Missing link in human evolution unveiled

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**generalgrog**

dogma wrote:
Clthomps wrote:macro evolutions still has a large amount of holes in it.

A theoretical gap is a very specific discrepancy of knowledge. For example, there is a gap between quantum theory and relativistic theory because all current attempts to reconcile the two have failed despite the fact that they each possess testable predictive power. Evolution is a self-contained theory based on the assumption that the world we observe is consistent with the world as it once was. There are no holes in the theory. There are holes in the data that serve to support the theory, but that is a wholly separate matter which has little bearing on the integrity of the theory itself.

We've been down this road before dogma. You state there are no holes in the theory, then turn around and point out the very things that are the holes in the theory.

And that is the lack of data(insert transitional forms). This IDA, is yet another attempt at "creating" a transitional form for Homo Sapiens.

And thank you for pointing out the assumption that is used in the modern version of the evolutionary model.

GG

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cheese Elemental wrote:-_- If we're starting a religious thread here, can we keep it sensible?

The DAKKA track record has been pretty good at keeping things reasonable, with regards to these issues.

GG

**spartanghost**

Sometimes I wonder what would happen if someday evolution was proven beyond all reasonable doubt to be true.

Also, Cheese Elemental, i could be wrong here but i think i remember reading that there is no evidence of a global flood to have happened in Moses' time. I'f i'm wrong please point me in the right direction.

Personally i believe evolution is true, but god exists in the form of a sort of operating system for the universe. Doesn't really interact with humans directly, but can influence the universe at large. Also that would confirm both creationists and evolutionists ideas. GODOS (as i shall call it) created the parameters for the universe, which resulted in the way it is now, including humans. so humans arent an afterthought. at least i hope not. afterthoughts suck. And the mechanism for humans becoming as we are is evolution. ta-da! everybody wins!

**Cheese Elemental**

If evolution was proven to be true, then I'm still right because God still did it. It's this thing that people call 'intelligent design' which is a happy-medium between evolutionism and creationism. Basically, it means that God created the world and all life, but evolution still took place because God nudged our genetics that way.

And it's quite hard to tell when a flood was. It's just a lot of water flowing over the ground, after all. Isn't it possible that the changes in sea level observed millions of years ago were caused by the flood? That goes against my beliefs (I don't think the earth is that old), but it's plausible.

**dogma**

generalgrog wrote:
We've been down this road before dogma. You state there are no holes in the theory, then turn around and point out the very things that are the holes in the theory. And that is the lack of data(insert transitional forms). This IDA, is yet another attempt at "creating" a transitional form for Homo Sapiens.

Theory is separate from data. Einstein's theory of general relativity was an internally consistent theory before there was ever any data to confirm that the theory aligned with reality. Evolution is very similar in that Darwin's initial theory was internally consistent before there existed data to prove concurrence with the natural world.

Incidentally, there are already several far better examples of transitional primates. Its completely disingenuous to state that there is no evidence of their existence. Either way, the type of analog proof you're asking for doesn't actually exist. You would never say that 2 cannot be proven to follow 1, even though there exist an infinite number of potential gaps between the two numbers.

generalgrog wrote:
And thank you for pointing out the assumption that is used in the modern version of the evolutionary model.

That's the same assumption that underlies all of life. If the world of today cannot be assumed to be consistent with the world of the past, then we can never actually learn anything. All we would be able to do is speculate, and pray. Which is preposterous given the existence of the computer we are both using to communicate.

Cheese Elemental wrote:If evolution was proven to be true, then I'm still right because God still did it. It's this thing that people call 'intelligent design' which is a happy-medium between evolutionism and creationism. Basically, it means that God created the world and all life, but evolution still took place because God nudged our genetics that way.

Another popular alternative is Pantheism, which essentially states that God and the Universe are functionally indistinguishable.

Cheese Elemental wrote:
And it's quite hard to tell when a flood was. It's just a lot of water flowing over the ground, after all. Isn't it possible that the changes in sea level observed millions of years ago were caused by the flood? That goes against my beliefs (I don't think the earth is that old), but it's plausible.

It isn't really that hard to tell when a flood might have occurred. And a flood which covered the whole of the world, like the one described in the Bible, would be incredibly easy to spot. One obvious sign would be a uniform layer of sediment at roughly the same depth over the entire planet.

**reds8n**

spartanghost wrote:

Also, Cheese Elemental, i could be wrong here but i think i remember reading that there is no evidence of a global flood to have happened in Moses' time. I'f i'm wrong please point me in the right direction.

Moses' time ? Do you mean perhaps Noah ?

The flood, as RAW, is impossible. There's never been enough water to cover the earth to that extent. I believe infact the weight of that amount of water would also be too much weight for most of the continental plates to hold without snapping.

And that's ignoring the whole problem with getting animals ( not pairs, that's a misconception) into the ark in the first place-- number of species, where they live etc etc anyway.

EDIT arK not arC.

**Cheese Elemental**

You know, when a divine being is involved in something, they probably wouldn't leave evidence. A flood would devastate earth, right? So wouldn't it be cleared up?

I get the feeling you're trying to turn me off my religion.

**reds8n**

Cheese Elemental wrote:You know, when a divine being is involved in something, they probably wouldn't leave evidence.

Why ?

A flood would devastate earth, right? So wouldn't it be cleared up?

I get the feeling you're trying to turn me off my religion.

The damage would have destroyed the Earth, and things like continental shelfs snapping tend to leave massive geological evidence.

Sure with handwavium a God could magically erase such damage, but there's no mention of that happening.

I assure you I could not care less what your religion /religious beliefs are.

**LuciusAR**

Cheese Elemental wrote:You know, when a divine being is involved in something, they probably wouldn't leave evidence

How convenient.

**Cheese Elemental**

But the purpose of the flood was to destroy the sinful world and begin again, so God would have fixed it with a wave of the hand.

**reds8n**

Perhaps. But there's no mention of that.

Now you could say it's implied.... but it's equally valid to say that the whole thing is metaphorical --that's what the early Church claimed, they often said it was in fact an analogy for Baptism if memory serves--or just the half remembered tale of an earlier story or myth--like in Gilgamesh.

**Cheese Elemental**

And I do believe that it's implied, and let's leave it at that, mkay?

I'm not wussing out of a religious debate, but I don't like to let religion disrupt my personality and everyday life.

**Kilkrazy**

The Flood story occurs in several world religions and probably reflects an ancient memory of rising sea levels at the end of the last major Ice Age.

For example, we know that the Mediterranean used to be a huge valley not a sea, and Britain used to be joined to the continent by a land bridge.

**ungulateman**

Thank you Killkrazy.

Anyway, I do actually remember a while ago on a TV documentary hearing that Noah's ark would be physically impossible to make. Any available woods couldn't support the ark's own weight, considering it would have to be the size of the Titanic. Not to mention the fact that there wouldn't be enough water.

**Cheese Elemental**

Ah, but couldn't a really, really good wood have been available before the flood?

**LuciusAR**

Cheese Elemental wrote:Ah, but couldn't a really, really good wood have been available before the flood?

Yes it's possible, but that's going into the realm of very very wild speculation.

Besides it doesn’t address the problems of how one of each species of land animal on the planet (and all the provisions they would need for 100 days at sea) could be rounded up and be placed on board this arc or how they came to so widely distributed afterwards.

Nor the fact that even if all the Ice caps where to melt and all the water-moisture in the atmosphere where to simultaneously turn to its liquid form, there still would not be enough water for a flood on the scale as described in the bible.

**reds8n**

"magic wood"....right...

First let us look at the ark built by Noah. Genesis 6:15 gives its measurements as 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide and 30 cubits high. The length of the cubit is based on the length of the human forearm and varies among the various ancient cultures. For instance, the Babylonian cubit was approximately 0.53 metres, the Roman cubit was about 0.44 metres while the Hebrew cubit was about 0.56 metres. Using the Hebrew cubit the ark would have measured 168 metres long, 28 metres wide and 17 metres high. There are two problems with this ark as described: it is both too big and too small at the same time.

It is too big, because before the invention of steel, the wooden ark of Noah simply could not have been structurally sound and was thus unseaworthy. The longest wooden ship ever built (i.e. historically verified) was the USS Wyoming. This vessel, which was, at 110 meters long, a full 50% shorter than Noah’s ark, was found to be so unstable that it could only be used for short coastal hauls to avoid rough conditions further out in the sea. The huge structural stresses that developed in the USS Wyoming made the ship sag and, well, it leaked. Water thus had to be pumped out continuously to prevent the ship from sinking. Now, here we have Noah’s ark, built with wood, before the invention of steel and hydraulic pumps, undergoing the turbulent conditions of the flood unscathed. It is simply an engineering impossibility.

It is too small, because there is simply not enough room for all the animals. There are extant today over 4,500 species of mammals, 6,000 species of reptiles, 8,600 species of birds and 3,000 species of amphibians. Each of these have many large members: elephants, camels, rhinoceros, hippopotamasus, giraffes, horses, donkeys, zebras, cattle, bison, tapirs, pigs, tigers, lions, jaguars, panthers, sea lions, walruses, crocodiles, alligators, giant turtles, Komodo dragon, snakes, ostriches, emus, falcons and giant salamanders. There are 23,000 species of fishes, many of which will not be able to survive the flood if not taken up into the ark. Each kilogram of fish require about a cubic meter of water to survive-this is simply to provide enough oxygen and provide space for swimming while sleeping and feeding. The volume of water required for the fishes alone would be larger than the ark.[4] And then there are the little creatures; there are about a million species of insects and 60,000 species of arachnids. How were these species stored in the ark?

linky

**Cheese Elemental**

Look, how much explanation do you need? If God was there to direct him, he did it. It's as simple as that.

Kindly stop trying to disprove my religion now.

**reds8n**

You appear to be failing to recognise the difference between disproving your religion, which we're not doing, and pointing out the fact that the section is question is, at best, metaphorical in nature and countering the increasingly spurious nature of your "answers". All whilst actually discussing other points. Go figure.

For many people it's not "as simple as that". Then again I doubt most people really care one way or another.

If the discussion that other forum members are having happens to upset you, then don't post in it or read it.

**LunaHound**

Cheese Elemental wrote:But the purpose of the flood was to destroy the sinful world and begin again, so God would have fixed it with a wave of the hand.

Which obviously didnt work . We still see sin everywhere.

Thus if god was omnipotent , why are there left overs?

Surely you dont mean the first cleanse failed?

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:The Flood story occurs in several world religions and probably reflects an ancient memory of rising sea levels at the end of the last major Ice Age.

For example, we know that the Mediterranean used to be a huge valley not a sea, and Britain used to be joined to the continent by a land bridge.

There are arguments that it also represents a catastrophic event that occurred at that time, or at various times.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Modquisition on. This thread has meandered into attacks on religion. It is closed.