Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peace0fM1nd)
    Hopefully the first link i posted will answer some of your questions. anyway, more specific to this thread please see this link also, hopefully it will help you unerstand my belief systems in terms of science. Also see if you can find any contradictions or similarities to your own beliefs.

    http://www.harunyahya.com/books/scie...le_cell_01.php
    Even a lot of muslims now reject harun yahya as a liar and a fraud. you're still stuck in that rut?

    Watch this on the evolution of the eye to see how "irreducible" systems can arise out of evolution by natural selection

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhDWC...layer_embedded
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vitamortis)
    Nothing, that's what.
    Actually it does...more so supporting the theory of the big bang. You haven't read the Quran by the looks of it so I don't think your in the position of saying nothing is said of the origins of the universe.
    Also stating the earth is egg shaped. Imagine someone saying that 1400+ years ago and to even go further in saying it resembles an ostrich egg.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Alexdurrant7)
    What does watching Dawkins' videos have to do with anything? He's a science writer. That's his job. From this job title, do you seriously deduce that videos of him will be representative of his best work? Don't his books seem more likely to be representative of this science writer's best work?
    He is not just a science writer. He is an evolutionary biologist. He is more than qualified on the subject.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    Actually it does...more so supporting the theory of the big bang. You haven't read the Quran by the looks of it so I don't think your in the position of saying nothing is said of the origins of the universe.
    Also stating the earth is egg shaped. Imagine someone saying that 1400+ years ago and to even go further in saying it resembles an ostrich egg.
    The earth isn't egg shaped. At the poles, it is moderately flat. And I have read the Qur'an. And you think a sentence such as "and it is we who are expanding it" somehow prove it supports the big bang? Care to show me any other quotes that seemingly support the occurrence of the big bang?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    Actually it does...more so supporting the theory of the big bang.
    What EXACTLY does it say? Give me quote right now.

    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    Also stating the earth is egg shaped. Imagine someone saying that 1400+ years ago and to even go further in saying it resembles an ostrich egg.
    lol the earth shaped like an ostrich egg? I don't think so.
    Offline

    14
    A challenge for the muslims on here: Find one source of so called 'scientific information' in the quran which wasnt known in ancient greece.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peace0fM1nd)
    Anyone who wants to know some of the scientific facts of my belief then download this link. otherwise, you clearly have ulterior intentions far from understanding the truth or your just a very awkward person. and im not inviting your or converting anyone, im just giving you an easier way to answer your questions about where my religion is actually a science of truths. hope this helps :cool:
    That is a diatribe against science; a lamentation that modern children are not sufficiently exposed to religious dogma and propaganda. It is not a scientific work.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by morecambebay)
    A challenge for the muslims on here: Find one source of so called 'scientific information' in the quran which wasnt known in ancient greece.
    The science of clouds.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by GodspeedGehenna)
    The science of clouds.
    You know what, I very nearly edited it to say 'not including the science of clouds' but then I thought 'theyll be bored by now', but you're not. :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by morecambebay)
    You know what, I very nearly edited it to say 'not including the science of clouds' but then I thought 'theyll be bored by now', but you're not. :p:
    :rofl:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sixthformer)
    Good point, but there is one mistake i can immediatley see. A mutation is a random brekage in the DNA. It is when DNA malforms. How could the DNA mal form to such an extent, that the neck grew longer and longer? This malformation would have to have happened to another female species of many other giraffes to be passed on. How can the same random breakage and mutation occour time and time again? It's not possible.

    Also, why can't we see other organisms with long necks? If it is true that organisms with long necks survived, why don't we see ' evolution/mutation' producing other organisms? There are many many tall trees. Also, by the way, the giraffes neck is more than tall enough to reach tree's. Why didn't it stop ?

    Answer the first questions, then come to the last one. Thanks, good point by the way. This is how i wanted the debate to go. Simple examples.
    The giraffe neck example is directly comparable to variation in humans. For example, someone with a big nose can, on rare occasions, be borne from two normal-nosed people. If the big-nosed person bred with another big-nosed person, there's a high probability that they their offspring will have a big nose. However, there's a small chance that the offspring's nose will be normal - this would be a mutation, in the same way that the original big nose on the parent was a mutation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Peace0fM1nd)
    Thread starter is using science to prove evolution wrong, his argument is not to prove the existance of God. His logic is not flawed, the fact that your response is on your own interpretations of his debate is in fact flawed. Also when you say that cell evolution is already heavily documented then show me. And did you know that no scientiest to date has proven or demonstrated a single case of genetic mutation in any living creature! not even Richard Dawkins.
    Do some research. Hell, even some basic research would serve you well.


    Oh, forget it. Look up 'Richard Lenski'. His experiment directly shows e.coli bacteria evolving to survive on citrate as well as glucose.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    The eukaryotic cell is very advanced, its in perfect harmony...more or less with its organelles.

    In the case of a prokaryotic cell engulfing a mitochondrion, the host cell would have to incorperate the design of the mitochondrion with its own etc (DNA mixing in the right order) in a short space of time for the next offspring to also have a mitochondrion. Quite simply this cannot happen over a large amount of time, as the mitochondrion would have been disposed of within the first moment...The cell originially engulfed the mitochondron for energy...so why (more so how) would it change its mind and keep it?

    You also know that mutated DNA has to also make sense for it to be functional. One wrong sequence and that's it it wont make sense, which is mostly the case in probably 99.9999999999% of cases.

    To maintain a symbiotic relationship the host cell would have to allow oxygen into the cell for the mitochondrion to use in order to use the energy produced by the mitochondrion. How would a cell...which doesn't even know what to do with a mitochondron (not included within its own DNA) instantly know what to do with it and how to make use of it?

    There is no chance of mutation and such being of use...with the increasing number of cancer victims over the years, have you seen it being of use to the person? Nope.

    Evolution would make sense once everything is all put together (though its not so much evolution anymore its just varience).

    There was this lake forgot its name, somewhere in kenya where 3000+ fossils were found covering millions of years. And if I remember correctly the article showed consistency for long stretches of time and then suddenly within thousands of years changes in the species. Now I don't accurately remember what the correct wording was but from when I read that it seemed to challenge the slow process from one to another, rather it happened suddenly. It would seem to suggest genetic mutation, but to utilize a genetic mutation to a point where it benifits an organism it would take a long amount of time, which is not what was suggested by the findings.

    Don't like the word "chance" everything happens for a reason and a reason for why it happened, even wrong duplication of DNA is not chance. Its easy to say oh DNA mutation this DNA mutation that...in practice this is very different and much more complex that what people make it sound.
    You know even in university lecturers who are far far more knowledgeable than us in TSR say its a theory and not fact. Which means it is open to challenges and such. What if we are missing something here? What we think was genetic mutation could have been something else?

    Just because some people read a text book they might think what they read is fact. Well what happens when the next revised edition comes out and new discoveries force the removal of the previous understanding. How comes normal people accept it without a challenge? Weren't you so sure about the theory before? Think for your selves and not have blind faith in a text book.

    E.coli is about 3 microns. With 4.6 million base pairs in DNA in its chromosome. What are the chances a genetic mutation would occur in its 1000 base pair copying speed per second AND be of benefit. That's re-arranging 3 pairs or by deleting, missing one or what ever. 3/4.6 million and it has to be in the right place. Someone do the maths cos it aint gnna be me


    DINNER TIME!!!! :woo:
    I am copying and pasting this post and putting it as the OP. Don't worry, your name will be included. This is the best scientific and logical post i've read so far. You've looked at both sides, and dismissed the evolution side NOT because it is evolution and you don't follow the theory, but rather, you feel scientifically it is not VALID!

    kudos.:woo:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vitamortis)
    The earth isn't egg shaped. At the poles, it is moderately flat. And I have read the Qur'an. And you think a sentence such as "and it is we who are expanding it" somehow prove it supports the big bang? Care to show me any other quotes that seemingly support the occurrence of the big bang?

    Lets not go into religion PLEASE.
    Make a new thread and discuss this there.
    ps. the direct translation is ' ostrich egg' go look one up. there are many kinds/shapes of an egg. Anyway, lets move on.

    I see no evolutionist, apart from maybe one a few hours ago actually debating rather than attacking either me, posting links, ect.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexdurrant7)
    Do some research. Hell, even some basic research would serve you well.


    Oh, forget it. Look up 'Richard Lenski'. His experiment directly shows e.coli bacteria evolving to survive on citrate as well as glucose.
    Re-read the OP

    g2g guys, ! brb in 4 hours
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Compare the image of an osterish egg and the earth. And see for yourself

    The quote I know of is, i believe there are others just cant remember where they were.

    Surah 21 Al Anbiya Verse 30:

    "Do not the Unbelievers see
    That the heavens and the earth
    Were joined together (as one
    Unit of creation), before
    We clove them asunder?
    We made from water
    Every living thing. Will they
    Not then believe?"



    I'm no scholor so i cannot provide commentary on the whole Surah, but you get the idea. Believe it if you want, search into it if you are interested. Deny it if you wish, but doing so wont hurt me in any shape or form

    The challenge you are giving to the Quran is incorrect. As these ancient civilizations whom did produce some degree of scientific hypothesis, they also posed incorrect ones such as the earth is flat, the earth is the centre of the universe, the sun is stationary. So if it's as easy as you are saying that it was said before...then why is it just been within the past few 100 years and not then that we have been able to confirm a few things and deny other to say the least.


    Edit: Whoops, like the OP said the is a post about discussing Evolution and not Religion. So only scientific proof, debating is valid here. Lets get back on topic guys
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by sixthformer)
    Lets not go into religion PLEASE.
    Make a new thread and discuss this there.
    ps. the direct translation is ' ostrich egg' go look one up. there are many kinds/shapes of an egg. Anyway, lets move on.

    I see no evolutionist, apart from maybe one a few hours ago actually debating rather than attacking either me, posting links, ect.
    ...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    Lets get back on topic guys
    And who took us into the realms of superstition religion? You did.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    compare the image of an osterish egg and the earth. And see for yourself
    They don't look quite different.

    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    The heavens and the earth were joined together,
    before we clove them asunder.
    How does that very short, vague and ambiguous sentence point to the Big Bang?

    (Original post by DarkTitan)
    The challenge you are giving to the Quran is incorrect. As these ancient civilizations whom did produce some degree of scientific hypothesis, they also posed incorrect ones such as the earth is flat, the earth is the centre of the universe, the sun is stationary.
    Are you referring to Ancient Greece? If so, then you are wrong.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Before I can get going on this I need you to do something for me. Describe the principles of the theory of evolution. I need to know whether you actually understand evolution first before I can tell if you have any knowledge of how to disprove it.

    Also (you don't have to answer this but it would be interesting) what religion are you part of (if any)? It's a very large chance that people who don't accept evolution have some kind of faith. Since that can be the reason why people don't accept evolution since it contradicts their faith. And before you ask, no I'm not a 'strict' atheist.

    One thing for me to start on too is that evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.