Do you understand the Theory of Evolution?

[McCulloch]

Suppose that a species of woodpecker with a one inch beak was introduced to an isolated island where its primary food source lived one and a half inches below the surface of the trees. For this species of woodpecker, there would be a significant advantage to have a longer beak in this environment.

Anyone who cannot answer this question correctly, does not understand how the theory of evolution works and to my mind is not qualified contribute intelligently to debate on the subject. This applies equally to those who agree and to those who disagree with the theory of evolution.

[McCulloch]

Yes I agree humanity should recognize all its shortcomings. Indeed. But you see God being PERFECT doesn’t have that problem.

I agree. God, being perfect is correct in all that he says. I am however completely unaware of God having communicated with humanity. I am aware of various humans claiming to speak for God, but that is an entirely different thing. Humans are fallible.

And the view of creation has been done in a marvelous book called the Bible. Even if you don’t believe it, I would recommend you read it to clear up any misconceptions you have about how God created the Heavens and the Earth and all living things in them.

Again, I agree. Everyone who wishes to have a basic understanding of Christianity should read Genesis, Exodus and at least the two of the other three books of the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, Esther, Job, at least half of the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, at least six of the twelve minor prophets, and the entire New Testament except the Gospel of Mark. I have read the entire Bible.

42

Wow I remember reading that somewhere in a fiction book. Wasn’t that in Hitchers Guide to the Galaxy? Is that where you’re pulling your scientific info from now? Next year it could change to say 55.....67.... 189…keep going....

Actually, there are 42 major milestones, but in reality, every generation is one step on the path.

1. the Neolithic Revolution
2. the Great Leap Forward
3. Humanity
4. Chimpanzees
5. Gorillas
6. Orangutans
7. Gibbons and the lesser apes
8. Old world monkeys
9. New world monkeys
10. Tarsiers
11. the rest of the prosimians - lemurs
12. Shrews
13. Rodents and Rabbits
14. Laurasiatheres
15. Xenarthrans
16. Afrotheres
17. Marsupials
18. Monotremes
19. Sauropsids
20. Amphibians
21. Lungfish
22. Coelacanths
23. Ray-Finned Fish
24. Chondrichthyes - Sharks and Their Kin
25. Lampreys and Hagfish
26. Lancelets
27. Sea Squirts
28. Ambulacrarians
29. Protostomes - worms
30. Acoelomorph Flatworms
31. Cnidarians - Jellyfish
32. Ctenophores
33. Placozoans
34. Sponges
35. Choanoflagellates
36. Mesomycetozoea
37. Fungi
38. Amoebozoans
39. Plants
40. Mixotrich
41. Archaea
42. Eubacteria

What a coincidence! It matches the late Douglas Adams number. He must have been divinely inspired. How else could he have known?

You said “the universe has been in existence forever but not for an infinite length of time�. Ok so IF the universe didn’t exist forever…….and it only existed as long as time has existed…..then how did the universe first form? What formed it? BEFORE time began, what formed it? And then what formed that? And keep going until you get to the VERY FIRST THING and tell me what created that?

The word before is a reference to time. There cannot be a time before time began. You cannot get colder than absolute zero. You cannot go slower than stopped. The tank is never less than empty. You cannot go south of the south pole.

You have to state that the very first thing ALWAYS existed else, where did it come from?

Something that has always existed cannot be said to come from anything. You say that God always existed, where did he come from? Same question.

You know DOD that app that you asked me to design, I’m going to just strive for “good enough�.

Yes, even the DOD has tolerances. They don't expect absolute perfection. Their good enough is (or should be) a much much higher standard then your typical commercial app.

Of course there is a relationship between teaching evolution and violence.
Anytime you take God out of the equation there is downward spiral.

This is not true. In fact, human history seems to indicate that putting God into the equation leads to violence.

Those precious “rights� that people live under where exactly do you think they got them from? The Bible. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shall not commit adultery. Where do you think that came from? They came from God, .....from religion.

No they did not. Sure, religious writers from all different religions and sects have discovered some of the same principles as have various philosophers, political and diplomatic leaders.

So what happens when you take Christian values out of a society? Values like it’s wrong to steal, it’s wrong to lie, it’s wrong to kill, it’s wrong to commit adultery. And you’re left with a society where alllll of those things are now RIGHT…Do you think that type of society is more or less violent?

These values are not exclusively Christian. To the Jews, it is wrong to steal. To the Hindus it is wrong to kill. To the Buddhists it is wrong to lie. To the Muslims adultery is wrong. To the Humanists, it is wrong to settle our differences by force of arms. Removing Christianity would not remove some of the values shared by Christianity with the rest of us.

That is because of a cultural misunderstanding. We are animals. We are multicellular living beings that are not plants or fungi. We are not dogs, monkeys or gorillas, but we are animals, mammals and apes.

“a cultural misunderstanding� ….wow!! So all those raciest comments over the years that people have made to other who just happen to be a darker complexion was just “a cultural MISUNDERSTANDING�…and they really had nothing to be offended by being called “you’re from a ape or monkey�????

Anything can be used as an insult. A white guy shouting at some black guys, "You are a bunch of apes." would correctly be taken as a racist insult. A biologist teaching a class that all humans are one subset of the apes would not.

Because it is science.

No, it’s not. We can agree to disagree.

No, I will not agree to disagree when you are wrong. It is science to call humans apes.
I will list a number of statements, please let me know which ones that you disagree with:

1. Humans are a life form.
2. Eukaryotes are life forms with cells that have a nucleus. Humans are eukaryotes.
3. Animals are eukaryotes that generally move about and do not perform photosynthesis. Humans are animals.
4. Bilateria are animals who are bilaterally symmetrical, with left and right side. Humans are part of Bilateria.
5. The vertebrates are bilateral animals with a backbone. Humans are vertebrates.
6. Mammals are air-breathing vertebrate animals characterised by the possession of endothermy, hair and mammary glands functional in mothers with young. Humans are mammals.
7. Primates are mammals with large brains relative to other mammals, as well as an increased reliance on stereoscopic vision at the expense of smell, the dominant sensory system in most mammals. Humans are primates.
8. Apes are Old World anthropoid tailless primates. Humans are apes.

[gospelsaves]

Yes I agree humanity should recognize all its shortcomings. Indeed. But you see God being PERFECT doesn’t have that problem.

I agree. God, being perfect is correct in all that he says. I am however completely unaware of God having communicated with humanity. I am aware of various humans claiming to speak for God, but that is an entirely different thing. Humans are fallible.

And the view of creation has been done in a marvelous book called the Bible. Even if you don’t believe it, I would recommend you read it to clear up any misconceptions you have about how God created the Heavens and the Earth and all living things in them.

Again, I agree. Everyone who wishes to have a basic understanding of Christianity should read Genesis, Exodus and at least the two of the other three books of the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1&2 Samuel, 1&2 Kings, Esther, Job, at least half of the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, at least six of the twelve minor prophets, and the entire New Testament except the Gospel of Mark. I have read the entire Bible.

42

Wow I remember reading that somewhere in a fiction book. Wasn’t that in Hitchers Guide to the Galaxy? Is that where you’re pulling your scientific info from now? Next year it could change to say 55.....67.... 189…keep going....

Actually, there are 42 major milestones, but in reality, every generation is one step on the path.

1. the Neolithic Revolution
2. the Great Leap Forward
3. Humanity
4. Chimpanzees
5. Gorillas
6. Orangutans
7. Gibbons and the lesser apes
8. Old world monkeys
9. New world monkeys
10. Tarsiers
11. the rest of the prosimians - lemurs
12. Shrews
13. Rodents and Rabbits
14. Laurasiatheres
15. Xenarthrans
16. Afrotheres
17. Marsupials
18. Monotremes
19. Sauropsids
20. Amphibians
21. Lungfish
22. Coelacanths
23. Ray-Finned Fish
24. Chondrichthyes - Sharks and Their Kin
25. Lampreys and Hagfish
26. Lancelets
27. Sea Squirts
28. Ambulacrarians
29. Protostomes - worms
30. Acoelomorph Flatworms
31. Cnidarians - Jellyfish
32. Ctenophores
33. Placozoans
34. Sponges
35. Choanoflagellates
36. Mesomycetozoea
37. Fungi
38. Amoebozoans
39. Plants
40. Mixotrich
41. Archaea
42. Eubacteria

What a coincidence! It matches the late Douglas Adams number. He must have been divinely inspired. How else could he have known?

You said “the universe has been in existence forever but not for an infinite length of time�. Ok so IF the universe didn’t exist forever…….and it only existed as long as time has existed…..then how did the universe first form? What formed it? BEFORE time began, what formed it? And then what formed that? And keep going until you get to the VERY FIRST THING and tell me what created that?

The word before is a reference to time. There cannot be a time before time began. You cannot get colder than absolute zero. You cannot go slower than stopped. The tank is never less than empty. You cannot go south of the south pole.

You have to state that the very first thing ALWAYS existed else, where did it come from?

Something that has always existed cannot be said to come from anything. You say that God always existed, where did he come from? Same question.

You know DOD that app that you asked me to design, I’m going to just strive for “good enough�.

Yes, even the DOD has tolerances. They don't expect absolute perfection. Their good enough is (or should be) a much much higher standard then your typical commercial app.

Of course there is a relationship between teaching evolution and violence.
Anytime you take God out of the equation there is downward spiral.

This is not true. In fact, human history seems to indicate that putting God into the equation leads to violence.

Those precious “rights� that people live under where exactly do you think they got them from? The Bible. Thou shalt not kill. Thou shall not commit adultery. Where do you think that came from? They came from God, .....from religion.

No they did not. Sure, religious writers from all different religions and sects have discovered some of the same principles as have various philosophers, political and diplomatic leaders.

So what happens when you take Christian values out of a society? Values like it’s wrong to steal, it’s wrong to lie, it’s wrong to kill, it’s wrong to commit adultery. And you’re left with a society where alllll of those things are now RIGHT…Do you think that type of society is more or less violent?

These values are not exclusively Christian. To the Jews, it is wrong to steal. To the Hindus it is wrong to kill. To the Buddhists it is wrong to lie. To the Muslims adultery is wrong. To the Humanists, it is wrong to settle our differences by force of arms. Removing Christianity would not remove some of the values shared by Christianity with the rest of us.

That is because of a cultural misunderstanding. We are animals. We are multicellular living beings that are not plants or fungi. We are not dogs, monkeys or gorillas, but we are animals, mammals and apes.

“a cultural misunderstanding� ….wow!! So all those raciest comments over the years that people have made to other who just happen to be a darker complexion was just “a cultural MISUNDERSTANDING�…and they really had nothing to be offended by being called “you’re from a ape or monkey�????

Anything can be used as an insult. A white guy shouting at some black guys, "You are a bunch of apes." would correctly be taken as a racist insult. A biologist teaching a class that all humans are one subset of the apes would not.

Because it is science.

No, it’s not. We can agree to disagree.

No, I will not agree to disagree when you are wrong. It is science to call humans apes.
I will list a number of statements, please let me know which ones that you disagree with:

1. Humans are a life form.
2. Eukaryotes are life forms with cells that have a nucleus. Humans are eukaryotes.
3. Animals are eukaryotes that generally move about and do not perform photosynthesis. Humans are animals.
4. Bilateria are animals who are bilaterally symmetrical, with left and right side. Humans are part of Bilateria.
5. The vertebrates are bilateral animals with a backbone. Humans are vertebrates.
6. Mammals are air-breathing vertebrate animals characterised by the possession of endothermy, hair and mammary glands functional in mothers with young. Humans are mammals.
7. Primates are mammals with large brains relative to other mammals, as well as an increased reliance on stereoscopic vision at the expense of smell, the dominant sensory system in most mammals. Humans are primates.
8. Apes are Old World anthropoid tailless primates. Humans are apes.

Whilst I'm 100% sure I could debate you FOREVER on this!!!! LOL I'm going to quit (at least on THIS subject) NOT because I agree with you ....it's because this could go on forever and I have a lot more quesitons that people have asked, and that I need to respond to. Not to mention I'm juggling 50 million other things in my life right now. And what little free time I do have I want to explore many topics and not hang on just one. So I look forward to our next debate, on the next topic.. I'm sure we will find ourselves debating again on the next subject. But I have other topics I need to respond to on this site and others so I can't continue this forever.

[wiploc]

I don't think YOU understand the theory of evolution.

Evolutionary theory argues that ALL the organisms alive on earth today share a common ancestor....the so called "missing link".

Juxtaposing without comment.

[wiploc]

I find it difficult to answer on many grounds. Are we talking about the first generation?

Yes. Offspring was meant to mean the first generation offspring of the original birds. With that caveat, this is not a difficult to answer question.

I'm going to guess that you mean at birth, so to speak. That is, you want answer #3 because you are envisioning the potential of the second generation, before the short-beaked population has been decimated by the sparsity of shallow food.

I'll have to take your word for it that having a slightly longer beak will be advantageous when the food is half an inch out of reach.

[bluethread]

Religion is about what you want to believe.

No, religion is what you do. Philosophy is what you believe. Since, until recently, the majority of western philosophy has contained theistic tenets, the term religion has taken on the connotation of theism. However, one can say that believing and doing are the same, since one does not truly believe in something, if one does not act on it. Hence the confusion.

In science, what you want to believe is irrelevant. In science, you follow the facts and the evidence wherever it leads.

I do not think this is entirely true either, because one is required to accept a common definition of what constitutes a fact and evidence, along with many other things. One of those things is natural selection, or survival of the fittest. This base principle is generally not contested. What is contested is the view that the environment of the earth changed via time and motion to facilitate the right selections at just the right times, repeatedly, without guidance, to result in a complicated life form like Homo sapiens. This latter is not precisely evolution, but when one speaks of continuous progressive change, one usually says it is evolving.

Like the term religion, this use of the connotative rather than the denotative often causes confusion. Therefore, I do not just dismiss those who mistake connotation for denotation, but prefer to point out the difference. If they then clarify that they were referring to the connotative, I ask then to restate their arguments accordingly. However, if their arguments are premised on the connotative, it is often difficult to convince them that it is the connotative and not the denotative that they are using.