Religion, Evolution, and stupid Republicans

The both of you can't continue arguing like this, neither of you will get anywhere.

I'm against teaching religion and calling it science. I love religion and a love science but they are different topics.

Teaching creationism as a scientific theory is lying to students about what science is. This lying demeans science and demeans religion. What we have in many science classes is bullshit religion and bullshit science.

Is it random mutations or is it masked traits becoming apparent after those that had that trait masked dieing out?

The short answer is "both". Evolution is defined as genetic change over time.
 
But, it is not a random series, correct? It is all very definite, is it not? Also, it can't really be random mutations, as evolution effects an entire species(Exception geographic isolation), not just one. The last time I checked, a mutation was an indiviudal attribute.
 
The last time I checked, a mutation was an indiviudal attribute.

Random mutations can cause the sort of genetic variation that are inheritable.

Sickle Cell anemia is (I think) an example of that.
 
But, those mutations would be incredibly hard to pass through the entire species(unless the species had very, very limited numbers).

I am not sure, but isn't sickle cell anemia more than merely a mutation? Doesn't some environment effect(nutrition, pollution, activity) the developing of sickle cell anemia(or any anemias)? I realize it is genetic, but can't it be found in a person who has no case of this in their family(no genes to cause it)?

Continuing on-most creationists proport that it is ridiculous things can occur with such odds(especially as to the big bang eventually leading to life. Or, some amoeba becoming a human being). However, it is not random, as has been more or less proven(and discussed in this thread over the last few posts). Therefore, under a structured path, it is inevitable(maybe not, but assuming that there will always be some sort of trouble/hardship) that a superior/intelligent life form should emerge, not chance. Also, an interesting concept-they(creationists) say that science shows a temperature difference of 1 K(elvin) at the time of the big bang would end all possibilites of life. But, the big bang is a REPEATING process-Therefore, if it is the wrong temperature, no life for billions of years, it crunches(big crunch theory), and there is another chance at the appropriate temerature. If the chance is missed, another several billion years pass. So, with one in however many billions chance there is of life(and how creationists that this leads to a God, as this chance is, well, infentessimal), there could have been several billion crunch(or, one series of bang to crunch, bound to bang again with a new seires) attempts, leading to the development of life.
 
But, those mutations would be incredibly hard to pass through the entire species

That's not necessary for evolution to occur.

Doesn't some environment effect(nutrition, pollution, activity) the developing of sickle cell anemia

Not the way you mean. Low oxygen levels in the bloodstream can trigger a crisis but it's straight dominant recessive inheritance.

I realize it is genetic, but can't it be found in a person who has no case of this in their family(no genes to cause it)?

It's genetic. If I remember my terminology it's recessive dominant or some such.

Or, some amoeba becoming a human being).

??????????
 
If the chance is missed, another several billion years pass. So, with one in however many billions chance there is of life(and how creationists that this leads to a God, as this chance is, well, infentessimal), there could have been several billion crunch(or, one series of bang to crunch, bound to bang again with a new seires) attempts, leading to the development of life.

How do you know that the Big Crunch doesn't repeat the SAME process during every cycle?
 
Hmm? I missed what you meant, I apologize.

To Throckmorton-I mean an amoeba(or any one celled life) evolving into all the life we have now, and especially humans.
 
Back
Top