Sparrow shot to death in the netherlands!

[Student Pilot 0]

Quote[/b] ]Evolution is a fact and a theory. Evolution is easy to prove, too;

I am open-minded, would you mind proving it?  And while you're at it, there is one thing I must see, please show me the transition forms of one being evolving into another.  In theory, there should be countless transitional forms.  For example, the most common belief is that man evolved from apes.  Please show me an ape-human.  If you can show me a real transitional form between an ape and a human that I can believe I will concede my point.  Please don't bring up Lucy, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man or the others, they have been proven to be fakes.

As Soul_Assassin said, evolution is a theory, and a very shaky one at best.

-Pilot

[Ares1978 0]

I am open-minded, would you mind proving it?  And while you're at it, there is one thing I must see, please show me the transition forms of one being evolving into another.  In theory, there should be countless transitional forms.  For example, the most common belief is that man evolved from apes.  Please show me an ape-human.  If you can show me a real transitional form between an ape and a human that I can believe I will concede my point.  Please don't bring up Lucy, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man or the others, they have been proven to be fakes.

As Soul_Assassin said, evolution is a theory, and a very shaky one at best.

-Pilot

Actually I would mind. It's not that I don't believe that you are open-minded, but there is so much information you would be gathering yourself if you were. There's plenty of transitional forms that you choose to ignore, and I'm not talking about those fakes either, so what's the point of me repeating the same facts over and over again? If they don't sink in the first time, they never will.

Evolution is fact and all the faith in the world won't change that.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

please show me the transition forms of one being evolving into another.

Wisdom teeth, hair, "goose bumps", plica semilunaris (the remnant of the third eyelid), coccyx "tail bone", vermiform appendix, the almost disturbing similarity of human fetuses and other fetuses of other animals, and nails seem useless yet found in our more distant relatives that "just happen" to share 96-99% of our DNA. Hell, we share 50% of our DNA with yeast.

Quote[/b] ]

In theory, there should be countless transitional forms.

Do you realize how painful process fossil forming is? When you consider the rather limited populations of our ancestors it's a small wonder to find one of their remains.

Quote[/b] ]

Please don't bring up Lucy, Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man or the others, they have been proven to be fakes.

Piltdown man and Nebraska man were "discovered" when verifying archeologic evidence was much more difficult. Just because there were couple of fakes almost 100 years ago it does'nt prove anything.

I have yet to see any half-credible source call Lucy (or any of the other countless fossils of our ancestors) a fake. Care to elaborate or are you just pulling this stuff out of your ass?

Quote[/b] ]

As Soul_Assassin said, evolution is a theory, and a very shaky one at best.

So are theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, atoms, causes of gravitation and many others. Yet I dont see this same scientific equivalent of "the wizard did it" applied anywhere else but in evolution by some people. Sure, it has some gaps but then again do lot of other theories. It is the most plausible of them all and you got to stick with the best option until something better comes along. (I call it the commander Adama doctrine )

[Student Pilot 0]

You haven't mentioned a single transitional form.  Not only that, you choose not to.  I have never asked you in the past to supply transitional forms.  Why aren't you willing to share your "superior" knowledge of science to me?  Don't you want me to see the error of my ways?

Quote[/b] ]It's not that I don't believe that you are open-minded, but there is so much information you would be gathering yourself if you were.

In other words, you don't believe I'm open-minded?

I do have creationists views.  However, if information comes along that proves evolution is true, I will not hesitate to change my views.  You, as an evolutionist, have to convince me that my view are wrong, I can't do that myself.  I have already looked at both sides of the argument and made my decision, you have to change my mind.  Unfortunately, you don't seem to want to do that.  You have not supplied scientific proof, you have not supplied transitional forms, all you have said is that it is true.

Let's face it.  Evolution can't be proved true.  Neither can creationism.  I will be the first to say that creationism requires one to believe in it, that scientifically it can't be proved.  The difference, to me, between creationism and evolution is that creation is more credible, it hasn't been proven wrong through counter-example.

-Pilot

EDIT:

@EiZei

Quote[/b] ]Wisdom teeth, hair, "goose bumps", plica semilunaris (the remnant of the third eyelid), coccyx "tail bone", vermiform appendix and nails seem useless yet found in our more distant relatives that "just happen" to share 96-99% of our DNA.

Damnit, I don't want to venture too far into religion here. I believe that God created the world. During his creation, he used similar designs for his creation because all of creation would be breathing the same air, perform similar life functions, live under the same conditions (generally), and feed upon similar foods. When a unique feature was required, it was added to the design.

Certain physical features we humans have we may not see a need for in modern times. However, for ancient man these physical features may have been neccessary. I really can't think of what purpose wisdom teeth had, but hair would help to keep the body warmer, especially head hair. Much body heat is lost through the head. Head hair keeps the body warmer in cold climates. "Goose Bumps" do the same thing. Once again I don't know what the purpose of the third eyelid is, I'm not a biologist, the tail bone serves as a cushion for the spine when sitting, and who doesn't want nails when opening a refreshing beverage?

Anyway, my point is features we don't see as useful today may have been useful in the past, or are still useful today and we don't know it. The human body is a complex organ, man doesn't know everything there is to know of the human body.

Quote[/b] ]Do you realize how painful process fossil forming is?

Yes I do, but it can be done, and I find it very hard to believe that not a single transitional form was saved.

Quote[/b] ]I have yet to see any half-credible source call Lucy (or any of the other countless fossils of our ancestors) a fake.

The Lucy fossil had long curved toes suitable for grasping, like those of other apes, and the skull was chimpanzeelike. Lucy can easily be considered an extinct ape.

Quote[/b] ]So are theories of relativity, quantum mechanics, atoms, causes of gravitation and many others.

Those other theories you mentioned at least have a scientific, mathematical model attached to them and have been observed in experiments. Evolution does not have any mathamatical models attached to it, and every "transitional form" can be considered a hoax.

-Pilot

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The difference, to me, between creationism and evolution is that creation is more credible, it hasn't been proven wrong through counter-example.

For the same reason you cannot prove that there are no 50 omnipotent invisible men behind me masturbating to a picture of Mao Zedong. Oh joy.

[Student Pilot 0]

I have never said that creationism can be proved scientifically, and I have never tried.

-Pilot

Btw, I editing my above post to respond to your comments, I was posting as you were.

[Supah 0]

Didn't you earlier claim that there only was one true religion and all other religions were sinfull and to try and understand some of their base points would be sinning and would result in you going to hell? I hadn't expected a more enlightened opinion from you on this matter. Besides, wasn't this thread about a dead Sparrow in the northern netherlands? Not about how you dont believe in science but more in magic?

[David 0]

How can you claim evolution does not exist? You just think that humans, and all other life forms for that matter, just appeared on this planet? That nothing evolved from simple one celled animals? That when this planet was first formed all the living things magically formed from out of nowhere?

[mattxr 9]

thats shan... it was cowering in a corner, they could of put it back out of the window and then closed the window

Edit: Science is my religion well Particle Physics

[WhoCares 0]

While creationism is still the topic (more or less), may I introduce you to the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

Flash Game

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]Wisdom teeth, hair, "goose bumps", plica semilunaris (the remnant of the third eyelid), coccyx "tail bone", vermiform appendix and nails seem useless yet found in our more distant relatives that "just happen" to share 96-99% of our DNA.

Damnit, I don't want to venture too far into religion here.  I believe that God created the world.  During his creation, he used similar designs for his creation because all of creation would be breathing the same air, perform similar life functions, live under the same conditions (generally), and feed upon similar foods.  When a unique feature was required, it was added to the design.

Quite lazy (and sort of dumb) of something that is supposed to be omnipotent. If you are claiming that god made us some kind of "improved" model are'nt you just claiming evolution in some other way?

Quote[/b] ]

Head hair keeps the body warmer in cold climates.  "Goose Bumps" do the same thing.

Goose bumps don't do shit without some proper fur cover. Not to mention their secondary function is to raise fur in order to scare other animals (which of course does not work with your tender 2mm hair cover)

Quote[/b] ]

Anyway, my point is features we don't see as useful today may have been useful in the past, or are still useful today and we don't know it.  The human body is a complex organ, man doesn't know everything there is to know of the human body.

Nails and head hair maybe but I really don't see why would any kind of intelligent designer start including torso third eyelids and goosebumps.

Quote[/b] ]

Those other theories you mentioned at least have a scientific, mathematical model attached to them and have been observed in experiments.

You can't really observe something like continent shifts, certain astronomical phenomenom or ancient volcano eruptions in experiments but you can observe their tracks in nature, just like evolution.

Quote[/b] ]

The Lucy fossil had long curved toes suitable for grasping, like those of other apes, and the skull was chimpanzeelike.  Lucy can easily be considered an extinct ape.

Of course Lucy's skull did'nt resemble a human's one. She was a one of those transitional forms you keep talking about, remember? It was considered remarkable because it was noted that she was the first possibly bipedal ancestor that didn't have a big skull.

Her bone structure was much more suited for bipedal operation and her teeth resembled human ones closely.

Yes I do, but it can be done, and I find it very hard to believe that not a single transitional form was saved.Yes I do, but it can be done, and I find it very hard to believe that not a single transitional form was saved.

Quote[/b] ]

Yes I do, but it can be done, and I find it very hard to believe that not a single transitional form was saved.

http://www.theistic-evolution.com/pages5455.jpg

(Times 8/1999)

[EiZei 0]

Didn't you earlier claim that there only was one true religion and all other religions were sinfull and to try and understand some of their base points would be sinning and would result in you going to hell? I  hadn't expected a more enlightened opinion from you on this matter. Besides, wasn't this thread about a dead Sparrow in the northern netherlands? Not about how you dont believe in science but more in magic?

Well, this thread was going to a hell in a handbasket anyway so I just decided to speed up the inevitable.

[shinRaiden 0]

Before this thread is locked for going OT, and diving into the murky waters mutually blindly narrow-mindedness away from rational debate and into dogmatic mudslinging, I'm just going to stick my nose in to the fray and remind you all that you're only preaching to yourselves.

The evolutionists continually prove that their zealous adherence to faith in the conjecture of the day and rejection of any opinions, theories, or case examples outside their prefered nihilism and willful anti-deism is only matched by the fundamentalists that demand that God act in the absurd and show utter disregard for the notions of law, order, and progessive growth.

I generally don't throw down this gauntlet as I prefer not to play scorched earth rules, but I will state that I have never met an avowed aethist - as opposed to an agnostic - that does not also have a strong anti-deity and ultimately pro-nihilistic anarchy jihad motive against the person or idea of God. I'd appreciate it they'd be a little more honest and forthcoming about the fact that there is ulterior motives to their vendettas.

That viciousness however is mirrored in elements of fundamentalists who fail to see the similarity between Jihad and Crusading, and insist on placing God in a restricted and confining little shrine box of their own imaginations and opinions. The narrow mindedness of so many like myself in fundamentalism - of all religions - severely limits their ability to accept and appreciate the manifest works of the Divine.

Either way, there's a dead sparrow and noone save God is paying attention to the sparrow. This discussion in it's present form is undebatable, as the topics and foundation and argumentative processes are - by the self-imposed intellectual restraints of both sides - incompatible.

[Placebo 29]

Once this thread was about a sparrow, I revisit 4 pages later and it's about evolution, interesting.