Evolution vs Creation-Comparing each View

[jay_a2j]

Sure they can. Monkey screachings, lion raws, bird calls, any other animal noise you'd care to name all contain information. What is speech but the transfer of information? Sure, it's nowhere near as complex as human speech, but it contains information nontheless.

Also dogs barking, birds singing, and cats meowing. There all sounds the animals make which others of its species understand.

Again....COMMUNICATION, not speech.

Definitions of speech on the Web:

* address: the act of delivering a formal spoken communication to an audience; "he listened to an address on minor Roman poets"
* (language) communication by word of mouth; "his speech was garbled"; "he uttered harsh language"; "he recorded the spoken language of the streets"
* something spoken; "he could hear them uttering merry speeches"
* the exchange of spoken words; "they were perfectly comfortable together without speech"
* manner of speaking: your characteristic style or manner of expressing yourself orally; "his manner of speaking was quite abrupt"; "her speech was barren of southernisms"; "I detected a slight accent in his speech"
* lecture: a lengthy rebuke; "a good lecture was my father's idea of discipline"; "the teacher gave him a talking to"
* actor's line: words making up the dialogue of a play; "the actor forgot his speech"
* language: the mental faculty or power of vocal communication;"language sets homo sapiens apart from all other animals"

I believe by your definitions they are more then communication, it is definately speech and possibly an actual form of language.

Can I just ask, wtf has animals having or not having a language or the ability to speak got to do with evolution?

Tail bone, opposable thumbs, fossil evidence, mutations, adaption to environments etc... prove evolution.

dude, when archeologists (i have NO CLUE if i spelled that right, i stink at spelling) found the tooth of a PIG they came up with what a human looked like (one that they thought was the "missing link") and they were utterly humiliated when they figured out that their whole "missing link" was just a pig. A PIG!!

There is a certain amount of scientific evidence to support the theory of evolution,there is NO scientific evidence whatsoever to support creationism NONE !

Look around. The evidence is there. Even some Scientist believe that with all the complexities of nature, the probability of all this happening by mere chance (evolution) is infinitely small. There was a creator and He still exists.

Playing the guitar is NOT speech. Put those infants in an isolated area for 100,000 years, never exposed to LANGUAGE and they will never speak with words. Speech is LEARNED. What does this have to do with evolution? If no one was here to TEACH the apes to speak...they would never be able to speak.



To address some of the posts...off to work now.....

[joecoolfrog]

Jay Creationism is not science it is religion,that is my view, the view of 99.9 % of the Scientific community and the view of the Supreme court of the USA.

[heavycola]

Look, this is turning into the same thread as all the others.

Jay - all you contribute is ill-informed nonsense that whips up these pointless arguments. They are pointless because a) you don't know what you are talking about and b) your faith makes you intransigent.

As i said: creationism is, at its root, a belief that the bible is literally true. If anyone disagrees with that, please speak up. And if you believe the bible is literal truth, what is the point in trying to persuade you otherwise, no matter what garbled nonsense you spout? Your mind is made up. All the evidence points to evolution and natural selection and it's still not enough to sway you people. Why? 'because the bible says so'. And that is not an argument. Creationism and evolution are not competing theories, and to treat them as such is just demeaning.

/backs quietly out of thread

[Titanic]

Put those infants in an isolated area for 100,000 years, never exposed to LANGUAGE and they will never speak with words. Speech is LEARNED. What does this have to do with evolution? If no one was here to TEACH the apes to speak...they would never be able to speak.

Are you mad? Do you think that we only know how to speak because we live with others who can speak? We would have the same ability to speak no matter how we were bought up, what your saying is complete crap.

Also, humans were never taught how to speak. Btw, according to you, who taught us how to speak in the beggining, the 100,000 odd years ago?

[Stopper]

Playing the guitar is NOT speech. Put those infants in an isolated area for 100,000 years, never exposed to LANGUAGE and they will never speak with words. Speech is LEARNED. What does this have to do with evolution? If no one was here to TEACH the apes to speak...they would never be able to speak.

What utter nonsense. Specific languages may be learned by children, but the capacity for language is innate to human beings.

Where there is no language, or it can't be accessed for some reason, then people, including children, will spontaneously generate a new language.

For instance, many sign languages for the Deaf, with extensive vocabularies and grammar, have spontaneously arisen in the past all over the world, with no-one to "teach" anyone the signs.

[ParadiceCity9]

I LIKE HOW CHRISTIANS THINK EVERY INDIVIDUAL SCIENTIST REPRESENTS THE CONSENSUS OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY.

HAY GUYS I FOUND PROOF OF JESUS, OH WAIT IT'S JUST A PIG THAT MEANS GOD DOESN'T EXIST. DUR DUR CHRISTOLOGIC I IS SMART.

he actually kinda made a good point about the jesus thing...jay what proof do you have of him splitting the red sea?

sorry if that's moses...i know nothing about religion.

[unriggable]

Look around. The evidence is there. Even some Scientist believe that with all the complexities of nature, the probability of all this happening by mere chance (evolution) is infinitely small. There was a creator and He still exists.

Playing the guitar is NOT speech. Put those infants in an isolated area for 100,000 years, never exposed to LANGUAGE and they will never speak with words. Speech is LEARNED. What does this have to do with evolution? If no one was here to TEACH the apes to speak...they would never be able to speak.



To address some of the posts...off to work now.....

Okay. Here you are wrong.

Cephalopods can communicate by flashing signals. We didn't teach them that.

As for the small chance thing, think of it as a battle royale. How many players - two hundred? Each one is a possible evolutionary route. The chance of any specific player to win is infinitely small - however one player is guaranteed to win. Same goes for evolution. You shouldn't think of it as being a result, but rather a transition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walking_catfish

[MeDeFe]

jay, mute people can speak, too, even though they don't use their vocal chords.

No, they can communicate not speak.

Sign languages are also languages, even though one does not use ones mouth and vocal chords when speaking them. They lack absolutely nothing of what you might term "normal" languages have.

[WidowMakers]

ISSUE: IRIDIUM LAYER
FACTS:
Iridium is rare on earth and common in foreign objects.
=========================================
Evolution Assumptions:
-Iridium levels in the huge IMPACT crater in the Yucatan peninsula.

-There is a thin layer between the Mesozoic dirt samples and Cenozoic dirt samples which contains high levels of Iridium. There are dinosaur fossils below iridium layer no dinosaur fossils above. Quick transition.

-Larger meteors, on the other hand, while losing more meteor substance still manages to hit the earth. The result is a huge crater because the meteor explodes upon impact, sending dirt and soot, and more importantly iridium in all directions. It is carried by the wind. The amount of iridium in this layer increases as we get closer to the crater.

Evolution Conclusion:
-Since the iridium layer separates the dinosaur and dinosaur-less layers, it would be beyond coincidence to think the asteroid did not cause them to die. This means that a flood is not the source of death thus the Bible is wrong.
=========================================
Creation Assumptions:
-Yucatan crater is a VOLCANIC crater.

1. There is obvious volcanism interspersed in the layers
2. There is no sign of any sort of impact melt sheet.
3. An asteroid large enough to make such a crater would have blasted out all the Upper Cretaceous sediments within the structure. ‘They are still there; ergo, no impact.’
source 1994 paper by Meyerhoff et al. in Geology 22:3

-Volcanic eruptions are now known unquestionably to raise iridium levels. The 1983 eruption of Kilauea in Hawaii registered iridium levels within airborne particles of 630 ppb, which is some 11,500 times the concentration in Hawaiian volcanic rocks.

Interestingly, the further away one went from the eruption, the higher the iridium levels in the soils. Apparently, iridium preferentially binds to the finer particles, which are airborne for greater distances.

-"Extinctions" not correlated with crater "dates"
Using evolutionary assumptions, it was not possible to find correlations between the times of major extinctions and the geological "dates" assigned to the Earth’s known impact craters. Some of these known craters are huge, yet show no sign of being associated with major "extinctions" in the fossil record.

-Fossils decline gradually. In several sites, there is a gradual decline in the number and variety of dinosaur fossils—hardly consistent with the impact hypothesis.

source: The Great Dinosaur Extinction Controversy Book by Charles Officer and Jake Page

Creation Conclusion:
-Gradual fossil decline and volcanic activity delivering the iridium layer show the Biblical flood as the reason for the current findings in the earth. The Bible depicts a world wide catastrophic flood and massive geological turmoil.

The waters continually increased for forty days during it (Gen 7:7)
the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.(Gen 7:11)

[heavycola]

THIS IS NOT A DEBATE. This is pitching scientific observation against one of countless creation stories. The two are not competing theories. One is the Hebrew version of creation, the other is science.
Which creation story gets to go up against evolution next? Zulu? Aboriginal? Egyptian? Iroquois? Hindu? Inuit? Norse? Zoroastrian? Muslim?

[Backglass]

Even some Scientist believe that with all the complexities of nature, the probability of all this happening by mere chance (evolution) is infinitely small.

This means nothing in the debate. Now I will say that "even some highly religious scholars believe in evolution!" There, see how that works?

There was a creator and He still exists.

Right...he just hides from us, because he wouldn't want to actually SHOW himself to anyone, that would make too much sense. Instead he only speaks through burning plants (one person at a time please...can't have witnesses!), impregnates earth women and allows famine, war, death and disease to run rampant in his giant ant-farm.

And you say evolution is a stretch. Christianity and creationism are nothing more than wishful thinking and fairy tales.

[Neutrino]

Communication by WORD of mouth not screeches of mouth. Try again.


Speech is learned...again who taught apes (after they developed the necessary vocal cords) to speak?

Look, lets put this in simplest form. Words are sounds made by vocal cords, which travel through the air, are recieved by an ear and then decoded in the brain.

Tell me, how is this any different from monkey screaches? Monkeys make noises, it travels through the air and is picked up by an ear and is then decoded by their brain. Exactly the same as humans do.

A yell of pain isn't speech, yet you know exactly what that means.



P.S. Developed? Sounds suspisciously close to evolution...

[unriggable]

Ants communicate by smell. Phermomones, really. Look it up. Tons of chemical combinations.

[vtmarik]

There was a creator and He still exists.

Right...he just hides from us, because he wouldn't want to actually SHOW himself to anyone, that would make too much sense. Instead he only speaks through burning plants (one person at a time please...can't have witnesses!), impregnates earth women and allows famine, war, death and disease to run rampant in his giant ant-farm.

And you say evolution is a stretch. Christianity and creationism are nothing more than wishful thinking and fairy tales.

Well, let's assume for a moment that God exists.

This is a being of massive proportions. This is a being that can create matter from nothingness in a way that science tells us is impossible.

This being suddenly appears to mankind in his massive glory. His sheer presence, being a being of such dimension and quality, would drive humanity insane.

If God was to reveal himself to mankind (since he cannot f*ck with free will), mankind would have a collective break and we would all die on the spot.

Ever see the end of Dogma?

[unriggable]

Vtmarik I know what you're saying - thinking about the creature from watchmen that emitted sensations on such a large level that people go insane from its presence.

Ever see the end of Dogma?

That is -the- movie.

[Backglass]

There was a creator and He still exists.

Right...he just hides from us, because he wouldn't want to actually SHOW himself to anyone, that would make too much sense. Instead he only speaks through burning plants (one person at a time please...can't have witnesses!), impregnates earth women and allows famine, war, death and disease to run rampant in his giant ant-farm.

And you say evolution is a stretch. Christianity and creationism are nothing more than wishful thinking and fairy tales.

Well, let's assume for a moment that God exists.

This is a being of massive proportions. This is a being that can create matter from nothingness in a way that science tells us is impossible.

This being suddenly appears to mankind in his massive glory. His sheer presence, being a being of such dimension and quality, would drive humanity insane.

If God was to reveal himself to mankind (since he cannot f*ck with free will), mankind would have a collective break and we would all die on the spot.

Ever see the end of Dogma?

Well, as long as we are fantasizing: It would seem to me that a being that powerful would simply fashion himself in a image that is palatable to the human eye. After all, as we have heard over & over again this being already knows how we would react. Since it already knows the reaction, it could easily adjust it's unveiling accordingly so that no "instant break" would occur. All the wars and atrocities would end and BOOM! An instant planet full of VERY devoted worshipers. That is the ultimate goal...right? Convert and save everyone? It could be done & over with tomorrow...yet here we are two thousand years later and mankind is still arguing.

Another take is that if this being is so unbelievably powerful and massive, why would it give a rats ass about us anyway? Do you care about the ants living in your back yard? Do you love them, watch over them and "hope they make the right choice" by worshiping you? Why does this supernatural magician crave our attention and devotion anyway. If it is so powerful, it could just snap it's giant fingers (claws? flippers?), delete our universe and create another cosmic ant-farm filled with MUCH more devoted followers.

And why would such an unfathomably powerful entity, need to impregnate an earth woman, have her bear a halfling child who he then allows to be killed...all so we believe in him? Why not just clap the almighty talons together and send down a few hundred offspring to spread the news? Why all the unnecessary drama? It can create an entire universe from nothing, YET it is so helpless that it must flood the planet with water to get it under control?! Why also does a being with such immense power need to communicate through dreams, burning plants and images in grilled cheese sandwiches? It seems to me that sky-daddy is quite the drama queen.

If the devoted could take off the rose colored glasses and step back a moment, a rational person would see that the mere concept of an all seeing, all knowing, invisible cosmic watchdog (and thus creation) is so far fetched it's practically science fiction. But that would mean throwing away the emotional security blanket of religion on perhaps the worlds biggest addiction. It's much easier to just keep on believin' and living the fantasy.

[ParadiceCity9]

OK this is what I think of creation stories (except evolution).

They make no sense. They came out of peoples' heads who have no grasp of scientific means (unlike Charles Darwin). The religious leaders created their own gods out of nothing, and made their little tales of how the Earth came about to how it is today.

The Big Bang/Evolution is why we are here.

[jay_a2j]

Cephalopods can communicate by flashing signals. We didn't teach them that.

And its NOT SPEECH!!!!!!!!!


Sign languages are also languages, even though one does not use ones mouth and vocal chords when speaking them. They lack absolutely nothing of what you might term "normal" languages have.


Must I define SPEECH again? Could someone post the WEBSTERS definition or something? If I remember, I'll do it.


he actually kinda made a good point about the jesus thing...jay what proof do you have of him splitting the red sea?

sorry if that's moses..




It was Moses who raised his staff but God who parted the sea. The same proof you have that Columbus discovered America in 1492. What proof do you have that we evolved from apes? (There is none so you don't even have to answer)


Also, humans were never taught how to speak. Btw, according to you, who taught us how to speak in the beggining, the 100,000 odd years ago?





It wasn't 100,000 years ago...more like 6,000, but I digress. Speech was never first taught to humans. The Bible, unlike Evolution, explains where languages came from....why there are different races and why they came from the geographical area's in which they did. (See Tower of Babel) God created Adam and Eve with the ability to speak...there was only one language until the tower of Babel.


Speech is learned...again who taught apes (after they developed the necessary vocal cords) to speak?


I knew I should have put " " around the word developed. I don't believe they ever did develop....I was asking the evolutionists this question.

[vtmarik]

Language is not a function of biology, it is an extension of psychology and behavior modification.

Here are some competing theories:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_Language

[Iliad]

The reason behind religion is simple:
cavemen saw a lot of things they couldn't explain: fire, stars, the list goes on. So they attributed it to different "gods" who controlled and said it was magic because they couldn't prove it with science. Slowly the gods became less numbered and more complex until Monotheism was achieved.

[unriggable]

Jay, speech is communication / language through sound. Just as complex is language through sight in the case of cephalopods, or smell in the case of ants.

[ParadiceCity9]

Cephalopods can communicate by flashing signals. We didn't teach them that.

And its NOT SPEECH!!!!!!!!!


Sign languages are also languages, even though one does not use ones mouth and vocal chords when speaking them. They lack absolutely nothing of what you might term "normal" languages have.


Must I define SPEECH again? Could someone post the WEBSTERS definition or something? If I remember, I'll do it.


he actually kinda made a good point about the jesus thing...jay what proof do you have of him splitting the red sea?

sorry if that's moses..




It was Moses who raised his staff but God who parted the sea. The same proof you have that Columbus discovered America in 1492. What proof do you have that we evolved from apes? (There is none so you don't even have to answer)


Also, humans were never taught how to speak. Btw, according to you, who taught us how to speak in the beggining, the 100,000 odd years ago?





It wasn't 100,000 years ago...more like 6,000, but I digress. Speech was never first taught to humans. The Bible, unlike Evolution, explains where languages came from....why there are different races and why they came from the geographical area's in which they did. (See Tower of Babel) God created Adam and Eve with the ability to speak...there was only one language until the tower of Babel.


Speech is learned...again who taught apes (after they developed the necessary vocal cords) to speak?


I knew I should have put " " around the word developed. I don't believe they ever did develop....I was asking the evolutionists this question.

That's all you ever say.

You obviously remembered to post the WEBSTERS version of the definition, why not do it right there? Because you know it will disprove you're unscientific theory.

We have extremely, extremely similar to apes.

Speech was never first taught to humans.

HE SAID IT!!
We have different races because of melanin intake in different areas of the world. Black people have a lot of melanin and are darker than Asians for example.

Your little "Bible" can't explain who taught apes to talk huh?

[Neutrino]

It was Moses who raised his staff but God who parted the sea. The same proof you have that Columbus discovered America in 1492. What proof do you have that we evolved from apes? (There is none so you don't even have to answer)

98-or-so% similar DNA, a whole raft of misc. similar behaveours, many species of homonids connecting man with ape. Probably a lot more.

Sure, you can't prove anything completely, but you can certainly provide likely scenarios.

Also, humans were never taught how to speak. Btw, according to you, who taught us how to speak in the beggining, the 100,000 odd years ago?

We taught ourselves. Increaced brain capacity brought about an increaced need for communication and an increaced ability to communicate. Add a bit of intellectual capacity to a monkey and you'll find that over a few hundred generations (remember, you have a million + years here) a more complex language has formed. It won't have the depth of modern languages (how are there multiple languages if god only taught one?) but it should have the ability to convey some deeper meanings than "food, mates and danger", which is all monkey languages do.

More time, a larger brain and more ability/ need to commuicate effectively later and you'll have a species with a better ability to communicate. You might even be getting abstract ideas by this point (possibly where the first reigions formed).

Rince and repeat a few times and you can produce something with very close to the intellectual capabilities and need to communicate as modern humans.

I probably didn't explain it very well, but even someone as stubborn as Jay should be getting the point by now.

The development of languages is perfectly internally consistent with evolution.

[heavycola]

I probably didn't explain it very well, but even someone as stubborn as Jay should be getting the point by now.

The development of languages is perfectly internally consistent with evolution.

And with people building a huge tower up to teh sky and worrying their god!!!!!11!!I know which i9 prefer!11!

(actually: if we can now see millions of light years in every direction around us, and we still haven't found heaven, then just how high was this tower of babel? Obviously it's not a symbolical account of why different people speak different languages - it's in the bible, after all - but if it was tall enough to annoy god, how high WAS it? That musta bin some building!)

[MR. Nate]

As i said: creationism is, at its root, a belief that the bible is literally true.

I think the original intent of the thread was to shed presuppositions at the door and look at evidence:

i.e. I won't say the Bible is literally true if you don't say that it's patently false.

So, instead of everyone yelling "you're stupid and I know the truth" why don't we try saying "One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning / development of the planet / species is ____________"

Just a thought.