you aren't prepared to do the research, don't write an article on something you clearly don't understand. Your attempts at grasping BAS$IC biology are laughable. Pick up a book (not that one), open your eyes and stop trying to attack an area of academia that thousands of people far more intelligent than yourself have devoted their lives to studying, proving and teaching. I empathise with Gallileo...

WdB 10/27/2009 6:39:19 PM
Get with the program people. We were put here by the aliens to mine gold. :)

alan 10/27/2009 6:42:38 PM
The argument between creationists and scientists is actually about their understanding of Time, not whether God exists. Evolution doesn't rely on the basis of there being no Creator, it just states that animals naturally resulted from random mutations and those that adapted the best to their environment, survived. After that process had been running for a very long TIME, humans appeared. Now to me this does not mean God did not create man, because I do not know how to create anything so how would I know the difference, so who can judge on that basis? So then one cant say Evolution contradicts God's creation, unless one has a preconceived idea of what the process of creation entails - unless one believes in "magic" and believe God is some sort of magician which is just superstitious! Creationists, just cant accept this gradual process, they want to believe it happened in 7 DAYS (a nice short fixed period of time) as per their literal understanding of a couple of English words meaning a period of TIME in a book written 2000 YEARS ago in a completely different language. So actually this whole thing is a misunderstanding that misguided pastors are blowing out of all proportion!

Denzil 10/27/2009 6:46:08 PM
@Sambok - the part of the whale skeleton you mentioned is to aid in reproduction, just because some people thing its not used doesnt mean it evolved. Just like a appendix, without it you have big problems its very usefull.

denzil 10/27/2009 6:47:43 PM
@chops - if my maths teacher goes to jail, does it mean that 1+1 doesnt equil 2 anymore?

HomoSuperior 10/27/2009 7:25:29 PM
A frog changes from one form, to a very different form, all in 1 life cycle. Evolution is fact. The evidence IS there. You need to start thinking for yourself, Nico and WAKE UP! Change is coming...

guppy 10/27/2009 8:03:19 PM
The colourful guppies you see in petshops today have been bred from silver river fish with small fins. Through breeder selection. So our historic harsh environments acted as the selective breeder to create us as we are today.

old fossil 10/27/2009 8:17:33 PM
the likes of yourself NICO reflect the missing links in the evolutionary process

Redclover 10/27/2009 8:19:37 PM
Evolution what nonsense!!! these unbelievers need to turn to God and the Word of God, all the answers are in Genesis. Stop wasting your lives with such pagan believs please. I will pray for all unbelievers.....

Flabbergasted 10/27/2009 8:27:03 PM
This must be the most uninformed set of opinions about evolution I have ever stumbled across. 90% of the commentators here do not even begin to grasp the basiscs of the theory yet somehow feel qualified to present an opinion. Please people, remember that addage about an empty can rattles the most. You are shooting your mouths off about something you clearly are totally uninformed about and you are forcing your pre concieved misconceptions onto a topic you are not equipped to comment on.

@lsa & lucky ralalawe 10/27/2009 8:37:27 PM
dateomate.com is where you two should be!!

From goo-to-you-through-the-zoo 10/27/2009 9:01:05 PM
Well done Nico. And you have only just scratched the surface with the non-evidence for evolutionism. Evolutionism is just a religion where trying to prove there is no God is the main agenda.

Evolutionists wake up! Use some critical thinking when looking at the evidence presented. Don't be fooled by the Darwinist conditioning we've received over the last 150 years. The evidence points very clearly (and more scientifically) to creation and ID.

But the space is limited here to argue this. Please go to creation(dot)com and answersingenesis(dot)com for excellent lucid explanations. You may be surprised.

From goo-to-you-throuh-the-zoo 10/27/2009 9:07:35 PM
Evolutionists explain that life started from non-living matter in some sort of "primeval soup." Over the years, they have presented several scenarios of how this might have happened. They have suggested isolated ponds, pools of water on the sides of volcanoes, and in the oceans. Let's consider the general mathematical principles involved in any of these scenarios.

In science, the person who proposes a theory is supposed to present the evidence for that theory. Yet, for the incredible claim that life sprang into being out of non living materials, no evidence is offered. Just how incredible are evolution's claims about the origin of life? Given the conditions evolutionists claim existed at the origin of life, the chance of evolving the simple, common, iso 1 cytochrome "c" protein is one chance out of one followed by 75 zeros. But that's not a living, reproducing thing. Given the same conditions, the chance of getting a DNA molecule with the ability to reproduce is 100 billion, billion to one. The chance of getting a minimal cell works out to one chance out of a 1 followed by 4,478,296 zeros!

Rigorous examination of evolution's claims about the origin of life shows that every evolutionary claim about how life started is just as fanciful. As every believer has testified, God is the source of all life, including yours and mine. It has always been so and will always be so.

dude 10/27/2009 9:40:06 PM
In the beginning, there was nothing...which violently exploded.

Al 10/27/2009 9:48:40 PM
Please do not drivel your apparently severe lack of education, reason and logic all over the web - please.

@chops 10/27/2009 9:53:48 PM
You're a MENSA member yet try to back up your argument with convicted fraudster Kent Hovind's material? The same Hovind who tries to pass off his correspondence course with a christian college as a doctoral? Barnum said "There's a sucker born every minute" and unfortunately, you're a prime example. :(

Clay 10/27/2009 9:55:28 PM
I wish the reader understood evolution because he would realize that every statement in the above is said from a severe lack of knowledge. Apart from that, God created through evolution. Only stupid humans cannot fathom a divine entity that can create a system that throws out everything he wants. Rather study evolution properly so that you can study God.

Modder @ Ryan 10/27/2009 10:09:29 PM
Do you know why evolution and the Christian faith cannot mix? If you believe in evolution, you say that Gen 1 to 8 is invalid/not true/etc. That means that there was no fall of Man, therefore there is no sin and no need for salvation. Jesus also spoke of events described in Gen 1-7. If he lied about those events, how can we believe Him about anything else He said?

Question to the evolutionists. EVERYTHING came from one little spot that exploded, right? It had to have spun, else we wouldn't have had spinning objects in space, right? It is called the conservation of angular momentum. Why then do we have planets and even galaxies spinning around vastly different axes? It is impossible to change angular momentum unless there is an outside force being exerted.

By definition the universe is a closed system. So where did the external force come from?

If everything started in the same spot and it exploded outward, then surely the concept of colliding galaxies should be a physical impossibility.

Just some thoughts. Use it, don't use it.

Evolution is merely the religion of atheists.

If we all came from boom that eventually became a rock that eventually became soup that eventually after billions and billions of years became mankind, why is murder wrong? Or rape? Or child molestation? If macro-evolution is true, there is no right or wrong.

From goo-to-you-through-the-zoo 10/27/2009 10:15:31 PM
And all those shouting that creationists (and Nico) should do more studying ... is exactly why the tide is turning on evolutionism. More and more people are looking critically at this Darwinistic thinking and realising the truth about it. The tide is turning against evolutionism as the deception is realised and the truth shines through. Like one fruit of Darwinism called eugenics that assisted in the promulgation of the holocaust amongst others ... see creation(dot)com

Hennie 10/27/2009 10:20:09 PM
"It is physically and logically impossible for simplex things to combine and, without adding anything else, to form a complex thing."

Please wake up! Read A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram.
It helps to study something before one puts pen to paper - just believing in it makes an ass of yourself.

Love Africa 10/27/2009 11:44:01 PM
Wow, the bible explains why we have 365 and 1/4 days in year, really Science can't explain this.. are you kidding me! Who is writing this crap? Who is feeding people this bull? If God was so mighty I knows everything why couldn't he tell us that the earth is round why did we need to prove it God and the Church?
Simple Evolution is a threat because it disproves God! This is the only reason we get these simple minded theroy's to explain away evolution. Lets see we all Gods children but God didn't accept Blacks and indians till recently.
All of you go read the word of god the supposed words of God. "Kill first borns" "Stone naughty children" "its ok to sell your daughters into slavery" Is this Satan nope its your loving God! How can you defend this unless of course you agree with killing naughty children. Wait Satan would kill all children not Naughty children silly me!

Biological Scientist (actually) 10/28/2009 12:09:39 AM
With a degree in microbiology, genetics and biochemistry, I am confidently able to state that evolution makes perfect sense - to anyone who has taken the time to study it. For the religous souls who think it is un-Christian to believe in evolution and would rather believe in a big man in the clouds, it would be much appreciated if you did not drag the IQ of the youth down with you - they need to learn science not folklore.

Without evolution, nothing that I have studied would have been known or understood. The genetic basis for evolution, for natural selection and for develpment of species is massive to the point that it is undeniable. A first year university class in biology would be able to tell you that.

I wish that people who do not know/understand/want to know what they are talking about wouldn't try to talk about things that they have no desire to understand. Get a degree in genetics, and if you still don't believe evolution, we'll talk.

Richard 10/28/2009 12:33:07 AM
Nico - you're worried about the missing 'transitional' species in the fossil records. I think you've missed the point a bit - ALL fossil species are transitional. The 'missing' species comment from scientists arises from the fact that, over the 10's, 100's and 1000's of millions of years over which the fossil record was laid down, there are large (and to-be-expected) gaps in that record and thus plenty of missing pieces in the fascinating evolutionary history of life on this planet. To put it another way, you, Nico, and every other human on this planet are an example of a transitional species (between Homo Sapiens 500,000 years ago, say, and Homo Sapiens Sapiens in (say) another 500,000 years). Understand this, and the fact that humans (and every other species alive at this time) are continuously undergoing ever-so-tiny changes, the accumulation of which (if they prove to be useful for survival, and thus DO survive) will result in a different species at that distant future date, and you will have grasped the basic idea. The difference will not be that much, but will be enough to be observable, and certainly very evident in the genetic record (as it already is).

To all of those slinging words at (non-evolitionist) Christians such as 'Religious Fools', and all of those calling evolutionists 'Morons' - argue the issue(s) please, and not the individuals.

As a nice little spanner in the works, consider that on 22 October 1996, Pope John Paul II issued a statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences entitled "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth". Therein he defended both the evidence for evolution and the consistency of evolutionary theory with Catholic religious doctrine [See Stephen Jay Gould: "Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms", pg 271-272]......

PDR 10/28/2009 1:02:42 AM
@BUNKUM - Check your sources. What Darwin did say was that he should have published his works earlier, but he didn't, because he feared the church and what their response would be. A typical case of the tyranny of religion.

It is tragic that we cannot measure ourselves purely on social ties, respect, education and sympathy. The human race is indeed in a poor state for having to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death, and not our own free will.

Piet Strydom 10/28/2009 1:26:40 AM
In the end it boils down to what is your axiom - If you use non-euclidian geometry, "parallel" lines WILL cross each other. If you use Euclidean geometry, they WILL NOT.

What is bothersome, is how little debaters here know about their OWN point of view, let alone what they know about the opposition's point of view. But it is always easier to set up your own straw man of the opposition, and then take THAT apart, rather than trying to understand what the opposition is all about.

And the master of that, is Richard Dawkins. He is a brilliant biologist, but know absolutely nothing about either religion or philosophy.

And then, the problems of logic - The fact that things evolve, does not allow you to make the deduction that there is no Creator. Similarly, because God created, does not mean that creation has ended.... The Bible never says that the 7th days has ended, it only ever says that it dawned....

pro darwin 10/28/2009 2:00:46 AM
Religious people ask in defence of their GOD.. " How can the big bang just happen".
Others who question a GOD don't get a answer from the Religious group as to where GOD came from or did he just happen. Sounds like the big bang theory all over again under a new name. If I'm to believe in something or someone, I would like tangable proof, not some cock and bull of good and evil, it's a cop out for non thinkers

Adrian 10/28/2009 6:43:39 AM
It "makes sense" because it gives evolutionists job security. They "discover" a hog's tooth, build a prehistoric woman and convince everyone that this is “Lucy the missing link”. I think some of these sun scorched idiots can qualify as the missing link without any more excavations.

Jack 10/28/2009 6:50:24 AM
@pie007 - how can you believe in religion...idiot! Religion was created for people who had no clue what to do..ie the weak.
And you're all wrong - the earth was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster with a touch of his noodly appendage according to the Gospel of the FSM. It's true! It's in the Book! :)

KG 10/28/2009 6:51:05 AM
I’m confused, The Religious Zealots here are demanding proof for Evolution, Yet Besides a book consisting of a bunch of Stories, there is absolutely no proof what so ever of there ever being a God or even a Worldly Incarnation of him.
This besides the fact that that very same book was guarded and written by a bunch of power hungry murderers for over 1 500 years, during which time it was punishable by death if you were caught even reading that very same book as that was the Priests job.
Also, if this God is so all knowing and wise, how come he had a complete about turn in his personality between the Old and the New Testament, going from a murderous zealot to the all forgiving savior …

Henry 10/28/2009 6:51:10 AM
And what exactly do you propose as an alternative theory? An invisible being that can't be observed? Excellent, let's get cracking then.

SS 10/28/2009 7:16:28 AM
The bible is just an overrated story book...

Singularity 10/28/2009 7:27:28 AM
@Nico; I don't really have to tell you how silly your arguments are considering the quality of the comments supporting you :D

ZLV 10/28/2009 7:32:30 AM
LSA and you guys, I'll bring the beer!!

I agree with Johan 100%, and I'm still waiting for the evolutionists to disprove him... sadly it's not gonna happen.....

@ pie007 10/28/2009 7:32:35 AM
pie007 - "Science could not explain why there are 365 and a 1/4 days in a year"
ummmmmm... 'science' as you put it didn't need to explain this. It is rather self explanatory - it takes that long for the planet to perform one rotation around the sun (or do you still believe in the archaic concept of the Earth being the centre of the universe?). You paint a picture that depicts 'science' and religion as opponents. That must be a heavy concept to think about whilst you drive to work in the morning with your crucifix hanging from the rear view mirror.
I believe in religion - I believe it is a baseless concept that originates from man's need to explain things he does not understand. People talk about evolutionists needing proof. Show me proof of the existance of a god. Creationists reply to this by saying 'look around you'. I do. What I see is more evidence that supports Darwwin's work than what is laid out in any religious script.
As we have developed in both intellect and knowledge we have attached valid explanations to much of the 'unknown'. I am not saying we know everything but we know enough to be able to identify God as being a myth. If there is a god he long ago saw what a mess he had made when creating us and moved to a different area code.

By the way; I think you wanted to say something like "So how can you not believe in God...IDIOTS!" you idiot.

Carl Muller 10/28/2009 7:34:55 AM
One thing that bothers me is that why did some apes became human and the other stayed apes.

anamarie 10/28/2009 7:40:26 AM
@Id Critic: Are you retarded? What you learn in Church is the only right thing! Got look for salvation soon...please.

@ BUNKUM 10/28/2009 7:53:37 AM
"Darwin on his deathbed begged salvation and admitted he was wrong."
Wrong about what?
Darwin's last words: 'Bob, I was wrong! It was all a mistake, forgive me...damnit. I'm sorry, I really should have painted the kitchen white. I was wrong to go with puce...."

Eugene Els 10/28/2009 7:58:57 AM
Evolution is a THEORY, don't lie or over exaggerate your believes mr "Evolution is fact", nowhere has the science community established it as fact, it is still a theory, until they HAVE found the missing link, which every now they think; this is it.

Francois 10/28/2009 8:12:13 AM
Not choosing a side... but if you are to believe the bible, Adam and Eve was the first humans on the Earth...where they eating dinosaurs... hehehe... and where did the wives of their two sons come from..

Happy-go-jingle 10/28/2009 8:26:04 AM
Bla-bla-bla on the subject of evolution rubbish. Aren't you more confused bro?

Peter K 10/28/2009 8:32:42 AM
Evolutionary theory states that Man and chimps share a common ancestor and this is supported by DNA analysis which indicates that more than 90% of the human and chimp DNA is common.

Now this may be all co-incidence. Manybe man was created in God's image and God is a chimpanzee. Planet of the apes?

D - To Zane 1st statement 10/28/2009 8:36:48 AM
We didn't evolve from chimps, they are our cousins and we have a common ancestor. Read
Richard Dawkins - The Greatest Show on Earth

duh 10/28/2009 8:37:26 AM
"Secondly, imagine male and female varieties of species. A male and a female are totally different and yet, they had to evolve from the same gene pool under the exact same circumstances at the same location, or mud pool.

Not only should they be biologically completely different but they should be 100% compatible to be able to breed. They also had to be ripe for procreation at the same moment in time to actually mate and create offspring."

Men and woman are genetically exactly the same except for one chromosome pair. One of the pair is also the same.

Zuntino 10/28/2009 8:40:08 AM
Heard last night there's something that was found in the sterkfontein caves that is going to Rock the Christian world!!! They refuse to announce it yet til it's confirmed because it is of huge importance to understanding our origins, watch this space, then debate... ha ha

duh @ Biological Scientist (actually) 10/28/2009 8:44:55 AM
Amen :)

faithless 10/28/2009 8:47:04 AM
The quickest way to start a fight is to talk about religion...kinda defies logic does it not?! In any event in person is entitled to his own view whether its pro-evolution or creation or both. It doesn't matter. What is certain to me is the need for us to shove our opinions and beliefs down other people's throats in any which way possible often times violent (count the current number of wars in the world)...which may be why the world is a ticking time-bomb right now filled with hate and aggression. So sad that 'evolved'; 'enlightened' and ?'god-fearing' beings such as humans can't be more tolerant.

Rolls Royce @Lucky and LSA 10/28/2009 8:51:04 AM
Sound cool There's that News Cafe in Midrand,thats halfway

MRG 10/28/2009 9:01:37 AM
@Francois... the bible says that Adam had sons and daughters... so it stands to reason that Adam's sons marries Adam's daughters i.e. their sisters which in thise days was not a problem. though they were so closely related they were no ill effects of those unions as the bodies of men and women at this point had been as near to perfect as could be be as sin was not as proliferate in the world as it is today... this is why they lived 900+ years back then... our bodies have "devolved" not evovled as some would have us believe and because of this devolution as a result of sin, we have become weaker and this the command that a man should not marry his sister as the result of such a union now between such close relatives is bound to bring some problems as we are all well aware. this whole debate is focused on the wrong issue... the issue at hand today is whethre or not you have been forgiven of your sin and whether you are living a righteous life in the hope of one day having eternal life!

GT 10/28/2009 9:02:25 AM
Eugene - you clearly dont understand evolution. There is no MISSING LINK. There is a vast (and I mean vast) track of fossil evidence which shows SUBTLE changes over LONG periods of time. Get your head around what a LONG PERIOD of time is. Modder - correct, the reason people fight against the facts of evolution is that it makes their religious faith look completely meaningless, petty and silly. Man has overcome so much with the study of natural science that the need to put your faith is the supernatural has become redundant. Apart from the Evangelical crazys, most mainstream churches have acknowledged that Gensis is a myth. Do you really believe in a talking snake? That the all powerful God only spoke to Moses through a burning bush. The difference between a prophet and a patient is the = availabily of mind altering drugs /quality of the mental health care available at the time.
If God has your life all mapped out, why pray? If you pray and it comes true, its Gods work. If you pray and it doesn't come true, it is Gods will. Bloody sad way to live IMO

Kevan 10/28/2009 9:06:02 AM
To put it simply : religious nuts are stupid, plain and simple. They are illiterate, ignorant and pathetic. They will never change their belief in some stupid big-man-in-the-sky fairytale because they are idiots.

Coelacanth 10/28/2009 9:07:44 AM
It is not worth engaging with retards on the evolution / creation argument. Suffice to say this writer is serving up the good old "God of the gaps" argument. However, the phrase "only a theory" recurs. Let me tell you what a "theory" is. It is a hypothesis that has passed every test that it has ever been subjected to - Ever. The next step after a theory is a physical law (ref. Newton). Only the admission of the possibility of a failure prevents evolution being hard and incontrovertible fact. It has not happened yet. Yes - why does News24 publish this stuff? Wilful stupidity is a human right, but it does not need to be encouraged.

Craig 10/28/2009 9:10:07 AM
Get over it dude! Evolution is a THEORY!!! Darwin said so himself... stop being so dam ignorant!

All you apes that believe in evolution...good luck to you. There are apparently no pills for stupidity!

Kevan 10/28/2009 9:16:29 AM
A few facts for the ignorant.
1) Humans DID NOT come from apes. We share a common ancestor. We are more like distant cousins.
2) Evolution is NOT an explanation of how life began. That is another scientific field known as abiogenesis which is totally separate from evolution.
3) Evolution is both a FACT and a THEORY. It's a FACT (whether anyone likes it or not) that populations experience genetic changes over successive generations. It's been observed over and over again. The THEORY of evolution is an attempt to explain how and why these changes occur. A new and better theory (explanation) for the fact could come up tomorrow but this wouldn't change the fact that evolution still occurs.

Lucky Ralawe to Point Blank and Rolls Royce 10/28/2009 9:26:13 AM
Durbs sounds enticing. I'm coming down in Jan or so.

Rolls Royce great idea. We can even meet during lunch time. Are you joining this historical meeting :)


robbie 10/28/2009 9:44:22 AM
@MRG,Do you make this nonsense up yourself as you go along,or is there a master idiot who makes it up for you.Where do they get this stuff from,? it would be quite entertaining if it was not so frightening!

Someone 10/28/2009 10:07:03 AM
There is science to support evolution. There is no science to support intelligent design. Even if you can refute evolution that does not make intelligent design automatically true. Many of you religious nuts don't understand what a scientific theory is. It doesn't mean someone just thought it might be true... it means its pretty much fact.

I suggest all you religious fanatics shut up before you hurt yourselves, and leave progress up to the rest of us.

Zeke 10/28/2009 10:08:07 AM
@Andy
Touching on what you said. Maybe we were made his image figuritivly. maybe he made us like him in spirit and because of free will we choose to be come corrupted and tainted souls that strayed from our origanial form...just a thought.

The Horned God 10/28/2009 10:09:22 AM
@ dude: "In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said 'let there be light', and there was still nothing...but at least now you could see it!"

GeraldR @ Evolutionists 10/28/2009 10:11:22 AM
The evolution theory falls in the realm of FORENSIC science. As such, it can NEVER be proven conclusively because you just CANNOT re-construct the past. No one can go back into the past and bring back concrete observations of what occurred there. So PLEASE, get it into your heads: Evolution hasn't been proved and never will, no matter WHAT scientists say or do. It CANNOT be done.

Robbie 10/28/2009 10:16:31 AM
Sorry to bug you MRG,but which adam and eve story are we talking about here...the original sumerian one written thousands of years ago,or your more recent plagiarised version

D 10/28/2009 10:17:49 AM
READ sincerely - Richard Dawkins "The Greatest Show on Earth" .... then make your opinion....

The Horned God 10/28/2009 10:18:49 AM
@Carl Muller (and all others asking the same tired old question): it's called a 'Common Ancestor' - look it up sometime and actually do some respearch on the topic before asking stupid questions....

GeraldR @biobot 10/28/2009 10:22:36 AM
The problem with your statement(s) is that those that believe in evolution ACTIVELY promotes the myth that evolution = "Science itself" and anyone that disagrees with evolution therefore automatically revolts against SCIENCE. So evolutionists call anyone who disagrees with evolution all kinds of names: morons, uneducated barbarians, dodos, etc, just check the comments! Since evolution has NO proof (despite what scientists want you to believe), it actually takes MORE faith to believe in it than to believe in God the creator. Don't think evolution is that hard to understand. Most people here do. And have made up their minds that it's a lot of bull.

The Horned God 10/28/2009 10:23:19 AM
@ Eugene Els: Simple explanation: In casual parlance, a theory is basically an idea or thought. It probably has no carefully collected data to back it up, let alone any rigorous hypothesis testing or experiments. In the world of science, however, a theory is a broad explanation of a phenomenon or phenomena that is testable, falsifiable and has multiple lines of evidence.

Zeke 10/28/2009 10:26:35 AM
@Jack
How can you claim that religion is for the weak? Maybe it's because your the weak one and too scared to put your trust and faith in a higher power that you can't eat.:)

Jim 10/28/2009 10:28:29 AM
To be impressed with one's own intelligence inhibits our ability to learn - gain insight. The origin of life can be very complex, or simple, depending on one's predisposition. So lets take life out of the equation. Can anyone explain (by a presentation of facts not opinion and without speculation) how the physical universe – just the solids/gasses/liquids (without any life forms) came about? To my mind this is an easier problem to solve. We have built the $xxbn proton collider to try and answer this question - which means we currently dont know the answer (we do have thories we are trying to prove). The origin of life is a more complex question to the origin of the universe without life and we dont know the answer to latter question. Surely the fact that we are here and (as we are learning) part of a complex / well balanced / carefully designed eco-sytem is evidence (consider for one thing the distance of the earth to the sun) that we were 'put' here. ;) To arrogantly dismiss as ignorant those who (through consideration of the currently available evidence) accept a ‘superior designer’ betrays a lack of open-mindedness that creationalist’s are accused of having.

D 10/28/2009 10:30:57 AM
@craig - why do you say people who believe in evolution are stupid? - u have a huge wake up call coming in the near future and then I want to see you apologise on this site. Only the wacky right wing churches hold out against this theory and AlQaeda, we all know how "normal" they are right?.....Check this....how can a Pastor from his platform declare evolution incorrect when there are specialist scientists who have dedicated their lives to the subject declare otherwise. Pastors know almost nothing about science which is why they are Pastors. Leave scientists to science and the church to the pastors. Where there is conflicting evidence then the church must get in line, just as with the Earth was once the centre and the Sun revolved around the Earth ..no church continues on this line today..and why? because scientists can prove otherwise!

The Horned God 10/28/2009 10:39:25 AM
A few choice quotes for those of a religious persuasion:
"It vexes me when they would constrain science by the authority of the Scriptures, and yet do not consider themselves bound to answer reason and experiment."
- Galileo Galilei
"The church says the earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in the shadow than in the church."
- Ferdinand Magellan
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
- Charles Darwin
"I can hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished. And this is a damnable doctrine."
- Charles Darwin

davidj 10/28/2009 10:40:20 AM
@kevan
Cannot agree with you, How can you sleep at night ignoring the foundation of your "faith", rocks to life dude ,that's what you preach and then you want say its better left to another field? Why? because you don't want to face the fact that your science-er-theology is based on loony tunes...
I reiterate the question I ask in all these topics : can someone please oh please give us a reasonable explanation of how life began... evolution cannot have its start just lopped off so that your argument can hold water , face the whole question or dont bother us with your drivel...

Ps still waiting for all those enlightened individuals out there to come up with a sane explanation of how the very very first piece of life , became , and then successfully passed on it's "life-experience" to its kids ... and did it get that right the first time ... or ... did life sputter and die a million billion times too before it was successfull in getting its kids to understand blue and tell it kid how to make blue because red got it into trouble last time ... get real...

PS evolution is NOT a fact its a THEORY ONLY , adaptation and (micro evolution if you want) is observed and acceptable as a good design, the rest i'm afraid is just plain old faith...

Old Nick 10/28/2009 10:54:10 AM
Did we not sort this out last time...everything began with the Big Bang when Chuck Norris lit the fuse. 'Where did Chuck come from?' I hear you ask. Do you want a roundhouse kick in the head? Now get back to work!!

D 10/28/2009 11:04:09 AM
Religious people can't prove there is a God - Evolutionists can't prove there isn't a God therefore Agnosticism is the Answer and your choice of faith is a personal matter ie traditions etc...eg a Hindu may be an Agnostic but follows Hindu traditions and so on

The Horned God 10/28/2009 11:06:41 AM
I find it hilarious that religious zealots point to the so-called 'leaps of faith' made by evolutionary scientists as evidence that it fails as a scientific theory, while at the same time not notcing what an INCREDIBLE leap of faith it is to suggest that we were all created from dust by a magical sky fairy!...
Which of course, we weren't, we were put on earth by the Flying Spaghetti Monster (bless His noodly appendage) - and I dare all of you on the God Squad to prove that the FSM doesn't exist (oh that's right, it's impossible to prove something doesn't exist - just ask the Loch Ness Monster - only that something DOES exist)

Where's the evo science? 10/28/2009 11:07:24 AM
Is there a comprehensive, conclusive and coherent book or paper proving that evolution actually occurred? The answer is NO. And what predictions does it make?
Is there anything that looks close to this one on the decay of the magnetic field of the earth?
http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/21/21_3/21_3.html

Of course you can use this as the counter:
http://gondwanaresearch.com/hp/magfield.htm.

BUT Then you have to explain the fulfillment of the predictions!
Here:http://www.icr.org/article/329/
Anyway, this nonsense can go on forever : Evolutionists believe what they want and so do creationists. The evidence doesn't matter, only the believe, from which the evidence is INTERPRETED.

D 10/28/2009 11:08:42 AM
@davidj - Read Dawkins " The greatest show on Earth" sincerely. It is excellent. There everything about evolution is shown openly and the best part is that Dawkins doesn't ask for an offering after you have read it. Churches tell you a load of brainwashing whatever and then fleece you too.

Jay 10/28/2009 11:10:55 AM
To Author, You have converted me, I will now believe that a talking snake told man and women to wear clothes, that a bearded man invited all the animals onto his boat for a tea party, and some magician walked on water and dissapeared form his grave and flew into the skys. Thank you for your enlightenment!!

homo novus 10/28/2009 11:12:39 AM
Should there be a reply from a pro-evolutionist, please explain how completely random, chance and accidental events nevertheless still led to advancement. Please also show where this process has been observed and replicated, seeing that observation and experiment are the two pillars of the scientific method. Thanks.

Chris 10/28/2009 11:16:26 AM
A question I have asked before. If Christians are wrong what have they got to lose by not accepting Darwinian evolution as fact? If evolutionists,atheists,agnostics etc wrong what have they got to lose by not accepting Christ as their Lord and Saviour?

davidj 10/28/2009 11:18:09 AM
@someone
"science supports evolution", absolute garbage, your science says random chance creates and preserves information ... my science says no it does not... Go ask an SETI expert why and how and what they are looking for in the SETI program? then ask yourself why would they consider that a result pointing to "intelligence" , but dna information not? This is funny and tragic at the same time , as modern man gets closer to a real understanding of how things are actually put together one can see the rage of that same man ranting at the possibility that they might have to account for thier actions or lack thereof to a God they dont want...

The only reason your science supports evolution is the alternative is too uncomfortable for you...

Modder @ the horned god 10/28/2009 11:19:06 AM
You say that "religious zealots point to the so-called 'leaps of faith' made by evolutionary scientists as evidence that it fails as a scientific theory, while at the same time not notcing what an INCREDIBLE leap of faith it is to suggest that we were all created from dust by a magical sky fairy".

No problem with that. Creationists have no problem acknowledging that they support a religion. Evolutionists have trouble acknowledging that theirs is a religion.

Kevan@davidj 10/28/2009 11:30:02 AM
Please re-read my post. I was merely distinguishing between evolution and the start of life - commonly known in scientific circles as abiogenesis. It has nothing to do with "leaving it to another field". It's merely a distinction between two different areas of study. Evolution is not an explanation of how life began - merely how life has "changed" over billions of years. We do not know exactly life began and no biologist will claim to have the answer. We do have an idea and you can be sure one day we will know how it all started.

As for the rest of your post - I can sleep quite well at night since I know that scientists all over the world are actively working on these unsolved mysteries and through rigorous study and experiment the answers will be found. How do you sleep at night when your all-powerful, loving god allows millions of innocent children suffer through starvation, murder, abuse etc? How do sleep knowing your god allows "evil people" to prosper while the likes of you (I'm assuming you're faithful to him) live distinctly average lives? How do you sleep knowing that millions of followers commit unspeakable acts in his name everyday? How do you sleep knowing that the world is in the mess it is today almost solely because of your religions.

Kevan@davidj 10/28/2009 11:34:19 AM
BTW evolution is both a solid fact and a solid scientific theory. Whether you accept it or not doesn't change a thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

davidj 10/28/2009 11:36:57 AM
@D , go read "The devil's delusion" an answer to ol dawkin's "God delusion" from a man thats not actually religious, but he sure shows ol dawkins up for what he really is ...
Or try http://irrationalatheist.com/freedl.html , ol vox even considers you important enough to put his ramblings online for nothing...

Oh and btw i want YOUR opinion not some guy's you've never even met...

The Horned God 10/28/2009 11:41:15 AM
@ Modder: One is based on millions of man man hours of scientific research, testing, and observation, as well as a massive (if incomplete) fossil record.
The other is based on a bunch of hokey stories, written by a group of men with their own political agenda, hundreds of years after the event and then proclaimed to be the word of god and thus the law by which we must govern our world.
One is based on hard facts and science, the other is based on fiath - therefore only one fits the definition of a religion...
...and it sure as hell isn't evolution, but nice try anyway!!!

GM 10/28/2009 11:44:20 AM
You are missing the point even professors and well educated doctors and scientist do admit that GOD exist and evolution is created by GOD that is why is complicated and no evidance christian do know that evolution is part of christianity the problem is that scientist want to discreted GOD and that will not happen the bibible intepretation is true tsunami, earth quakes and HIV was professize an predicted 1000 yeaars ago by differnt prophets not long on the same time where do they get this intepretation? the answere is from GOD so from your theory can evolution interpreted the next TsunamI? no GOD Created science he made the evolution him self

@Kevan 10/28/2009 11:49:32 AM
If you understood the bible you would also understand how believers manage to sleep at night. Same old story, people who claim to have scientific knowledge argue against the Word of God without even a superficial understanding of it.

Digger 10/28/2009 11:54:38 AM
If Evolution is a FACT, then could somebody explain to me when it is going to hit South Africa; For instance religion, science, poverty, corruption and AIDs are all FACTs of life.
As for the frog in boiling water theory, it applies to all of the above, I think.
If any of you fancy jumping out of the water, please don't come to England we're F***ing full already. Cheers.

Kevan@homo novus 10/28/2009 11:55:54 AM
The simplest example of evolution in action would be antibiotic-resistant bacteria or pesticide-resistant insects. These organisms have evolved a resistance to certain drugs and chemicals over the short space of a few decades. Simple, elegant and satisfactory. No need to introduce a magic man in the sky to explain it. You can read more at :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent#
Evidence_from_antibiotic_and_
pesticide_resistance

dr Muzumba 10/28/2009 11:57:14 AM
what i always fnd strange about fundamentalist "believers", wether christian or otherwise, is that they begin and end their debates on a bok, that is but one among many,some of which were written well before it.ever heard of the religious texts on the pyramids? what about our own african oral knowledge (mind book)? Lets talk facts. evolution is all around us.if a cure for aids is not found, natures says all promiscous people will perish, and there will arise a healtheir and smarter people..simple as that.In a dark place, all light colored animals are chowed by predators, till only the darkest remain..just simple logic.

Abri 10/28/2009 11:58:01 AM
The problem, and one of the reasons this debate is still ongoing, is because people do not know and understand the difference between "Evolution" and "Adaptation".

Kevan@anonymous 10/28/2009 11:59:31 AM
I understand the bible, I've studied it extensively. Please explain to me this special understanding you have of the bible that justifies the atrocities committed against innocent people especially children. Aren't children supposed to be free of sin?

D 10/28/2009 12:20:48 PM
@davidj - I will take a look, will you read the greatest show on earth ?

davidj 10/28/2009 12:26:41 PM
@kevan
Nope ... sorry bud, evolution IS a statement of how life began, you just dont want to admit it, that's ok, was'nt really expecting any earth shattering changes on that front ...

Glad to hear those "facts" are good enough for you , me well ... nope ...

And I sleep quite fine knowing that those that have a real RELATIONSHIP with God do not commit any of the evil you try to place in thier laps, not that we are perfect either, just saved thats all. Religion does not get you to God, if you care to check you'll see much more blood is spilt in the name of other things than God, try WWI,WWII for that matter and dont tell me ol hitler was Christian... but even if someone does say they are and commits some attrocity , actions speak more than words ... a quick check on the fruit they produce tells us exactly who they serve...
And as for being average, ah thats ok too, eternity is much much more important and I think God knows whats best for each of us... and until one breathes his last breath God still extends his hand out to them, so its all cool.
Yes the innocent do suffer, at the hands of? ... MEN my freind,not God, God gave MEN authority on this planet an it was given to the devil (someone else you dont really want to beleive in - I'm sure he really likes that one) this is not really a 1 line answer topic... but the answer lies in the realm of "free will" and that there is devil that hates you with a vengeance because its the only way he can hurt God...
Ps when you hit the sack tonight consider if : Any of those hard working scientists has a decent explaination for the need for infinite number of universes? (I'd love to see the experiment on this one)

D 10/28/2009 12:27:46 PM
@davidj - my opinion has to be based on what the specialists in their field say. I haven't studied genetics or biology to Professorship level...Dawkins is one of the top in this field. Dawkins is an atheist but evolution is not about atheism.

cindyK 10/28/2009 12:33:26 PM
Bunkum - You are are one of the few people on this site that talks sense!!! Love it!

fredster 10/28/2009 12:37:45 PM
@Fraudster. a Tadpole does become a frog , not by evolution but by growth, as do us humans. The evolution theory will soon be proven wrong ( cause there is no substantial proof anyway). God made you, in His image wether you like it or not. He loves you the same as anyone else. The decision lies with you as to accept Him and all this will make sense one day. A lot to loose if you don't, and so much to gain if you do....bless you.

davidj 10/28/2009 12:40:00 PM
@D
To be honest probably not, for 2 reasons
1) I dont have the time
2) I dont just believe in the "theory of God", so why would i want to discover why a man does not beleive in the existence of a God that I KNOW exists?

Witwortel 10/28/2009 12:41:35 PM
God exists. The earth is young. Jesus will be coming again. Evolution is nothing but false theories.

http://creation.com/geology-and-the-young-earth

D 10/28/2009 12:46:36 PM
@davidj - I'm already on pg 6 laddie. Pity vox believes the obvious from the start...Jesus is returning - thought he should have been here already...millennium and all of that...but nah...no jesus...
I shall now continue....have you ordered the greatest show on Earth yet?

Kevan@davidj 10/28/2009 12:48:13 PM
Your insistence that evolution is the same as abiogenesis is typical of theists. Closed-minded and unwilling to listen to anything that goes against your precious god and his failed religion/s. I will say this For the last time : evolution is not the same as abiogenesis. Now instead of insisting that it is, do yourself a favour and go study it (something you lot seem to be allergic to). Here's a quote to get you started : "In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or "chemical evolution", is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how groups of living things change over time." Source is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis

Next use the internet (you know, that thing that works on your computer which just happened to be invented by godless scientists) to do a search on the topic.

Also note in my previous reply I said that we do NOT know for certain how life began - totally separate from how life has evolved and continues to evolve but we will figure it out.

As for suffering, what kind of cruel god would give men the authority to oppress his own "beloved" people. What about those innocent children who have to suffer. Is your god really that cruel? I can understand the sinful and god-haters suffering but little children? He doesn't stop it but he's a loving god? Theists will justify the most ridiculous things! Need we ask why the world is so backward with logic such as this?

ahimsa 10/28/2009 12:52:39 PM
Please do yourself a favour and look into this information about how spiritual people are now working together to scientifically disprove Darwin theories.

http://www.iskconnews.com/node/2319

@davidj 10/28/2009 12:53:00 PM
hmmm...time...make time A Christian can read other books besides Christian literature.
Dawkins personal beliefs must not hinder his scientific work of which is based on countless other scientific works.
Don't believe everything your church tells you. Jimmy Swaggert preached against prostitutes yet had a whale of a time with them behind the scenes...Question - Do you know what your pastor did today?

D 10/28/2009 12:54:43 PM
@witwortel - I can't wait for Jesus to be arriving. Then He can explain evolution to you clearly.

cindyK TO ALL NON-BELIEVERS 10/28/2009 12:55:30 PM
I will Strike Down upon Thee with Great Vengeance and Furious Anger, and You will know My Name is the Lord when I Lay My Vengeance upon Thee

cindyK TO ALL NON BELIIVERS 10/28/2009 12:58:13 PM
And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. and You will know My Name is the Lord when I Lay My Vengeance upon Thee

d 10/28/2009 12:59:06 PM
@davidj - pg8 the atheists who denied the gods of Olympus - were they right or wrong?

Ouboet 10/28/2009 1:01:27 PM
There is this entity in the sky and he has the ability to monitor 6 billion humans (their actions and their thoughts) 24/7 in order that some may live forever and others may burn forever! Sounds a lot like a man made system to control humans based on their fear of death.

davidj 10/28/2009 1:02:38 PM
@D
To quote my dad : "If he puts his head in a parafine tin are you going to do the same?"
What if these educated men have a chip on thier colleective shoulders and kinda want God out of the picture so that they can continue on living like they want?

D 10/28/2009 1:05:03 PM
@witwortel - Yes the Earth is so young I have a dinosaur in my backyard.

Modder 10/28/2009 1:07:14 PM
@Horned God. Sure, evolution takes up millions of man-hours of testing, etc, etc. There is a tremendous amount of faith required in believing that the pure statistical improbability of evolution (as the world currently worships it) resulted in life at all, let alone the world as we know it.

Where are the transitional fossils that shows us exactly when sea-based life decided to grow a pair and try it out on dry land?

Can anyone answer me what the common ancestor is of man and foxterrier? Our ultimate ancestor apparently was the offspring of soup and lightning. All mammals are supposed to have a common ancestor. What was the ur-mammal?

Another problem I have is that the THEORY of evolution still hasn't come up with any answer (let alone a feeble one) explaining why the LAW of conservation of angular momentum is conveniently ignored. A small thing I know, but significant nevertheless.

And I am still awaiting an answer to the colliding galaxies conundrum. Even if you go 4-dimensional space right from the word go, they still would not collide if they all originated from a single point as there is no outside force acting on the universe. Except for God that is.

@Kevan 10/28/2009 1:13:47 PM
so you think that "resistance to pesticides" is sufficient evidence that one species (and we know that inter-species reproduction is not possible) evolved into another? Resistance is hardly even adaptation, which i don't dispute anyway.

D 10/28/2009 1:17:38 PM
@davidj - interesting but not entirely correct.
check : http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/
sorry to mess up your day - God just refuses to heal amputees...it is amazing but I bet an evangelist has made a leg grow...nice trickery of course and the money flowed

M.S. Hartter 10/28/2009 1:20:29 PM
A big bang could never produce perfectly round spheres in space, an explosion normally produces haphazard shapes called shrapnel. If two evolving creatures are changing shape and form completely seperate from one another, how do they become perfectly compatible afterwards? it would be like two people making something on opposite sides of the globe without ever enquiring about what the other is making and yet when they meet and compare their items they discover it to be a perfect match. This is impossible and improbable. These and many other questions that point us to a loving and kind Creator. Someone once said "you have to be a monkey to believe in evolution" I wonder if that's not true?
Please believe in a God who made you with love and who wants to share eternity with you in a place where no fear, pain or discomfort can ever harm you again, the answers can be found in the Bible and at a church conveniently located near you...
with love, M. S. Hartter.

Pieter van Onselen 10/28/2009 1:28:22 PM
We can argue about evolution for years to come. I have seen Christians argue about it as well.

One thing stands, if evolution did occur (which I doubt) or not is not the issue.

The issue is do you believe in God? And the only answer to those who doubt is this:

I know He lives because I personally experienced his existence.

I have called on Him and He answered my prayers.

I have this challenge for those who doubt! Give God and chance and you will see your life transformed. Call on the name of Jesus and you will know for sure that He lives.

To God all the praise in heaven and on earth through His Son Jesus Christ.

Jackp 10/28/2009 1:32:48 PM
if we believe in evolution when did love evolve? what about justice and the belief in right and wrong, waht about truth, mercy, grace, peace, joy, passion, purpose? Christians arent the only one's without all the answers, but in christianity we find The Answer, Jesus Christ. Sometimes we miss the point of the Bible, its about Jesus, Christians believe that we will one stand before Jesus and i doubt he will ask about how many days the earth was created in...So please dont dismiss christianity based on the number of days,etc, because the truth is you are dismissing Jesus

Ronald 10/28/2009 1:36:54 PM
@Jules - I don't think that Christians have a problem with being created from "dirt". In our belief system we believe God created us and he was smart enough to realise that as an organic based lifeform we would require organic sustenance. Jesus tells us to look at the earth and listen as it will teach us many things, like symbiotic relationships. Can you explain to me, from an evolutionary point of view, how a symbiotic relationship (e.g. flowers being pollinated by insects)evolved over time? How did the flower know to produce nectar when insects evolved? How did it know to produce a sweet nectar? What was its method of replication before insects?

cindyK TO ALL NON BELIEVERS 10/28/2009 1:43:41 PM
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness.
For he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.
And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you."

cindyK 10/28/2009 1:44:53 PM
@Pieter van Onselen - AMEN!!!!

Ronald 10/28/2009 1:50:15 PM
It seems that when people communicate about this topic there is a lot of personal attacks. We are all humans, fallable and full of sin. So could you all be so kind and stick to the issue at hand and not attack each other personally. For the skeptics of Christianity, do not judge the religion based on the flaws of men who are trying to follow it. At least they are trying, and we all stumble every now and then. It is not for man to judge one another but for God and his son Jesus. The reason for this is that he knows your heart and your true intentions. The cornerstone of the Christian faith is love. We can all believe what we want to believe and live accordingly, but the day will come when we will know the truth.

Modder 10/28/2009 1:56:25 PM
@Kevan. According to the Oxford English Dictionary evolutionist is described as follows: n. person who regards evolution as explaining the origin of species.

Origin is described as: n. 1 starting-point; source. 2 (often in pl.) ancestry, parentage.

So how is evolution not the study of where life came from?

When it comes to the English Language, OED is king. Not your gods Ricky Dawkins or Charlie Darwin.

D 10/28/2009 1:58:41 PM
@cindyk - vengeance vengeance ....what a loving God you have

BJisright 10/28/2009 2:03:00 PM
Life is absurdely wonderful even though there is no point to it! BJ have you read Sartre and Camus by any chance ?
Very nice . You religious fanatics can keep your blinkers on and waste your short life ! enjoy

Bob 10/28/2009 2:06:57 PM
I agree that there's incomplete evidence for evolution, but there is absolutely no evidence of a god or any form of intelligent design (our inability to explain something is not evidence of ID, it's just a reflection of our limited knowledge and intellect). For now I'll go with the theory that at least has some evidence to support it.

Bob 10/28/2009 2:08:22 PM
I agree that there's incomplete evidence for evolution, but there is absolutely no evidence of a god or any form of intelligent design (our inability to explain something is not evidence of ID, it's just a reflection of our limited knowledge and intellect). For now I'll go with the theory that at least has some evidence to support it.

Kevan@anonymous 10/28/2009 2:08:31 PM
Clearly you know little to nothing about evolution. Did you even read the article I included in my previous post? If you had you would have seen more examples than just antibiotic resistance but why let facts get in the way of your god right? Since you missed it here it is: "The development and spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria, like the spread of pesticide resistant forms of plants and insects is evidence for evolution of species, and of change within species. Thus the appearance of vancomycin resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and the danger it poses to hospital patients is a direct result of evolution through natural selection. The rise of Shigella strains resistant to the synthetic antibiotic class of sulfonamides also demonstrates the generation of new information as an evolutionary process[20]. Similarly, the appearance of DDT resistance in various forms of Anopheles mosquitoes, and the appearance of myxomatosis resistance in breeding rabbit populations in Australia, are all evidence of the existence of evolution in situations of evolutionary selection pressure in species in which generations occur rapidly." If you want to know exactly why this is true do a google search on it.
Obviously the entire field of biology must be wrong since it's accepted that resistance to antibiotics and pesticides is evidence of evolution in action. Needless to say, you will find some way to refute this as genuine evidence.

In any event here are more examples of new species that have been observed to form. Note that observation here does not mean instantaneous but gradually over a period of years.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html#part5


Ronald 10/28/2009 2:18:52 PM
Part 1
This has become a passion of mine i.e. determination of the origin of life, earth, the universe, as well as the meaning of it all. The scope of information is so vast that one will spend an entire lifetime and still not have all the answers, as history has proven.

Before I continue, I would like to make sure we all know the distinction between knowing something (fact), thinking something (theory/hypothesis) and believing something (faith). To have a clear understanding of this is extremely important when having discussions of this nature.

science ['sa??ns] (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/religion)
n
1. the systematic study of the nature and behaviour of the material and physical universe, based on observation, experiment, and measurement, and the formulation of laws to describe these facts in general terms
2. the knowledge so obtained or the practice of obtaining it
3. any particular branch of this knowledge the pure and applied sciences
4. any body of knowledge organized in a systematic manner
5. skill or technique
6. Archaic knowledge

D 10/28/2009 2:20:35 PM
@ALL-BELIEVERS - The big J will never return...it is all hocus pocus - beware many of the new churches if not all are money cults, go - give and be saved. Saved from what...oh yes - the loving God's vengeance

davidj 10/28/2009 2:26:06 PM
@D
Oh dear, so thats why you dont believe?
Mess up my day? remember I believe in a God that made something from nothing, lives forever, has no beginning, exists outside of time , exists in our passed, present and future simultaneously... but lets not get too technical lets just concentrate on just one "little" miracle: He stops the whole planet to secure a battle, or perhaps He moved the sun, Joshua did'nt float away so i'm guessing he moved the sun or decided to pause the laws of gravity for a quick intervention but ask yourself perhaps if Moses & Joshua had the "science" maybe they would have said er thats a bit impossible can't ask that! we'll have to come back tommorrow... now take that up to the present , perhaps the limb regrowing thing is much the same, perhaps its us that limit God, (you can read that Jesus did not perform many miracles in his home town cause they did'nt beleive in him, because they grew up with him) so what does this say ? We can limit God's presence and work in our lives...
Can He heal? yes, Will He? yes, Has He healed a limb, yes but I'll bet the person that was healed is not really interested in posting on some website anymore , so whats wrong ? us perhaps ... certainly not Him, also God is sovreign and just plain does'nt have to prove anything to anyone... what did Jesus say regarding the evil generation seeking a sign, He said none will be given... Personally I think this statement is still in force today, signs take away the need for faith, it basically alleviates the need to really seek Him... God is a treasure
that we need to seek out , He's not just hanging out in the open :)

Grant 10/28/2009 2:30:29 PM
Written in true religeous bias.
The counter argument is also valid by asking where the proof is regarding a "creator", and its influence.

Digame 10/28/2009 2:40:54 PM
Your assumption that man can't create anything more intelligent than himself is baseless. Man can create machines that are artificially intelligent and that can learn. The basics are simple, create a machine that can process information faster that what our current biological model can do. That is quite possible just be using different materials. By forming the basics of intelligence and by making the machine self-evolving as is already currently possible, one can eventually exceed the human intelligence. ...Also, there is a form of being that is more intelligent than a single man, it is called collective man. Combining things, such as our computing machines or ourselves does form a more intelligent machine. But it seldom happens on News24 if you look at some comments.

Ronald 10/28/2009 2:41:46 PM
Part 4
3. Scientifically speaking how are the half-lives of elements determined i.e. C-14 (half-life 5730 years, 40K decays with a half-life of 1.248 x109 (1.248 billion) years to 40Ca and 40Ar ?(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-argon_dating). From an obersavtional point of view who has been watching the C-14 decay for 5730 years, let alone K for 1.2 billion years.

4. The earth’s rotation speed is slowing down, which means that in the past it was spinning faster. Every 18 months a leap second is added to our clocks. (http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae695.cfm). Now, assuming the same rate of slowing, take 65 mil years*12months/18months = how many seconds one can subtract from 24hours to determine the length of a day 65million years ago, when the dinosaurs went extinct, and the answer is 43333333.33 seconds=722222.22minutes=30092.59hours! Thus, potentially a limiting factor indicating that 65million years might not be correct. Please help with the math, is it correct?

Kevan@davidj 10/28/2009 2:45:56 PM
So your god (like all others) has nothing to prove by providing a sign. I put two scenarios to you.

1) Your god provides a sign - a true miracle that will gets millions if not the whole world on his side thereby defeating satan and allowing all his children to spend an eternity in heaven.

2) A bunch of power-hungry leaders contrive to write a book on said god with the aim of getting the people in line. Unfortunately since they can't prove he exists they very cleverly tell the people that god doesn't have to prove himself. All that's required is faith, thereby instantly ensuring millions follow their every word without question and they maintain control of the masses.

Please do tell, which seems the more likely scenario?

Ronald 10/28/2009 2:47:29 PM
Part 5

In conclusion, an observation I have made over the past 4 years of researching this topic is that it appears that the time scales required for the evolutionary theory (from Big Bang to man kind evolving [i.e. macro evolution]) is required for the theory to be conceived as scientific, even though based on the scientific method it cannot be substantiated/proven. Just to clarify, Adaptation/Micro-evolution does occur and does measure up to the scientific method. However no person has ever witnessed/observed a macro-evolutionary change, and to my knowledge not even in the fossil record. (If you disagree please state so and provide reference to proof)

In my humble opinion, both evolution and creation (Creator/Intelligent Designer) are religious i.e. one has to believe it occurred as according to scientific method neither can be proven scientifically. Then what really matters is what we believe and why we choose to believe it. You see, our belief systems determine our values, morals, principles and more importantly how we treat others.

Final thought, in the book of Job (Christian Bible) God asked Job a series of questions of which one was “Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go and say unto thee, Here we are?” KJV Job 38 v35. I will leave you all with a final question to think about: When was electricity first utilized by man as a means of communication?

Ronald 10/28/2009 2:49:13 PM
The earth’s rotation speed is slowing down, which means that in the past it was spinning faster. Every 18 months a leap second is added to our clocks. (http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae695.cfm). Now, assuming the same rate of slowing, take 65 mil years*12months/18months = how many seconds one can subtract from 24hours to determine the length of a day 65million years ago, when the dinosaurs went extinct, and the answer is 43333333.33 seconds=722222.22minutes=30092.59hours! Thus, potentially a limiting factor indicating that 65million years might not be correct. Any Takers?

D 10/28/2009 2:49:37 PM
@davidj - I have been where you are still trying to go - I am Saul who has seen the light. If you want to believe in money cults, fake miracles, the end of the world is nigh, be my guest...aren't miracles signs?...I will bet not one amputee has ever had a leg or arm regrow...with no trickery involved of course...I have witnessed trickery with my own eyes, I have seen the money cults at work like a mill churning out salvation for tithes...If there really is a God I think the believers may be in more trouble than any unbeliever with all the nonsense that is done in Gods name....You end your statement "God is not hanging out in the open" ....wasn't Jesus hanging out in the open?...Why do you find you can't read any Dawkins?

Ronald 10/28/2009 2:50:06 PM
1. Taking into consideration that limestone is a sedimentary rock, and thus radiometric dating methods cannot be used to determine the age of the limestone, as well as that in the geologic column there exists many limestone layers that are dated different ages. How and when were these ages of the different limestone layers determined?
Please provide references

2. Has a dinosaur fossil ever been dated using Carbon-14 dating? How do scientists determine the age of the fossils?
Surely, to be scientific we need to use all tests to provide limiting factors on our observations/theories/hypothesis. I mean the current theories are that dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago, so then all dinosaur fossils that are dated using C-14 should give an age that is to the maximum of the dating range of C-14 dating i.e. 60,000 years.
Please provide references

Ronald 10/28/2009 2:52:51 PM
Why doesn't my articles come through on this site that contain relevant questions to scientifically challenge the views of the misguided evolutionists? If this forum is open, why are my scientific view points being scensored? Fair is fair, allow me to present the creationist point of view!!

Ronald 10/28/2009 3:12:07 PM
Reading through all these transcripts is interesting and I think definitions need to be cleared up:
Micro-evolution: change within a species/kind; can also be called adaptation (scientific as it follows scientific method)
Macro-evolution: change from on specie to another; one kind to another. This is tricky due to the changing defining of specie!If one takes a bacteria and it becomes resistant to anti-biotics it has gone through a change but it is still a bacteria!
Thus, macro-evolution i.e. change from 1 kind to another e.g. bacteria to virus has never been observed and thus is not scientific according to scientific method.

If evolutionists choose to believe that adding the magic ingredient of billions of years will cause the outcome to be different, they are welcome to that. But remember they choose to believe it and it is not science!

Bacteria replicate quickly, thus why over the last 30years with all the experimentation utilising bacteria has there never been documented and widely published that a bacteria had evolved into a completely different form. I mean if one starts with 1 bacteria, repoducing asexually, how many bacteria will there be after 30 years? How many generations and mutations would have occured providing opportunity for macro-evolution?

Can somebody please provide referenced proof in this regard

FrankensteinISHere @ Kevan 10/28/2009 3:17:58 PM
So where is there any indication that Staphylococcus aureus changed into anopheles mosquitoes or that cholera changed into ants? THAT is the question. NOT the adaptations your speak of. So what is your definition of evolution? ANY change or adaptation to environment that occurs or the jump from one defined species to another? Why do you talk about the one(adaptation) but actually bleat about or imply or insinuate the other(inter-species jump)? THIS last bit is what people are saying is NOT FACT and never will be proven. Adding time to the equation does NOT create birds from reptiles or vice versa, no matter what you say. You have NO proof! Is TIME the magic elixir?

@Kevan 10/28/2009 3:26:27 PM
your "explanations" amount to nothing more than further propositions. Evolutionary theory is not the only explanation for resistance in any of its forms. Why do you think the existence of resistance automatically amounts to evidence of cross species evolution? Why would this be the sole explanation for resistance, ruling out all others by necessary implication?

James 10/28/2009 3:27:13 PM
To think that the study of science was started by people that believe in God. They knew that a rational God would work a rational cosmos. I.E. Something that could be studied. If the world generated out of confusion then it wouldn't be able to be studied as all the results would be ...Confused.

Urs 10/28/2009 3:30:37 PM
Why do we persist in trying to make the bible "fit". It doesn't. It is not suppose to. It is a summary, written so people of the time could understand it. Evolution does not disprove the existence of God, neither does a belief in God do away with an acceptance of Evolutionary theory.

Ouboet 10/28/2009 3:30:49 PM
@Kevan 2:45: Hear, hear. So we have to follow blindly just like supporters of a certain political party. Oh, and also the dominee instructed us to not ask questions.

Nathan 10/28/2009 3:31:45 PM
PEOPLE, THERE ARE TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS!!! STOP BEING STUPIS AND GOOGLE IT!!!
Here I will for you:
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton2.html

The Horned God 10/28/2009 3:35:37 PM
@ M.S. Hartter - the big bang (even though this is an evolutionary topic, and has nothing at all to do with astrophysics) did not produce perfectly round spheres, these were created by gravitational rotation (unless, of course, you don't believe the earth spins on its axis?)
As for your point about evolution where you state: 'it would be like two people making something on opposite sides of the globe without ever enquiring about what the other is making and yet when they meet and compare their items they discover it to be a perfect match. This is impossible and improbable.' actually, I can give you two very specific examples of that happening in recent history: the motor vehicle was developed simultaneously in the US and Germany, while the jet engine was also developed simultaneously by the Germans and the British (and since they were at war with one another at the time, there's no way they would have shared any information) so if this is not only clearly possible, but actually probable (and has happened more than once in the last 100 or so years), then why can it not happen in nature, which had millions of years to get it right?

The Horned God 10/28/2009 3:36:47 PM
@Ronald: so are you then suggesting that man and dinosaur occupied the planet at the same time?
Cause if I recall correctly, the bible says that Jesus rode an ass into town, not a hadrosaur....

Riaan 10/28/2009 3:37:22 PM
Am I late on evolution? Coz every day I have to here from ignorant people that "my bloed is blou". The last time I checked my blood was red. Am i late or are they just BULLshitting me.

The Horned God 10/28/2009 3:39:45 PM
@ davidj: so hang on a minute - instead of believing in scientifically tested empirical evidence, you want me to believe in a book that claims the 'sun was moved' (or the earth was stopped) so that some guy could win a battle?
Sorry my frind, there aren't enough halucinogenic drugs in the world to make me believe that....

D 10/28/2009 3:44:36 PM
@davidj What branch of Christianity are you in? (just interested)

Kevan@FrankensteinISHere 10/28/2009 3:50:20 PM
THE definition of evolution is as follows : A change in the frequency of alleles in a given population over successive generations. Bacteria HAVE and continue to display this change. They may not have evolved into totally new species but there are indeed genetic changes that occur. Once you accept this definition you can take it further over lets say 4 billion years and lo and behold new species can be formed. So yes, time is indeed the "magic elixir" that results in new species being formed. It is our genes that define our species - nothing else. Therefore it stands to reason that if those genes can change, species as a whole can change. Evolution does not claim that species spontaneously change into new species, that is a common fallacy. Simply put, gradual changes in a particular species over millions of years will result in new species. It's amazing that you cannot see this.

Arithmetic 10/28/2009 3:53:03 PM
Ronald, your mathematics is hopeless, you refer to the manner of measuring time by adding a second every 18 months to compensate for the slowing of the earths rotation - correct? well you hit a snag. How is 722 222.2 minutes = 30092.59hours try 12 037.0 hours.

So your argument is that in 65 million years our measurement of time is out by 1.3 years. that is 2 millionths of a percentage out.

I guess that makes the world 7000 years old? And dinosaur bone carbon dating is a sham?

So much for your passion.

Kevan@anonymous 10/28/2009 3:57:59 PM
Your ignorance amounts to nothing more than a waste of my time. If you bothered reading ANY of the links I've provided you would clearly see the wood for the trees. You've brought nothing to the discussion except a loud-mouthed nonsense about how wrong evolution is. Those are not my explanations but the explanations of hundreds of learned people who spend massive amounts of time studying evolution and biology. Have you even bothered reading more on the subject. So much evidence but you refuse to accept it. You've shown you know nothing on the subject but here you are on your high horse going on about "further propositions". If you're interested in not making a constant fool of yourself go read up more on the subject. It's amazing how stubborn people can be.

davidj 10/28/2009 3:59:40 PM
@kevan
1) God provided a sign , believe on Him... you dont want to believe the eyewitness accounts, well thats your problem is'nt it, no one is forcing you to...
Ps: Christians see the sign of God everyday...

2) A bunch of power-hungry leaders contrive to write a book on said evolution with the aim of getting the people in line. Unfortunately since they can't prove it exists they very cleverly tell the people that evolution doesn't have to prove itself just trust the guy with the PhD. All that's required is faith, thereby instantly ensuring millions follow their every word without question and they maintain control of the masses.

@D
I too have seen many fake cults, but you cannot justify your position on fake cults afterall you used the word : they are FAKE, are you sure about the REAL ones...
Yes Jesus was in the open and yet many did not believe and still dont...

I dont WANT to read dawkins... thats the choice I'm making, just like you. I'm sure of my position, I hope you are in yours. Even if i read ALL of dawkins there WILL be no change in my thinking , therefore i would rather use my time elsewhere...

@ronald
Yeah one day 50% of my comments did'nt get posted, today was a good day... hint keep notepad handy before you submit...

I have a brain 10/28/2009 4:02:30 PM
Evolution is a theory, a theory is something that someone comes up with and puts up for debate, it is not immediately taken as fact, it is just something that scientists are investigating.

If you don't believe, you don't believe. I'm not convinced, but I'll keep my decision to myself until there's more proof, instead of condemning further studies.

All I'm saying is don't put nature down, cause after you've seen your child grow from a sperm and an egg, to a tiny spot in to a human being that resembles you, you are in awe of nature.

FrankensteinHere @Evolutionists and Kevan the monkey's cousin. 10/28/2009 4:05:55 PM
Evolution is usually coupled to the operational science [the actual facts and things that work] by adding the obligatory "Evolutionary consideration" section at the end. The theory/Hypothesis of evolution adds nothing of value other than allegiance to the Tribe of Evolutia.

davidj 10/28/2009 4:10:45 PM
@kevan who are you refering to as anonymous? I dont see any posts regarding anonymous...

@horned god - go ask kevan , you may not use the word evolution and big bang together its ANOTHER field of study... but not abiogenisis, prolly astrogenesis or something.

*forgive my sarcasm, i just could'nt help myself*

StevenD 10/28/2009 4:14:24 PM
Computers have evolved over time from simple machines to more complex and capable ones.

If one had to look at the evidence of computer development and extrapolate backwards in time, then one would prove that computers evolved on their own without any form of intelligent design.

I have a PhD in biology and cannot accept that the ordered complexity in nature and its ability to adapt and self regulate just happened from randomness. It was made to do so.

The best design of a machine would be one that can change in response to the environment in which it exists.
That would be genius design.

Kevan@davidj 10/28/2009 4:16:52 PM
I don't care for your god's signs and I'm glad I don't see it. I could care less about your or any other theists' religious nonsense. What does bother me is you people constantly trying to impose your will and "values" on everyone else. Stop trying to control what I can and cannot do, what I can and cannot watch on my tv or hear on my radio. Stop knocking on my door preaching about saving my soul and trying to get me to go to your church. Stop giving more of my hard-earned money to your religious organizations and places of worship, instead of investing in science and technology which will provide real tangible benefits for everybody. Get out of my government and take your christian/muslim/hindu etc nonsense with you. This article is a perfect example of the influence you people have. Rubbish like this shouldn't even see the light of day. If you can do all of that, then you needn't hear from the likes of me again. Atheists and scientists have been bullied and oppressed by theists for long enough. We'll make our voices heard and we aren't going away. Stay out of my life and I'll stay out of yours.

D 10/28/2009 4:21:47 PM
@davidj - religion causes a veil to cover your intellect and once in any religious system you can't read other information which may challenge you in a different way. One day you may read Dawkins and realise he is not so bad after all.

@Kevan 10/28/2009 4:32:26 PM
the point simply put, is that the fact of resistence and adaptation fits equally comfortably in the hypothese of Intelligent Design. You were the one who highlighted resistence and all i did was to try and show that the presence of resistence takes your position no further beacuse it can be just as easily accounted for from within a Creationist viewpoint. No need to get so angry.

mad hatter 10/28/2009 4:46:15 PM
Evolution and religion are mutually exclusive , they have nothing to do with each other!

Craig@D 10/28/2009 5:39:38 PM
The WHOLE theory of evolution is based on a "missing link", how can you base a theory on something you cant find??? There is MUCH more evidence of God existing than of some missing link.

Evolutionists are dumber than smokers if you ask me...

Chris 10/28/2009 6:12:11 PM
Evolution is fact, saying its JUST a theory is like saying Newtons theory of Gravity is just a theory. Got better things to do that poke holes or fight arguments with people who practice blindly following what they want to rather than looking at reality and the facts. Just like the gospels of Thomas or Philip didn't make it into the bible because they were deemed by the church as 'not divinely inspired' Intelligent Design is just a new trend by creationists who are looking for ways to link scientific theory with religious dogma against surmounting evidence to the contrary. Here is something on recent news... http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080417112433.htm

There is some evolution for you. My sources dont just consist of 1 book.

And besides, I refuse to believe that telling children a mythical man/jesus in the sky loves them and you must believe in him otherwise you will burn and scream in agony and torture for all eternity... thats unhealthy for anyone to believe. Oh yeah, and the biggest joke is that he loves us all, but if I lived my entire life doing good and being a better person than many the religious bigots and hypocrites out there, Ill go to hell. Even if I was a saint...

By the way Jesus was a Jew, but in Judaism there isn't a hell but in Christianity there is, atleast not in the Christian sense of hell.

Ouklip 10/28/2009 6:44:25 PM
Evolution is not a religion as a lot of people seems to think. The Big bang started it all. The question is what triggered it. A superior being or an accident in nature. Evolution is a part of nature and the development of species to adapt to heir habitat is not theory but fact. Look at the animals in Australia and Madagascar. Look at desert plants. To ask why chimps are not changing into humans shows how little is understood of what Darwin said so long ago. Chimps are changing as are humans. We don’t see it as it slowly happens. Religion is not a science and to teach kids in school the creation by god as a scientific fact is fraud. There are still people out there that believe men have 1 rib less than a female. Don’t use the bible for what was not intended.

Meme 10/28/2009 7:53:19 PM
anyone who still believes in the myth of evolution has not watched "Intelegent design" on tv shack.
As Aldous Huxley said "I am happy to believe in the THEORY or evolution as it rids me of the moral obligation of having to believe in God"


Johann 10/28/2009 9:20:44 PM
Go and read Ancestors Tale by Richard Dawkins, A Brief History of Time by Stephan Hawking and Guns,Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond. It's hard to believe that computer literate people can actually be braindead.

panda 10/29/2009 6:16:37 AM
... also, I didn't realise how many judgemental people there were out there.

haha @ religion nuhts! 10/29/2009 6:19:39 AM
I love religion - its like a Stalinist dictatorship: love me and give me your devotion, or you are sinner and you'll go to Hell.

... I don't personally believe in evolution either but I like the fact that Darwin won't appear before me when I die and send me to evolutionary Hell for being a 'non-believer'

Ronald 10/29/2009 8:03:00 AM
@Arithmetic: Brilliant!! Finally, someone that checks the numbers. You are correct, the actual hours is not 30092.59hours but 12 037.0 hours. So, if we subtract 12037.0 hours from 24 hours (our current time span of a day), how short were the days 65 million years ago?

FrankensteinISHere@Kevan 10/29/2009 8:12:14 AM
Kevan, It's amazing that you cannot see that your staunch believe in magical time TIME is exactly the same as faith in some god!!! You cannot prove within your lifetime that evolution will occur to the extend that trilobites will change into crabs, but you have to keep believing faithfully that it will happen - with time. This is why evolution is simply another religion - something based on FAITH. Smoke that.

Ronald 10/29/2009 8:13:47 AM
@Ouklip: You are absolutely correct when you say we must not teach creation as there is no scientific proof for it. But, neither is there for the big bang, macro-evolution. Taking the big bang into consideration, how does nothing explode into something? What about some of the natural laws (physics and chem) i.e. conservation of angular momentum, laws of thermodynamics which state that energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed? Are these laws incorrect? Taking the elements of into consideration how does one get past Fe, I mean the theory goes hydrogen formed first, them helium and so one to more complex atoms, how does one get Fe?

I really like science, especially physics, and what is an interesting question for me is how did this physical laws evolve? Please enlighten me?

D 10/29/2009 8:23:42 AM
@ all religous people - the problem is this : seeing evolution is true (see Dawkins - The greatest show on Earth with plenty proof) you feel this negates your Bible story. Well you take God on faith therefore you will have to compromise that God created us through the medium of evolution over millions of years. You still keep your faith and scientists keep their findings. Simple

Andrew 10/29/2009 8:25:40 AM
You ignorant fool!!!!
Every fossel is a "transitioning species". Every fossel is part of a transition from one species to another. That is the definition of evolution.

panda 10/29/2009 8:34:48 AM
there is nothing intelligent about 'Intelligent Design'. The word 'intelligence' implies that there is some logic and evaluation of many sources of information ... you may as well call it 'Blindly Dogmatic Design'

Ronald 10/29/2009 9:26:14 AM
@The Horned God: The word dinosaur is derived from two Greek words i.e. deinos (monstrous) and sauros (lizard), thus a dinosaur is nothing but a monstrous lizard. It was included in the English dictionary during the 1800's (approx 1840). Thus, when Latin,Greek and Hebrew bibilcal texts were translated into English, according to chronology above, the word dinosaur did not exist. But what did exist was the word dragon (derived from Latin draco or dracon meaning large serpent). There are numerous verses in the biblical text refering to dragons i.e. Job 40:15-24, Job 41:1, Isaiah 27:1, Deuteronomy 32:33, many in the book of Psalms. (KJV reference).

During the journeys to the east of Marco Polo, the chinese emporer was documented as having "Royal Dragon Feeder". Why would an emporer have a "Royal Dragon Feeder" if there wasn't any dragon? Do some reading on stories reported, even during the 1900's, about strange animals seen by sailers in the oceans? How open is your mind?

Yes, according to scripture I believe (do not have emperical evidence) that man and dinosaurs (large lizards) occupied the earth at the same time. Tell me, can you prove scientifically (empirically) that the dinosaurs and man did not occupy the earth at the same? In addition, can you prove that dinosaurs don't exist today? Please provide all emperical proofs.

@Ronald 10/29/2009 9:29:32 AM
A year is the time it takes the earth to complete a circuit around the sun. The number of days (i.e. revolutions of the earth)within a year is determined by the speed that the earth is rotating at. The earth is losing angular momentum due to the gravitation pull of the sun and other planets (especially the moon). Therefore, the earth is slowing down and days are getting longer. But this does not necessarily mean the time it takes the earth to move around the sun (i.e. one year) is changing.

mad hatter 10/29/2009 9:58:45 AM
Pls tell me how you can bring scripture into a evolutionary debate ? scripture was written by men about things which occurred 100 years after the actual events of man who claimed divinity around which a religion was formed , the other is a sceintific theory based on scientific evidence of genetics, observation and fossil reminants that is universally agreed upon by scientists around the world . Just because the thoery does not explain everything about how all complex life got to where it is does not mean that the fundamental aspects of the theory are not good, its a theory which seekd to simplify the complex process so that we can better understand the fundamental principles. People choose not except it as they think it contradicts their literal translation of scripture . Man and dinosuar did not walk the earth at the same time , why? Carbon & radiometric dating ! A system perfected in the last 100years . Pls go to wikipedia and look these up .

jade 10/29/2009 9:59:19 AM
I understand your point i do. But you are arguing that the stats within science are unrealistic. But thta does not mean impossible. In relation the the number of opportunities in the universe to create life, and considering how many failed. You should be grateful that yoru soul was directly related to this planet. The stats are perfectly fine, and i agree that you should brush up on your facts.
However, in the argument of science and of what is possible. You are saying that things that dont have a arguable creation point are invalid? Right?
Well then there is your biggest problem. It makes just as much sense that a coinincidence of fact based materials can be true (Evolution to Creation), it does not support how "God" came to be. How can you suggest that there is more faith that something COMPLETLY unexplainable is more likely to exist because the facts are a little flawed. Yes they are, and yes i understand your argument. But in all fairness, i offer my 'leap of faith'. To something that at least has a slightly fact based heading... unlike the bible, and god. i am NOT a bible basher, i completely agree with the fact that you COULD be correct. But dont waste your time trying to convince people that because one or two ends dont tie up, that they should drop it completly and base thier faith in something that has no fact at all...

Ronald 10/29/2009 10:22:08 AM
@ the person who responded @Ronald: I am not questioning the time it takes for the earth to revolve around the sun, I am questioning the fact that the earth's rotation around it's axis is slowing down and approx 1 second is added to the clocks every 18 months. Thus, if the earth's rotation is slowing down then it means the days are getting longer by 1 second every 18 months. Thus, the earth rotation must have been quicker previously, and doing simple arithmetic we can determine how much time to deduct from our current 24hour day to determine the length of a day X number of years ago. Of course, one is making an assumption that the rate of slowing has been the same throughout history. Thus, looking at dinosaur extinction at about 65 million years ago, we convert the years to months 65,000,000 x 12= 130,000,000, then divide this by the months it takes for a second to be added to the clocks (due to the rotation speed of the earth around its axis) 130,000,000/18=7,222,222 seconds = 120,370 minutes = 5,015 hours (@Arithmetic - please check previous comm). Thus, in conclusion either the decline in the earth's rotational speed around it's axis has not remained the same throughout the history of the earth or, if the rotational speed has remained the same, then based on the calculation above the time span of 65 million years is mathematically improbable.

Let's look at it from another way, let's determine how long back in time do we have to go to when a day was only 1 hour long in duration i.e. it took the earth 1 hour make 1 complete revolution around it's axis, allowing for a complete "sunrise and sunset" cycle. There are 3600 seconds in an hour and 86400 seconds in a day (1 complete earth rotation around it's axis), thus we need to loose 82800 seconds (86400-3600). Going back in time, if we gain 1 second every 18 months then 82800*18= 1,490,400 months = 124,200 years. Mathematically still probable.

However, what would the speed of earth's rotation be if a day was only 1 hour and not 24 hours? What effect does this rotational speed have on the atmosphere, Corriolus effect (excuse the spelling). weather patterns etc?

Young earth creationists believe the earth is about 6,000-8,000 years old. Let's do first calculation with this in mind, then the days would have been only 88 seconds shorter than what they currently are. Of course, assuming the same rate of slowing throughout the earth's history.

Which is more mathematically probable?

D @ Ronald 10/29/2009 11:18:32 AM
Stop smoking your socks right now. You have watched far too much of Jurassic Park and believe dinosaurs exist today. Believe me if dinos existed today humans would have had them in zoos long ago. Crocodiles may be evolutionary related but dinos in the pure sense are fossils only.

jas@Craig 10/29/2009 11:38:02 AM
I sincerely hope you are joking? You're happy to posit that evolution has a missing link, so it can't be real and in the same paragraph proclaim that there is far more evidence of God? Where? Show me the evidence. I'm not denying his existence, but if your criteria is evidence, then show it to me! And none of this it's all around you, feel-good nonsense. I want HARD evidence. For every instance you provide along the lines of "it's in the birth of a newborn baby" i will counter with "what about the horrible rapes and murders of infants". Again, I am not denying God's existence, but stop telling "evolutionists" that they are wrong, because they have no proof.

GT 10/29/2009 11:42:12 AM
@StevenD - as a biology PHD, please explain all the extinct species (99% of all things that have lived are already extinct) If we are so well designed, why do we have redundant parts? Why do we die of all kinds of strange mammalian ailments?? If there was a designer he was pretty rubbish! What is clear is that if there was a designer, who designed the designer We live on a climate knife-edge, always have and we have nearly gone extinct a number of times. Explain the ice ages, the dinosaurs, viruses, . Your position is astonishing... unless of course you are not what you say you are.

GT 10/29/2009 11:43:47 AM
@Ronald. You are an idiot. The evidence is clear, just get off your lazy ass and go and look at it! Muppet

Ronald 10/29/2009 11:58:30 AM
@GT: Do you have to stoop so low as to name calling when making a suggestion. Please infomr me of what evidence you are referring to and I will gladly look at it.

Jas 10/29/2009 12:27:18 PM
@Ronald - I'm sorry my friend, but the fact is that people who are far more qualified than you in the fields of science are making these calls. You can harp on all you like about time and seconds etc, but the reality is that you, like everybody else here are just twisting things to suit your argument. There is far more evidence of evolution than there is of a higher power. I'm not suggesting that there isn't a higher power, because I think anybody who refuses to believe in something, simply because they don't understand it is a fool. However, there is more than enough evidence to suggest evolution is real. FAITH is not proof of existence, which is what most creationists would have you believe.

ZION PAY TO RONALD 10/29/2009 1:26:35 PM
You are a wizard and I agree completely with you. however you have not, as far as I read, stated the cause of the earth slowing down on its axial rotation. The answer is relatively simple: ocean tides. The moon, earth and sun are close on the same plane. At spring tide, for example the moon and sun are in line with the earth and the gravitational effect is compounded and the pull is greatest on the ocean surface resulting in a tidal bulge. This bulge is dragged around the earths oceans causing friction in the water layers. this effect is never cancelled because the moon, though smaller than the sun creates a larger gravitational pull due to its proximity to earth. The ancients believed this made one looney.

@Ronald - from The Easter Bunny Again 10/29/2009 1:34:05 PM
The Big Bag theory (and yes, this one IS a theory) does not state that something exploded out of nothing... it states that the universe came from a single or even possibly multiple points and is radiating outwards... these single points were gaseous clouds, not nothing... you could argue, who created the gaseous clouds, but then of course I would argue, who created the creator of the gaseous clouds... Chicken and egg... IF their was a creator (there is absolutely no evidence of this Nor any need to believe there is one) BUT if there is a creator, I would bet my non-existant soul that it is not the creator described in any Christian bible, Islamic, Hindu or Judaic Scripture/text...
Something to ponder... we know that their are more stars in the universe than grains of sand on every single beach on Earth... we can estimate(thru observation) that approximately 10% of these stars have planets revolving around them... out of tis 10% about 10% of these have planets which could sustain life, if only 10% of these could sustain life there would still be billions of planets with life on them... secondary to this train of thought... if there are more stars than grains of sand, try to imagine how insignificant you are as a human being in the greater scheme of things... to believe in a creator that actually gives a damn about your every whiney need, is arrogant in the extreme

@Zion - The Easter Bunny 10/29/2009 1:45:43 PM
Yes, hence the word lunatic... from the word Lunar... I wrote a long response previously with regards to Ronalds ascertation that the earths rotation is slowing down by 1 second every 18 months... his assumption is wrong (it is actually 1 leap second not 1 second) and secondly his logic is extremely flawed... I see News24 have not included my last 2 posts... hope they post this one :)

@GT 10/29/2009 1:46:22 PM
From a Biblical world-view, sickness, extinction and dis-ease in general are all a result of separation from God. The Bible is clear that man's rebellion affected the entire earth to the point that " All of Creation groans until the revealing of the children of God" so that restoration of all things can come. The chaos today is a result of man's pride, thinking that he can run the show without God's help. That is why everything is "winding down". Don't forget, the bible also refers to an enemy of God and man, called Satan.

JustShootMe 10/29/2009 2:01:10 PM
I remember a similar argument taking place a few hundred years ago. Scientists said that the earth is round. Those who didn't like science said: "Look around you, the earth is flat! Your round earth argument fails." I can't remember who was right in the end.

SS 10/29/2009 2:15:21 PM
Reasoning with christians is pointless. Go on believing every word (written by man)in your little book of fairytales.

A Lot Of Time 10/29/2009 2:20:22 PM
It is hard to grasp the amount of time involved, as it is an entirely abstract concept for human beings who live no more than 100 years. 100s of millions of years is impossible for some people to imagine.

ZION@THE EASTER BUNNY 10/29/2009 3:28:45 PM
Apologies for the oversight but I was not too interested in the time element It could be a second or leap second the point I made was the cause of the retardation of rotation of the earth's axial spin. But like all wise men I will go back to the book and find the correct figure. (book in lc)

Nostrum 10/29/2009 3:45:48 PM
@Ronald: The only thing you have right in your “argument” is that the speed of the Earth’s rotation about its axis is slowing. You are completely off the mark when you blather on about leap seconds; that has nothing to do with the argument you think you’re making. Do you also think that because we have a leap year every 4 years and add an extra day to February, February will just get longer and longer? And 40 years from now a year will have 375 days? Try the calculation again using the correct parameter: the length of a day is increasing by about 1,7ms/century.

jackp 10/29/2009 3:49:01 PM
@SS. Reasoning with Christians us pointless because we believe everything in a book written by men...who wrote ur books?
here's a thort - christians believe there is more to this life, aethists believe believe in only what they can see...who is more open-minded?

@Ronald, thanks for making ur arguments clear, a worthwhile read!


Jaco 10/29/2009 5:14:29 PM
if you are not doing your masters on hox genes or worse which i asume the case is if you have never heard of hox genes I fail to see why you have the right to publish anything about evolution. This is absolute garbage and I cannot understand why news24 would publish such an article!!!?

kdd 10/29/2009 5:16:52 PM
You're a blithering idiot...

You really should watch the David Attenborough documentary on Darwin and Evolution called "Charles Darwin and the Tree of Life".

It explains evolution in a non-radical way, and demonstrates thoroughly how evolution works, and is currently working.

The question of intelligent design is also dealt with in this program.


Caniculus 10/30/2009 9:40:07 AM
Evolution is nothing more than assumptions. It hasent passed the stage of a Theory. Its not proven as science dictates. When it comes to datelines , thats the ultimate flaw.

Mark 10/30/2009 10:10:59 AM
Belief in an imaginary sky friend has really made the world completely and utterly stupid. I'm embarrassed to be called the same species as some of the people that have responded to this blog. How ignorant do you have to be to doubt evolution in the first place. Come on people, how do you even tie your own shoelaces in the morning, surely it's far too much of an intellectual accomplisment for you.

How many christians does it take to change a lightbulb?

Ronald 10/30/2009 10:14:24 AM
@The Easter Bunny: Thank you for your response regarding the Big Bang theory and acknowledging it is only a theory and not scientific fact. I suppose this theory does vary depending on what you read. You mention "it states that the universe came from a single or even possibly multiple points and is radiating outwards", do you know that "scientists" think/believe/hope/pray/postulate/theorize that it started from a singularity due to the phenomenon called red-shift which they assume is the same as effect as as the Doppler Effect (as an onject approaches you the sound waves are compressed resulting in a higher pitch and when the object is moving away from u the sound waves are decompressed resulting in a low pitch), u can observe this clearly by watching formula 1. Are light and sound the same? Does the doppler effect rely on a non-vacuum medium to work? I mean was the doppler effect demonstrated in space? For compression to occur a medium must exist that can be compressed. Observational points: Light is different to sound (scientifically speaking), the earth's atmosphere contains gases whereas space is a vacuum (given not 100% vacumm, but close to that). Thus, scientifically can the same effect be tranferred between different "things" in different "environments"? "Things" mean light and sound, and "environments" means earth's atmosphere and space. Ponder on this, can light be compressed?
In conclusion: The Big Bang theory, which is part of the overall evolution theory, is as by your admittance a theory and not fact, and I acknowledge that my theory that God created everything is a theory and not fact. So here we both agree that our theories are not fact and thus we have to believe they happened. Thus, my friend, both of our theories are religious.

MH 10/30/2009 10:43:27 AM
So many questions, so much speculation, so much still not known, but there are always those that are ALL knowing:)
!! :)

Nostrum 10/30/2009 10:44:09 AM
@Ronald: Once again you demonstrate your ignorance. The Doppler Effect can be applied to light and works in a vacuum with light (electromagnetic radiation). The frequency of the light changes just as it does for sound waves dependent on whether you are moving toward or away from the source and with what velocity.

aajj@D 10/30/2009 11:45:17 AM
Yes there is money making cult churches that fake miracles, there has always been false prophets. In terms of regrowing a limb - I would guess that in Jesus's time someone surviving the loss of a limb would be very rare thus there is no record of Jesus restoring a limb.

Ronald 10/30/2009 11:45:47 AM
@Nostrum: Thanks for pointing out my ignorance. Is the speed of light different for the different wavelengths? Is light affected by gravity? Could the red-shift we see in some of the stars be only due to the fact that they are moving away from the earth? Could there be another cause for why we observe the red-shift?

Ronald 10/30/2009 11:49:16 AM
@Zion, Easter Bunny & Nostrum: Thanks for the feedback, I really appreciate it. Regarding the rotational speed of the earth slowing down, let's look at this logically. This is what we know: 1-The rotational speed of the earth is slowing down, 2-Time was, and still is, measured by astronimical observations and since 1958 by atomic clock cessium-133 atom, 3-From 1961 to 1971, the rate of (some) atomic clocks was (for purposes of UTC) constantly slowed to stay in sync with Earth's rotation. (Before 1961, broadcast time was synchronized to astronomically determined Greenwich Mean Time.), 4-UTC is counted by atomic clocks, but is kept approximately in sync with UT1 (mean solar time) by introducing a leap second when necessary. This happens when the difference (UT1 - UTC) approaches 0.9 seconds, and is typically scheduled either at the end of June 30 or December 31 (though leap seconds can be applied at the end of any month). On January 1, 1972, the initial offset of UTC from TAI was chosen to be 10 seconds, which approximated the total difference which had accumulated since 1958, when TAI was defined equal to UT2, a smoothed version of UT1 (GMT) no longer used. The table shows the number of leap seconds added since then. The total difference between TAI and UTC is 10 seconds more than the total number of leap seconds.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second) The way I see it as follows: 1-from observation we know the earth's rotational speed is slowing (cause is not relevant here), 2- in the 1950's (1958) it was decided to keep time using an atomic clock (cessium-133 atom) and they calibrated the radition cycles to that of the second (which was an astromical second 1/86400 of a mean solar day), 3-Between 1958-1972 the atomic clock was not in sync with astronomical measurement and the offset was 10 seconds, 4-From 1972 until 2008 (26 years) 24 seconds were offset on the atomic clocks (reer to table on website referenced). In conclusion: the earth's rotational speed is slowing which results in our day's becoming longer. This is observed astronomically. Earth time is measured astronomically (primary measurement) and with atomic clock (cessium-133 atom) since 1958 (secondary measurement), which was first calibrated against the astromical measurement (primary) with a 10 second offset (after 14 years) and then with 24 second offset (over the last 26 years: 1972-2008), once again against the primary measurement. I think it is obvious, that the secondary measurement is not accurate, as they have to keep calibrating it against the primary measurement. Regardless of this, we know the earth's rotational speed is slowing, which results in a longer period of time (what ever time may be) being required for a complete solar day/cycle to occur.

Ronald 10/30/2009 11:55:41 AM
@mad hatter: I agree that it is important to understand the origin and meaning of things and that theories are put in place to try an explain occurences of things. But surely, if the theory does not match the facts and/or scientific method, then the theory should be changed. Let's look a radiometric dating methods e.g. K-Ar. 40K decays with a half-life of 1.248 x109 (1.248 billion) years to 40Ca and 40Ar ?(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-argon_dating). Applying scientific method, who observed the decay of 1kg K to .5kg Kfor 1.2 billion years to determine it's half life? I understand there are mathematical equations they use to derive approx dates for half lives. Basically K decays to Argon (noble gas i.e. chemically inactive element) which takes 1.2 billion years. The theory is that when that molten rock will contain none, or very little Argon gas, as it will diffuse through the molten rock, setting the "argon clock" to 0. When the rock cools the K in the rock that decays to argon will be trapped in the rock. Now the scientists go get the rock, grind it up and determine the amount argon gas, K and the relative ratios. It all sounds good. However, there are some flaws with this. When they used potassium-argon dating to date the cooled down lava flow of the mount st Helens eruption (2 years after eruption) they came out with dates that ranged from 250,000 years to 1.8 millions years. So it is fine to accept the dates derived from this dating method when we don't know the age of the lava flows, but when we do know when the lava flows took place we can dismiss the dates. Some good reading is the preconditions that need to exist for radiometric dating to be accurate. C-14 dating is full of documented dates that are flawed, the reason is that there are too many variables that aren't taken into consideration like the weakening of the earth's magnetic field, solar-flare etc. In addition, I think you would enjoy reading about how fossils are dated. In conclusion, If a theory does not provide all the answers/explanations are we then not moving from knowing to believing, from science to religion? When evolution is taught it is presented, as many people in their comments on this topic have indicated, as fact. Even though this theory has,as acknowledge by your comment,a lot of unanswered questions resulting in one having to believe it and not knowing it! Christianity is a religion as I believe it to be true, but so is evolution (not micro-evolution/adaptation as this measures up to scientific method) as you have to believe that man has evolved from apes, which evolved from it's prehistoric ancestors which evolved from primordial soup, which evolved from a rock 4.6 billion years ago. Finally, we all have the right to believe what we want to believe, but let's keep the science in the science books and the fairytales, religions, theories and thoughts that do measure up to the scientific method out of the science books and science class rooms! @GT: Do you have to stoop so low as to name calling when making a suggestion. Please infomr me of what evidence you are referring to and I will gladly look at it. @D: Thank you for your input, you should read the my previous comment about the origin of the word dinosaur. In addition, how can you prove dinosaurs are not around today? Can you be at all places simultaneously? Thought not! Some advice, there exists a fine line between believing something and knowing something.

Debbie 10/30/2009 12:21:53 PM
Some interesting points... here are some more. The head of paleaontology at the British Museum has said there are no known fossils that support the evolutionist theory. Dr. Kent Hovind has for the past 10 years or so offered $250 000 for evidence supporting the evolutionist theory but to date no one has yet been able to. (see www.drdino.com) There are photos he has of dinosours/ dragons that have washed up on the beach in California a few years ago, or been picked up by trawlers off New Zealand. Some have been spotted in the Congo (article quotes a South African in a Cape Town newspaper). Just because there are so few around doesn't mean they don't exist anymore.
Carbon dating could be flawed - it's a fairly new technology developed only in the past 100 years or so. And experts have been wrong about theories in the past. for intstance a few hundred years ago everyone believed the world was flat. But the Bible in Job recorded the earth as a sphere (written roughly 4000 years ago) Matter tested from comets is said to be not older than 10 000 years, it's possible then that the rest of our world is also not older than that.
Also only in the recent past have doctors found that blood is vital to a body, until only the past century doctors would 'bleed' patients for different ailments. This would worsen their condition. The bible says the 'life is in the blood'. It's vital for that body to survive.
It seems that it can take thousands of years for man to prove something that has been in the bible all along.
A huge ark/ boat has been found in Turkey which is apparently a national heritage site, Noah's ark? It's possible.
Darwin's origin of the species was a book that promoted racist theories, are evolutionists racists as well? (Do you know what the full title of his book is?)His theories that one race was better than another influenced despotic dictators like Stalin and Hitler. They believed in superior races in the socalled 'race of life' just like Darwin did. They killed millions of innocent people because of a 'wrong belief' in my humble opinion.



Nostrum 10/30/2009 12:52:21 PM
Ronald, It’s precisely because Potassium-40 has a half life of 1250 million years, that it is a totally unsuitable method to test samples of rock that are less than a few million years old, so little argon would have accumulated that the error rate would be enormous. Just like Carbon dating with a half life of about 5800 years is not much good for dating anything older than about 60 thousand years because almost all of the C14 would have decayed, making the measurement of the ratio very error prone.

Nostrum 10/30/2009 12:59:29 PM
Debbie: “head of palaeontology [sic] at the British Museum has said there are no known fossils that support the evolutionist theory”
I doubt that very much, do you happen to have a name?


Jas @ Caniculus 10/30/2009 1:09:14 PM
Would everyone please stop clinging to the word theory! Gravity is also just a theory! Science does not set out to prove anything. it is based on inductive reasoning, i.e. a finite set of observations. In order to prove gravity, you would need to compare the laws of attraction of every object in the universe against every other object. The theory of gravity is used to explain the laws of gravitation, not prove them. Next time you fly,maybe have a think about the theory of aerodynamics. We build an object that weighs tons and then put it in the air and you know what that is based on? A theory that it will remain in the air.

Nostrum 10/30/2009 1:12:43 PM
@Ronald: “Is the speed of light different for the different wavelengths?” No, but it can change with different mediums.
“Is light affected by gravity?” Yes.
“Could the red-shift we see in some of the stars be only due to the fact that they are moving away from the earth?” That’s exactly why we observe it.
“Could there be another cause for why we observe the red-shift?” Such as?
Getting back to the rotational speed of the earth: My point in the previous comment was that you used the wrong parameter for your calculation and are confused about leap seconds. Cutting and pasting an entire Wikipedia article hasn’t changed that.


Ronald 10/30/2009 1:33:36 PM
@Jas: There is the Theory of Gravity and then there is Gravity. The one describes the other. The difference here is that gravity is demonstratable. Jump out a plane, fall out a tree. It seems pretty definitive. Can you demonstrate to us non-believers in macro-evolution, how man as evolved, let alone any other biological macro-evolutionary change?

ZION@RONALD AND THE REST 10/30/2009 1:38:54 PM
Not bad, Ronald, I actually enjoyed that, no joking. Will you clue me up: We know there is energy in a vacum and passing radiation through that vacume may produce mass. good.
What is time? Time and mass are synonimous
ie a material object cannot exist in a timeless medium.
atomic activity such as rotation is time dependant. This means nothing can exist outside our universe. further time is dependant on mass to distort space and that is why our universe exists. Ask someone else to explain the initial conditions(John Hawking)for instance

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:02:17 PM
@D: Thank you for your input, you should read the my previous comment about the origin of the word dinosaur. In addition, how can you prove

dinosaurs are not around today? Can you be at all places simultaneously? Thought not! Some advice, there exists a fine line between believing

something and knowing something

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:04:16 PM
@The Easter Bunny: Some info on the Big Bang theory and cosmological evolution from wikipaedia-
In physical cosmology, Big Bang nucleosynthesis (or primordial nucleosynthesis, abbreviated BBN) refers to the production of nuclei other

than those of H-1 (i.e. the normal, light isotope of hydrogen, whose nuclei consist of a single proton each) during the early phases of the

universe. Primordial nucleosynthesis took place just a few minutes after the Big Bang and is believed to be responsible for the formation of

a heavier isotope of hydrogen known as deuterium (H-2 or D), the helium isotopes He-3 and He-4, and the lithium isotopes Li-6 and Li-7. In

addition to these stable nuclei some unstable, or radioactive, isotopes were also produced during primordial nucleosynthesis: tritium or H-3;

beryllium-7 (Be-7), and beryllium-8 (Be-8). These unstable isotopes either decayed or fused with other nuclei to make one of the stable

isotopes.

Take Note of the word "BELIEVED" in the second last sentence. Thus, not emprically scientific (does not measure up to scientifc method) and

then in the next sentence they go from believe to fact. How can they do this? One has to be very careful when reading.

Physics professor 10/30/2009 2:08:21 PM
Evolution is a religion that preaches we came from a ROCK... A ROCK!! Shame on all those intentionally ingorant people who stand behind the biggest scientific fraud of our generation. The only reason you believe in it is so you don't have anyone to answer to when you die... and you will, so enjoy the next 40 or so good years of your life believing in garbage, I'll spend mine preparing for an eternity in heaven.

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:12:01 PM
@Nostrum: Thanks for your reply regarding radiometric and C-14 dating. But how do we know then that a rock dated 10 million years old is

correct, if there is not a control to be measured against? Do we not then rely soley that the method we are using and all built in

assumptions/preconditions need to hold absolutely true for the measurement to be correct? I have read through all the preconditions that need

to exist for Potassium-Argon dating to be accurate, and if we take a sample of rock, that we do not know if these preconditions were met,

then are we not inferring error in the calculation? Thus, are we not basing are calculations on assumptions? Thus, are we not moving away

from fact to belief, and hence from science to religion?

Here is a scenario:
If I bring you a fossil that was found in limestone, how would you determine the age of the fossil?

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:24:40 PM
@Jas: There is the Theory of Gravity and then there is Gravity. The one describes the other. The difference here is that gravity is

demonstratable. Jump out a plane, fall out a tree. It seems pretty definitive. Can you demonstrate to us non-believers in macro-evolution,

how man as evolved, let alone any other biological macro-evolutionary change?

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:27:09 PM
@Nostrum: My mind is open and thus my ignorance can be fixed. Thus will you be so kind as to scientifically describe what sound is

(properties and characteristic) and what light is (properties and characteristic) and how the doppler effect is attributed/applied to both.

Please be clear in the cause and effect on the different items.

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:27:09 PM
@Nostrum: My mind is open and thus my ignorance can be fixed. Thus will you be so kind as to scientifically describe what sound is

(properties and characteristic) and what light is (properties and characteristic) and how the doppler effect is attributed/applied to both.

Please be clear in the cause and effect on the different items.

Pagan 10/30/2009 2:31:14 PM
@ Physics professor

You are not really a professor are you? It just cannot be. If you will please let us know where you teach so that I can ensure my child doesn’t go there at all. If I may quote: “Evolution is a religion that preaches we came from a ROCK…” May I be so humble as to ask what religion are you? Perhaps you do believe the bible and come from the religion of Genesis 2:7 and if I may quote: “the Lord God formed the man from the DUST of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of live and man became a living being.” Now that MAKES SENSE! Isn’t the evolutionist a lucky fellow, man comes from dust and dust comes from rock. Therefore they are 100% correct, biblically that is.

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:40:39 PM
@Nostrum: Regarding the earth's rotation and time, could you then explain to me why they adjust the atomic clocks and the reference they use to adjust the atomic clocks is based on the solar second? If the earth's rotation is slowing, would this not infer a increase in the part of the earth's surface exposed to the sun and an increase in the earth's surface not exposed to the sun? In addition, could you please provide clarity on how the leap second is applicable.

Ronald 10/30/2009 2:59:26 PM
@Nostrum: Regarding the earth's rotation and time, could you then explain to me why they adjust the atomic clocks and the reference they use to adjust the atomic clocks is based on the solar second? If the earth's rotation is slowing, would this not infer an increase in the the duration of the part of the earth's surface exposed to the sun and an increase in the earth's surface not exposed to the sun? In addition, could you please provide clarity on how the leap second is applicable.

John the Saint 10/30/2009 3:07:08 PM
Carbon dating can be out with a thousands of years (40 000 about), science don't work in thousands, it works in millions and billions.

Nostrum 10/30/2009 3:35:11 PM
Ronald, I don’t know what you are trying to get at by asking me to explain what the characteristics of sound and light are when you can obviously look it up quite easily for yourself if you were interested.


Nostrum 10/30/2009 3:43:04 PM
Ronald said: “Regarding the earth's rotation and time, could you then explain to me why they adjust the atomic clocks and the reference they use to adjust the atomic clocks is based on the solar second? “
It’s in the article you posted from Wikipedia.
“If the earth's rotation is slowing, would this not infer an increase in the the duration of the part of the earth's surface exposed to the sun and an increase in the earth's surface not exposed to the sun?”
It means that the length of a solar day (one complete rotation of the earth about its axis) is getting longer.
“In addition, could you please provide clarity on how the leap second is applicable.”
Again, that’s in the article you yourself posted, I don’t think I could explain it better.


Jas @ Ronald 10/30/2009 4:01:58 PM
Oh and another thing. I've already stated that Science doesn't set out to prove anything. It makes observations based on the finite information that is available. So with all the embryonic, geobiological, sociological evidence that exists, the theory of evolution stands up. Now, if you can't accept these things as a demonstation of macro-evolution, then all I request is that you provide me with 1 piece of demonstrative evidence that God did it all. Not faith. Evidence.

FrankensteinIsHere @GT and others who blame God 10/30/2009 6:05:29 PM
If you read the bible: Man sinned - disbelieved and defied God's word and paid the price - death: Spiritual(separation from God) as well as physical. God CURSED the earth so that everything would come by huge painful effort and THAT curse combined with man's inability to deal with right and wrong(evil) is why we have rapes and murders and beatings and strife and accidents and alcoholics and druggies and need i go on?
Don't blame God. Everything was perfect until WE sinned.
So why does God allow it to go on? Because He is giving everyone a chance to admit that they have sinned and ARE sinful beings in need of a spiritual saviour [have you ever disobeyed your parents? Well, then YOU flouted God's law and deserve death!]. So here's the chance to set the equation right: Accept God's gift of eternal life by believing in Jesus' death as payment for your sins. And that he rose again in victory.
The choice is yours.

The Observer 10/30/2009 6:18:38 PM
@Kevan - why should we leave you alone? If natural selection, or variations of survival of the fittest are true, then we should fight as hard as we can to eradicate atheists and evolution-teaching scientists to prove we're stronger. Why should I respect you? Is respect necessary for my species to continue? Did humans evolve respect? Did they evolve fellow-feeling? It makes more sense to me that these were given to humans only, along with the freedom of choice as to how to employ them. We were also given directions on how and why we should use them, but the majority seem not want to know about it. Evolution is the biggest excuse for this, and probably a big reason for the worlds general decline since Darwin theorized it.
BTW - wikipedia is not a reliable source. If you want to be taken seriously, you'll avoid quoting it.

Jon Wells 10/30/2009 6:50:37 PM
I dont believe there ever is a 'complete' specimen, I myself am in the process of gradual transition. My mouth is too small to accomodate the number of teeth left over from apes, I needed my wisdom teeth removed to end the resultant pain! My spine has to incorporate a pronounced curve to enable me to stand straight up! My feet are not flat like they should be for optimal stability, but still arched as they were once used for grasping!

Kyran@the observer 10/30/2009 10:54:10 PM
If you want to be taken seriously I suggest not comparing eugenics to natural selection... emphasis on 'natural'. Eugenics is as artificial as selection gets, like breeding dogs. To answer your question on 'respect'. Yes it did evolve and is present in the animal kingdom, it makes sense, be good to your neighbour and he will reciprocate. Oh and seeing as though IQ is inversely proportional to religious tendencies I think the fittest group in this case might not please you.

Ronald 10/31/2009 9:55:09 AM
@The Obeserver; You raise a valid point. If Evolution is who, i.e. that man has evolved over millions of years, then who determine's right from wrong? Where did all the initial laws come from? If every body just abides by the ten commandents, then everything would be fine...I mean how many of us lie (small or big) every day, how many of us steal (taxpayers - does everybody declare all incomes?). There is a saying, "if the head of a body is corrupt so is the body", the worlds leaders are corrupt chasing power, which in the modern world is money.

What amazes me is that evolutionists will stoop to name calling, defining people as dumb, stupid, ignorant if they don't believe in evolution. This is similar to the religious fundamentalists that, regardless of reason and scientific proof, will go against the word of God to achieve their own goals.

We can all only choose to believe it one way or another, God's existence cannot be proven and neither can evolution, so both are religious.

God bless

Ronald 10/31/2009 9:58:39 AM
@Nostrum: the reason why I ask you to explain the characeristic and properties of sound and light scientifically is I am open regarding my understanding of the "way of things" but you do not disclose your understanding or methodolgy, except saying it is so. Just by repeatedly saying something is so, doesn't make it so. This is called a mantra and has been used by many governments as a method, including the previous gorvernment and current government in south africa.

Jas@frankensteinishere 10/31/2009 12:22:52 PM
Babies are born innocent. And yet they are raped and murdered before they can walk, talk or do anything for themselves. So your God is happy to put these children through that pain, to make a point about the sins of other? Why not a quiet death in their sleep? If that is how you view your God, then you can keep him, because in my world, your god sounds evil.

Mike 10/31/2009 8:34:59 PM
And some people have evolved more then others!!

Delano 10/31/2009 10:55:22 PM
I ask my friends who believe in evolution to look at something, then close their eyes and then while their eyes are closed I move the something they looked at to another position . I then ask them to open their eyes and tell them that what they looked at moved to its new position on its own. They all tell me that it is impossible for it to move on its own. Yet they believe in evolution.

I tell them that they have to be brainless to believe that everything they see, touch, taste, smell and hear happened out of nothing.

Ish 11/1/2009 11:58:11 AM
You and Julias Malema should be brothers

pam quinton 11/1/2009 7:17:39 PM
Well now!!! If we evolve from chimps then there must be some comparison to make with the looks of humans. For instance the French apologized for puttinh Sarah--forgot the surname-- on display as a close link to chimps. So why apologise --she should have been proud to have been a good example of one.
I can think of a white South African ex-president that has the sort of features of a chimp. If they apologized to Sarah then evolutionists aught to apologize to the whole human race for calling our ancestors chimps.
I believe the bible---maybe it was simplified in order to give us something to debate in order to keep our minds accupied so that we dont fall back into chimp like states.
Most of the time people like to prove evolution to disprove the bible.
Take the virgin birth for instance. Peole will argue that that is far -fetched yet scientists today can put a virgin pregnant by artificial insemnation--but God nay.
Heehee.
Whatever life is so short we should be enjoying the outdoors instead of debatting evolution--we will all soon find out when we die what is what?

MFed 11/1/2009 9:00:54 PM
*Bangs head violently against a wall*

Read Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth". Ignore his vitriol about the "forty-percenters", etc., but focus closely on the irrefutable body of evidence (fossil evidence is nice, but it is a drop in the ocean) and also how evolution via natural selection actually works before making wildly ignorant objections. Without a shadow of a doubt, you have missed the point of the theory. Straw-man arguments are easy to win; you just make the facts up to sound wild and completely implausible (which by the way, I agree, some of your claims are; again, this is not how the theory works!) and then show them false. "First don't fool yourself, then it's easy not to fool others," as Richard Feynman once said (more or less).

@The Observer: General decline? Pray do tell how you consider the religiously-backed Spanish Inquisition on the Middle Ages, and other such tripe (the burning at the stake of various "heretics", such as the scientist G. Bruno), as a better world; or for that matter how you think that the subjugation of the native peoples of the world by colonial empires at the height of their powers in Darwin's time was a good thing? I would love to know.

And also, if Wikipedia is unreliable (I agree to a point; it's useful, but you don't cite it in a scientific context), why do you claim special exemption for religious texts being adjudged by the same standards? When I can go out and perform an experiment that tells me how old the earth is (and there are more such than you can imagine), and then compare to a book that tells me that, if I add up all the generations, the world is only 4000 years old, what does the rational person believe?

Nostrum 11/2/2009 10:45:48 AM
Ronald, There are over a dozen different radiometric dating methods and in situations where there is doubt about the determined age it is usually possible to check the results by using more than one method. Of course it is possible for labs to make mistakes or for samples to be contaminated, and whenever this happens creationists jump on it as if it invalidated the science underpinning it. It doesn’t.
To answer your other question: Science is not a religion; scientific theories are supported by evidence. Religion is based on faith without evidence. If you want to equivocate science and religion then you may as well call rugby a religion.
“Here is a scenario:
If I bring you a fossil that was found in limestone, how would you determine the age of the fossil?”
You can’t date fossils directly with radiometric dating, or for that matter limestone, as I suspect you know. You would have to date igneous rock from above and below the geological layers where the fossil was found, which would give you an age range.


Ronald 11/2/2009 12:21:30 PM

@Nostrum: Thank you for your response. You are correct when you state schience is not a religion, and I agree with with, as with religion you have to BELIEVE, and with science we KNOW (through schientific method: observe, demonstrate, repeat & falsify). Thus, regarding the fossil in the limstone, we would have to date other igneous rock either above or below it. How do they falsify these dates they achieve using the different dating methods, what control do they have to compare against? Most of the radiometric dating methods have constants in their equations which are altered from time to time. In mathematics a constant is a constant, otherwise it is variable. YOu see, I acknowledge I believe in creation and cannot prove it, thus making it religious. But you seem to fail to see/acknowledge that, even with all the assumptions/error corrections/postulates, in the radiometric dating methods and/or evolutionary theory (big bang to micro-evolution) that do not meet the requirements of the scientific method, that it is science and not a religion. Do some research on the geologic column i.e. when it was first derived and the dates that were applied to the different rock strata, I think you would really enjoy it.

FrankensteinIsHere @Nostrum 11/2/2009 12:35:54 PM
Oh Please, sir. Nobody is saying SCIENCe is religion. We're just saying that evolution is not SCIENCE! believing in evolution is what requires faith and hence it's a religion, just like Christianity. Please get that straight. Just because we're criticising evolution does not mean that we're debunking science. It's the evolutionists that want to confuse that issue. Science does not only comprise evolution and evolution is not the whole of science. Evolution theory is based in forensic science and as such can NEVER be proven conclusively, no matter if you stand on your head, hold your breath and turn blue. No matter ALL the supposed evidence and beautiful scientific terms for eras and fossils. It cannot be proven because no one can go back in time to confirm it. You can only take it ON FAITH! Same as saying there's a God who created everything. Just think about it logically, leaving out the emotions and you'll see that it is so.

FrankensteinIsHere @Jas 11/2/2009 12:59:44 PM
Sigh....Yes, it's horrible that babies get raped, innocent children murdered, butchered and enslaved. But WHO is committing the sin? God? or Man?
But do you really understand God's standard for holiness? The bible says that "..you were conceived in sin..." meaning that the very essence of your current [human] being is sinful. Children are BORN sinful and not innocent. It's just at our level and in our standards that they appear innocent. By God's standards, their very nature is tainted.
Without holiness, no one will see God. And then this is where God's mercy comes thru for us: Whilst we were yet sinners[un-holy] God in His infinite mercy sent Christ to die for us and take our punishment [of death] on Him, so that we may have everlasting life.
So: God is patient, not wanting that anyone should perish, but that all should come to Him for life. It's a fact though that people choose to dis-believe and push God away.
Look again at who is committing the sin: Those that love God or those that don't?
Your choice.

Ronald 11/2/2009 1:29:58 PM
Let's stick to science then and thus I pose the following question to you :"In the scenario where you recommend dating the igneous rock above and below the limstone layer to get an age, are you not making an assumption that all the preconditions for radiometric dating to be accurate are being met for which ever radiometric dating method you decide to use?" How do we scientifically determine if those conditions had been met? Do you see that you go from knowing (science) to believing (faith, hence religion) right here in this asumption?

Nostrum 11/2/2009 1:47:44 PM
Ronald, radiometric dating would be falsified if one could show that decay rates vary over time. Scientists have been studying and precisely measuring decay rates of many isotopes for half a century, there is no evidence that this is the case.
I presume the constant you are referring to is the half-life of the radioactive isotope. The only thing that has changed about this “constant” is that it has been measured to greater degrees of accuracy as technology and techniques have improved. This has only strengthened the validity of the results. If you want a mathematical analogy, it’s the same as using pi=3.141592653 in a calculation instead of pi=3.141: the result of the former will be more precise.
I have and still do enjoy reading about geology. What’s your point?

FrankensteinIsHere, The theory of evolution is a scientific theory that meets all the criteria of a scientific theory and it is supported by multiple lines of evidence from many scientific disciplines, including; palaeontology, biology, genetics, physics, geology, embryology, etc. I know I’m going to regret this. What lines of evidence do you have for your alternative theory?


Nostrum 11/2/2009 1:53:40 PM
Ronald, I see, I point out you are wrong when you claim that that light is not subject to the Doppler Effect, then you expect me to write an essay for you explaining the properties of sound and light. Why don’t you just pick up a high school textbook, or use google, even Wikipedia would be good enough. I’m certainly not going to waste hours trying to explain this to you when the information is already so easily available. You’re not wrong just because I say you’re wrong, you’re wrong because there is a huge body of scientific research and knowledge that proves you’re wrong. You just don’t want to look at it.
In fact you have been wrong about everything you have asserted in your comments. Starting with the length of a day 65 million years ago (it was about 18 minutes shorter by the way), the properties of light, and radiometric dating. Do you admit you were wrong about any of this?
The bit about governments and “mantras” is a nice red herring; I don’t think I’ll be following the trail though.


Ronald 11/2/2009 2:00:50 PM
@Nostrum: My point is this: Let's stick to science then and thus I pose the following question to you :"In the scenario where you recommend dating the igneous rock above and below the limstone layer to get an age, are you not making an assumption that all the preconditions for radiometric dating to be accurate are being met for which ever radiometric dating method you decide to use?" How do we scientifically determine if those conditions had been met? We don't know. Do you see that you go from knowing (science) to believing (faith, hence religion) right here in this asumption?

Soothsayer 11/2/2009 2:13:41 PM
If you don't believe in the Bible stop suggesting that those who believe should read "Greatest show on earth". They are all books, its just that my interests have "evolved" to like one and not the other. And please show me one guy who has not read even a single line in a Bible... and now show me one who has not read Darwin's book?

Ronald 11/2/2009 2:42:35 PM

@Nostrum: Two points, first point: if my calculation is out by a few minutes then it is inaccurate and a problem to believe but we can believe radiometric dates, of which we know not if all preconditions were met, which could result in millions and billions of years of inacuuracy. Second point: I will answer your answer your question of admittance if you answer mine first regarding the leap of faith one has to take in believing the date from radiometric dating considering we do not know if all the preconditions for the different types of these methods have been adhered to, "Do you admit you have to believe the preconditions were adhered to for millions and billions of years for these dates derived from the radiometric methods to be accurate?"

Nostrum 11/2/2009 3:01:39 PM
Ronald, the only assumption I would be making about the dating method is that it is valid because it has been tested and verified countless times over the last 50 years. Yes, this is inductive reasoning, but without this you couldn’t get very far with science. For example, I presume you accept Newton’s second law: F=ma (leaving our relativity for simplicity)? How can you accept this without personally having tested it everywhere in the universe? Unless you use inductive reasoning and assume that the laws of the universe are uniform you can’t. This is not the same thing as faith which in this context is belief without evidence. You are welcome to your faith, but that’s still not a good way to evaluate truth claims.

Ronald 11/2/2009 3:33:31 PM
@Nostrum: My friend, you seem very logical, and thus I struggle to understand why you fail to see that the dates derived from the tests are accepted without knowing if the presconditions over the past millions & billions of years have been met to result in the radiometric dating methods being accurate. Let me put it another way, the scientists that developed and tested these radiometric methods, do they know whether the preconditions that are required for these methods to produce a accurate result were met? How do they know?

Ronald 11/2/2009 3:33:32 PM
@Nostrum: My friend, you seem very logical, and thus I struggle to understand why you fail to see that the dates derived from the tests are accepted without knowing if the presconditions over the past millions & billions of years have been met to result in the radiometric dating methods being accurate. Let me put it another way, the scientists that developed and tested these radiometric methods, do they know whether the preconditions that are required for these methods to produce a accurate result were met? How do they know?

Nostrum 11/2/2009 3:44:14 PM
Ronald, ok what preconditions are you talking about?

base 11/2/2009 4:25:16 PM
None of us will truly know, for none of us were truly there. All creationism theories are based on books created by humans (guided by divinity maybe) and all humans are fallable, hence so are those books.

Evolutionism is also a theory created by fallable humans with limited understanding of science and the universe (we do not know everything and we have been proven wrong over and over again for example the world isn't flat...)
So truly, what does it matter.

FrankensteinIsHere @Nostrum 11/2/2009 6:47:42 PM
Preconditions: In case Ronald can't answer.
You have to know the starting amount of radioactive material that produced the end-result from which you are now trying to determine a date. Furthermore, did that initial lump remain uncontaminated during the time of the experiment? Did any environmental conditions change, e.g. pressure, water flow, heat, magnetic field reversals, cosmic radiation?
Basically, did the rate of decay remain constant with time or did it change due to some unforeseen factors.
Scientists cannot rule these things out with absolute certainty and hence the results cannot be trusted with certainty. Even more problematic is that the uncertainty cannot be ascertained....Sigh!.

Jas@FrankensteinIsHere 11/2/2009 9:24:59 PM
So you're telling me that babies are born as sinners? Mate- you are brainwashed. And you dare to call evolution a hoax? You ignore the facts and argue based on emotion and blind faith and that is why scientists have stopped bothering to argue with creationists. Because they never argue the facts. They just waffle on about the nonsense they read in the most recent pamphlet they received or what they googled on wikipedia. Ronald goes on about lightwaves, leap seconds and the atomic clock, all the time ignoring the ACTUAL evidence of evolution, simply because he sat down and scribbled out some numbers on the back of a napkin. It's pointless debating with fanatics.

Ronald 11/3/2009 8:07:53 AM

@:FrenkensteinIsHere: Thanks, ran outta time yesterday, but well put. There is uncertainty regarding the if all the preconditions have been met.

@Jas: Do you disagree that the earth's rotation is slowing down? Do you disagree that historically scientists paused our clocks (usually june 30 or december 31) to ensure that our clocks are in line with our atronomical observation?
Take a step back from this and ask yourself, how does man define time? what is our point of reference regarding this? How do we get to a day having 24 hours an not 32 hours?

Nostrum 11/3/2009 11:36:18 AM
FrankensteinIsHere Said: “You have to know the starting amount of radioactive material that produced the end-result from which you are now trying to determine a date.” Wrong.
“ Furthermore, did that initial lump remain uncontaminated during the time of the experiment?” That can happen, but extraordinary measures are in place to prevent this.
“Did any environmental conditions change, e.g. pressure, water flow, heat, magnetic field reversals, cosmic radiation?” None of these has any effect on radioactive decay. Variation in cosmic radiation only affect the ratio of C14 in the atmosphere, scientists know this and it is compensated for.

“Basically, did the rate of decay remain constant with time or did it change due to some unforeseen factors.” Given what we know about modern physics there is every reason to be confident that the rate of decay is constant.
There are also several other dating methods all of which consistently confirm radiometric methods.


Nostrum 11/3/2009 11:37:00 AM
Ronald, are you deliberately trying to be obtuse? I have tried to explain to you that you are very confused if you think that a full rotation of the earth is taking 1 second longer every 18 months. The correct figure is 1.7ms/century. You don’t understand the concept of a leap second, so stop blathering on about it.

Modder @ Nostrum 11/3/2009 1:42:33 PM
You said in your 11:36 comment:

“You have to know the starting amount of radioactive material that produced the end-result from which you are now trying to determine a date.” Wrong.

How is that wrong? You have a current amount of said radio-active material (C-14 or whatever method one uses) and you know the rate of decay (and assume it has never changed). You then HAVE TO know the starting amount of said radio-active material. How else would you calculate the age if you don't know where to stop? Please enlighten me? The maths don't make sense.

Ronald 11/3/2009 1:56:36 PM

@Nostrum: Regarding C-14 dating which is also reliant on the strength of the earth's magnetic field, which is known to be weakening, thus would alter the amount of C-14 forming in the earth's atmosphere. Thus, how do the scientists know what the strength of the earth's magentic field was 100000 years ago? Would they not have to make the assumption that the rate of weakening has been the same? As soon as there is an assumption then one is deviating from the schientific method. Look it up!
Regarding radio-active decay, of course the environment has a role to play. Did you read through the pre-conditions during your research?
Regarding the leap second, would you then explain, in your words how a leap second works. In addition, please show me mathematically how the 1.7ms/century is determined?
Nostrum, you make statements without refering to a logic mechanism e.g. "There are also several other dating methods all of which consistently confirm radiometric methods.", which one's r u referring to? Name them so we can discuss them, be definitive in your answers

Ronald 11/3/2009 2:44:39 PM
@SS: It saddens me that you hold Christians is such a bad light, especially the word of God. Regardless, if you want to present your theory or your scientific evidence this is the place to do it. Use it, don't use it.

my 2 cents 11/3/2009 3:29:29 PM
The Doppler effect WRT light is what is used to calculate relative velocity of aircraft by every Doppler Radar system on the planet, and every GPS receiver.

The doppler effect definitely applies to light.

RP 11/3/2009 5:41:37 PM
The fact that the religious are not interested in interrogating the origins of what they believe and blindly accept flawed writings that have either evolved over the years to conform to prevailing sensitivities or continue to be locked into a narrow less informed time, shows that the concept of evolution would be much too frightening for them to conceptualise. Also the fact that all existence is probably just the culmination of a random set of circumstance is not something those searching for the meaning of life like to hear. If there is an after life those expecting to find an everlasting religious piousness will be in for a shock as to accommodate all souls it will be your spiritual health that will decide this, not how much you have hated those who don't believe as you do!!

Ronald 11/4/2009 11:06:51 AM
@my 2 cents: If your statement is that the doppler radar & GPS utilise light, then your statement is incorrect. Doppler radar uses radio waves, more specifically microwaves, and "Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites broadcast radio signals to enable GPS receivers to determine location and synchronized time." Wikipaedia.

Nostrum 11/4/2009 1:28:13 PM
Modder, you don’t need to know how much of the parent isotope was originally present because the calculation is based on the ratio of current parent and daughter products.

Nostrum 11/4/2009 1:33:35 PM
Ronald, you might be interrested to know that light and radio waves are both electromagnetic waves in different frequency ranges.

Nostrum 11/4/2009 2:47:03 PM
Ronald, yes I know that the variations in the earth’s magnetic field affect the rate of production of C14 in the atmosphere, because of its effect on cosmic radiation. This is taken into account by analysing carbon in organic material of known age and compensating for the variation, for example from tree rings or lake sediments. As I said before carbon dating is not useful beyond about 60 thousand years and isn’t used to date rocks or fossils, only organic material that was once alive. I suggest YOU look it up, on a non creationist website!
I say this again, the environment, as we find it on earth, plays no role in varying the rate of radiometric decay.
You won’t stop with the leap second will you? OK, I did a search, which took about 10 seconds (not leap seconds BTW) and found an article from the US Naval Observatory which explains it very well in layman’s terms: http://maia.usno.navy.mil/eo/leapsec.html . I think we can agree that this is probably a reliable source. Now if you go and read this and you still don’t get it then I certainly won’t be able to help you.
Alternative dating methods: Ice cores, tree rings, electron spin resonance, layering in coral reefs, sediment varves, and others. I’m not going to explain how these work, it’s easy enough to look it up.


Ronald 11/9/2009 7:40:16 AM
@Nostrum: Thank you for your detailed response. Nostrum, it is very clear that you are not, As I am, being definitive in your answers. You keep placing up links, explain it in our own words. I am very well aware that radiowaves and light belong to the electromagnetic spectrum. Regarding the red-shift, which is a doppler effect on the electromagnetic spectrum with the "light frequency", has this been demonstrated according to the scientific method. Or have we assumed that cause these both belong to the electromagnetic spectrum that they will behave the same? Regardless, if doppler effect hasn't been tested in space and not with light, are we not make assumptions? Why does a radar gun work different from a laser gun?
Regarding the leap second, thank you for you link and I will read through it when I have more time. You still haven't provided me with how 1.7ms/century is derived. Regardless, the point is we know the earth's rotational speed around it's axis slowing, which would result in a longer duration of the "sunset-sunrise" cycle i.e. solar day. Thus, they adjust our "time" by pausing the clocks i.e. adding a leap second. Try an stay with me here, if the earth's rotational speed aroubnd it's axis is slowing, this means that it in the past would be going faster. This means, that the "sunrise-sunset" cycle (solar day) would be shorter in duration. R u still with me here? So, the question we must ask, is how much shorter. There would be two ways to determine this? What would they be?
Regarding "Alternative methods" : ice cores and tree rings. A very good example to show you how 1 concept is applied to another without scientific method. Tree rings are also referred to as annual rings cause it is believed that every year a tree makes a ring in its stem and thus these rings ware used to date the tree. Nice but has inaccuracies under certain conditions. Now, ice rings follow the same methodology that during summer snow/ice would melt and during winter it would refreeze. From ice cores a similar ring structure as that to trees. See the link, easily get brain washed right here. Now it is youor time to learn, go google the lost squadron. A group of ally planes that were lost (over greenland if I remember correctly) during the second world war. Some rich guy went to excavate these planes and after only 40-50 years of snow and ice deposits these plane were below hundreds of feet of snow/ice. Upon investigation, it was discovered that there were many hundreds (can't rember exact figure) of ice rings in their core samples. Now, following scientific method, should we not expect only 40-50 ice rings? The ice ring dating method is inaccurate and according to the investigators concluded that it is more reflected of warmer and cooler periods and not necessary summer/winter cycle i.e. indicating an annual period. Very ineresting. Coral reefs, Australian coral reef growth has been date over the past 25 years and based on it's growth rate the calculate age of the great coral reef on earth is about 4000-5000 years old. Look it up!

In addition, how were fossils dated before radiometric dating methods were derived/invented? If you are not afraid of discovery, go and do some research on this topic. It is very interesting

JCK 12/4/2009 4:32:35 PM
To understand how species develop, read "Almost like a Whale" by Steve Jones
Your name
*
Email
*
Comment
*
  Sign up to our daily newsletters...
  Sign up for mobile alerts...
 

inside news24

Weather
Traffic
Lottery
Cpt: 19-26°C Sunny. Mild. Pta: 17-30°C Sprinkles early. Broken clouds. Warm.
Jhb: 14-28°C Widely scattered tstorms. Morning clouds. Mild. Bloem: 15-34°C Showers late. Afternoon clouds. Pleasantly warm.
Dbn: 19-29°C Light rain. Morning clouds. Warm. PE: 19-25°C Sprinkles late. More sun than clouds. Mild.
7 day forecasts...

Jobs - Find your dream job

ENGINEERING MANAGER

Gauteng
The Personnel Concept
R800,000-850,000 Per Annum

CONTRACTS MANAGER

Gauteng
The Personnel Concept
R650,000-720,000 Per Annum

Editor

Western Cape - Cape Town
Media24

Browse more jobs...
Register your CV...
Advertise a position
Job alert e-mails...

Cars - Search 1000's of new and used cars

AUDI

2009 Audi A3 2.0 T Sportback Manual - 24000kms
Lava Grey & Tan leather interior
R 275 000

MITSUBISHI

Colt 2800 D LWB Hi-Line Dsl PU MY06
2008
R 154,995.00

FORD

Bantam 1.3i XL AC PU MY09
2007
R 89,995.00

VOLKSWAGEN

Polo Classic 1.6 Comfortline Tiptronic
2008
R 139,995.00

Property - Find a new home

RUIMSIG

Single Residential R2,895,000

MENLO PARK

Single Residential R2,150,000

MOSSEL BAY

Single Residential R3,040,000

Travel - Look, Book, Go!

Get away from it all!

Retreat to the Garden Route this summer with an all-inclusive package from R1954. Book now!

Free Games - TOO MUCH NEWS? TAKE A BREAK!

Farm Frenzy 2

Play Now »

Twenty20 Cricket

Play Now »

Mahjongg Fortuna

Play Now »

Zuma

Play Now »

Bejeweled 2

Play Now »

More Free Games

Kalahari.net - shop online today

Great Festive Savings on Books

2.3 million titles to choose from.

Sleek New iPod Range. Order Your's Now!

iPod nano 16GB - Black, Was R2,499.00 Now R2,299.00! Save R200!

Fabulous Festive Flicks

46 000 DVDs and Blu-Ray on sale now! Pre-order Up and District 9!

ALL Music on Sale

100s of festive new releases now in stock! Now, Bump 25, Bon Jovi & more!

1000s of Festive Toys on Sale

Lots of Toys, free gift wrap, lowest prices on Lego Mindstorm, Ben 10, Hannah Montana & more!

Hot Deal of the Day!

All DVDs on Sale

46 000 titles to choose from!

District 9, UP, Ice Age, Transformers, Life & more!

Up to 40% Off Sale on All Books, Toys, CDs, DVDs & Games!