DescentBB

Worse than that Ferno is ultimately man's existance is derived from a worm

flip wrote:EDIT:This means that man was the last to develop but also the most evolved?

how is this question relevant to an article about evidence on the history of water on earth?
what's happening, where am i

That was a side thought that might lead somewhere. It was along the lines of my greater point. That ALL of the major changes throughout the evolution of the Earth and life on it have been fairly sudden and at significant times.

Instead of continual topic changes, It's much more useful to concentrate on single points until they are actually addressed.

My point all along has been towards sudden drastic change in all creation as opposed to slow gradual development. I've actually said that at least once already.

But when asked to provide evidence of this you have been jumping from topic to topic. Are you sure that what's not happening here is that when your words are under scrutiny and you feel that someone is close to showing you that something you've suggested is untrue - instead of riding it out to it's conclusion and then inevitably analysing the consequences, you instead just change the topic before that can happen?

flip, 1 page ago, wrote:Slick was kind enough to come in and give separate definitions for the big cluster of confusion "evolution" has become. It's like pin the tail on the donkey now, but the tail always has to be called evolution. Like I said before, one definition has merit, the other has nothing but speculation.

Uh, to be honest i'm not sure Slick is entirely correct. AFAIK The Origin of Species is just the Title of Darwin's book introducing the theory of Evolution, but "origin of species" is not any sort of seperate named theory in itself, just a book title. The "origin of species" term itself referring to where species came from, ie: "why are there different species anyway?". I have not read the book so i don't actually know either way, i'm just saying that i've heard a lot of discussion of evolution and any dicussion of "origin of species" beyond that of a book title is certainly new to me.
Also i'm not sure what you mean when you say that evolution has a lot of different (confusing/contradictory?) definitions. I'm not sure I've experienced that, can you give me examples? (Try to keep em accurate)

flip, 1 page ago, wrote:the fact that 98% of the creatures that used to exist on the planet are extinct seems to suggest evolution is failing at it's job significantly.

Evolution's "job" is to change a population of reproducing organisms to be better suited to it's environment, it's doing it's "job" perfectly well. I put "job" in inverted commas because it's very important to know that evolution is not directed, it does not have a goal anymore than rust has a goal to oxidising metals - both are chemical processes, there is no choice in the matter, it's merely inevitable. The reality is that we OBSERVE populations of animals changing to suit their environment and we struggled to understand the forces involved, once we did understand we then gave the observed phenomenon a name: Evolution. We don't make up theories that nature has to adhere to, we use words to describe processes that we observe happening.
Here's a video illustrating evolution. And 2 other videos i showed you in the other thread that i doubt you watched.
[youtube]x5YhE3a5dqw[/youtube][youtube]R_RXX7pntr8[/youtube] [youtube]7w57_P9DZJ4[/youtube]
After watching it, i think the big question for you to consider is how COULDN'T this happen? When you take a thing that reproduces with variation amongst environmental pressures, evolution is such a simple, obvious and inevitable consequence. But being simple, beautifully elegant and obvious clearly isn't good enough, it's gotta fit with the evidence - which brings me to my next point: Evolution HAS stood, and continues to agree absolutely PERFECTLY with all available evidence: plate tectonincs, geological strata, genetics, i could go on forever. We literally use the theory of evolution to chart the spread of infectious disease pandemics (they reproduce so fast that they literally evolve as they spread), to design drugs to treat disease*, and to make other countless predictions in all relevant fields.

*(edit: it just occured to me that this may fit perfectly into a lot of people's anti-medical-science conspiracy theories, (evolution=evil, medicine=evil, ,.-~*´¨¯¨`*·~-.¸evolution+medicine=double evil all the way across the sky,.-~*´¨¯¨`*·~-.¸), if this is the case with you please say so.)

Also back to these shenanigans, note the underlined part in the first quote:

flip: The current theory of evolution depends on a fossil record and slow development over time but that's not what we see in the evidence. We see things happening very quickly and then periods of rest in between.
roid: ...punctuated equilibrium... ?
flip: Punctuated equilibrium is basically the same thing I'm saying...
-------then later------
roid: you said that evolutionary theory DEPENDS on the absence of punctuated equilibrium in the fossil record. But that's wrong, no such dependence exists.
flip: No I didn't. I said that things would happen suddenly with periods of rest in between

THAT'S WHAT PUNCTUATED EQUILIBRIUM IS, AND YOU HAVE ALREADY AGREED IT IS "basically the same thing i'm saying".

ASEJAWSRKLJFLKASJDFLKASJDRF

Yeah, and evolution happened pretty quick too didn't it?

And, for the record, everything we see, feel, taste, touch, and smell is made up of atoms. So everything is either alive, organic, or radioactive.

Is it not amazing how atomic particles break off and are picked up and identified by our noses?

Every atom is made of only three different particles: protons, neutrons and electrons. The protons and neutrons are lumped together in the middle forming a nucleus and the electrons whizz around the outside.

Note: The figure is not to scale - if a proton was the size of a football and in the centre of a football pitch, the electron would be the size of a pea somewhere in the stands.

There are only 111 different atoms in the whole Universe. About 92 occur in nature, the rest only exist in laboratories and the heart of exploding stars.

I'm just trying to get a big picture from the time of the Big Bang till now. Broken down it goes like this. Big Bang > molecular cloud > reionization by Star formation > Earth with stable atmosphere > huge explosion of life > at least 3 major extinction events > present day. I'll fill in times later I guess.

LOL, I think God was having a good time until He made us. , but in his great compassion, He will not just kill us off, because we are like Him.

http://i.imgur.com/hKQrl.jpg

(h/t Instapundit)

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en ... =101&ty=53

I've had nothing but time on my hands for 3 years, now if I was just rich to boot

and sure enough flip, you change the topic.
so i'll take that as my answer:

roid wrote:But when asked to provide evidence of this you have been jumping from topic to topic. Are you sure that what's not happening here is that when your words are under scrutiny and you feel that someone is close to showing you that something you've suggested is untrue - instead of riding it out to it's conclusion and then inevitably analysing the consequences, you instead just change the topic before that can happen?