Creationism vs. Evolution

Also what's your point.

 

The correct answer is both

and this thread is ghey and seems to contrevene the site rules about politics

 

not in science.

 

IBTL



Fink

 

Do you mean individual organisms? If so, that's not evolution. The law of acquired characteristics was a theory from the 1800s and sounds a lot like your example. Evolution is the change in the frequency of genetic expression (alleles) over time, meaning from generation to generation.

One organism going blind in a cave isn't evolution.

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6e4_1318195408

 

Adaptation is NOT evolution, and evolution has never been observed.
They are still the same species that they were when you put them in the cave. They did not add any information to their DNA. It is not possile to add something that isn't there. It didn't change from a salamander to a pig. It is now just a blind salamander. This is where most people or misinformed and can't differentiate.

Your statement is confusing to me, because you first said evolution happens, but then said we have adapted, and also said "humans have always been humans". But if 'we' have adapted, then we are still just 'we's'...meaning we are still humans and not another creature or species. But you said that already. Seems contradicting to me.

still nope.......

you see ghey, yet you continue to return. glad you're here to give input

....and I've been called much worse.

 

I'm not here to form an argument in either direction but I feel the need to post this:

Evolution:
3. Biology . change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

See the natural selection part? meaning strongest survive? meaning most adapted to the environment makes it?

Also, Evolution has been recorded. Pikachu -> Raichu.

/Thread.

 

Evolution. Nuff sed

 

you feel the need to post the definition you found online? how can the dictionary create a definition for something that hasn't been proven by the standards of science needed for 'proof'. And it's scary that many people take a link on line or a definition from a dictionary as the truth.

Strongest survives means that the species stays the same and is just stronger. Most adapted means, well, most adapted, but still the same species. They didn't add anything new.

Natural selection uses genes that are already available in the gene pool. Evolution claims to ADD genes to the gene pool. They can't decide where they come from though.

Life started with one single living cell. Where did all of the additional info come from to eventually allow that single cell to add info to DNA as it progressed?

Mutation is the loss of information. Again, evolution requires gaining new DNA code that was unavailble in previous parents of the same species.

Evolution witnessed, or just recorded? Big difference.

 

+1

 

I stand by my " both " answer .

Evolution is scientific fact , but I also believe someone , or something created the beginning .

You disagree .

I don't care .

I just don't define my beliefs by a 2000 year old storybook .

FYI , YOU are not the topic of this thread , calling this thread ghey is not me calling you ghey .

I don't understand how divisive political threads like this are allowed to stay open while trivial threads are locked .

 

This thread is political?


Obama created man? In Kenya?

 

This- If you don't like the thread-Don't try to turn it into a trainwreck...Just leave it alone.

 

Political in the sense that it is equally or a more divisive topic than national politics .

For the record , yes , I do believe Obama created man while he was street racing drunk in a Ford Raptor with James

 

I'm trying to turn it into a train wreck B

 

This I can see....

 

Nice.

 

I can get behind that.

 

I feel as if im wayyy to late to join this one and have the slightest idea to what has been said thus far.