do people understand my religious jargon

Author: crossed

Posts

Total: 145
#61
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@Stronn
Even that isn’t fully accurate - a statistical link between traits and the number of offspring that themselves survive to reproduce: but the more accurate it is, the harder it is to understand!
#62
Stronn
Stronn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 511
2
2
4
Stronn's avatar
Stronn
2
2
4
-->
@crossed
Individual animals don't evolve, populations do.

That is just one of your fundamental misunderstandings.

Topic's author
#63
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
Ramshuta said


 
But the principle behind the two are roughly the same, right?




my reply
selective breeding talks about animals traits and them breeding. those are the similarity between them




snoopy we are talking about god creating the universe.



i'm saying that 


examples like

a dog building a coat during the winter and owl having night vision because i live. at night shows that god was thinking when creating these  creatures.





god must have had knowledge that winters are cold and animals like the dog would need to keep warm so he designed the dog to grow more fur.





God must have known that the nocturnal animals like animals would need a way to see. We humans thrive during the day so we do not need that many eye rods and cones that owls have.  this is proof that the creator was thinking when he created life. He gave nocturnal/ night time animals “like the owl” more rods and cones in their eyes which gives them night vision because he designed those animals to live at night. While he designed the day time animals with less rods and cones because he knew those animals would not need them because he did not intend for them to live during the night.


and my way is more founded then natural selection or evolution


#64
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@janesix
"Mutation" is simply "changes". You agree that organisms are not exact copies of their progenitors. Doesn't that mean something in them changed? You can literally watch viruses mutate (change) in a microscope. What about the idea of mutation is so crazy to you?
#65
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
When I said "mutation", I was responding to this:

 exactly what aspect of evolution requires something over and above “more or less of what you started with”?
Mutation requires a change in morphic fields, and are not random or happen by chance in any way.
#66
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
Can you give me a scientific explanation of 'morphic fields'? I can't find anything about them that looks like non-crystal, aura, energy woo woo, I'm hoping there's more to it than that. Changes do not require anything outside of imperfections in copies of genetic material. 

Topic's author
#67
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
stronn

ok so your saying that a species of an animal evolved so not just one monkey evolved into humans but a group of them did.

so it was no one monkey who evolved into humans but a group of monkey that evolved into humans


what are the chances that lets say 10 monkeys evovle into the same creature aka a human.





general topic


the preacher who is on the radio.i listen to chuck swindol talks about how evolution is impossible because the body dna repair system trys to prevent mutations


DNA has a a repairing system that helps prevent mutations so change like evolution described would be impossible. http://pediaa.com/how-does-dna-polymerase-prevent-mutations/
this is this guy who came up with the evolution is impossible because of the dna repair system trying to prevent mutation talking point
https://insight.org/about/chuck-swindoll


so it would be impossible for animals or humans to change over time like Charles Darwin described.

#68
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
No, I can't. 
#69
Stronn
Stronn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 511
2
2
4
Stronn's avatar
Stronn
2
2
4
-->
@crossed
stronn

ok so your saying that a species of an animal evolved so not just one monkey evolved into humans but a group of them did.

so it was no one monkey who evolved into humans but a group of monkey that evolved into humans


what are the chances that lets say 10 monkeys evovle into the same creature aka a human.
You are still thinking as if individuals evolve. They do not. Populations evolve. It works like this. Say I have a population of monkeys. They mate, and have offspring. The offspring are slightly different than the parents. The population of monkeys now consists of the parents and their offspring, and because offspring are slightly different than their parents, the population as a whole is now slightly different. Now, guess what the offspring do? That's right, they mate and make more offspring, which again are slightly different than their parents. The changes accumulate over many generations of offspring, until thousands of generations later the population is so different it is no longer the same species. That is evolution.

All this time, each generation is interbreeding to produce the next generation's offspring, which is why the differences (mutations) spread through a population. 

the preacher who is on the radio.i listen to chuck swindol talks about how evolution is impossible because the body dna repair system trys to prevent mutations
I suggest you consider whether a radio preacher is the best source of information about science.

DNA has a a repairing system that helps prevent mutations so change like evolution described would be impossible. http://pediaa.com/how-does-dna-polymerase-prevent-mutations/
this is this guy who came up with the evolution is impossible because of the dna repair system trying to prevent mutation talking point

so it would be impossible for animals or humans to change over time like Charles Darwin described.
Did you actually read that first article? The first thing it does is list the types of mutations that actually do occur. The "mutation prevention" it describes only happens during the DNA replication process. If a mutation is already present, it will be faithfully copied during this process. 
#70
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@janesix
Interesting to base your opinion on something that cannot be demonstrated through practical example, but okay. 
#71
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
I base my opinions on personal experience, and common sense, and what I can deduce from a combination thereof.
#72
ludofl3x
ludofl3x's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,071
3
2
2
ludofl3x's avatar
ludofl3x
3
2
2
-->
@janesix
That is not a very reliable path to what's true, but okay. 
#73
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@ludofl3x
I don't care.
Topic's author
#74
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
-->
@Stronn
ok populations evolve



it was not a single monkey that evovled but an entire group of them??? am i getting that right. 



there should be a couple thousand examples of fossils and or bones of the different stages of that one animal. because a monkey to a human is quite the change. most of there supposed missing links turn out to be scams just monkey parts mixed with human parts they literally have more scandals than most politicians. i do not believe that these are missing links i mean there should be more than just one example for humans and monkey evolution there should be thousands mabey even millions of different stages i mean. there should be as many example of pre evolved creature fossils as there are dinosaurs fossils we should be seeing these creatures everywhere. this seems to be an impossible task for most scientist were they have to make up there own evidence for example was human bones and monkey bones they still claim it is a real missing link and just say the mix up was an accident. but they do this time and again. if evolution is true we would be finding millions of examples in the form of bones. and almost all if not all there missing links have something series shady stuff surrounding them. there like the people who claim to have found Bigfoot. 




evolution has more scandals then most politician. doctors heckles embryo scam. which is still in are text books

all there missing links ending up in the end just being a mixture of human and monkey bones

im looking at you pitfall man and lucy etc. plus its a theory not a fact.






DNA repair try's to prevent mutations



firstly he is not wrong. i said the body try's to prevent mutations. mutations do occur the system screws up. but a mutation like a monkey turning into an human is impossible. plus those are good mutations and from what i have seen the only mutations that generally happen are bad??? and evolution goes against that








#75
Stronn
Stronn's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 511
2
2
4
Stronn's avatar
Stronn
2
2
4
-->
@crossed
it was not a single monkey that evovled but an entire group of them??? am i getting that right. 
It was a population, a group whose membership is constantly dying and being replenished by offspring.

there should be a couple thousand examples of fossils and or bones of the different stages of that one animal. 
There are millions of such examples of such transitional animals. Here is a partial list, including transitional forms of humans:


 a mutation like a monkey turning into an human is impossible.
Monkey to human is not the result of a single mutation. It is the result of millions of mutations accumulated over many, many generations.

plus those are good mutations and from what i have seen the only mutations that generally happen are bad???
Most mutations are neutral, meaning they have no affect on survival or ability to produce offspring. Most of the remaining ones are bad, and a few are good.

Now look at what happens when a mutation is bad. A bad mutation, by definition, means the organism is less likely to survive, and thus less likely to produce offspring. Fewer offspring means that fewer individuals in the population carry the bad mutation. Over generations, the bad mutation becomes less and less frequent in the population, because those without it produce more offspring than those with it.

Conversely, a good mutation, by definition, means the organism is more likely to produce offspring, passing on the mutation. More offspring means that the frequency of the good mutation in the population increases over successive generations.

In short, good mutations tend to be reinforced over time while bad mutations tend to be weeded out.


Topic's author
#76
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6

evolution says


the polar bear turned white by adapting to its snowy environment.


the snow owl turned white because it adapted to its Alaskan environment



the desert owl turned yellow because it adapted to its yellow desert environment.


so on so forth.


what i think happened

this is going to be a little off topic but stay with me


a race car driver has a red car. his sponsor gave him red clothing to go with it.


another race car driver was given a blue car. his sponsor gave him blue clothing.


why did the sponsor give the red car driver red clothing and the blue car driver blue clothing.


he gave the red car driver red clothing to go with the red car.and same thing for blue. for simplicity we will call this process complimenting another thing


god did the same thing

god made the polar bear white to go white the white snowy environment he is complimenting another thing. like the race car driver.


god made the snow owl white to go with its Alaskan environment which is white. he is complimenting another thing like the race car people


god made the desert owl yellow to go with the yellow desert he is complimenting another thing.



does your evolution work for seasonal creatures. my examples does


during the summer seasons the rabbits are brown but during the winter the rabbits fur turns white. This is not just one example here are 7 animals that do the same. These animals do not fit into evolution but they do fit with my theory that god created these animals white during the  white winter. Just like how a sponsor gave a race car driver red cloths because he has red car


Topic's author
#77
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
-->
@Stronn
Dna repair prevents mutations
yes but we see that bad mutations are passed down and not good ones like evolutions says. if you have a bunch of mutations you are most likely to have autism or something.

stronn said
Monkey to human is not the result of a single mutation. It is the result of millions of mutations accumulated over many, many generations.




and there should be millions of different pre human creatures for every change. see how many there should be.

i am aware that they have there bones that they say are pre evolved creature. they get caught in a  lie on a lot of them like i show above but sometimes they get a few threw

for example in the link you posted
there should be millions of pr evolved whales in this this one line because there millions of transitions

for example  the horse evolution on that site you posted



all they show is bones of horses that is bent and a bunch of bones with slight changes. and say that these horses are prevolved. but what if its just different breed of horses. horses of different breeds to have slight changes of one another and would fit this. maybe its not even a horse but another animal entirely

do you know how many different types of horses there is what if these bone of horses with slight changes. are just different breeds of horses. and the thing that does not look like a horse is just a different creature.



this proves nothing


there are different types of the same creature. for example there like 50 different types of owls there the desert owl there the whte owl.

that's probably what this is here there the lab dog thing there the saint Bernard  dog thing there the poodle dog . same creature just with slight changes which is exactly what these bones show.


#78
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@crossed
for simplicity we will call this process complimenting another thing
For even more simplicity, we call it marketing.

Is God marketing polar bears and owls?

This is not just one example here are 7 animals that do the same. These animals do not fit into evolution but they do fit with my theory that god created these animals white during the  white winter. Just like how a sponsor gave a race car driver red cloths because he has red car
Did you even read that link?

"In fact, most Arctic animals do not change color with the seasons at all, even species closely related to those that do"
#79
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@crossed
If there any god(s) exist and if any god(s) planned on there being white polar bears specifically them clearly this plan was carried out by the process of evolution.

Evolution is a proven scientific theory. There is no debate. It is also completely unconnected with the question "is there a god?" Either some god(s) exist and there is evolution among organic species or no god(s) exist and there is evolution among organic species.
#80
janesix
janesix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,049
3
3
3
janesix's avatar
janesix
3
3
3
-->
@secularmerlin
No, it is not proven.
#81
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@janesix
The process of adaptation through out generations has been observed in laboratory conditions. That process is all that evolution is. Evolution exists and is taking place. Do you want me to send you some links to relevant studies? I'm pretty sure I have before but if you would like me to send them again...
#82
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@secularmerlin
Do you want me to send you some links to relevant studies? I'm pretty sure I have before but if you would like me to send them again...
Links to relevant studies don't help people who deny evolution, they don't even understand the very basic principles of the theory, how it works and how it explains the evidence. They unlikely even took biology in high school.

Sending links to studies is like sending a schematic upgrade of a turbo fan jet engine to someone who doesn't know how a propeller works.

There's little point in engaging science deniers with the very science they don't understand.

Topic's author
#83
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
i don't post during the weekend so sorry for the lateness. threads like this usually go on forever that's why i prefer debates. anyway i probably going to disappear for a while to create more theory's but i will make one last rebuttal.




alright you got me i did not know that they included seasonal creatures as part of the evolution thing. 



i'm  not marketing or selling anything


and i



i believe that god created these seasonal animals to turn white during the winter to go with the white snow.


the bunny turns white during the winter so that it can go with the white snow.


the builder of a brick house creates the house mailbox brick to go with the brick house



a race car driver sponsor gives the race car driver a red uniform to go with the red car the driver drives


i wearing a blue shirt i also put on blue pants to go with the blue shirt.


god created the weasel to turn white during the winter to go with the white snow.


ya and i do beleive those studys are bull 












#84
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@crossed
Evolution is not really a religious topic but if your religion is invalidated by the process of evolution then I may have some bad news for you.

I'm not sure who this is addressed to 
i believe that god created these seasonal animals to turn white during the winter to go with the white snow.
But if this is the case then evolution is the process that the god(s) you are proposing seems to have used to accomplish this.
i do beleive those studys are bull
Which studies exactly?
#85
WisdomofAges
WisdomofAges's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 354
0
1
3
WisdomofAges's avatar
WisdomofAges
0
1
3
-->
@crossed
LOOK in the mirror...all anyone need is between their EARS...sadly the majority of humans are BRAINWASHED and HYPNOTIZED into dumbed 
down slaves of clever MIND and LIFE MURDERING psychopaths....most who hide behind some GOD hoax, Political Circus, Business Maze,

all HUMANS seem do do well is MURDER each other both PHYSICALLY... but especially MENTALLY....=  the OPEN MIND CONSTRUCT....the BODY is not a TERRORIST MURDERER it is merely an AVATAR a TOOL...it's the "INVISIBLE Parasite Vampire VOMIT" flowing in the neural network of HUMANITIES BRAIN....that is used as TOOL to create FEAR - INTIMIDATION - VIOLENCE....

This relatively small FLESHY SPONGE = BRAIN becomes the WAREHOUSE of methods to MURDER and DESTROY its own species and all other
life forms on EARTH.....how utterly INSANE for these pathetic humans to use some GOD hoax as a TOOL to extinguish themselves...and to also
PLAY GOD in Government and Business for the same intention...POWER and CONTROL or DIE....

Wake UP HUMANS...your time on this world and in this LIFE FORM is fading.....either eliminate the Parasite VAMPIRE diseases of GODS and 
PLAYING GOD...or forever be EXTINCT...and rightfully so....your place in the COSMOS is NOT VIABLE....extinction eminent...

#86
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@crossed
Your masochism runs deep, why else would you proclaim to the world your complete and thorough ignorance of evolution?

7 days later

Topic's author
#87
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
-->
@WisdomofAges
you are the slave mind. you have fallen into the belief that believing in Jesus is like believing in Santa. and that it is silly to believe that there an all powerful god who created the universe.



santa is Satan rearranged. and do you remember Santa last name. it is claws

santa claws is satan claws.


you are believing in what Satan wants you to believing. satan created all these pagan holidays like the easter bunny tooth fairy santa claws. so people would start saying hay believing in these things is like believing in Jesus.


other deceptions


aliens are just demons

ghosts are just demons

vampires are just demoms

other supernatural things are just demons.



long ago when god kicked demons out of heaven they when to earth and made man worship them. these demons called themselves gods and a lot of these demons who called themselves gods created a lot of religions for example the Muslim religion was started by the angle Gabriel along with 10 other religions.

satan makes people rich than haunts them
you  know on how almost all the haunted houses are big mansions. why is it  always rich people and not poor people i believe that this is because  these houses once belonged to people who had sold there souls to Satan  in exchange for wealth.

the devil made them rich they bought all there luxury  like mansions. but then satan turned on them and started haunting them. thats why all the haunted houses are mansions and not poor people

Topic's author
#88
crossed
crossed's avatar
Debates: 62
Posts: 516
2
2
6
crossed's avatar
crossed
2
2
6
-->
@secularmerlin
and disgusted






on the evolution timeline for the creation of the earth


they say plants were the first life to appear on earth. something billion years ago. they say this because they believe plants are primitive


the next thing to appear is animals which were created on the earth something million years ago


the thing after that people appeared


the problem with the assumption where the first life to appear on the planet because there primitive is wrong. because plants are not primitive they have insane medical properties for example turmeric. turmeric heals a damaged brain via 270 known pathways. that is in no way primitive. and tell me how else would plants get medical properties like these if it was not god


#89
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@crossed
Learn just the basics of evolution before making a fool of yourself again.
#90
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@crossed
they say plants were the first life to appear on earth. something billion years ago. they say this because they believe plants are primitive
No evolutionary science makes this claim. Neither that plants were the first life nor that contemporary plants are "primitive". 

Please address this issue since the rest of your argument seems to hinge on it.