isn't it obvious that it's god who evolves just by looking at himself? come on people.

ok i'm done with this because like i said you believe evolution and think it's fact. i believe creation and think its fact. my point is not to change your mind. my point is to teach both theories as well as any other credible thoeries in school. i'm not against the teaching of evolution in school even though i don't believe it yet you seem to be against teaching creation in school because you don't believe it. i'm not saying i'm right or your right i'm saying they are all theories and should be taught instead of teaching only one and essentially brainwashing.

something that comes to mind with the downfalls to the theory of evolution that you may have an answer for me. the sun is a burning ball of gas yes? there is a rate at with it burns away every year. we know the rate at which it burns. calculating that out over millions or billions of years would make the sun so big that it would burn the earth. something i read one time, and i'm not going to argue it as fact but if you have an opinion let me know. you seem to be pretty knowledgeable in the area of evolution.

According to what we know, the sun is destined to at some point (about 5 billion years) to become a red giant when the hydrogen "fuel" is spent. Basically, the sun will then expand and become so large that it will engulf the planets closest to it in the solar system.

No offence, but I don't see what this has to do with evolution.


As for my stance on what should be taught in schools, I think we should teach "truths". How do we know what's true and what's not? The truth is we can't, but truth doesn't have to be a black or white thing. There are different levels of credibility. For example, I can say I have a theory that you are a human. That theory is more credible than say the theory that you are in fact a dog. Why is it more credible? Every practical experience says you're not a dog. Does that mean that you're human is a fact? No, not really because we can't be 100% sure as ridiculous as it sounds.

Every time a child is born and does not have the exact same genetic makeup as a parent, that is a practical example of evolution right there. The most basic practical experiences give it support and it's a part of life just like our planet is warmed by the sun or that stuff tend to fall down towards the ground if you drop them. Maybe our knowledge of those phenomenas are still lacking details or maybe our lives are in fact all just dreams and the real world is not like that, so we call them theories even though they can for all practical reasons be considered truths.

I think we should teach those credible truths in school. Truths that can and have been tested by experiements and experience. Religion doesn't fall under that.

the point toward evolution with the sun was that if it is burning away at a rate that we know and can calculate that rate as to how much smaller the sun gets every year. if we calculate that mass back to the sun there is no way the earth can be millions of years old. now this is also something i read once so i'm not going to pass it off as fact as i can't back it up.

what you consider credible and i consider credible are differing opinions. with all the scientific evidence that supposedly backs up evolution how come we have yet to find one fossil in all the fossils we've discovered that actually shows an animal in transition from a single celled organism to man or any variation along the line. there is also a difference between evolution and adaptation.

the problem like i've stated is that creation falls under religion so without a belief in a god it would seem ridiculous. no more than i think evolution is ridiculous. but i don't see we can't teach them both. if there is so much evidence to back up evolution then supposedly anyone in their right mind would believe it over creation according to you so in turn is there any harm in teaching another theory??

i'm not going to defend the theory of creation here. i don't have the knowledge or the facts to back up statements. i'm not about to do a bunch of research on the two theories as you still won't view the theory of creation as credible because it has to do with religion.

i think any theory that has merits should be taught. if i remember right i believe there are a few more theories other than just creation and evolution. teach them all. knowledge is everything.

as far as religion goes. it has declined so much that it's hard to take it seriously. there are to many religious people out there telling people what they think is right and wrong and and judging people who don't believe in what they believe that it goes against the whole idea of religion. every one decides that they are god and can decide what you should do if you want to get into heaven otherwise you'll burn in hell. the pope even went as far as making up new sins. it says right in the bible not to judge so that pretty much means there are a lot of so called christians that are going to be in for a suprise if there actually is a heaven and hell. like i said i believe there is a god but i am skeptical of a lot of so called christian beliefs. this is why i don't like to debate religion.

as far as presenting it in school as another theory well why not. we have brains use them. if someone wants to believe evolution great. if they want to believe creation great. if they want to believe aliens put us here whatever. there is no harm in presenting the options.

What? I still don't get what you're after. As I mentioned, it is generally believed that the sun will burn up the last of it's hydrogen fuel in 5 billion years. This is claimed by the same scientists who believe the sun is about 4~5 billion years old today.

As far as I know, there's no scientific evidence out there today that says the earth cannot be millions of years old.

I don't know all the weird physics that are believed to happen in stars, but I'm sure you can find some answers to your questions regarding the sun on Wikipedia's article.


What? We have found lots and we're digging up more every day. You also posted we haven't found the "missing link" in human evolution. Sorry, but that's just popular creationist propaganda. The fact is that we're finding so many bones from different humans in Africa that biologists are finding it hard to fit everything together.

Life is always in a transitional stage, always adapting. You can look at whatever organism you want at any time.

If you want fossils, then Archaeopteryx is one of the most famous and iconic ones. It's a transitional stage if you will between dinosaur and bird.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...1/15/Vog1h.jpg

Here's a model of what some think it may have looked like. Notice the absence of a beak for example.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...yx-model-2.jpg

Since the first archaeopteryx was discovered, we've found lots more. Sinosauropteryxes are the most primitive dinosaurs found that have fossilized feathers. Sinornis is an example of a prehistoric bird.

We also know of prehistoric ancestors of many of the animals around us today. Take the palaeomastodon for example, a likely ancestor to elephants or mastodons.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eomastodon.jpg

Anyone in their right mind should believe in evolution. I've never read a single good scientific argument against it and as a biologist, I see it everywhere.

The problem about evolution is that religious people feel threatened by it and they are opposing it ferociously with tooth and claw. Indoctrination, brainwashing, pseudosciences, whatever they can say and do to decredibilize science in general - all tricks are being used. However, the thing is evolution has support in that's it's empirically true and it's not easy arguing against such truths. I think unless modern society and everything we know crumbles, people will inevitably accept it.

[QUOTE=toretorden;617674]The problem about evolution is that religious people feel threatened by it and they are opposing it ferociously with tooth and claw. Indoctrination, brainwashing, pseudosciences, whatever they can say and do to decredibilize science in general - all tricks are being used.

here is a point i will agree with you on and the same reason why i'm not about to defend the theory of creation. the same can be said about aspects of evolution. i will also say that the last time i read into either of them seriously was probably about 10 years ago or more so maybe their is more facts out there now.

their are millions of people who believe in the theory of creation and their are millions who believe the theory of evolution. between the two groups one present facts and other discredits them and vise versa. the point comes down to if the evidence clearly points to only one theory out of the two or other theories as well where is the harm in presenting all theories and letting people decide for themselves what they want to believe. you say creationists are threatened by evolution and will take any means possible to disprove it yet as an evolutionists you are against even presenting the theory of creation in school. why?? most people will believe the logical theory no??

^Well, if you wanna teach everything, that would come at a cost. It would seriously cheapen the quality of the education .. by that logic, you should teach every theory out there that explains where we are and where we come from.

If only one of those theories is true, you quickly see how much time you'd spend teaching people stuff that is not true.

I agree that the more you know, the better. It's good to know what people belonging to another religion believe in even if you don't believe it .. but we're talking education here on a big scale. Is it worth the cost? What benefits society the most?

Darwin's Theory of Evolution - A Theory In Crisis
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is a theory in crisis in light of the tremendous advances we've made in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics over the past fifty years. We now know that there are in fact tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Specified complexity pervades the microscopic biological world. Molecular biologist Michael Denton wrote, "Although the tiniest bacterial cells are incredibly small, weighing less than 10-12 grams, each is in effect a veritable micro-miniaturized factory containing thousands of exquisitely designed pieces of intricate molecular machinery, made up altogether of one hundred thousand million atoms, far more complicated than any machinery built by man and absolutely without parallel in the non-living world." [5]

And we don't need a microscope to observe irreducible complexity. The eye, the ear and the heart are all examples of irreducible complexity, though they were not recognized as such in Darwin's day. Nevertheless, Darwin confessed, "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." [6]

here is something i c/p from allaboutscience.org. not to carry on the argument but to present that even darwin himself states that it seems unlikely. to be honest i only know the creation and evolution as far as explaining how we came to be. in light of the advances we've made in science and understanding things evolution could be wrong but the only other option is creation which is based out of religion. so what do you believe is true? well if you don't believe in a god well that leaves evolution even though it may not be right. i can't tell you either evolution or creation is correct but there is the unexplained in both.

I actually read this here...but should we teach the theory of intelligent falling as well as gravity? In a science class we teach things that are science, theory of creation is not. Why should we allow religion in our public schools?