but at what point does a species evolve so much that it is far from the original species, and considered a new species by somebody with a pad and paper?Ullopincrate;2884567; said:
DO YOU BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION?
- Thread starter keepinfish
- Start date
- Status
Ullopincrate;2884567; said:
A single cell like a womans egg or a mans sperm? that kinda single?
Isn't that what we start off as? or was it that dam stork again....lol
When a species can no longer produce "fertile" offspring then they are considered a different species but are in the same genus.
Ullopincrate;2884567; said:
no worries, I do think it is relevant though. I believe one must actually take multiple college level bio/evolution/micro to start to understand what we do not understand, if you know what I am saying...
instead of quoting hafl the commetns mentioned, here are some great comments tht sum it up.!
Quotes by Evolutionists
“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever.”
Fresno Bee, August 20, 1959, p. 1-B [quoting *T.N. Tahmisian, physiologist for the Atomic Energy Commission].
"I personally hold the evolutionary position, but yet lament the fact that the majority of our Ph.D. graduates are frightfully ignorant of many of the serious problems of the evolution theory. These problems will not be solved unless we bring them to the attention of students. Most students assume evolution is proved, the missing link is found, and all we have left is a few rough edges to smooth out. Actually, quite the contrary is true; and many recent discoveries . . have forced us to re-evaluate our basic assumptions."
Director of a large graduate biology department, quoted in Creation: The Cutting Edge (1982), p. 28.
"Evolution is perhaps unique among major scientific theories in that the appeal for its acceptance is not that there is evidence of it, but that any other proposed interpretation of the data is wholly incredible."
Charles Singer, A Short History of Science to the Nineteenth Century, 1941.
"Evolution…is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent from the prevailing view of Darwinism."
James Gorman, "The Tortoise or the Hare?" Discover, October 1980, p. 88.
"It might be argued that the theory is quite unsubstantiated and has status only as a speculation."
George G. Simpson, Major Features, pp. 118-119.
"Modern Darwinian paleontologists are obliged, just like their predecessors and like Darwin, to water down the facts with subsidiary hypotheses, which, however plausible, are in the nature of things unverifiable . . and the reader is left with the feeling that if the data do not support the theory they really ought to . . This situation, where scientific men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science."
W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," Origin of Species; statement reprinted in Journal of the American Affiliation, March 1960.
"The overriding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research—paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology—has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth.”
"Throughout the past century there has always existed a significant minority of first-rate biologists who have never been able to bring themselves to accept the validity of Darwinian claims. In fact, the number of biologists who have expressed some degree of disillusionment is practically endless.”
Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 327.
"The particular truth is simply that we have no reliable evidence as to the evolutionary sequence .”
J. Bonner, "Book Review," American Scientist 49:1961, p. 240.
"The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge."—Albert Fleishman, zoologist.
“…evolution not only conveys no knowledge but it seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge." Colin Patterson, Address at the American Museum of Natural History (November 5, 1981). Head of the paleontology department.
“It may come as a shock to some, but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples…have been adopted as “acceptable” by investigators.” J. Ogden III, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol 288, 1977, pages 167-173
“If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put I in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put them in a footnote. And if it is completely ‘out-of-date,’ we just drop it.” T. Save-Soderbergh and Ingrid U. Olsson,”C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology,” Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, ed. Ingrid U. Olsson, page 35
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances …could have formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absured in the highest degree.” Charles Darwin, The Origin of the Species (1909 Harvard Classics edition), page 190
Quotes by Evolutionists
“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever.”
Fresno Bee, August 20, 1959, p. 1-B [quoting *T.N. Tahmisian, physiologist for the Atomic Energy Commission].
"I personally hold the evolutionary position, but yet lament the fact that the majority of our Ph.D. graduates are frightfully ignorant of many of the serious problems of the evolution theory. These problems will not be solved unless we bring them to the attention of students. Most students assume evolution is proved, the missing link is found, and all we have left is a few rough edges to smooth out. Actually, quite the contrary is true; and many recent discoveries . . have forced us to re-evaluate our basic assumptions."
Director of a large graduate biology department, quoted in Creation: The Cutting Edge (1982), p. 28.
"Evolution is perhaps unique among major scientific theories in that the appeal for its acceptance is not that there is evidence of it, but that any other proposed interpretation of the data is wholly incredible."
Charles Singer, A Short History of Science to the Nineteenth Century, 1941.
"Evolution…is not only under attack by fundamentalist Christians, but is also being questioned by reputable scientists. Among paleontologists, scientists who study the fossil record, there is growing dissent from the prevailing view of Darwinism."
James Gorman, "The Tortoise or the Hare?" Discover, October 1980, p. 88.
"It might be argued that the theory is quite unsubstantiated and has status only as a speculation."
George G. Simpson, Major Features, pp. 118-119.
"Modern Darwinian paleontologists are obliged, just like their predecessors and like Darwin, to water down the facts with subsidiary hypotheses, which, however plausible, are in the nature of things unverifiable . . and the reader is left with the feeling that if the data do not support the theory they really ought to . . This situation, where scientific men rally to the defense of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science."
W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," Origin of Species; statement reprinted in Journal of the American Affiliation, March 1960.
"The overriding supremacy of the myth has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research—paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology—has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth.”
"Throughout the past century there has always existed a significant minority of first-rate biologists who have never been able to bring themselves to accept the validity of Darwinian claims. In fact, the number of biologists who have expressed some degree of disillusionment is practically endless.”
Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 327.
"The particular truth is simply that we have no reliable evidence as to the evolutionary sequence .”
J. Bonner, "Book Review," American Scientist 49:1961, p. 240.
"The theory of evolution suffers from grave defects, which are more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge."—Albert Fleishman, zoologist.
“…evolution not only conveys no knowledge but it seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge." Colin Patterson, Address at the American Museum of Natural History (November 5, 1981). Head of the paleontology department.
“It may come as a shock to some, but fewer than 50 percent of the radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples…have been adopted as “acceptable” by investigators.” J. Ogden III, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol 288, 1977, pages 167-173
“If a C-14 date supports our theories, we put I in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put them in a footnote. And if it is completely ‘out-of-date,’ we just drop it.” T. Save-Soderbergh and Ingrid U. Olsson,”C-14 Dating and Egyptian Chronology,” Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, ed. Ingrid U. Olsson, page 35
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances …could have formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absured in the highest degree.” Charles Darwin, The Origin of the Species (1909 Harvard Classics edition), page 190
Good observations that people who want to believe in evolution will discard and stop reading by the third paragraph lol
keepinfish;2884599; said:
DolphinRyan;2884540; said:
As a side note, athiest means "without thought" (latin roots) and these are the people heading up the evolution movement.
I guess I am an idiot engineer working on designs that a quarter of you have in your offices.
-BS Electrical Engineering from OIT 2006
- Status
