Fhqwhgadshgnsdbkhsdabkfab wrote:
the only real physical advancements were with the ridge over the eyes, ... ridge right under our mouth, in our jaw
You are about 100 years old in your evolution theory. Modern evolutionists say that Neaderthals did not evolve into modern man. But you believe it anyway, without evidence. That's more faith than any of the Christians here have!
Fhqwhgadshgnsdbkhsdabkfab wrote:
doesn't it seem like creationists don't seem to believe in ... every post-1933 advancements in science?
I myself took advantage of stem cell research just this year. I believe in adult stem-cell research. As Didymus said, I don't believe in sacrificing others' lives to help mine against their will. One of the post-1933 developments in medicine was the useage of twins and Jews against their will for medical research by Nazi Germany, so for that one post-1933 advancement... no. I don't want it.
Didymus wrote:
I also happen to love MP3's (obtained ethically, of course)
Me too!
Didymus wrote:
For cloning: there are ethical questions involved in cloning that even geneticists are asking.
For example, who will be the clone's parents/legal guardians? Will it be the corporation that grew it? The clone will be a human, and any time a U.S. citizen creates a human the
normal way there are legal and ethical obligations that a laboratory is not well suited to perform. The clone will have rights, too, like anyone born in the U.S. And one of its rights will be to refuse medical procedures, the very procedures that cloning advocates want to raise them in order to perform.
Didymus wrote:
However, I would be willing to support stem cell research if they could find a means to harvest stem cells without producing such a meat market.
I actually donated some stem cells. It didn't hurt much at all. I suggest you go to your local Red Cross and have your HLA typing performed so that if anyone needs your bone marrow stem cells, you can chose to donate some. There are a number of hospitals trying to build up a list of eligible donors. You could save a life. And donate blood while you're at it. Of course, only if you're over 18, or if you have your parents' permission.
Fhqwhgadshgnsdbkhsdabkfab wrote:
i'm not old enough to understand
Yes, you are
. Little children understand Adam and Eve just fine. You're plenty old enough. You're right that people should not be overbearing at you, as that's not appropriate in this friendly forum. But no one here is so much better than you that you should feel inferior.
Fhqwhgadshgnsdbkhsdabkfab wrote:
i just don't like that creationists saying that if your views on the homo sapien's coming into existence is scientific instead of divine, that you should go to hell fo being sacreligious.
That stated view is not exactly discrimination in the way you're thinking of it. While some people probably come off that way to you, rest assured that nobody goes to hell because of monkeys.
TheNintenGenius wrote:
I probably won't add much, but I will say that I am a pretty stauch evolutionist, just given the amounts of scientific evidence provided for it.
The amount of evidence? Or the amount of public school science teachers teaching it as fact? Keep one thing in mind (apologies in advance to any science teachers here), science teachers are not scientists. 95% of them just teach whatever the book says to teach without doing any research. Many of the "facts" science teachers taught in high school just 25 years ago have been completely revoked by the actual scientific community. So to just believe whatever they say is blind faith, much more than creationists could ever muster up.
TheNintenGenius wrote:
However, I am open to the concept that some divine force may have created life but then allowed life to more or less evolve on its own to suit its own desires.
Why? I mean, why are you open, and why would it do such a silly thing? When I make something, I use it for my own purposes. Maybe God is better than I am.
TheNintenGenius wrote:
doesn't quite explain differing ethnicities
What differences? We're all the same. I've been all over the world and there's really no difference. I mean, there are cultural differences, but there's a bigger difference between you and your parents culturally than there is between you and a Philippino teenager.
TheNintenGenius wrote:
while she thinks Adam & Eve happened, post Adam-Eve God then created other groups of people, which would help explain the differing races thing again.
I've heard that theory before, but I can't put my finger on it. Is that Mormonism or something?
furrykef wrote:
The whole story is pretty much blown to pieces by math.
I am a mathematician... what operation would you like me to perform? Allow me to create an Excel Spreadsheet. Assume the population of earth to be 2, doubling every 100 years. Now take into account that the Bible seems to imply that we're just over 6000 years into creation. 2 Quintillion people. In fact, 6 Billion people only takes about 3200 years at that very conservative rate, considering that when you were born, there were less than 5 billion people, and now we're over 6 billion! So, actually, your argument is what's blown to pieces by math. Whoever told you this fairy tale about population being too big for Adam and Eve must think you're a chump. I have more respect for you than that.
TheNintenGenius wrote:
there's still the whole "if everyone came from two people, where do we get blacks, asians, caucasians...
There's no appreciable genetic difference. We're all the same color, just different shades. It's a chemical in skin cells called "melanin." So there's really only two colors: melanin and albino. And melanin parents can have an albino child without any mutations, therefore that's not even proof of evolution. Height differences are as much nutritional as they are genetic (who's one of the tallest players in the NBA right now? Oh, a Chinese man!). So, who can name a trait that's actually proof of race? Of evolution? If there is something to one race being more evolved than another, what race is the superior one? You see, "believing" evolution leads directly to racism, and if you truly
truly believe in evolution then you
have to be a racist. To be an egalitarian evolutionist is a direct contradiction in terms. Only a creationist can believe that all people were
created equal.
Kaffiene wrote:
Genetic mutations could have occured, giving certain individuals a darker skin colour, who then reproduce and create more of similar features/attributes/etc.
I have only ever met a few mutants. They had Down's syndrome. I have never observed a single mutation that led to a different characteristic like you're attributing to races, and certainly never any one that could account for the evolution of anything. Mutations are always, without exception, destructive. Find me 1 contradiction and I'll admit that evolution is possible. But I don't think you can, because for all the "evidence" for evolution, it's all thought experements. There are no positive mutations in any observation I've ever seen or heard of!
With one set of exceptions... hear me out. Scientists have created new pet fish that have firefly DNA. So these fish now glow. It's really cool, and took thousands of years of scientific research to accomplish! Didn't happen in the wild, or in the swamp, or in the ocean, but in the hands of intelligent creators. So, there may be positive mutations at the hands of scientists.