Theory of Evolution

Discussion in 'Science and Nature' started by lenhattien, Nov 20, 2020.

  1. Ideas aimed at explaining how organisms change, or evolve, over time date back to Anaximander of Miletus, a Greek philosopher who lived in the 500s B.C.E. Noting that human babies are born helpless, Anaximander speculated that humans must have descended from some other type of creature whose young could survive without any help. He concluded that those ancestors must be fish, since fish hatch from eggs and immediately begin living with no help from their parents. From this reasoning, he proposed that all life began in the sea.

    Anaximander was correct; humans can indeed trace our ancestry back to fish. His idea, however, was not a theory in the scientific meaning of the word, because it could not be subjected to testing that might support it or prove it wrong. In science, the word “theory” indicates a very high level of certainty. Scientists talk about evolution as a theory, for instance, just as they talk about Einstein’s explanation of gravity as a theory.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. When man crawled out the ocean what did he eat ?
    A complete food chain already existed ?
    What about the plants that require insects to pollenate them ?
    Some of those insects only have a life span of a couple days , so the insects crawled out the ocean in two days and pollenated the plants in the food chain in two days .
    I forgot It wasn't just man that crawled out of the ocean in one spot what had a complete food chain .
    But it had to be Male and female that crawled out of the ocean at the same time and place .
    with every animal Male and female that makes up the food chain in the same time and place .

    And this took place millions of years ago on this planet ?

    So i can take kids play toy a spinning top and make the top spin for a year and make the top spin the exact same speed for that entire year .
    That doesn't seem possible ? what about the surface where the top is spinning -its a point of friction and what about gravity ?
    Me making a top spin for a year the same speed is impossible .
    So you all believe the earth was spinning the exact same speed that it is now 250 million years ago when the earth is in a gravitational pull from the moon and spins in a friction environment?
    And science is saying the earth rotation is slowing down ever year .?

    Science says the earth was rotating 213 thousand miles per hour 250 million years ago and nothing would of existed on the face of the year with surface wind speeds like that .
    No trees or plants and no animals

    next issue is the moon ,, its getting father and farther away each year according to NASA .
    Problem being how close was the moon to earth 250 million years ago and what gravitational effects would the moon have earth ?
    Problem being is according to science the moon 250 million years ago would gotten pulled to earth or been creating massive floods several times a day .
    That is if the world was turning the same speed that it is now..

    next issue ,,, salt in the ocean .
    As growers we know that the used up nutrients in our grow systems turns to sodium ( aka salt ).
    Every year around the world the nutrients in our soil get used up and floats the the top of the soil as sodium .
    Rain and snow washes the sodium and other nutrients and minerals into creeks streams rivers and finally into the ocean .
    Problem being if you take the average amount sodium being washed into the ocean every year and how long some people say that oceans existed x amount of billions of years ago, the oceans should have allot more sodium in them then they actually do .

    next issue is the sun ..
    The sun surface nuclear fusion is getting smaller by 5 foot a day in diameter .
    Evolution suggest that earth has been here what 4.7 billion years ago.
    so times 5 feet by 365 days in one year and then times that number by 4.7 billion year and that is how much bigger the sun was 4.7 billion years ago .
    problem being is earth would of been allot hotter because the sun was allot bigger ..

    There is about 100 other facts that need to be explained before the theory evolution could be considered .
    It seems certain institutions are suppressing certain facts because it goes against their theories .
    Making theories and science into a religion .




    Evolution Is Impossible. Evolution is biologically impossible. Evolution is mathematically impossible. Here are some reasons.

    The Earth's Magnetic Field: The strength of the earth's magnetic field has been measured for well over a century. This provides scientists with exceptionally good records. In an important recent study, Dr. Thomas G. Barnew has shown that the strength of the earth's magnetic field is decaying exponentially at a rate corresponding to a half-life of 1,400 years. That is to say, 1,400 years ago the magnetic field of the earth was twice as strong as it is now.

    If we extrapolate back as far as 10,000 years, we find that the earth would have had a magnetic field as strong as that of a magnetic star! This is, of course, impossible. Thus, based on the present decay of the earth's magnetic field, 10,000 years appears to be an upper limit for the age of the earth. Finally, evolutionists believe that the earth's magnetic field is due to circulating electric currents in its core.

    If we extrapolate backward about 20,000 years, we find that the estimated heat produced by the currents would have melted the earth. Clearly, the testimony of the earth's magnetic field is strongly in favor of a relatively young earth, not an ancient one. Memorable Quotes "Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with modest powers must feel humble." - Albert Einstein, towards the end of his life."

    Once we see, however, that the probability of life origination at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect deliberate. It is, therefore almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligence . . . even to the limit of God." - Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astrophysicist, an atheist for much of his life, until he finally admitted the truth.

    The Chance of Evolution Ever Occurring is so Remote as to be Mathematically Impossible. The theory of evolution is like placing a monkey at a keyboard and having him start typing. Assume the monkey never dies and give him 5 billion years to type. What are the chances the monkey will type out the entire works of the Encyclopedia Brittanica volumes A-Z in the exact order with no spelling or grammar errors? The chances of that happening are actually BETTER than the theory of evolution ever happening!

    Points to Ponder If you ever look at cliffs you will see that they erode rapidly. In "millions of years" they would have long gone!
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. yeah thats not a stretch at all.

    wtf
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Why is man (and everything else) expected to change, but not the climate?
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. You are a fluke of the universe. You have no right to be here.
    Deteriorata. Deteriorata.
    Go placidly amid the noise and waste,
    And remember what comfort there may be in owning a piece thereof.
    Avoid quiet and passive persons, unless you are in need of sleep.
    Rotate your tires.
    Speak glowingly of those greater than yourself,
    And heed well their advice, even though they be turkeys.
    Know what to kiss, and when.
    Consider that two wrongs never make a right, but that three do.
    Wherever possible, put people on hold.
    Be comforted that in the face of all aridity and disillusionment,
    And despite the changing fortunes of time,
    There is always a big future in computer maintenance.
    You are a fluke of the universe.
    You have no right to be here.
    And whether you can hear it or not,
    The universe is laughing behind your back.
    Remember The Pueblo.
    Strive at all times to bend, fold, spindle, and mutilate.
    Know yourself.
    If you need help, call the FBI.
    Exercise caution in your daily affairs,
    Especially with those persons closest to you -
    That lemon on your left, for instance.
    Be assured that a walk through the ocean of most souls
    Would scarcely get your feet wet.
    Fall not in love therefore. It will stick to your face.
    Gracefully surrender the things of youth: birds, clean air, tuna, Taiwan.
    And let not the sands of time get in your lunch.
    Hire people with hooks.
    For a good time, call 606-4311. Ask for Ken.
    Take heart in the bedeepening gloom
    That your dog is finally getting enough cheese.
    And reflect that whatever fortune may be your lot,
    It could only be worse in Milwaukee.
    You are a fluke of the universe.
    You have no right to be here.
    And whether you can hear it or not,
    The universe is laughing behind your back.
    Therefore, make peace with your god,
    Whatever you perceive him to be - hairy thunderer, or cosmic muffin.
    With all its hopes, dreams, promises, and urban renewal,
    The world continues to deteriorate.
    Give up!
    You are a fluke of the universe.
    You have no right to be here.
    And whether you can hear it or not,
    The universe is laughing behind your back.
    You are a fluke of the universe.
    You have no right to be here.
    And whether you can hear it or not,
    The universe is laughing behind your back.

    Radio Dinner.

    BNW
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. what one thing has ever evolved into another thing? we may have been hybridized with ape man but we surely did not evolve from a fish haha.

    there would be no watch were it not for a watch maker. if modern science is currently cloning pigs, chickens, and goats (and likely humans), it's not a stretch to think they're not playing with embryos. they're growing edible meat in a petri dish these days!

    evolution is crazy talk. hybridization yes. evolution nah.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. Why is evolution crazy talk?

    What's your alternative hypothesis?
     
  8. hybridization. are you a Darwinian theorist? "lucy" and all that hogwash?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Can you elaborate on what you mean by hybridization?

    I wouldn't say I'm a Darwinian theorist, but there's nothing I've seen of his working being effectively and thoroughly refuted, so that leads me to believe that he was pretty accurate. He provided a foundation from which we've expanded our knowledge upon, like a low resolution picture that's been fine tuned to higher and higher resolutions, but it's still the same picture. For example, there was no knowledge of DNA or genes in his day, but when we discovered these mechanisms, they were seen to be in congruence with Darwin's theories and so our picture became clearer.

    By Lucy I assume you mean the fossils found in Ethiopia? And by hogwash I assume you mean to say that you don't believe that we all originated from Africa?
     

  10. i'm an Ancient Aliens believer. i'll just leave it there. i can see we're not in agreement and if you think the collective "we" all came from Africa then we never will agree. it's ok. i dont need to be right in your eyes nor you in mind. you and a few others herein see the world so differently than i that it's pointless to debate this topic. it's a similar topic as the color of a person's skin and what that means and it is a pointless, circuitous, never ending discussion.

    just because we have 99% of the same genes as a chimp or great ape does not mean we evolved from them. plants, animals, humans all share similar genes. i may be corny but but my moma was not an ear of corn - nor was my dad. let us simply agree to disagree. i have never once read or reviewed any thesis or scientific fact that holds the logic or the fact that "we" all descended from Ape Man "naturally".

    hybridization, common ancestor, genetic manipulation by "the gods". that's what i believe. who were "the gods"? idk but it surely wasn't a Bonobo making love to a Silver Back. maybe it was the same "gods" that built the megalithic structures located around the planet, perhaps it's "the gods" the ancients wrote about, perhaps it was just a grand and marvelous mistake of nature. idk and neither do you but to think that "we" on this planet evolved out of Africa from one single ape-woman is as ridiculous to me as my statements must be to you.
     
  11. Had you on ignore because of the nonsense going on in the political forum, but took a chance and peeked at this. We align closely enough here to show me it was shortsighted of me to do that. Your "idk but it surely wasn't ...." is what sold me. My answer to most of these philosophical questions is, "I don't know what is, but I'm pretty sure of what's not."

    It's easy to get lost in details, but if you ask why enough times you'll eventually come to a dead end. I'll never understand why people have to make shit up to explain something that is beyond their comprehension.
     
    • Like Like x 2

  12. i so much dislike politics for exactly the reason you insinuate - nonsense. i hope we're good as i really dont enjoy politics on any level.

    however, on philosophical discussion my currents run deep and strong, and i could discuss the wonders of the universe for days on end. i dont see how any of us can foster bad feelings towards one another simply based on thought. the origin of man is indeed a fascinating thing to ponder and when doing so ime it is so much easier to find our commonalities versus our differences between our fellow man.

    my apologies if i offended you. the politics section and the subjects therein are as dry kindling to a fire - explosive and easily fired up. peace and good will. to yourhealth, salud!
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
  13. How does evolution fit in with ancient technologies ?
    To this day we cant make the pyramids like they were made 5000 to 10.000 years ago .
    We cant mold boulders together like they did thousands of years ago .
    We would need several cranes to move 400 to 800 ton stones !
    Look at all the the things made that are pointed to certain stars that exist around the world ..

    What about the The Piri Reis map ?
    Either Antarctica didn't have ice on it when the The Piri Reis map was made or it was made in space ...
    The Antarctic coast[edit]
    There are two major discrepancies from known coastlines: the North American coast mentioned above, and the southern portion of the South American coast. On the Piri Reis map, the latter is shown bending off sharply to the east starting around present-day Rio de Janeiro. Another interpretation of this territory has been to identify this section with the Queen Maud Land coast of Antarctica. This claim is generally traced to Arlington H. Mallery, a civil engineer and amateur archaeologist who was a supporter of pre-Columbian trans-oceanic contact hypotheses. Though his assertions were not well received by scholars, they were revived in Charles Hapgood's 1966 book Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings.[36] This book proposed a theory of global exploration by a pre-classical undiscovered civilisation based on his analysis of this and other ancient and late-medieval maps. More notoriously, these claims were repeated in Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods? (which attributed the knowledge of the coast to extraterrestrials) and Gavin Menzies's 1421: The Year China Discovered the World (which attributed it to supposed Chinese voyages), both of which were roundly denounced by mainstream scholars.[36]

    A more sober analysis of these claims was published by Gregory McIntosh, a historian of cartography, who examined the map in depth in his book The Piri Reis Map of 1513 (Athens and London: University of Georgia Press, 2000). He was able to find sources for much of the map in Columbus's writings. Certain peculiarities (such as the appearance of the Virgin Islands in two locations) he attributed to the use of multiple maps as sources; others (such as the errors in North American geography) he traced to the continued confusion of the area with East Asia. As far as the accuracy of depiction of the supposed Antarctic coast is concerned, there are two conspicuous errors. First, it is shown hundreds of kilometres north of its proper location; second, the Drake Passage is completely missing, with the Antarctic Peninsula presumably conflated with the Western Patagonian coast. The identification of this area of the map with the frigid Antarctic coast is also difficult to reconcile with the notes on the map which describe the region as having a warm climate.[36]

    Maps of the period generally depicted a large continent named Terra Australis Incognita of highly variable shape and extent. This land was posited by Ptolemy as a counterbalance to the extensive continental areas in the northern hemisphere; due to a lack of exploration and various misunderstandings, its existence was not fully abandoned until circumnavigation of the area during the second voyage of James Cook in the 1770s showed that if it existed, it was much smaller than imagined previously. The first confirmed landing on Antarctica was only during First Russian Antarctic Expedition in 1820, and the coastline of Queen Maud Land did not see significant exploration before Norwegian expeditions began in 1891.[38][39] In 1513, Cape Horn had not yet been discovered, and indeed Ferdinand Magellan's voyage of circumnavigation was not to set sail for another six years. It is unclear whether the mapmaker saw South America itself as part of the unknown southern lands (as shown in the Miller Atlas),[40] or whether (as Dutch thought) he drew what was then known of the coast with substantial distortion, but in any case, serious scholarship holds that there is no reason to believe that the map is the product of genuine knowledge of the Antarctic coast.[36]
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Ancient Aliens? What kind of aliens? No need to get defensive matey, I'm interested in all this stuff and I enjoy entertaining different possibilities. There's a compelling case to be made for there being 'outside' tampering in the evolution/growth of humanity. How were our brain cavity and mental processes able to develop at such a rapid rate in such a short space of time, in comparison to the rest of the processes occurring in nature. And to open up some thought into a topic that you're engaging with recently, mushrooms could be a prime candidate for this. For example, you take mushrooms and you've got greatly increased neurogenesis going on, you've got improved visual acuity, you've got mass data downloads, you've got increased sexual drive, a decrease in the fear response - this is all stuff that's been clinically analysed in trials and information gleaned through thousands of similar trip reports - and then you repeat these processes millions and millions of times and you've got some kind of advanced acceleration of evolutionary (or genetic manipulation as you've termed it) processes going on.

    And to continue, if you look at mushroom spores and how they're able to survive in a vacuum, who's to say that these processes haven't occurred and been established on a grand scale all across the universe and this is just the Earth's turn? I think it's definitely worth focusing in on. And then it brings the question of what is happening during the experience and is it just the molecule tickling your brains receptors and you're getting high, or is it an interface between the fungi (and plant) kingdom and humanity, or is it even an inter-galactic theatre where the mycelium hivemind is the backdrop for fungal intelligence communication from light years away, intertwined with myriad other lifeforms within the theatre (dose definitely acts as a throttle for such experiences). The mind boggles really.

    Going back to what you've said about evolution though, I think you're misunderstood about lineages and common ancestors. No ones ever said that humans are directly descended from a bonobo and a gorilla mating, what the research and fossil records show is that we have a common ancestor. The succinct way to put it is that: for example, a person is descended from their grandparents, who are now deceased, but this person has cousins who are descended from the same grandparents. So it's this similar process, but over many many generations and on a massive scale. Humans were never what we think of as apes nowadays, but we do most certainly share a common ancestor and a lot of similarities. As you said yourself, there's undoubted proof of a 99% genetic match.

    At the end of the day though, yes, no one has got the faintest idea of what's going on.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. you're right. my apologies for coming across as pugilistic.

    "Ancient Aliens" is a History Channel series (big fan here), and it's also a theory. idk if the "aliens" are extraterrestrial or if they're terrestrial but i think the theory goes a long way to identifying a source for the famous "missing link".

    haha i have to lol about the mush. my experiences thus far have consistently been revealing as to the "absurdity of it all" as i've come to label it. talk about a journey through a fractal worm hole! woohoo! love it. :smoking-banana:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. #16 Possuum, Nov 24, 2020
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2020
    so how about this, we know from fossil records that species and sub-species of hominids existed and coexisted 600,000 - 400,000 BCE. there are cave paintings dated to 60,000 BCE (very simple drawings), and there's a big gap in the record from ~40,000 BCE - to ~12,000 BCE when its estimated man was growing grain crops, domesticating animals, creating language and writing, and quickly following were building cities and megalithic stone structures. what happened in the years immediately preceding ~12,000 BCE that would otherwise wipe out all evidence of an evolving species from time before that? it's like something special happened on the planet in the time frame from ~40,000 BCE to ~12,000 BCE.

    this anomaly in the historic record might be explained away as some global catastrophic event or it might be indicative of some outside influence that brought HU-man forward so rapidly. this gap in human development is just one of many "missing links" in the story of hominids coming out of Africa 600,000 BCE all the way up to the time of ancient Sumer. it's really something to ponder on if one is so inclined. something certainly occurred that can not be easily brushed aside.
     
  17. Well all life on Earth originated from one core molecule; the protein and it was first found in water I believe.
     
  18. #18 Headhunterpipes, Dec 7, 2020
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2020
    Hi
    I am not all in on all these thousands or millions of years ago.
    For one I don't believe the earth was spinning the same speed then , as it is now and the moon would of been much closer and magnetism of earth would of been hundreds times more then it is now.
    How could the moon not be sucked to earth from the earths magmatism ?

    Trying to remain open minded ..... easier said then done
    I study materials that backs my beliefs, its the nature of the way we are , we all would like to be right all the time , sad part of that normally man kind has always been extremely bull headed .
    That statement alone pretty much says the chances of us knowing all the true facts is slim to none.

    So read this article about Carbon and fossil dating , it was about a stalagmite's that came from under the Lincoln memorial.
    I guess there is abundant amount of minerals dripping from under the concrete foundation.
    They took a stalagmite and had it fossil or carbon dated .. straight up ,i haven't done allot of research into carbon or fossil dating , I will explain later .
    At the time the Lincoln memorial at the time was 55 years old .
    The place that did the carbon or fossil dating test said the stalagmite was 30.000 years old .
    That is really sad ,,,clearly something is fucked up.
    either carbon or fossil dating is all screwed up or the company that did the test is, ether way it introduces disbeliefs in figuring out how old things really are .
    Rapid stalactites - creation.com

    More facts is almost all the dinosaurs bones getting dug have soft tissue attached to them .
    You are going to dig up a 250 million year animal and it still has traces of soft tissue on the bones ?
    That doesn't sound right to me.
    Bacteria eats soft tissue ,,
    Ancient tissue found in 195 million-year-old dinosaur rib - CNN

    So many of these theory's never address the other facts that make the theory's pretty much impossible .

    When should any theory side step gravity, friction and magmatism ?
    If someone says 250 millions of years ago animals roamed the earth are we all are expected to believe the earth was rotating the same speed then as it is now ?
    When the earths rotates in a gravity field and because earth has atmosphere
    means the earth is spinning a a friction environment .
    Even Nasa says the earths rotation is getting slower and slower every year.


    These are some of the reasons why i tend to believe that earth isn't millions of years old .
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. My 2¢:
    There (must have been) a time before any life existed, the first cell split and became two, & 4 & 8 etc. All life came from this one, unique, first cell. It evolved into life as we know it today.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. How is that possible ?
    For single celled ameba to crawl out of the ocean and evolve into a multi celled animal it needs to be able to eat .
    Where is the food chain for that animal to eat ?
    If you say this took time , animal live for certain time and then they die .
    My point is these multi celled animals had to evolve in the same place at the same time and both male and female ..
    And evolution had to happen in the time line of what ever animal that has the shortest life span that makes up the food chain .
    We depend on certain insects to pollenate certain plants that is part the food chain .
    Most of those insects have a extremely short life span meaning that evolution or everything evolved had to all happen at once according to what animals or insects has the shortest life span.
    That is the window of the time line that evolution if force to make all life happen.
    The insects that help complete the food chain life span in some cases is less then a day .

    So how long can every animal in the food chain live without food until evolution gets the food chain established ?
    2 weeks at best .
    So evolution had to have everything that evolved all animals and plants from a singled celled ameba into a multi celled animal in the same place in a two week time period and both sexes .
    Or else the multi celled animal would of starved .

    i find the theory of evolution not possible.
    Plus your also saying earth was spinning the same speed it is now 4.7 billion years ago ?
    That's pretty far fetched
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page