Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire So, which of the 6 theories of Evolution do you unbelievers believe in?

Keep telling yourself GOD is cheering those buds of yours who kicked HIM out of our schools and push homosexuality on the kids and pushed abortion and now push infanticide. Keep drinking your mind numbing kool--aid.

There will be a great gnashing....

This is another really good example of set theory dogma.

most folks think that a set has something in it,, but there is an empty set called the Null Set --- nothing there zero, this is a living example


it also forms the basis of the Null Hypothesis, used in probability theory,, simply stating that this much empty cant exist so the opposite must exist.

like comparing apples and oranges hmmm

apples and oranges have more in common than not in common

same size
same weight
almost same amt. of carbohydrates
both have seeds
both can be cut with a knife. [/quote]

So, im wondering what was the reason for the driving force to make them become more specialized, or different if you will.

Was there a driving need for a fruit that was more acidic, I mean, other than an intelligent plan to make more variety for man?

Perhaps, in the least eloquent manner possible, you could answer a question.

These apples and oranges....despite all they have in common, can they (or have they ever) produce(d) fruit with each other?

Ha ha ha ha ha!

I heard an evolutionist in lecture say something like, "If we could find the common ancestor of man and ape it would look like an ape."

Don't think Delicious and Naval have got it on, although I know they set beside each other at the store.
Positive that Envy and Tangerines have, how else could Mandarins be so much better.
Pretty sure Honeycrisp has been seeing Grapefruit


to answer directly yes they can produce , if you would like to donate to my genetics lab we can finish question up a the Myriad genetics lab in SLC

not sure what the point would be though

That’s contrary to the scientific consensus.

I heard a Parathenogenist say, If we could find the common ancestor of man and ape it would like a tree. Whats your point?

The question assumes a exclusive set of arguments.

A genetics lab in SLC. With D-way so close, I’d imagine genetics efforts in that area are quite interesting.

I am just a simpleton and have no idea exactly what has been explained to me or anyone else on this thread. The old Bible thread was better. So many Biblical contradictions got posted on there, it was almost embarrassing.
Even I did not know or remember how bloodthirsty the Old Testament really was. Jesus’s old Man was a real SOB. He would have fit well on the ‘Fire.

Science is not based on consensus. Science is based on observation and repeatability. Creation and evolution are exactly the same: Both happened in the past and are taken on faith. Therefore it is incumbent upon the observers to set aside their biases, as much as is possible, and search for the most likely "facts". That's why evolutionists become creationists and not the reverse.

So, im wondering what was the reason for the driving force to make them become more specialized, or different if you will.



[/quote]

Didn't you ever go to high school? Those so-called similarities are shared by all fruits that evolved to have their seeds spread by herbivores.

What was the driving force? A random genetic mutation occurs. Mostly it has no value and does not propogate through the species. If it has some survival value, more offspring will have that variation and it will become more standard.

An example is white skin. Homo sapiens all had dark skin until perhaps 8,000 years ago. A light skin mutation quickly spread through European Homo sapiens (your ancestors) because it helps UV radiation from the sun produce more Vitamin D. Those with the light skin mutation survived to produce more offspring. That's why you're "white." Dark skin is better for survival in the tropics.

Homo neanderthal, which separated from your stock a lot earlier, developed a different mutation for white skin. There are many other examples.

If the Caucasian and Negro races remained separate for a few hundred thousand years (which won't happen), they would each acquire a different genetic load through mutations that would eventually prevent them from interbreeding.

Evolution is as simple as that and that's how different species arise.

Sometimes different species which are somewhat closely interrelated can interbreed. Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthal, for instance. Wolves and dogs in the wild. Lions and tigers (but not in the wild). Horses and donkeys (though the offspring are infertile). But those of more genetic distande, such as dogs and cats, cannot interbreed.

Could humans and chim-panzees interbreed? Asking that question would certainly be forbidden. The two branches diverged about 7,000,000 years ago so the answer is probably no.

If justice were to prevail over tyranny in this country, there would be blood flowing bridle length....uh, nevermind.

lol

Nobody said it was.

And the general agreement...overwhelmingly...in science, based on observation and repeatability, supports evolution.

Evolution is zero threat to the faith of SO many Jesus followers; why does it appear to be such a threat to your faith...?

Didn't you ever go to high school? Those so-called similarities are shared by all fruits that evolved to have their seeds spread by herbivores.

What was the driving force? A random genetic mutation occurs. Mostly it has no value and does not propogate through the species. If it has some survival value, more offspring will have that variation and it will become more standard.

An example is white skin. Homo sapiens all had dark skin until perhaps 8,000 years ago. A light skin mutation quickly spread through European Homo sapiens (your ancestors) because it helps UV radiation from the sun produce more Vitamin D. Those with the light skin mutation survived to produce more offspring. That's why you're "white." Dark skin is better for survival in the tropics.

Homo neanderthal, which separated from your stock a lot earlier, developed a different mutation for white skin. There are many other examples.

If the Caucasian and Negro races remained separate for a few hundred thousand years (which won't happen), they would each acquire a different genetic load through mutations that would eventually prevent them from interbreeding.

Evolution is as simple as that and that's how different species arise.

Sometimes different species which are somewhat closely interrelated can interbreed. Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthal, for instance. Wolves and dogs in the wild. Lions and tigers (but not in the wild). Horses and donkeys (though the offspring are infertile). But those of more genetic distande, such as dogs and cats, cannot interbreed.

Could humans and chim-panzees interbreed? Asking that question would certainly be forbidden. The two branches diverged about 7,000,000 years ago so the answer is probably no.


[/quote]

So, the first human born from a [bleep] couldnt interbreed with its sibling of the opposite sex? I suppose it was just good luck another such human of the same genetic mutation but of the opposite sex was dropped by a monkey in an adjoining tree. Then they grew up bossom buds and made whoopi. From there we were off to the proverbial races, as different as they would soom prove to be.

Im sorry you are so stuck to unproven science you havent the ability to delve into theoretical philosophy without being thrown out of yout circadian rythm.

Now, tell me how the Bell Curve doesnt really pass scientic muster. As i expected, so much for your love of science.

I thought science proved that as time progressed, things became less specialized.

Put tame feral pigs in the forest for generations and they eventually revert back to the hogs they were originally. IOW, less specialized.

main difference between apples and oranges is citric acid.

once man figured out they needed Vit C, oranges (citrus fruit) was carried wherever shipping went.

apples meh, high fructose, requiring ATP and purines spells gout.

Yes, but how did apples know to become oranges because man needed Vit C. The apple came first . Remember, there was an apple tree in the Garden of Eden.

Todays science is, unfortunately ,a consensus

reasons being it is not science, but technology ----- there is a difference.


Not one great scientific idea or breakthrough was done by consensus.

somebody had a revelation, an epiphany, call it what you want, and all the players lined up. it was because they "knew" science (at least up to that point in history) more players lined up