Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Biology Human Evolution

views
     
robertngo
post Jul 10 2009, 11:57 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(maknyuus @ Jul 10 2009, 03:00 PM)
even if there is "life" in other galaxy, we would not recognize it as life. why? because they are probably NON-carbon based. how would you recognize them as "life" ? scientists have been looking for water on Mars, why water? because they are expecting carbon-based life form there. which is probably not going to happen. what if those living things are silicone-based? for gods sake, an ion must be living things too. thats why i ask, how do you define "living things"?
*
then how does you define living things?
robertngo
post Apr 12 2010, 02:05 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


now if human are created in middle east less than 10k years ago, how does they find the time to travel all the way to the american, australia and those remote pacific island?

user posted image

robertngo
post Apr 28 2010, 04:29 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(NasiLemakMan @ Apr 28 2010, 03:17 PM)
And how do we evolved the mental capacities in the 1st place? If apes can be thought to of a higher class of psychological processes to what not equal but at least close to of a human; who taught us? Whales developed a far more sophisticated language than us but why whales does not become any smarter?
*
why is whales language more sophisticated the human?
robertngo
post Apr 29 2010, 12:20 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(Vagrant @ Apr 29 2010, 02:10 AM)
Please try searching for Ken Ham and Dr Francis Collins, or you can look  up their interviews in Religulous.

Both claim their faith to Christianity. One had absolute confidence on young earth theory, the other believes in Theistic evolution. I use to wonder what would happen if both of them met and discuss about this matter.

It seems to me that the same book that leads them to their believe/faith, does not really shows them the real truth, yet they claim they behold the truth.

Sometimes, you don't need to counter points from Atheist, there's already a lot to counter among fellow followers.
*
what Francis Collins believe in does not conflict with scientific evidence, he dont believe in the bible creation story literally. he believe if i am not mistaken that God set the rules of physic and the universe created in a big bang, solar system and earth form following the law of physic and the life emerge and evolved following evolution. God could have intervene during some stage of the process, and there is no way to prove or disprove that god have choose two humanoid to become adam and eve.

but if you are Ken Ham, your believe in young earth creationist is against the very foundation of geology, biology and physic.
robertngo
post May 1 2010, 12:44 AM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(mashqi @ Apr 30 2010, 09:40 PM)
The evolution theory is still a debated topic. It is not fact. So, until there's a solid scientific proof, I won't believe it. Personally, I think that animals and humans will change and adapt to its environment but not to the extent of the animals to become another new species.

Peace.. biggrin.gif
*
not this again, a scientific theory is supported by scientific fact, so evolution is a theory and also an fact. scientific theory does not become scientific law and vice versa, creationist arguement that because evolution is not proven as it is not yet an law only show they dont understand the scientific term.
robertngo
post May 1 2010, 10:48 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(mashqi @ May 1 2010, 07:26 PM)
It's like a bird change to cat like that.
*
evolution does not mean cat can change to bird or bird can change to cat, it said bird and cat share an common ancestor as all the species on the tree of live can be trace to a common ancestor. all the fossil and DNA evidence so far have supported this theory, there is no solid reason to doubt that is false, like there is no solid reason to doubt the theory of gravity will still be true tomorrow, there is possiblity that gravity will be goon tomorrow, science dont deal with absolute certainty, but the possibility is so low that it is not reasonable to believe that it will happen.

so is evolution, all the evidence discover so far have supported the theory, and there is a lots of evidence, first there is all those fossil and then there is the DNA, we can now accurately draw the tree of life the way Darwin can never imagined. it is not reasonable to reject evolution because the remote possibility that there is suddenly be a bunch of evidence disproving evolution been discover tomorrow.
robertngo
post May 4 2010, 01:27 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


a good explaination on scientific term of theory, fact and law

Evolution vs. Creationism:Is Evolution Just a Theory?




robertngo
post May 19 2010, 05:03 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,027 posts

Joined: Oct 2004


QUOTE(ReWeR @ May 19 2010, 01:27 PM)
hypothesis are mean to open for ppl to find new evidence to disprove it.

until then, it mean it receive no challenge.
*
hypothesis mean no one need to pay much attention to it until it have evidence to support it and being verified by several other scientist, then it will become accepted.

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0251sec    0.32    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 7th December 2025 - 08:45 PM