Thursday, October 29, 2009

Devolution?

The family who walked on all fours is an absolutely fascinating discovery. Although this is old news for some, I only recently learned of these children. The family was visited by scientist and journalist beginning in about 2002 and PBS broadcast a program in 2006 and reran it recently.

“The three sisters and two brothers may offer insight into the way our apelike ancestors moved, according to scientists. Human ancestors are believed to have begun walking on two legs more than three million years ago. Discovered in a remote area of southern Turkey last summer, the family of ethnic Kurds has sparked a scientific debate…”


On one side of the debate Uner Tan, a neurophysiologist at Cukurova University in Adana, Turkey believes the siblings are “evolutionary throwbacks—a "missing link" to our forebears.”

Then, German geneticists believe the siblings' genetic abnormality may be because the children do not have the gene responsible for bipedalism, or two-legged walking, in humans.

And yet another says the cause is twofold: the way the siblings were raised and brain damage resulting from the genetic defect.

An incredible discovery to say the least but what fascinates me about all this is the debate! At this point none of the scientist involved agree…that’s perfect! Now they go to work, they ask questions, they test theories and make conclusions. We may never have a definitive answer but we will always have the questions. As long as there are questions and someone seeking answers, we will progress.

Wow! What a wonderful world to which we are born.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1986/JASA3-86Murphy.html

14 comments:

rick b said...

Interested said As long as there are questions and someone seeking answers, we will progress.


In so many words you yourself admited to not wanting to look at the evidence or both sides. It really bothers me that you say stuff like this As long as there are questions and someone seeking answers, we will progress.


But then when it comes to the Bible, reject any evidence before even looking at it. Or if you say fine, post it, you still by your own words before have rejected it and it would make one wonder if all you were doing is saying post the evidence simply to get people off your back, but in reality never even looking at it. Just my thoughts. Rick b

Interested said...

Okay Rick...short and sweet...well maybe. Ask me one question, just one and I will do my absolutely best to answer it.

rick b said...

As I have asked many times why is it you say, people can believe what they want, as long as it does not interfere with your life, but what you believe interfere's with mine.

Examples:
1. In the movie no intelligence required, the atheists admitted, if a atheist scientist or school teacher converts to belief in Jesus, they can or will lose Jobs, or be down graded in pay, or some form of retaliation will occur.

This shows a one sided view.

Example 2. Atheists want evolution taught in schools. You have said people need to view both sides and think for themselves. But atheists fight us in court to allow only what they/you believe. So much for thinking for yourself. That is what is called a hypocrite.

Now for example 2, you might say you dont mind both sides being taught, but since we both know that atheists are fighting this issue in court, even if you say you want both sides taught, if your not being vocal about it, then it would lead me to believe, you really dont.

3rd example. many atheists want to allow abortions or things that us Christians are opposed to, yet were told to mind our own business.

In many cases, it is my business, because my tax money pays for them, so I should have a say in it. it boils down to this, as an atheist, your life does interfere with mine and your belief does interfere with mine. So why is it ok for you guys to be so one sided. Are you really afraid of the truth?

I know you will say your not afraid of the truth, but why is it so one sided to the point you guys fight us in court or attack believers, like I pointed out already. Rick b

Interested said...

I asked for ONE question and you hand me many but I will do my best.

“As I have asked many times why is it you say, people can believe what they want, as long as it does not interfere with your life, but what you believe interferes with mine.”


“Examples:
1. In the movie no intelligence required, the atheists admitted, if a atheist scientist or school teacher converts to belief in Jesus, they can or will lose Jobs, or be down graded in pay, or some form of retaliation will occur.”
First, I am not all atheists so I cannot speak for all. The reason that schools are not and should not be allowed to teach outside the curriculum is because the district board, made up of people who live there, decide what is to be taught in the schools and what is not. It is a board of folks elected by the people who decide.

This shows a one sided view.

“Example 2. Atheists want evolution taught in schools. You have said people need to view both sides and think for themselves. But atheists fight us in court to allow only what they/you believe. So much for thinking for yourself. That is what is called a hypocrite.”

Creationism is not science. Evolution is science.

“Now for example 2, you might say you dont mind both sides being taught, but since we both know that atheists are fighting this issue in court, even if you say you want both sides taught, if your not being vocal about it, then it would lead me to believe, you really dont.”

It isn’t about both sides being taught in school. School is academic not religious. Evolution is science. Creation is religion. Church and State are separate for a very good reason. If schools were allowed to teach religion which religion would they teach? Do you want your children to learn about Joseph Smith or Muhammad? Religion rightfully belongs to the realm of parenthood. You decide what you want your children to learn about religion, including creation. Remember there are many creation stories, the bible only tells one.

“3rd example. many atheists want to allow abortions or things that us Christians are opposed to, yet were told to mind our own business.”

Abortion is a tough issue but it is a legal issue for the state not a religious one. It does not interfere with you if abortion is legal because you are not forced to participate. On the other hand, if it is illegal I am forced to participate. See the difference?

“In many cases, it is my business, because my tax money pays for them, so I should have a say in it. it boils down to this, as an atheist, your life does interfere with mine and your belief does interfere with mine. So why is it ok for you guys to be so one sided. Are you really afraid of the truth?”

At this point tax dollars are not used for abortion, to my knowledge, however tax money, mine and yours, is used to support unwanted children who are born to crack mamas and welfare families.

“I know you will say you’re not afraid of the truth, but why is it so one sided to the point you guys fight us in court or attack believers, like I pointed out already. Rick b”

Truth….your truth is not mine. My truth is not yours. There is not one truth when we discuss religion or a lack of it. I do my best not to attack believers personally, but I do attack religion in general. It is dangerous and it does a lot of harm, in my opinion. I have a right to my opinion as do you. Courts decide law and must not be involved in religion any more than religion should be involved in the law.

rick b said...

Interested said Creationism is not science. Evolution is science.

Funny you should say this, in a prior post you said
When I think of science and the scientific method or 5 steps used by most school kids for science fair, I understand what it is:

1. I ask a question to which I want an answer.
2. I do the research on the background.
3. I postulate an idea or hypothesize a result.
4. I test by doing an experiment.
5. I analyze the data and draw my conclusion.

If I have worked correctly my results can be repeated by the next person who asks the same question. What are the steps for faith? How can it be tested?



Now since YOU SAID evolution is science, and you gave the definition of science, Please give examples of Science using those 5 methods to prove evolution, if you cannot do it, then explain how you can say evolution is science.


Now when you said you asked for one question, and I posted many, let me ask you a question. Why are you willing to only answer ONE?

Also I did not ask many questions, I did ask one question and gave examples, I even stated EXAMPLE 1.
EXAMPLE 2, EXAMPLE 3.

These 3 examples were not questions, they were examples of what I was talking about. Remember I have always said, I do my best to give evidence or go into great detail, This way you or anyone can never accuse me of not asking questions, or dodging questions or not giving evidence. Rick b

Interested said...

Rick I was not trying to avoid questions in any number but I was asking that you stick to one topic, perhaps I did not state it well.

Evolution: I, along with the entire scientific community understand that evolution did and does occur. I did not, nor could I, personally conduct the experiments but I have read the results and seen the papers presented so I accept evolution as a fact of life. The mapping of the human gnome, the discovery of Lucy et. al., the observation of mutation but the scientific world convinces me, without a doubt that the human race evolved over time to arrive where are and that we will continue to evolve as time passes. So my confidence in evolution comes from a huge community of scientist who agree that the evolution theory is valid. I am providing a link to a simple paper that explains it better than I can.

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/biology/bio039.htm

rick b said...

I gave you a post a while back about Atheists from a Chuck Missler.

The guy's IQ puts in in the mensa group. So you cannot say he is Stupid. With that said, here is a DVD he did. I think you should buy it and watch it. I want an honest answer from you, Will you watch this DVD. If Money is the Issue, I will pay for it.

But if that does not matter and you say, Nope wont watch it, give me an honest answer as to why you will not, Here is info from the site about the DVD, and the link again is, www.khouse.org.

I think it will be an eye opener for you, since the scientists you listen to cannot prove evolution, all they have is a hope that it is true approach. Rick b

Darwin’s Dilemma - DVD

The Cambrian explosion was one of the most spectacular events in the history of life. In a short window of geological time, an abundance of new animals – and new animal body designs – arose fully formed without evidence of any evolutionary ancestors.

Charles Darwin viewed this as an inexplicable mystery. He had envisioned the evolution of life through a multitude of small, undirected steps. Yet, the fossil record reveals not such pattern of gradual development. Instead, early in the Cambrian period, compound eyes, articulated limbs, sophisticated sensory organs and skeletons burst into existence seemingly out of nowhere.
Darwin’s Dilemma - DVD

Darwin’s Dilemma explores the Cambrian explosion and the scientific controversy that still surrounds it. Where are the missing transitional forms that Darwin’s theory requires?

Filmed on four continents, this fascinating documentary examines some of the most important fossil discoveries ever made, and with them, a mystery deeper than Darwin ever imagined. For the Cambrian explosion of life was actually an explosion of biological information — assembly instructions in DNA and embryonic blueprints that directed the development of the first complex animals, information that points unmistakably to foresight, purpose and intelligent design..

BONUS DVD FEATURES

* Scientist and scholars answer questions about the Cambrian explosion and intelligent design
* Virtual museum of Cambrian fossils
* Reference library of books on the Cambrian explosion, evolution, and intelligent design
* Music from the original score of Darwin”s Dilemma
* Chapter Selection

Running Time: Approximately 72 Minutes

Interested said...

I have see some of the video but this,along with many others written about him tell me that he is not a reliable source.

Chuck Missler - Important Rapture Cult leader who is notorious for brazenly lying to his audience to curry favor. An entertaining public speaker popular on the cult circuit, Missler rolls out detailed and elaborate prevarications to pump up the Rapture Cult lie the doctrine was taught in the early church. In a typical presentation, in a rapid fire fashion, Chuck Missler will cite over a dozen ancient Christians (Irenaues, Hippolytus, Jerome, etc), with dates that sound authentic, and categorically state they all taught the pre-tribulation fraud. To an unlearned Christian, such a presentation is compelling.

Christian Media's James Lloyd, compiled recordings of the aforementioned presentations and reduced them to transcript form. He then tracked down the actual statements from each historical figure, and discovered not one ancient teacher or writer cited taught the pre-tribulation rapture! The results of that research, including the actual transcript of statments, formed a significant portion of the book The Rapture Cult: Dishonesty In Dispensationalism by James Lloyd. The bottom line is, Chuck Missler is a very clever liar, and the Bible says "whosoever loveth and maketh a lie" is found in the eternal company of "dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolators...." (Revelation 22:15)
Source: http://www.christianmediaresearch.com/snapshotsC.html

Interested said...

And check this out.

http://www.christianmediaresearch.com/snapshotsC.html

rick b said...

You never cease to amase me, I'm a Christian who believes the Bible and you reject everything I say. But you find so called "Christians" that agree with you or slam other Christians and you believe them.

The problem with what your saying or should I say, believing is, these guys are bickering over petty things.

I believe in the rapture of the Church, but the problem is, their are 3 views to the rapture, I believe the bible is clear as to which one is correct. But it's really ok that Christians dont fully agree since the Rapture of the Church is not what we call a salvation issue.

What I mean by that is, if we have the wrong view of when the rapture takes place, that will not keep us out of heaven, like rejecting Jesus will do.

I also dont believe you really looked into the Missler thing since your reply was so fast, it was like you just Googled his name and added the first attack you could find. I really feel sorry for you. Rick b

Nicole said...

INT:

I am not convinced of your initial research on Mr Missler.

My research on Mr Loyd tells me HE'S not a reliable source.

Interested said...

Onr of my daughters is a bor again christian and she is also a Missler fan so yes I know about him. Although there is a lot of negative stuff about him out there I did give his stuff a fair shake. However in the end the reliable information is from other sources.

rick b said...

Site your reliable sources.

I check them out, and I checked out the site about Missler.

Like always, you ignore evidence and run to however says what you want to hear. As I said before, I'm a Christian who believes the Bible, yet you reject what I say. But you tell me, this Christian or this Christian site deny's what you say.

Like with the Gog and Magog invasion topic. You found a so called Christian who rejected what the Bible says.

Why do you find Christians that tell you what you want to hear, they believe them? It's simple, they tickle your itching ears, Funny how you reject the Bible, but the Bible predicted people like you.

2Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

The site about Missler Rejects any person who believes in the rapture, but they provide no evidence, or only one verse. They do so little in the way of evidence that it does not surprise me that you believe them. Rick b

rick b said...

A while back, beast would get mad because I would tell him, If a so called Christian rejects the Bible or deny's what they Bible says, or live an evil life, Example, If Hitler said he was a Christian, I would say he was a liar.

All these people are not Christians, Beast claimed they were. I dont care what he thinks, if a person denys Scripture and lives like that, they are not believers. So all these so called Christians or Christian websites you find info on that rejects the Bible or claims these teachers are wrong, they themselves are wrong and do not know the Bible. Rick b