Religion And Common sense

[crabcakes66]

i seriously want to believe, i just need another reason other than "you're going to hell if you don't"

I feel the same way. Where I live currently Christianity/religion is in my face constantly. I dont like set rules for religion.....



so much ignorance and hipocracy......

 

[PvtRyan]

It's always fun to see ignorant stubborn creationists argue with the findings of thousands of (genetic) biologists with Phd's.
That you don't accept evolution theory, fine, but don't try to point at the 'flaws' in it, that's a discussion you can't possibly win. I'm not gonna argue with NASA because I don't understand the principles of rocket flight and thus it's impossible to go into space now do I? I won't say airplanes are impossible because I don't know the physics behind it. It's the same thing with evolution, just accept you don't know anything about it, and stop pointing 'errors' to biologists who studied it for years.

Awesome post btw Sprafa, I agree with it. And I do have respect for religion, believe whatever you want to believe, I don't care. But leave scientific facts alone.

 

[Neutrino]

Christain myself.

Just looking at the posters comment on making certain something happens, rather then praying...

why not do both? Never hurts.

Seriously, there are some things that you simply cannot make certain happen, such as a loved one that is seriously injured recovering, etc.

I didn't really want to get involved with this, but, A2597 is going to force me to.

A2597,

First, I don't care what you believe and what religion you follow, but don't come in here spouting all sorts of nonsense in some attempt to back up your belief. You say that there must be a god because the universe is perfect? Why is it perfect? By who's standards? I personally think it is far from perfect. So am I to believe that you think that murder, torture, rape, and war are all perfect? Well, they must be since they are part of a "perfect" universe.

Next you argue that evolution must be wrong because no one has created life in the laboratory. The theory of evolution is not concerned with the creation of life. It only explains how species evolve. So your whole arguement is pointless.

Next, you go on to talk about the age of the earth. First thing is it's "billions" not "millions". You talk a lot about this without actually saying much. You attack the phenomenon of carbon dating but you don't actually give any evidence to prove it is inaccurate. Plus there are more ways of dating things then just carbon dating. Also, you say that archeologists have proved there was a great flood. So you blindly accept the "proof" of one group of scientist that support your views and scoff at another group which threaten your views? Convenient no?


Then we go on to your "man didn't create religion arguement". I can't even comment on this sense you didn't make any sense.

So again, I don't care what your views are and you have a right to them. But don't make silly, unfounded arguments to prove yourself right.

 

[Brian Damage]

<Pops into thread>

<Looks around>

<Shudders>

<Leaves>

 

[PvtRyan]

You talk a lot about this without actually saying much. You attack the phenomenon of carbon dating but you don't actually give any evidence to prove it is inaccurate.

Not to mention carbon-14 dating isn't used for dating stuff like the earth itself. It's used for fossils (all living things contain C and thus C-14) and about accurate up to 65,000 years. For dating of rock they use isotopes with a much longer half-life like some forms of Uranium.

 

[A2597]

I agree with the STDs but your takin safe sex out of the equation. 2nd of all I dont see how fantasizing about having sex is bad, and if you tell me you dont masterbate, think about having sex or havent seen a porno then I dont know what to say to you, other than your a liar. I used to see this as bad, but sex is one of the most amazing pleasures one can experience, but then again Im atheist so call me crazy.
[v]You asked. "Your crazy" (J/K!!! )
OK, it's easy for me to be around a girl without thinking about doing her, no problem. However masterbation, porno, whatever make you think about it alot more, which makes it harder to not think about it later. You also wind up comparing girls to your fantasys, which doesn't help. No I won't deny fantasys or masturbation. They are not parts of my life I am proud of, and thankfully God forgives. I just do the best I can to NOT do those things. Moving on to porno....concidering a commercial for womens shampoo nowadays counts as soft core porn, yea, I guess I've seen alot. (Not to mention my americain cinima class....bleh)[/b]

3rd I dont see how you can say Im crazy for not waiting for marriage to have sex. For one I dont plan on getting married, now let me clarify before you mislead this one. I mean I dont need a ring on my finger to tell the woman I love her, theres no need for marriage and no Im not scared of commitment I want someone to commit myself too but bowing before a church or the government isnt neccessary for it.
No ring, no commitment. And yes, I know what I am saying. You might think there is commitment, she might think there is, but there isn't. 90% of the people around here (Meaning the area where I live) are not married. They always introduce their live in as "Their Fiancee" usually about a year or two later, one was caught cheating, end of relationship. This repeates. Alot.

opps I hit submit reply and I got the "cant display page" and had to type it up and just left it out. Ok my point on the meaninglessness is this: We are told we have original sin correct? And inless we repent sin we are fuel for the fire in hell right? Put the 2 together. Christianity uses original sin as a way to show how one would need salvation, to motivate by guilt that at our heart we are evil and we most atone for the sins passed down by adam otherwise we are worthless to God.

The moment your born you don't have sin. Problem is, God's exceptations for us to enter heaven mean we can never sin once in our entire lifespan, which is impossible to do. The original sin brought sin into the world, we are not born with win, but rather into a sinful world. We don't need to atone for Adams sin, God sent Jesus to do that. All we have to do is ask God to forgive us. Jesus paid the price for our sins, because we were not able to atone for our own. Big difference between having to atone for them, and just asking God to forgive us.

 

[Maskirovka]

The moment your born you don't have sin. Problem is, God's exceptations for us to enter heaven mean we can never sin once in our entire lifespan, which is impossible to do. The original sin brought sin into the world, we are not born with win, but rather into a sinful world. We don't need to atone for Adams sin, God sent Jesus to do that. All we have to do is ask God to forgive us. Jesus paid the price for our sins, because we were not able to atone for our own. Big difference between having to atone for them, and just asking God to forgive us.

you conveniently ignored a few posts there :\

and personally, i already know all that stuff. i was brought up catholic and i was even confirmed. because if satan exists, you'd better be sure i reject him. but i'm looking for a reason to believe

you talking about sin and a sinful world and Adam and Jesus doesn't help convert anyone...and it doesn't help anyone understand.

you need to speak from OUR point of view, not yours. in your point of view, God exists, Adam sinned, Jesus atoned for our sins, etc etc. in OUR point of view, none of that matters. We want a reason to believe, not meaningless facts from the bible. give me a reason to believe that is NOT CONTAINED in the bible and i'll start to listen to the bible.

i already lead a life with christian values. i still think the 10 commandments are a solid foundation of morals. i'm just not so sure that God exists (though i lean towards something existing...and if you've read my posts i think you know why)

so please, if you want to continue addressing the evolution thing, please learn what it actually is...it's nothing even close to the absurd notion of cows making ducks or sheep being dropped out of airplanes turning into seagulls. and if you want to convince anyone in this thread that religion is good, you're going to need some help from outside the bible.

i'll re-post my "asshole referee" analogy.

that'd be like some NFL referee whipping out a new rule book halfway through the game that he claims was made official by the comissioner. he expects everyone to follow these new rules or else they can't win. half the people want to believe the referee, and other people want an explanation of why they should follow these new rules when they're already playing a perfectly good version of football. But to prove his rule book is genuine, he quotes the rule book...worthless tool of persuasion in the eyes of everyone who doesn't believe. Then he further asserts that if you don't win the game, you are to be executed along with all of the fans for your team. Now the referee just looks like an asshole :\ :\ :\

that's what you look like to us :\ you don't offer any explanation or proof...or anything other than bible rhetoric for that matter. please stop looking at things from your own point of view only. look at yourself in our eyes and see how ridiculous the things you're saying actually sound to the non-believer.

 

[A2597]

to the link posted before....

never saw that site before now, but I agree with whats it's saying. Would have been nice had they bothered to better document their report though.

 

[mchammer75040]

No ring, no commitment. And yes, I know what I am saying. You might think there is commitment, she might think there is, but there isn't. 90% of the people around here (Meaning the area where I live) are not married. They always introduce their live in as "Their Fiancee" usually about a year or two later, one was caught cheating, end of relationship. This repeates. Alot. .

lol what about all the people who do get married yet cheat on each other then? Dont pull this bullshit, them not being married has very little to do with how successfuly their relationship was. But I expected something like this, you spitting some random crap from your mouth in favor of your argument. Again like Ive said there is no need for marriage, 2 people can love each other without a ring on their finger. But please make up some excuses as to why its totally neccessary.

The moment your born you don't have sin. Problem is, God's exceptations for us to enter heaven mean we can never sin once in our entire lifespan, which is impossible to do. The original sin brought sin into the world, we are not born with win, but rather into a sinful world. We don't need to atone for Adams sin, God sent Jesus to do that. All we have to do is ask God to forgive us. Jesus paid the price for our sins, because we were not able to atone for our own. Big difference between having to atone for them, and just asking God to forgive us.

Sigh.. around and around we go...

 

[Maskirovka]

to the link posted before....

never saw that site before now, but I agree with whats it's saying. Would have been nice had they bothered to better document their report though.

they didn't document their sources because their only source is their own arrogance and the bible. that entire page is filled with lies.

and c'mon...don't you feel like the "asshole referee"?

 

[A2597]

ok, something a bit more accurate, which shows why the Bible holds more thruths then other religios text, specifically for the time periods in wich it was written:
http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/science.html

moving on, right off hand the only historian that is concidered accurate to my knowledge (Looking for others, but very few historians text have survived all this time) is the works of Jesphus, which documents a number of things, which confirm the Bibles historical accuracy.

 

[Dr. Shim]

Okay, this is not a Spam or Flame war thread.
Just discuss why you do or don't practice a religion etc.

I don't
Thats not bad, it my way of life.
I would rather make sure something goes a certain way in a situation than prey that it turns out alright.

I believe in a form of diety just plainly because too many things occured in my life for me not to. I don't practice any form of religion, other than trying to be a morally good person: i.e., I don't go to church, ect. Mostly because the condition the church is at the moment. It is it's own !#%@$ political system, for crying out loud! It's way to screwy for me to even want to go back to one, ever. Although I have tried to participate in a few, just for the heck of it. Just got waaay to freaked out. :dozey:

 

[Neutrino]

ok, something a bit more accurate, which shows why the Bible holds more thruths then other religios text, specifically for the time periods in wich it was written:
http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/science.html

moving on, right off hand the only historian that is concidered accurate to my knowledge (Looking for others, but very few historians text have survived all this time) is the works of Jesphus, which documents a number of things, which confirm the Bibles historical accuracy.

Ahahahahahahahahahah

*cough* *cough*...excuse me

ahahahahahahaha

That website doesn't prove crap.

In the years 161-126 BC, the man who is said to have first started the study of astronomy, Hiparchus, counted the number of stars in the heavens, and put the number at 1,080. This number was considered to be fairly accurate 300 years later, when Ptolemy announced that the number was more like 1,056.

It wasn't until the invention of the telescope that people realized that the number of the stars was huge ...in the countless millions. The Bible didn't make the mistake of saying that the number was merely a few hundred or thousand, but rather, in about 600 BC, the prophet Jeremiah says the number is "countless as the stars of the sky and measureless as the sand on the seashore" (Jer. 33:22). Also, from the year 1500 BC, the same concept comes from Genesis 22:17. And this is correct, because we now estimate the number of stars to be approximately 10 to the 26th (which may also be a fair estimate of the number of the grains of sand on all the earth's sea-shores), but the actual number is "countless" for us to attempt to precisely count. ---However, God, who is infinite in knowledge, knows the exact number, as the Bible says, "He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name" (Psalm 147:4).

See? Well that obviously proves that the bible is completely right.

Also, I find it funny that your now trying to use science to support the bible when before you were bashing science that disagreed with your views.

 

[A2597]

lol what about all the people who do get married yet cheat on each other then? Dont pull this bullshit, them not being married has very little to do with how successfuly their relationship was. But I expected something like this, you spitting some random crap from your mouth in favor of your argument. Again like Ive said there is no need for marriage, 2 people can love each other without a ring on their finger. But please make up some excuses as to why its totally neccessary.




Sigh.. around and around we go...

Dittos the last statement....

Yes, ALOT of marrigaes fail, and most because they look at marraige like you do. A peice of paper, nothing more.
To me, Marraige is a commitment not just to one another, but also to God. When I marry, it will be for life. If for some reason we get a divorce (And the only reason that would be biblically allowed is if one of us cheated on the other) I will never marry again, because in Gog's eyes, we are still married. The only way I could re-marry is if my wife was dead.

And, because I know this is coming....
Yes, in the old testiment many people had multiple wifes or concubines. God isn't stupid though, since back then there were MANY fewer people, and one wife per male wouldn't be able to populate the human species. Once there were enough people, you'll note that man was allocated one wife, not many.

 

[Maskirovka]

stop trying to prove that the bible is a correct historical document. even if it is, that's not proof that what it contains is true...only that certain people did write it. at a certain time or place.

you're still being the asshole referee...you're trying to prove the bible from within the bible. you can't prove that the bible's contents are supernatural. you can't prove that the contents of the bible are 100% true. just because someone wrote them doesn't mean they're true (the miracles, Jesus is God's son, etc.) you just can't prove that stuff to someone who doesn't take the bible as fact...i.e. us.

can't you say anything about your religion that doesn't have to do with the bible? any reason you would still believe if you didn't have the bible? besides your story about the kid healing overnight or whatever...something you can prove (even if it's your own thoughts)

 

[A2597]

Also, I find it funny that your now trying to use science to support the bible when before you were bashing science that disagreed with your views.

Are you confusing me with MorningStar? I've stated that science is a good thing, but that evolutionist just twist the data to suit their needs to falsify the need for God.

 

[PvtRyan]

ok, something a bit more accurate, which shows why the Bible holds more thruths then other religios text, specifically for the time periods in wich it was written:
http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/science.html

moving on, right off hand the only historian that is concidered accurate to my knowledge (Looking for others, but very few historians text have survived all this time) is the works of Jesphus, which documents a number of things, which confirm the Bibles historical accuracy.

Lol wat a laughable site, it just bends the words of the book till it fits our scientific conclusions.
I could make any old book fit current scientific theories by interpreting the words differently.

And it's funny to see you embrace science when it's convenient to you, but ignore it if it doesn't fit your point of view.

 

[Maskirovka]

And, because I know this is coming....
Yes, in the old testiment many people had multiple wifes or concubines. God isn't stupid though, since back then there were MANY fewer people, and one wife per male wouldn't be able to populate the human species. Once there were enough people, you'll note that man was allocated one wife, not many.

no that wasn't coming because nobody cares. you're still trying to prove the bible from within the bible.

and furthermore, you'd better stop posting geocities sites as "evidence" any fool can make a geocities site. i can go make one right now that says the sky is green, but it isn't now, is it?

also that site conveniently ignores evolution. the only genetics-related subject he tackles is an incorrect theory from the early 1800s by some french guy that has nothing to do with evolution.

 

[Maskirovka]

evolutionist just twist the data to suit their needs to falsify the need for God.

isn't that "bashing science that doesn't agree with your views?" there is no "twisting" contained in evolutionary theory. it is all backed up with observations. something your arguments lack. again...please give us a reason to believe that doesn't come from the bible directly.

 

[mchammer75040]

Yes, ALOT of marrigaes fail, and most because they look at marraige like you do. A peice of paper, nothing more.
To me, Marraige is a commitment not just to one another, but also to God. When I marry, it will be for life. If for some reason we get a divorce (And the only reason that would be biblically allowed is if one of us cheated on the other) I will never marry again, because in Gog's eyes, we are still married. The only way I could re-marry is if my wife was dead..

Thats all marriage is, is a piece of paper, it takes much more to love no? See your also talkin about commiting to God, and since Im atheist I dont believe in God so there is no good reason as to why I should get married. I can make a commitment to a woman without a piece of paper and a ring on my finger.

And, because I know this is coming....
Yes, in the old testiment many people had multiple wifes or concubines. God isn't stupid though, since back then there were MANY fewer people, and one wife per male wouldn't be able to populate the human species. Once there were enough people, you'll note that man was allocated one wife, not many.

I wasnt even goin to mention that...:|

 

[Maskirovka]

Thats all marriage is, is a piece of paper, it takes much more to love no? See your also talkin about commiting to God, and since Im atheist I dont believe in God so there is no good reason as to why I should get married. I can make a commitment to a woman without a piece of paper and a ring on my finger.

ok ok...stop talking about marriage values...that's a result of your non-belief, not a reason FOR that non-belief. this thread is all about WHY you don't believe, not what happens when you don't....you can't prove values or morals, so don't bother discussing them in this way.

 

[mchammer75040]

ok ok...stop talking about marriage values...that's a result of your non-belief, not a reason FOR that non-belief. this thread is all about WHY you don't believe, not what happens when you don't....you can't prove values or morals, so don't bother discussing them in this way.

True, but he brought it up so I had to say something. :E

 

[A2597]

OK, look. I wasn't expecting anyone to actually believe me. Most people in the threads just don't want to.

But, Maskirovka, you said you wanted to know if there was a God? The best way it just to humbly (Which in this case means honestly) Ask God to display himself in your life, and see what happens over the comming months, keeping an open mind.

 

[Maskirovka]

OK, look. I wasn't expecting anyone to actually believe me. Most people in the threads just don't want to.

But, Maskirovka, you said you wanted to know if there was a God? The best way it just to humbly (Which in this case means honestly) Ask God to display himself in your life, and see what happens over the comming months, keeping an open mind.

no i don't want to know if there is a god. please read and comprehend my sentence. i want you to give me a reason to believe that does not come directly from the bible.

i absolutely want to believe you...i just can't because there are these facts in my face that tell me otherwise.

 

[mchammer75040]

OK, look. I wasn't expecting anyone to actually believe me. Most people in the threads just don't want to.

But, Maskirovka, you said you wanted to know if there was a God? The best way it just to humbly (Which in this case means honestly) Ask God to display himself in your life, and see what happens over the comming months, keeping an open mind.

lol the reason people arent believing is you arent giving us a good reason to and your not demonstrating anything. I asked you countless times: on what basis should i accept your religion over all others? I never got a answer. Also as far as opening your heart to God, let me repost my dialouge that you never payed attention to:

A2597: Timmy will you accept God into your heart?

Lil Timmy: On what basis?

A2597: Faith

Lil Timmy: , not on evidence?

A2597: :|

Lil Timmy: Alright, alright for the sake of the argument I will accept it on "faith".

A2597: Alright, well now that it is accepted you can now see it is quite obvious that God created all of this.

Lil Timmy: Wait..first you have to demonstrate it to me, demonstrate to me how God created all this and the universe couldnt have come about otherwise.

A2597: You have to accept God with faith then you will see.

Lil Timmy: Well its painfully obvious that all you have to do is get one to accept the belief on faith and tell that person to accept it wholly on faith, which is to believe without question, and there is no need for demonstration. If one wholefully believes without question they will fill in the blanks themselves.


Just like I made a example earlier with people praying for a baby boy to buddha, if you accept the religion you fill in the blanks yourself.

 

[Neutrino]

OK, look. I wasn't expecting anyone to actually believe me. Most people in the threads just don't want to.

But, Maskirovka, you said you wanted to know if there was a God? The best way it just to humbly (Which in this case means honestly) Ask God to display himself in your life, and see what happens over the comming months, keeping an open mind.

First, it's not true that I "just don't want to". It's just that I have a rather analitical way of viewing the world and how can I accept something that seems to be logically untrue or atleast far from proven? That's just the way I see things. I can't help it. So if a god is going to send me to hell for a having a specific personality trait then he's more than welcome to.

For your second point: I do keep an open mind. I may not believe in god but I by no means completely deny that such a being could exist. But the whole "ask god to display himself in your life" bit is not very effective. If you want to believe in god than you will of course see all the good things in your life as being influence by him and if your adament about not believing you won't see any difference.

I, personally, credit all the good things in my life to my own hard work and perserverence. No invisible man in the sky is going to take credit for the work I've done. :E

 

[Maskirovka]

If you want to believe in god than you will of course see all the good things in your life as being influence by him and if your adament about not believing you won't see any difference.

exactly...it's a self-fulfilling prophecy...if you want God to display himself in your life, then you will attribute all the good things that happen to God. that's why christianity needs the devil...to explain all the bad things.

cause if you say, "God will appear if you truly want him to" and then the person's parents die and their wife is diagnosed with cancer, the person's gonna say, "ok...um...God didn't appear"

so your response would be something like, "God has a plan for you. All these things happened for a good reason...you'll see." or "the devil works to destroy everything good."

but can't you see how most people just come to the conclusion that God doesn't exist...or at least has doubts?

christianity has an "explanation" for everything. even if that explanation is, "God works in mysterious ways...we can never understand God's Will." well heck...you can chalk up anything weird or bad to "God's Will." it's very convenient (and lacks any support or proof)

 

[Neutrino]

Plus, isn't one of the most important things god supposedly did for us is give us free will? If we have free will then what the hell is he doing mucking about with people's lives in the first place?

 

[Lucifer Crass]

Back to evolution, when 2 animals mate, the thrid is different from the parents. So if one parent had a small tail and the other had a larger tail, the large tail would be passed on. They could survive better in, for example the water. The one with the smaller tails eventually die off until there are none with small tails. The tail gene was brought about by some sort of accident in DNA or outside interference like polution or something.

Plus, isn't one of the most important things god supposedly did for us is give us free will? If we have free will then what the hell is he doing mucking about with people's lives in the first place?

Exactly. Hahhaha thats a Good one.
:cheers:

 

[Marijn]

Look this religious thing is quite easey to explain. first some facts:
- over time people have generally become more at ease when theres a strong powerfull friend near who's helping you.
- life as you know it is an interpretation of your sences by your mind. you mind can make up things and they will appear to be true and realistic. (santa claus was real when you were 3yr remember?)

Now imagine that you believe you have a magical invisible friend who is unbeatable, allways right, extreemly powerfull and here to help you! nice if it was true.

Now this is exactly what religion is, people believe that they have such a friend (God/Allah/Jaweh) and because their mind decides what's real the "good feeling" will kick in. So religion makes them feel good. The good feeling then will be used as a proof that god does exist. ( How can something that doesn't exist make me feel good? - he must exist. ) This affirms the believer and will make the magical friend even more real.... you can see the vicious circle at work.

The problem with religion is that when other people claim your god wants you to do some thing, how can you check? (hint: you can't he's not real) So people usually take what their religious leader says for granted, why question a man who devoted his life to god right? Your religious leader now has an ability to control your actions. eg. pope: condoms are bad, mohammed: don't eat pork, etc.

So how would i classify religion? It's a virus and trojan horse in the human mind, it's widely spread in many variations. Damage: depends on version but "suicide bombing","denial of medical attention resulting in death" are reported.

 

[Maskirovka]

all information is a virus...it just depends on what happens...does it display some happy faces across your brain, or does it cause you to kill other people? like you said...depends on what information you receive and what your defenses were against it.

 

[Marijn]

all information is a virus...it just depends on what happens...does it display some happy faces across your brain, or does it cause you to kill other people? like you said...depends on what information you receive and what your defenses were against it.

if i tell you "i like cookies" it is information but not a virus since a: it's not harmfull, b: doesn't try to spread itself to other hosts.

religion is a system that does try to infect other hosts, influence decissions, makes questioning the religion a bad thing... etc.

not all information is a virus.

 

[Maskirovka]

i don't consider "i like cookies" to be information when i talk about information being viruses. i guess the word information by itself is too broad. but all statistics, data, conclusions, etc. are viruses.

if you tell me "i like 'brand x' of cookies because they're very soft and delicious" then that is a virus. next time i'm at the store, i might consider buying that brand because I heard from you that they're soft and delicious. however, if i like crunchy cookies, i won't buy soft cookies, and i am immune to your informational virus.

 

[Murray_H]

I read one of the many sites that have appeared on here, it talked about "dumb atoms"

If really are so "dumb" how come they can realise that sharing something can lead to stability? If only the world followed the atoms, it would be a such nicer place

 

[PvtRyan]

Back to evolution, when 2 animals mate, the thrid is different from the parents. So if one parent had a small tail and the other had a larger tail, the large tail would be passed on. They could survive better in, for example the water. The one with the smaller tails eventually die off until there are none with small tails. The tail gene was brought about by some sort of accident in DNA or outside interference like polution or something.

That's not really the thriving force behind evolution, the so called point mutations who change the DNA at one spot. They refine larger mutations which copy whole chromosomes as a result of a copying error. Thus creating new information.
I'm not completely familiar with this, but I'm pretty sure point mutations aren't the major force behind speciation.
One of the biggest arguments agains evolution seems to be "mutations never create new information", but they simply do. Not that this has anything to do with your post, but wanted to point that out

 

[Lucifer Crass]

That's not really the thriving force behind evolution, the so called point mutations who change the DNA at one spot. They refine larger mutations which copy whole chromosomes as a result of a copying error. Thus creating new information.
I'm not completely familiar with this, but I'm pretty sure point mutations aren't the major force behind speciation.
One of the biggest arguments agains evolution seems to be "mutations never create new information", but they simply do. Not that this has anything to do with your post, but wanted to point that out

Thank you for the info.


Point mutations are the only thing I can see that could change a cow into a camel. A fish into a whale. Ape to man. n00b to l337. Gills to lungs. Otherwise, wtf makes them change? If it isn't point mutations caused by enviromental conditions such as to much heat or really cold, poisionous atmosphere how would one thing adapt to the other.
Like those sea worms that live in the bottom on the ocean that take in the poision gas from water vents and change it into air. If there wasn't spot mutation there wouldn't be anything even near those vents. Unless, its magic

 

[Lil' Timmy]

sup y'all? man this thread is still going? just read some of the last posts, and thought i should drop this in. again, i'm not geneticist or evolutionary biologist, but as i understand things:

evolution is, of course, predicated on genes, which are comprised of chromosomes, in turn made of DNA. the DNA is functionally made of sequences of 4 nucleic acids that are 'zipped' together by molecular bonds in a ladder structure (see the figure here: http://www.cs.stedwards.edu/~kswank/Dnabasepairs.html). the sequence of these pairs is just like any language, most obviously, for us, similar to computer code. DNA is a set of instructions which is interpretted by cellular machinery. as the cellular mechanisms "read" the DNA, they essentially receive instructions. some of these instructions direct the cells to make protiens of some sort or another (specifically, the DNA provides a specification of the serial order of amino acids that are to be strung together to form a protien). some of these protiens are the very cellular machinery that "reads" DNA.

some of this cellular machinery is designed to copy the DNA, so that during cell division, a copy is made for both of the new cells. the process is analogous to the production of copies of a document by an office copying machine. many errors are made in the DNA copying process. but part of the copying machinery is essentially 'proofreading-protiens' devoted to comparing the newly manufactured strands to the old ones and correcting the errors. however, and this is the important part, the correction mechanisms are not 100% fool-proof. therefor some small amount of these errors can be found in the all of the cells (including the eggs and sperm) of organisms. these errors, when read by cellular machinery could result in physiological changes in an offspring away from either or the parents.

this is the basic process that allows populations of organisms to 'acquire' characteristcs from outside the standard genepool. natural selection, as a "force", would act upon any physiolgical changes due to this type of mutation as it would any other physiological differenece between individuals ina population. if one of the mutations led to an organism-physiology that had selective disadvantages in a given environment, mor-likely-than-not, that mutation would be selected against, and would be unlikely to get passed on to future generations. the vice-versa scenario is obvious.

anyway, that's how i understand it, please correct any errors, or ask any questions.. i'll be back on later tonight.


edit: generally speaking, the change in DNA from chromosomal damage caused by radiation or toxins is orders of magnitude higher that the tiny random mutations caused by replication error. usually this 'resequenced' DNA is not even readable by cellular machinery and causes severe problems (nearly always selectively highly disadvantageous) for any organism unfortunate enough to be formed using such damaged DNA. not generally an important aspect of evolution, afaik.

 

[Maskirovka]

i see that the religious people seem to have left the thread for whatever reason...i think it's gonna die soon. but after reading your last post, timmy that's how i understand things as well. i'm not any kind of expert either, but i can't spot any flaws in your interpretation.

and btw...i like the new sig...i especially like the first one
and thanks for including me...i feel special now!

 

[Dr. Shim]

In my opinion, the question shouldn't be, "are you religious, do you believe in a 'Bible,' and why aren't you scientifically sound?" The question should be, "what do you believe is wrong." The Bible (just as an example), might not be scientifically sound in some of it's stories. But it's what the moral is. We could just as well critisize Esopes Fables; foxes don't talk, nor do they eat grapes.

 

[Maskirovka]

In my opinion, the question shouldn't be, "are you religious, do you believe in a 'Bible,' and why aren't you scientifically sound?" The question should be, "what do you believe is wrong." The Bible (just as an example), might not be scientifically sound in some of it's stories. But it's what the moral is. We could just as well critisize Esopes Fables; foxes don't talk, nor do they eat grapes.

i agree with you...however, the christians participating in this thread do not. Apparently being a christian isn't just following christian morals....because I do that already and i think everyone should. if you don't believe in jesus then you're going to hell. it's simple to them, but seems stupid to everyone else :\