For the Creationist Biologist.

RSS
Email

Author	Comment
Quontir	For the Creationist Biologist.	Lead	[-]
Posts: 32 (02/25/08 12:44:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Tags : None At least one person here has stated that they are a Biologist, but that they are also a creationist. With that in mind I took some time to find some course materials for Biology 101 (that's Freshman Biology in College). An Online Textbook of Natural History is available for anyone to read and examine. It's also available if anyone wanted to take a 100 level course in Biology. Now for those of you who call yourselves Biologists. I'd like to know which parts of this book you decided were wrong and how you convinced your professor that they were indeed wrong. In other words I want to know how you answered the tests given to you? Exactly how could you pass Freshman Biology without accepting evolution? You wouldn't have purposefully given an answer that you knew was wrong would you?
AUTigers001		#1	[-]
Posts: 403 (02/26/08 07:41:53) Veteran Who Just Won't Go Away Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Who was it that said that?... just curious... As the light changed from red to green to yellow and back to red again, I sat there thinking about life. Was it nothing more than a bunch of honking and yelling? Sometimes it seemed that way. -Jack Handy
Quontir		#2	[-]
Posts: 33 (02/26/08 09:09:48) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Who was it that said that?... just curious... One of the Xtians around here was saying they were Biologically inclined. Maybe I screwed up and they don't post here so much.
WordClock		#3	[-]
Posts: 4 (02/27/08 13:26:35) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I am not a biologist or a creationist and I got through my biology courses without accepting evolution. I did this by answering the questions asked with the answers provided from my professor and textbooks in order to get a passing grade, it wasnt very hard. I later accepted the theory as a possibility few years later but now Im unsure again. There is no denying certain aspects of evolution but I would need more proof of macro-evolution before I could fully commit to it. I was taught many things in school that I didnt accept (mainly in the subject of History) but in order to be successful in any college course you have to pass the test. So naturally I did whatever it took to make this happen.
tracyanneb		#4	[-]
Posts: 10 (02/27/08 18:38:36) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	There is no denying certain aspects of evolution but I would need more proof of macro-evolution before I could fully commit to it. What evidence would you find compelling? or to put it another way, what evidence do you not find compelling? Free and Open Linux and Open Source Software. You know, us Linux users are really spoiled, and we don't appreciate it. We get for free, stuff that Windows users have to pay a lot of money for - Fleetwod Barney (Musician)
Rambo123UK		#5	[-]
Posts: 367 (02/28/08 01:57:21) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Common ancestry is as near a proven fact as anything can be. This can be shown from molecular biology, cladistics (nested heirarchies), etc. Plainly if you wish to actually see a fish turning into an amphibian in real time, you are going to be disappointed, but since we can see it in fossils, why are you not convinced it could happen? Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory
WordClock		#6	[-]
Posts: 7 (02/28/08 09:29:35) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Rambo123UK wrote: Common ancestry is as near a proven fact as anything can be. This can be shown from molecular biology, cladistics (nested heirarchies), etc. Plainly if you wish to actually see a fish turning into an amphibian in real time, you are going to be disappointed, but since we can see it in fossils, why are you not convinced it could happen? Im certainly not convinced its not happening, dont get me wrong. Maybe I dont know enough to be convinced. You gotta admit in schools they dont teach evolution in any real detail, it can be pretty vague. But regardless, Im still open to other possibilities. I wasnt aware that there were transitional fossils on a macro-evolutionary level. I'd be interested to see some photos. "What evidence would you find compelling? or to put it another way, what evidence do you not find compelling?" Its not that I dont find the evidence compelling its that there seems to be a lack of tangible evidence....that im aware of. I could be wrong but I dont think there are any fossils that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from any particular species. You'd think there would be at least one. But Im not ruling it out as a possibility. So far its makes more sense than any other theory of the origin of human life I've heard. Last Edited By: WordClock 02/28/08 09:31:57. Edited 1 times.
Rambo123UK		#7	[-]
Posts: 368 (02/28/08 11:35:58) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	If you're talking about US high schools, I have no personal knowledge, being raised in the UK. However, if I limited my learning to what was on the UK national curriculum, well... I could be wrong but I dont think there are any fossils that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from any particular species. You'd think there would be at least one. Why? Do you expect there to be fossils of every single species that ever lived to have survived for us to look at? And I'm not quite clear what you mean - we can trace our family tree back through archaic H. sapiens, through H. heidelbergensis, to H. erectus/ergaster, and back to H. georgicus and then, where it gets complicated, probably H. habilis. If you mean that we cannot trace it with any certainty back beyond 2 million years, you're correct, but if it wasn't A. afarenis or A. africanus that gave rise to H. habilis and H. rudolfensis, then it was a closely related and as yet undiscovered species. And if humans did not evolve from apes, why can such a progression of ape to hominid to human be traced in the fossils? Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory
WordClock		#8	[-]
Posts: 10 (02/28/08 12:22:03) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Rambo123UK wrote: If you're talking about US high schools, I have no personal knowledge, being raised in the UK. However, if I limited my learning to what was on the UK national curriculum, well... I could be wrong but I dont think there are any fossils that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from any particular species. You'd think there would be at least one. Why? Do you expect there to be fossils of every single species that ever lived to have survived for us to look at? And I'm not quite clear what you mean - we can trace our family tree back through archaic H. sapiens, through H. heidelbergensis, to H. erectus/ergaster, and back to H. georgicus and then, where it gets complicated, probably H. habilis. If you mean that we cannot trace it with any certainty back beyond 2 million years, you're correct, but if it wasn't A. afarenis or A. africanus that gave rise to H. habilis and H. rudolfensis, then it was a closely related and as yet undiscovered species. And if humans did not evolve from apes, why can such a progression of ape to hominid to human be traced in the fossils? I dont expect a fossil of every species to be discovered but I do expect that they should at least exist. As hard as we look and as bad as it wants to be proven I suspect that there should be at least one humanoid fossil proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from apes. Dont assume that I am against evolution or that i am looking for reasons not to accept it, I will admit that I dont know enough information to make an honest judgement. Maybe you guys can help me out with that. Do you have a good link for the ancestry you mentioned?
Rambo123UK		#9	[-]
Posts: 371 (02/28/08 12:30:09) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	As hard as we look and as bad as it wants to be proven I suspect that there should be at least one humanoid fossil proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from apes Excuse me? What exactly are you looking for? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/ Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory
WordClock		#10	[-]
Posts: 14 (02/28/08 12:57:25) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Rambo123UK wrote: As hard as we look and as bad as it wants to be proven I suspect that there should be at least one humanoid fossil proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from apes Excuse me? What exactly are you looking for? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/ Do I sense frustration from you? I simply meant that as hard as science is looking and as bad as science wants to find "missing links" it hasnt yet done that.....as far as im aware. Like I said, I could be wrong. I myself am not in the field looking for anything but neither are you so......
Quontir		#11	[-]
Posts: 34 (02/28/08 13:08:18) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I did this by answering the questions asked with the answers provided from my professor and textbooks in order to get a passing grade, it wasnt very hard. So basically you lied in order to get a good grade. How interesting also it seems rather antithetical to education. How can you learn anything by parroting the book? There is no denying certain aspects of evolution but I would need more proof of macro-evolution before I could fully commit to it. You might want to start with the 29+ evidences for Macroevolution. I was taught many things in school that I didnt accept (mainly in the subject of History) but in order to be successful in any college course you have to pass the test. So naturally I did whatever it took to make this happen. When I was in college and had doubts I dug through the texts to see if they had answers and if they didn't I would bring it up in class and ask for good explanations from professors. If they didn't have time in class I went to their office. I can't imagine wanting to do anything less than know the truth as much as possible.
Quontir		#12	[-]
Posts: 35 (02/28/08 13:10:47) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I simply meant that as hard as science is looking and as bad as science wants to find "missing links" it hasnt yet done that.....as far as im aware. The problem with that stetment is the simple fact that every new fossil creates two new missing links. You're basically asking that every species that ever existed have a fossil. Such a circumstance would be imposssible.
WordClock		#13	[-]
Posts: 15 (02/28/08 14:26:37) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"I did this by answering the questions asked with the answers provided from my professor and textbooks in order to get a passing grade, it wasnt very hard." So basically you lied in order to get a good grade. How interesting also it seems rather antithetical to education. How can you learn anything by parroting the book? No I didnt lie. In order to lie the information given would have to be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be the absolute truth. I simply answered the questions given with the answers given. If the answers given are lies then it would be me who was lied to. "There is no denying certain aspects of evolution but I would need more proof of macro-evolution before I could fully commit to it." You might want to start with the 29+ evidences for Macroevolution. Yeah I read that. Not bad. Quontir: "When I was in college and had doubts I dug through the texts to see if they had answers and if they didn't I would bring it up in class and ask for good explanations from professors. If they didn't have time in class I went to their office. I can't imagine wanting to do anything less than know the truth as much as possible." I agree. But sometimes the answers to questions arent always there.
WordClock		#14	[-]
Posts: 16 (02/28/08 14:27:50) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Quontir wrote: I simply meant that as hard as science is looking and as bad as science wants to find "missing links" it hasnt yet done that.....as far as im aware. The problem with that stetment is the simple fact that every new fossil creates two new missing links. You're basically asking that every species that ever existed have a fossil. Such a circumstance would be imposssible. Why would it be impossible? Just curious. What two missing links are you talking about?
tracyanneb		#15	[-]
Posts: 15 (02/28/08 23:37:59) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I simply meant that as hard as science is looking and as bad as science wants to find "missing links" it hasnt yet done that. What missing links? Free and Open Linux and Open Source Software. You know, us Linux users are really spoiled, and we don't appreciate it. We get for free, stuff that Windows users have to pay a lot of money for - Fleetwod Barney (Musician)
Rambo123UK		#16	[-]
Posts: 374 (02/29/08 00:15:13) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	No, you sense me not knowing what you are talking about. What do you expect to see in a "missing link"? You seem to think we haven't found any, whereas we have many links of the chain between apes 5+ million years ago, and modern humans about 150,000 years ago. What are you expecting to see, and why do you think we haven't found any "missing links"? Any frustration is at your ignorance, nothing else. Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory
tracyanneb		#17	[-]
Posts: 16 (02/29/08 00:35:59) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Its not that I dont find the evidence compelling its that there seems to be a lack of tangible evidence....that im aware of. So basically you have no idea what the evidence is. I could be wrong but I dont think there are any fossils that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that we evolved from any particular species. Given that both the fossil record and DNA evidence both point to a common ancestor for humans and Apes, I'm wondering what additional evidence you seek. Free and Open Linux and Open Source Software. You know, us Linux users are really spoiled, and we don't appreciate it. We get for free, stuff that Windows users have to pay a lot of money for - Fleetwod Barney (Musician)
Rambo123UK		#18	[-]
Posts: 376 (02/29/08 02:52:11) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I'm still waiting to find out what a "missing link" is supposed to look like, if "Lucy", Archaeopteryx, Acanthostega or Ambulocetus are not "missing links"? Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory
tracyanneb		#19	[-]
Posts: 17 (02/29/08 04:24:06) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Actually Rambo, they aren't missing. Free and Open Linux and Open Source Software. You know, us Linux users are really spoiled, and we don't appreciate it. We get for free, stuff that Windows users have to pay a lot of money for - Fleetwod Barney (Musician)
Rambo123UK		#20	[-]
Posts: 377 (02/29/08 06:41:14) Regular Type Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Well, no, they're "found" links, aren't they? Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful. -- Seneca http://biblebabble.yuku.com/directory

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

For the Creationist Biologist.

For the Creationist Biologist.

Quick Reply