Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » What if both evolution and creationism both happened?
  1. Results 31 to 50 of 50
  2. Page 2 of 2
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2

Thread: What if both evolution and creationism both happened?

post 1690584843 09-24-2023, 11:11 AM
-
#31
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Location: Washington, United States
  5. Posts: 32,174
  6. Rep Power: 347469
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
That’s the point dummy. Atheists don’t pretend to know. Our position doesn’t depend on explanation for an origin. So either you were implying god of the gaps, or you don’t know what an atheist is and why there is no onus to explain the origin.
Actually atheists do pretend to know

It’s a claim there is no god, that’s claim to “knowledge” of some kind.


Agnostics claim to not know, which is why I was agnostic for about 15 years.
post 1690585353 09-24-2023, 11:21 AM
-
#32
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2012
  4. Posts: 7,601
  5. Rep Power: 51600
Originally Posted By Paul
Random mutations never produce functional information, and origin of information always arises from intelligence
Nonsense. There are several well established mechanisms for generating entirely novel genes and gene families. Duplication events and subsequent divergence is one example.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
post 1690585443 09-24-2023, 11:23 AM
-
#33
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2012
  4. Posts: 7,601
  5. Rep Power: 51600
Originally Posted By Duckliver⏩
Actually atheists do pretend to know

It’s a claim there is no god, that’s claim to “knowledge” of some kind.


Agnostics claim to not know, which is why I was agnostic for about 15 years.
That’s not what an atheist is. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. I am an agnostic atheist and by the sounds of it, you are too. Welcome aboard.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
post 1690585723 09-24-2023, 11:30 AM
-
#34
  1. georgeenoob
  2. Registered User
  1. georgeenoob
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2010
  4. Age: 32
  5. Posts: 5,226
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
That’s not what an atheist is. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. I am an agnostic atheist and by the sounds of it, you are too. Welcome aboard.
Big difference between an agnostic atheist and just an atheist. You should've clarified from the beginning.
post 1690585803 09-24-2023, 11:32 AM
-
#35
  1. georgeenoob
  2. Registered User
  1. georgeenoob
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Feb 2010
  4. Age: 32
  5. Posts: 5,226
  6. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Nonsense. There are several well established mechanisms for generating entirely novel genes and gene families. Duplication events and subsequent divergence is one example.
And what are the odds of this even happening?
post 1690585893 09-24-2023, 11:34 AM
-
#36
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Location: Washington, United States
  5. Posts: 32,174
  6. Rep Power: 347469
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
That’s not what an atheist is. Atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive. I am an agnostic atheist and by the sounds of it, you are too. Welcome aboard.
Actually it is



And no it’s not compatible with agnosticism which remains open to possibility of a god but makes no claim as to what they know. Atheisms requirement is literally disbelief in god.

And no I am not either, I believe in our lord god and Jesus Christ and regularly read the Bible



Whoever invented agnostic atheism and agnostic theism is a giant retard who doesn’t understand how words work.

Edit: apparently I’m the retard cuz it’s the same guy who was coining all the terms. I still believe it’s absolute stupidity to have conflicting beliefs either you’re agnostic or not.
post 1690586363 09-24-2023, 11:43 AM
-
#37
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  1. Reliance012
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2012
  4. Posts: 7,601
  5. Rep Power: 51600
Originally Posted By Duckliver⏩
Actually it is



And no it’s not compatible with agnosticism which remains open to possibility of a god but makes no claim as to what they know. Atheisms requirement is literally disbelief in god.

And no I am not either, I believe in our lord god and Jesus Christ and regularly read the Bible
Try reading that definition one more time. A lack of belief in god can include, but is not necessarily the same as, believing there is no god. Your own definition shows you don’t understand what an atheist even is.

Atheism and agnosticism are about two different things. One is about belief and one knowledge.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
post 1690587263 09-24-2023, 11:59 AM
-
#38
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Location: Washington, United States
  5. Posts: 32,174
  6. Rep Power: 347469
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Try reading that definition one more time. A lack of belief in god can include, but is not necessarily the same as, believing there is no god. Your own definition shows you don’t understand what an atheist even is.

Atheism and agnosticism are about two different things. One is about belief and one knowledge.
Yeah I’m wrapping my head around it and haven’t framed it that way my whole life. Prolly gonna take me rest of the day.

My critical thinking is slower than I like but I jump to conclusions very fast. Gotta reframe.
post 1690611433 09-24-2023, 08:08 PM
-
#39
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2005
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 7,482
  6. Rep Power: 12818
Originally Posted By Duckliver⏩
So was what I was taught in elementary school that amoebas evolved into all intelligent forms still the commonly held belief for evolution? That’s really the only part I have high levels of doubt on, everything else checks out pretty solid. Keep in mind I don’t have any religious skin in the game cuz even if it was amoebas evolving into t-Rex’s I would still see evolution and the Bible as being compatible. I just literally don’t believe based on science that amoebas can turn into huge land animals etc…
The first thing you want to look at is what's called endosymbiosis and/or Serial Endosymbiotic Theory (SET). This will get you started. Once eukaryotic cells existed lifereallystarted to speed up.

Here's a good schematic:



Note that amoeba is an evolutionary "dead end":



Note we're talking billions of years, all of written human history has been a number of thousands. You won't find the answers you're looking for on here, use books. Hope that helps a little. Good luck.
No war but class war
post 1690611623 09-24-2023, 08:13 PM
-
#40
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2005
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 7,482
  6. Rep Power: 12818
Originally Posted By Paul
There is no species/family change from one to another. Much of what is usually attributed to mutations in the nature is simply adaptation, and that adaptation has today a name, EPIGENETICS. It is a system that does not change the DNA, it regulates gene-expression and does not need those millions of years to do it. In fact a good example of epigenetic adaptation are the Galapagos finches. It was supposed until recently that changes in the size and form of their beaks required time periods typical to the Darwinian explanation, observations have however confirmed that the changes occur continuously (as rapidly is in a couple of years) and are reversible.
Well, if it doesn't exist, define speciation. In your words. No links.
No war but class war
post 1690612113 09-24-2023, 08:26 PM
-
#41
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,385
  6. Rep Power: 316746
Originally Posted By Reliance012⏩
Nonsense. There are several well established mechanisms for generating entirely novel genes and gene families. Duplication events and subsequent divergence is one example.
Duplication means an original was already created. Changing anything at random, ALWAYS degrades it. Purely undirected processes cannot produce the complexity or the information necessary to build the complexity to make a living organism.
post 1690612163 09-24-2023, 08:27 PM
-
#42
  1. 401Delta
  2. ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠
  1. 401Delta
  2. ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠ ☠
  3. Join Date: May 2017
  4. Posts: 25,167
  5. Rep Power: 417920
Evolution didn't happen. It's happening.

Creation is a story.
post 1690612283 09-24-2023, 08:30 PM
-
#43
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,385
  6. Rep Power: 316746
Originally Posted By squanto⏩
Well, if it doesn't exist, define speciation. In your words. No links.
What do you mean it doesn’t exist? I’m saying there are no transitioning links from animal to man. Or cat to dog, etc. You have animals belonging to the same family/class, but you have no links outside of that. Please don’t use bacteria as an example.
post 1690612723 09-24-2023, 08:37 PM
-
#44
  1. miscerForLulz
  1. miscerForLulz
  3. Join Date: Aug 2016
  4. Posts: 8,465
  5. Rep Power: 51479
Nah I'm sweet brah
2:136
Say, ˹O believers,˺ We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us; and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and his descendants; what was given to Moses, Jesus, and other prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them. And to Allah we all submit.
post 1690615033 09-24-2023, 09:32 PM
-
#45
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2005
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 7,482
  6. Rep Power: 12818
Originally Posted By Paul
What do you mean it doesn’t exist? I’m saying there are no transitioning links from animal to man. Or cat to dog, etc. You have animals belonging to the same family/class, but you have no links outside of that. Please don’t use bacteria as an example.
Humans are animals.
Originally Posted By Paul
There is no species/family change from one to another.
To be clear, are you saying there is no change from one species into another species?
No war but class war
post 1690616473 09-24-2023, 10:18 PM
-
#46
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,385
  6. Rep Power: 316746
Originally Posted By squanto⏩
Humans are animals.



To be clear, are you saying there is no change from one species into another species?
Humans are not animals.
No change from one species to another outside of the same family. The easiest example would be a “missing link” from ape or “relative of a monkey” to man..they are all frauds, we can go through all of them if you like, starting with Australopithecus that was half assed thrown together by a bankrupt ****** that was about to lose all his funding.
post 1690616923 09-24-2023, 10:32 PM
-
#47
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  1. squanto
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2005
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 7,482
  6. Rep Power: 12818
Originally Posted By Paul
Humans are not animals.
Well, it is a free country, you can think whatever you want.

I'm going to stick with what the scientific community says.

If you don't think humans are animals I don't really see much common ground for us to have a discussion on the issue, so I'm going to wish you well and be done with it.
No war but class war
post 1690616963 09-24-2023, 10:33 PM
-
#48
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  1. Paul Kreul
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Apr 2006
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 33,385
  6. Rep Power: 316746
Originally Posted By squanto⏩
Well, it is a free country, you can think whatever you want.

I'm going to stick with what the scientific community says.

If you don't think humans are animals I don't really see much common ground for us to have a discussion on the issue, so I'm going to wish you well and be done with it.
So you can’t provide proof of any missing link?

Do you believe that Planet of the Apes was a documentary?

Srs question
post 1690625493 09-25-2023, 05:27 AM
-
#49
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  1. Bodhy
  2. Paddling to New Zealand
  3. Join Date: Mar 2020
  4. Posts: 17,326
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Paul
So you can’t provide proof of any missing link?

Do you believe that Planet of the Apes was a documentary?

Srs question
You are such a disingenuous fukslut, but that's basically your prototypical creationist. You're peddling in chestnuts that have been addressed ad nauseam by biologists.

We've found many, many transitional fossils. The only caveat is what layfolk think a transitional fossil is meant to be and what science deems solid evidence.


You're expecting some sort of perfect hybrid fossil which is like the exact mix of ape and man. That concept is arbitrary and evolution is more complex than that. Evolution doesn't proceed linearly, it's recursive and heirarchical. The fossil record of human evolution isn't a series of a few species leading to humans. It's a big tree of different ancestors which have both living and extinct species.


We don't have your mythical "ape-man". But we do have fossils that show gradual development of apeish ancestral species to more human like species. In fact, if you named any group of life you could find a few examples of fossils representing their early evolution.



All of which is absolutely moot since we don't need a single fossil to demonstrate the truth of evolution. There is an enormous body of different forms of evidence for the theory.


Bodhy: Actually degree qualified in biology.


Paul Not-Cool: Low IQ tradie.


Pretty obvious why we hold our respective opinions on the issue.
Back off, Warchild.

Seriously.
post 1690629023 09-25-2023, 07:31 AM
-
#50
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  1. Duckliver
  2. Offal
  3. Join Date: Jun 2013
  4. Location: Washington, United States
  5. Posts: 32,174
  6. Rep Power: 347469
Originally Posted By squanto⏩
The first thing you want to look at is what's called endosymbiosis and/or Serial Endosymbiotic Theory (SET). This will get you started. Once eukaryotic cells existed lifereallystarted to speed up.

Here's a good schematic:



Note that amoeba is an evolutionary "dead end":



Note we're talking billions of years, all of written human history has been a number of thousands. You won't find the answers you're looking for on here, use books. Hope that helps a little. Good luck.
Appreciate that I actually want to see what’s currently going on with education.

So I can see we’re still on bacteria type things growing up into complex organisms.

What evidence has ever been presented this is possible ? What mechanism in nature? What science were they doing 75 years ago that hasn’t been amplified 100x but we still have nothing but “hrrr durr this happened over the course of a billion years”. The whole thing is theory crafting. Every major breakthrough “this is a human from 3 million years ago”. Gets turned out 10-25 years later as “actually it was just a monkey relative and australopithecines aren’t related to humans at all”. Etc..


It’s literally the same level of belief as taking genesis as non allegorical with the “best scientific guess”. Being rewritten as “this happened”
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts