Runboard.com
You're welcome.
The Neutral Zone
Welcome To The Neutral Zone:
The place to discuss topics that may cause debates on other boards without getting yelled at or banned!

"It is not so much our friends' help that helps us, as the confidence of their help." - Epicurus


runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) Sign in (lost password?)


Page:  1  2  3 ... 10  11  12  13 

 
Lesigner Girl Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
(Top of the page)
Premium

Head of Runboard staff

Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 634
Karma: 13 (+15/-2)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


Yet another link in the tree of life. Thanks for posting that, Petal. emoticon

MO, that's an interesting thought about the dog and the covers. I can see it becoming a learned behavior that's passed down through the generations, but I wouldn't expect it to bring about any biological changes as long as there are people to care for her descendants. However, if some of them were let loose in the wild and subjected to cold winters, I could see some of them having thinner fur after a while, since thick fur would no longer be as much of a factor in keeping them alive to reproduce.

---
Runboard Knowledge Base
Website Creation Tutorials
10/14/2009, 8:06 pm Link to this post Send e-mail to   Send PM to Blog
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


Yes, isn't that we way we also learned and eventually lost our own body hair.
We used to run around nekkid until one of our ancestors starting making designer outfits for the women to wear from the skins of the animals they killed, to make their bodies look better than the other tribes' women.
Over hundreds of years, the new idea caught on and everybody started wearing skins that they could throw away when the fleas got too many, rather than have to continually washing your own fur, you could throw the artificial fur away and your own fur began to disappear (thus the first rubbish tip was born).
Over a few more thousand years, the only fur we kept was that on our heads.
So if Bella is allowed to breed and she and her descendants are kept covered at night, they would no longer need fur to keep them warm, and especially if they continue to live here where it's freakin' hot for most of the year.
So bald boxers would evolve.
I like it!
 emoticon
10/15/2009, 12:18 am Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 
Lesigner Girl Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
(Top of the page)
Premium

Head of Runboard staff

Registered: 11-2005
Posts: 634
Karma: 13 (+15/-2)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


I think those would be some pretty ugly dogs. emoticon

Heh, that could be how we finally split from the chimp line. Maybe the hairy bipeds thought the bald bipeds were too ugly to mate with. emoticon

---
Runboard Knowledge Base
Website Creation Tutorials
10/15/2009, 9:17 pm Link to this post Send e-mail to   Send PM to Blog
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


For one thing and for another, other animal skins were better than their own, so that's why they killed them, like leopards which our Zulus still wear on ceremonial occasions.
10/15/2009, 11:20 pm Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


quote:

Pastor Rick wrote:

Humans didn’t descend from a sponge, reveals analysis - April 3, 2009
quote:

WASHINGTON - A new research has rebuffed a theory which said that humans have descended from a sponge, and has determined that all sponges descended from a unique sponge ancestor, who in turn was not the ancestor of all other animals.

]click here for the rest



I've just read through that again.
My question is if sponges were there right at the beginning of life, and modern sponges descended from a ancient sponge ancestor, but other life forms, i.e. vertebrates didn't, then what was the ancestor offered as the alternative of vertebrates. Also what did this ancestor descend from?
Ultimately, all life descended from the first unicellular
lifeform that developed in the morass that was early earth. All this argument is saying is that the common ancestor of all life goes back further than the first sponges, which really doesn't make much difference.

10/26/2009, 3:48 am Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 
Pastor Rick Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator
(Top of the page)
Premium


Registered: 07-2005
Location: Runboard Staff Aux
Posts: 1876
Karma: 28 (+41/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


Not really, the current theory is that life came from several unique and original life forms at roughly the same time. Three of these original lifeforms (some say more) survived and from them come everything else. The original ancestor of the sponge is not in our line of creation.

---

RSFRDAdvertise Boards On TRDREITB
10/28/2009, 11:29 am Link to this post Send e-mail to   Send PM to Blog
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


Yes, but is you read what I said in the rest of the post, it doesn't really make a difference in the timespan of billions of years, also what is the alternative?
If vertebrates didn't descend from the descendants of ancient sponges, then what was their ancestor in the line of evolution when sponges first appeared.
In order to refute a scientific claim, surely there has to be a scientific alternative.


BTW PS a 'mea culpa':
I must apologise for all the typos in my long evolution story. I reread it for editing purposes for my thesis earlier this week. There are some serious typing errors. I'm going to blame my sore shoulder for those. LOL
I usually reread what I've typed in case there are errors but those were very long posts taken from my first draft so I didn't, which proves that you shouldn't rely on spell and language checkers for correcting typos.
Again, my apologies.
10/28/2009, 10:46 pm Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 
Kaunisto Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: Finland
Posts: 122
Karma: 11 (+11/-0)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


quote:

Pastor Rick wrote:

Not really, the current theory is that life came from several unique and original life forms at roughly the same time. Three of these original lifeforms (some say more) survived and from them come everything else. The original ancestor of the sponge is not in our line of creation.

Not that I'm any sort of expert, but I wouldn't call it "current theory", I think the single origin is still more widely accepted.

But this sponge thing seems to support the option of several origins, although I'm not very convinced. The way I see it two organisms can have same origin even if they no longer have any same genes.


In general logic/common sense without actual scientific knowledge, I feel it would be more likely that there have been more then one "first organism". But on the other hand it's more propable that only one line would survive as it would have millions of years head start.



---

10/29/2009, 2:44 am Link to this post Send e-mail to   Send PM to
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


Yes the original sparks of life came from the sort of things that grow in primordial ooze. If you live in a dank moist humid and hot region, you can see this happening.
It only needed the right temperature and humidity to cause moulds and fungus to generate colonies of themselves and if you look at the whole event from single cell self-replicating organism to the growth of moulds and basic fungi taking millions of years, it is completely feasible that the first multi-cellular life may have been several living organisms.
In the same way that humans went through several evolutions that failed until the one that succeeded worked, it had to have happened with every other life form.
10/29/2009, 11:07 am Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 
Morwen Oronor Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Resident Scholar
(Top of the page)

Registered: 01-2008
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1743
Karma: 15 (+28/-13)
Reply Quote
Re: Only 39% believe in Evolution!


With the Darwin anniversary this year, there's been a lot of talk about evolution etc on TV and I've been watching it, certainly now after reading up on it.
One of the new theories is about water. Traditionally, and if you look in my earlier notes, it was thought that water arrived as a result of comets crashing into the earth.
The new theory is that it was already there. That when the 'big bang' happened and the earth formed, it already had water and the water that has arrived since then added to the water that was already here.
One of the reasons for this is that it is thought that Mars had water once, it had ice caps and scientists think that there is water under those, but they don't know what happened to Mars' water, i.e. the oceans they believe were there before.
I'm watching another one right now, and the question is asked "what started the big bang" and although the universe is changing all the time but the laws of physics don't. so if they can figure out what started it, then they will have all the answers.
But there is a theory, and that is that because they know that 'big bangs' are happening all the time within the universe, that eventually our universe will expand to the point where it leads to another 'big bang' and that this happens about every trillion years. If this theory is correct then it would mean that our 'big bang' was the result of the total expansion of a previous universe that happened 13.7 billion years ago, so when our universe reaches around the trillion year mark, another 'big bang' will wipe it out and start a whole new universe.
Interesting????
11/16/2009, 3:45 am Link to this post Send PM to Blog
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3 ... 10  11  12  13 





You are not logged in (login)