Evolution/Creation

[Antenora]

Evolution is one of my favorite subjects to debate on, so I'm starting a debate thereon. Post your opinions on evolution or creationism, and support your theories with evidence.
I'll say that I want evolution to be taught in schools, non-religious ones at least. I believe that the Creators, or Authors, or gods, started the evolution of life on Earth and other planets, and perhaps guided the evolution of mankind as some sort of experiment. And I'm sure I can support my case when speaking of evolution. So let's try to have a civil debate.

[Celinra]

I'll start by saying I think there must be a Creator of some kind. It's not scientifically plausable to believe that life, no matter how simple, suddenly sprung out of non-life. It's possible that God created the world in six days, and it's possible that He guided evolution. Either way, He's there.

I think if schools are going to teach evolution, they should also teach creationism, to be fair. Or at least, they should make it known that evolution is still a theory (many schools teach it as scientific fact, when it really isn't yet).

[The Flossing Ferret of Nigeria]

I think that when God created everything, he made dinosaurs in a part of the world no one knew about. So in one part of the world, there was a very short time of dinosaurs, cave men, prehistoric mammals and birds and other stuff like that, and then People spread everywhere and That's what the Bible covers. So I guess you could say I support both theories.

The Big Bang: Don't beleive it

Which came first?: The Chicken because God made everything else in adult form. He just put everything on this planet to reproduce, not to grow up because then who would care for them as young? They'd just all die!

[MambaduMal]

We're learning about evolution in biology class... apparently, it's possible to make organic (carbon-based) proteins using lightning and some of the gases that were in the earth's atmosphere before there was life.

So scientists believe that somehow, RNA (ribonucleic acid) was created, and bacteria formed. The first bacteria were anaerobic, meaning that they did not need water or oxygen to survive. The next bacteria were photosynthetic, meaning they could use sunlight, water, and some of the present carbon dioxide to produce food.

Then, because the end product of photosynthesis is oxygen, the atmosphere soon had enough O₂ to support aerobic bacteria.

The bacteria became co-dependent, living in colonies, which scientists believe is how multicellular organisms were created. Animals and plants evolved from these.

Evolution is really interesting to me... how sea mammals most likely did not evolve straight from fish, but from land mammals. So a fish would evolve into a land-dwelling creature, then a land-dwelling mammal, then back into the ocean. Also, how completely unrelated species can end up looking very similar, because they live in different environments.

And have you ever compared embryos of different species to each other? (i.e. chicken, human, turtle) They're so alike it's frightening.

So I think I do believe in evolution, although I also believe in God. I'm not quite sure how that works yet, but I'm working on it... I've got plenty of time to figure out what I believe

[Dark]

I remember when I was in Junior High, in a Catholic Jr. High. We had Biology classes, and we spent some time studying different evolution/creation of life theories. In my opinion this was fair because we spent an equal amount of time analyzing each theory. But, since it was a Catholic school, some time after the classes from some upper organization came a nun to give a speech to explain why all the theories we just learnt are bullsh*t. Not with those words but pretty much the same idea. She said that God created life as it is today because He loves us.

[Zombie-chan]

My class is on evolution too, Mamba...I've seen pics in the lovely bio book of the chicken/human/turtle comparison. You're right, it is really creepy.

[Pester, Rumormonger]

MambaduMal said:

We're learning about evolution in biology class... apparently, it's possible to make organic (carbon-based) proteins using lightning and some of the gases that were in the earth's atmosphere before there was life.

So scientists believe that somehow, RNA (ribonucleic acid) was created, and bacteria formed. The first bacteria were anaerobic, meaning that they did not need water or oxygen to survive. The next bacteria were photosynthetic, meaning they could use sunlight, water, and some of the present carbon dioxide to produce food.

What you are referring to is the Miller Experiment of 1953, where he kept ammonia, hydrogen, methane, and water vapor (what he thought made up a primordial environment) at boiling point for a week and zapped the whole thing with electricity for a week. The end result was about 20 amino acids that form basic proteins.

However, if he had not immediately isolated the amino acids with his "cold trap" the very environment in which they were formed would have destroyed them. (He didn't use a cold trap in any of his earlier experiments, because there is no way that kind of thing was in existance on primordial earth. And in his earlier experiments, not a single amino acid survived.)

The remainder (I forget the actual chemistry term for the product that doesn't matter) was carbolyxic acid and tar, both of which are poisonous to life.

The components he began with aren't even accurate, since due to the geology of the time most of the atmosphere would've been CO2, oxigen, water vapor, and nitrogen. He left oxygen out of the mix because oxygen would've just broken down the amino acids. Without oxygen, you have no ozone layer, and any primordial loife would've just been killed by UV rays. (Should I make an ooze cancer joke? No? Okay.)

Even if the components of the atmoosphere were what he said it was, and the amino acids were somehow isolated, and if oxygen had shown up at the right time to save them from UV rays, you still have that leftover carbolyxic acid and tar to deal with, and the amino acids would've bonded with that more readily than they would have bonded with eachother to form a protein.

So... there goes the Miller experiment.

[Pester, Rumormonger]

Nymphia said:

My class is on evolution too, Mamba...I've seen pics in the lovely bio book of the chicken/human/turtle comparison. You're right, it is really creepy.

Ack, your not talking about these, are you?

I can't believe they still put that stuff in some books. But you know how it is, as soon as somebody publishes something it's a fact forever. Ernst Haeckal drew that in the 1860s, won some prize, and was exposed as a fraud by his university in 1847. This is more like it:


Top Row: Haeckel's drawings of how embryos look at the "tailbud" stage of development.
Bottom Row: Richardson's photographs of how embryos look at that same stage of development.

Oh, and if you couldn't tell, I'm in the "creation" camp.

[BSam]

Petra! said:

Ernst Haeckal drew that in the 1860s, won some prize, and was exposed as a fraud by his university in 1847.

now that's what i call anticipation...

[Dark]

It was the University that, allegedly, invented the time travel machine.

[Pester, Rumormonger]

I didn't know that. They should've just jumped ahead to 1874 and saved everyone a lot of embaressment.

Edit: Oops, I get it now. That was supposed to say 1874. See, that's what happens when you pay attention to what you say instead of what you type.

[Antenora]

The embryo images, the photos at least, are good support for evolution, thanks for posting those. Another, similar, proof of evolution is the close genetic similarity between humans and chimps, and the fact that we share 50% of our DNA with bananas. Yes, bananas. For some reason every time I've heard that it uses a banana. And in my family it's a running joke to call bananas our cousins. Everyone in my family believes in evolution.

I was taught that evolution was true in all my science classes; I think it should be taught as fact in non-religiously-oriented schools. My theory that the gods started/guided evolution as an experiment is called "intelligent design", and it's a middle ground of sorts between creation and evolution.

And as for chickens/eggs, reptiles evolved before birds and they laid eggs, so according to evolution the egg came first. Why do they always use chickens in that classic query?

[Dark]

Tocuna said:

...and the fact that we share 50% of our DNA with bananas. Yes, bananas. For some reason every time I've heard that it uses a banana. And in my family it's a running joke to call bananas our cousins.

Oh god, I just hope my father never knows that. Otherwise he will start telling me "Say hi to your cousin" each time he sees a banana...

[Celinra]

...I had stuff to say, but Petra said it all, anyways.
I have a book that talks about evolution/creation, but it's being loaned out to somebody. Once I get it back, I may have more to say.

As for it being taught in schools... I think the fact that we're able to debate about it, with evidence supporting either side, shows that it's not a scientific fact, and so shouldn't be taught as such.

[Pester, Rumormonger]

So do I, I got it for free in the malt stand at a summer camp in Pennsylvania.

I think that the whole problem is the publishing thing. Nobody ever wants to say that any previous theories were wrong, because that discredits the whole thing,