I know this may be a risky thing to stick out there with all the really impressively great posting going on here but why do we have to settle for an either/or set up on this? Why can't there be a third choice that embodies both areas well enough, a kind of strange gap filler? I know a great many of the writers I have enjoyed reading fall somewhere between science and faith themselves. They would be the first to propose another bookcase labeled... ummmm, SCIAITH or FAIENCE... to house their tomes?

I know, I warned you it was kind of silly! :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by valinors_sorrow

I know this may be a risky thing to stick out there with all the really impressively great posting going on here but why do we have to settle for an either/or set up on this? Why can't there be a third choice that embodies both areas well enough, a kind of strange gap filler? I know a great many of the writers I have enjoyed reading fall somewhere between science and faith themselves. They would be the first to propose another bookcase labeled.... ummmm, SCIAITH or FAIENCE.... to house their tomes?

I know, I warned you it was kinda silly! :o

---

I have said in several posts here that I don't believe that evolution and belief in the bible are mutually exclusive. Unless one believes only in a strict, literal acceptance of the bible rather than a allegorical one, one can believe in both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Your timing on this is not good. My daughter is working on her Masters in Education. She is currently taking a course in Philosophy of Education. So this issue was part of the discussions in her class. I won't dispute that the American Education system has many problems. But its not as bad as you paint it. The conclusions she reached from this course was to teach students to think for themselves. So there is hope.

I went thru my secondary and college education more than 30 years ago. I don't recall being especially brainwashed and indoctrinated. I very strongly believe that I am a free thinker. That I arrive at conclusions based on factual evidence and logical considerations.

One of the problems I perceive in your arguments is that you seem to consider only extremes. Things are either one way or another. That just isn't always the case.

---

College courses in the humanities require learning how to think. Most college students today take practical courses in order to make money so humanities courses are not as popular as they once were. These money-making oriented courses, such as banking,
Computer programing, architecture, and others like it do not make etrhics and logic required subjects. So these students are graduated essentially unable to reason any better than they were in high school.

The problem is that from grade school to high school no concerted effort is made to teach kids ethics, or logic. These are left up to the churches which only teach deontological reasoning based on rules which doesn't really teach the kids why it is that they are required not to do certain things and makes them inflexible when faced with situations that require flexible thinking or a judgment call after weighing the pros and cons.

These are the same kids who grow up and justify child abuse, wife beatings,
Stealing when it's convenient, lying when it suites them, or else are walking robots which pave a road to hell via good intentions. That remains my view based on my familiarity with this educational system and the type of citizens it irresponsibly generally produces.



Again my apologies if I came or come across as rude.

BTW

When you expose a young mind to authoritative texts calaimin certainty where there is no certainty, and indirectly calling religeon myth or foolisness, or making them feel stupid if they reject evolution, then if that's not brainwashing then what is it? Indoctrination? This is common in all public schhools. If it weren't the there would not be protests about it from creationists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedball1

Starman,
"Remember, the debate is really about whether evolution occurs, not about whether there's a creator behind it"
Whoa!! Back the truck up. Your entire package is about a Creator/ Intellect Designer who just said "poof" and there we were. And now you say it's not germane to this debate? Let's stop copying and pasting up articles both pro and con. I can find as many as you can but it's nonproductive since we don't believe each other anyway.
Let's focus instead on the issues.
This is not about whether evolution happened. Of course it happened. We're here aren't we. This is about HOW evoluation happened. Your claim is that it happened by Intelligent Design. Mine is that it happened by natural selection.
You claim intelligent Design. That requires a designer. Trot him out! Who is he? Does he have a name and what is it? If you can't produce or even name a Designer then how can you argue that it even took place. If you have no evidence and the only thing you can do is attempt to discredit Evolution or trot out old tired Creation arguements then you're outta gas. But I'm a fair guy. I'll back off and let you prove your case. If you have no evidence or proof to back up your claim then this debate is over and I'll get back to the plumbing page where i belong. It's been fun. For me it's been a case of "daja Vue" (sp.)
I debated for years, both in religious chat rooms and in the street at the clinic, and this gave me a little stroll through the "faded yellow pages of yesterday". Starman, Take it from me. In those years I heard just about all the arguments that there were to hear. You haven't surprised me with anything different. Just as I could never win out there so can I never win in here. As can you. Unless you have some dramatic proof to put forth let's just agree to disagree. You're a fine debater and a challange, plus a lot of fun to debate but I don't think Ben should have ever started this thread. It's just too emotional a subject. And your thoughts? Regards, om

---

Do you really consider you evolution arguments novelties? Tagging an argument as tired only means that you are unable to refute it via logic and evidence and find it convenient to tag it that way and evade the issues.


Actually, I consider your arguments not only tired but beyond your comprerhension not because you can't reason, but because you refuse to. This refusal causes your attempt to be logical to destroy what little credibility you might have had by contradicting yourself. So sadly, the one lacking evidence here is you my friend since what you present as evidence are biased conclusions buttressed by a pathetic attempt at using an analogy.


You deamand disrespectfully for me to trot out my God? Why not trot out yours since you have made evolution your religion and the evolutionist sceientists your god.
No one has seen one animal change into another. All animals appear inn the geological stratum fully developed. Intermediary forms are assumes to be intermediary by a stretch of the imagination. Harmful process of mutations are claimed to benefit organisms in the long run because the original survival of the fittest idea proved inadequate. Human remains that are contemporary with your cherished man apes are conveniently shelved or ignored because they don't fit in with your precious beliefs. DNA similarities are interpreted to mean lineage. The law of Entropy is conveniently ignored because if they don't then evolution is impossible so they choose to make believe it doesn't exist. A simple arrowhead is evidence of mind but the human brain popped up from mindless shufflings. And on and on it goes. So in terms of proof, sorry but you really have none.


Who is he? He is the creator. What is his name. "I am that I am"
Why do I believe he exists, because his creation gives powerful testimony that he does.


I am not attempting to win out only to show the reasons for my beliefs and let the coin fall wherever it falls.

I don't claim that evolution happened by intelligent design. I believe it didn't happen at all.

Also, the manner in which you choose to describe creationist beliefs comes across as ridicule. Do you really believe that we believe such things? I don't imagine God saying "poof!" and things popping magically into existence and I am sure that you are unable to present evidence that creationists belief things in the way you describe.

The universe is complex even down to the atomic and subatomic levels and such complexity requires planning and scientific investigation shows it took vast quantities of time--from a human standpoint.

I imagine God delving on how he is going to design something before embarking on the task and then using the power and wisdom available to him to accomplish that task.

The fact that we are here doesn't prove evolution. In order for that conclusion to be reached simply because we are here, one must first reject intelligent design. Only then can we say what you say. But first comes the belief in evolution and the rejection of creation.


No one is out of gas my friend. I present you with the Entropy problem and prove to you that your analogy is faulty. You choose to ignore it which is a sign of inability to face the issues via counterargument. A watch changing because of intelligent design is not comparable to MINDLESS evolution. The mindless part is what causes your analogy to be false. Ignoring entropy is not scientific.

Actually, you are very skillfully proving my point instead of yours and asking me to accept it as proving yours. The reason for this? Beats me.

BTW


Idenifying a false analogy was one of the basics in logic which I aced. So this is not a matter of feeling that it is a false analogy it is a matter of knowing it is a false analogy.

Your constant accusation that my purpose in this discussion is motivated by my need to denigrated other people's beliefs is annoying. I hope that you realize that the same accusation can be leveled at you in relation to religion. Also, I only posted those examples of evolutionist fraud because you posted examples about creationists. It was more as an illustration that such displays of one-upmanship can go on and on and prove nothing.

But let's just agree to disagree since this can go on ad ad infinitum.

Starman,
You missed my point. But its getting off topic. My daughter is being taught how to teach. What she is being taught is to teach free thinking. Letting studenjts learn by discovery and experience. Now just depositing knmowledge into their heads.

Oh no! We can't quit on insults and put downs. Wherever did you get the impression that making me liook bad makes you look good?
You state;"I don't claim that evolution happened by intelligent design. I believe it didn't happen at all."
I love it! Reason and logic against faith and belief. If you can not process the information below then I can provide pictures. Or if you let me know what large city you're near I can give you directions to the nearest Musum of Natural History where you might even be allowed to touch a fossil bone from the evolutionary process that you claim doesn't exsist. Read in my acid tongued friend and then deny history.

Timeline of evolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the history of evolutionary biology, see History of evolutionary thought.
This timeline of the evolution of life outlines the major events in the development of life on the planet Earth. For context, see geologic time scale, and the history of Earth. Dates given are estimates based on scientific evidence. The table uses the symbols "Ma" for "mega-annum (million years ago)" and "ka" for "kilo-annum (thousand years ago)". English literature also uses the abbreviations "mya" (m.y.a) and "tya" (t.y.a) or "kya" in the same sense.

In biology, evolution is the process by which populations of organisms acquire and pass on novel traits from generation to generation. Its occurrence over large stretches of time explains the origin of new species and ultimately the vast diversity of the biological world. Contemporary species are related to each other through common descent, products of evolution and speciation over billions of years.

Date Event
4600 Ma The planet Earth forms from the accretion disc revolving around the young Sun.
4100 Ma The surface of the Earth cools enough for the crust to solidify. The atmosphere and the oceans form.[1]
4000 Ma The earliest life appears, possibly derived from self-reproducing RNA molecules. The replication of these organisms requires resources like energy, space, and smaller building blocks, which soon become limited, resulting in competition. Natural selection favors those molecules which are more efficient at replication. DNA molecules then take over as the main replicators. They soon develop inside enclosing membranes which provide a stable physical and chemical environment conducive to their replication: proto-cells. At this time, the atmosphere does not contain any free oxygen.
3900 Ma Late Heavy Bombardment: peak rate of impact events upon the Earth, Moon, Mars and Venus by asteroids and comets (planetesimals). This constant disturbance may encourage life to evolve (see panspermia). It is thought that these impacts cause the oceans to boil away completely, more than once; yet life persists.[2]
Cells resembling prokaryotes appear. These first organisms are chemoautotrophs: they use carbon dioxide as a carbon source and oxidize inorganic materials to extract energy. Later, prokaryotes evolve glycolysis, a set of chemical reactions that free the energy of organic molecules such as glucose. Glycolysis generates ATP molecules as short-term energy currency, and ATP continue to be used in almost all organisms, unchanged, to this day.

3500 Ma Lifetime of the last universal ancestor; the split between the bacteria and the archaea occurs.
Bacteria develop primitive forms of photosynthesis which at first do not produce oxygen. These organisms generate ATP by exploiting a proton gradient, a mechanism still used in virtually all organisms.

3000 Ma Photosynthesizing cyanobacteria evolve; they use water as a reducing agent, thereby producing oxygen as waste product. The oxygen initially oxidizes dissolved iron in the oceans, creating iron ore. The oxygen concentration in the atmosphere subsequently rises, acting as a poison for many bacteria.
2500 Ma Some bacteria evolve the ability to utilize oxygen to more efficiently use the energy from organic molecules such as glucose. Virtually all organisms using oxygen employ the same set of reactions, the citric acid cycle and oxidative phosphorylation.
The "runaway icehouse" effect[3] results in the Huronian glaciation (2500–2100 Ma).[4]

2100 Ma More complex cells appear: the eukaryotes, the closest relatives of whom are probably the archaea. Eukaryotes contain various organelles with diverse functions, probably derived from the co-evolution of symbiotic communities of prokaryotes. The most dramatic examples are mitochondria, which use oxygen to extract energy from organic molecules and appear similar to today's Rickettsia. Many eukaryotes also have chloroplasts, organelles which originated from cyanobacteria and similar organisms, which derive energy from light and synthesize organic molecules.
1200 Ma Sexual reproduction evolves, leading to faster evolution.[5] While most life still exists in oceans and lakes, some cyanobacteria may already live in moist soil by this time.
1000 Ma Multicellular organisms appear: initially colonial algae, and later seaweeds, living in the oceans.[6]
900 Ma
ChoanoflagellateThe choanoflagellates develop. These protists are considered the ancestors of the entire animal kingdom, and specifically the direct ancestors of the sponges: the choanocytes ("collar cells") of sponges (and a few other animal groups, such as flatworms) have the same basic structure as choanoflagellates, and DNA evidence suggests a close relationship between the two.
The modern species proterospongia, consisting of choanoflagellates that live in colonies and exhibit primitive cell specialization for different tasks, is likely very similar to the ancient ancestor species that would have bridged the gap between choanoflagellates and sponges, and thereby between protozoa and all metazoa (multicellular animals).

1000–750 Ma The first known supercontinent, Rodinia, forms, and then breaks apart again.
950–780 Ma Sturtian ice age, a time of multiple near-global glaciations, with periods oscillating between a Snowball Earth and a greenhouse Earth.
900 Ma There are 481 18-hour days in a year. The rotation of the Earth has gradually slowed ever since.
750–580 Ma According to the Snowball Earth hypothesis, the Precambrian Varangian ice age is so severe that the Earth's oceans freeze over completely; only in the tropics do oceans remain liquid.
600 Ma
SpongeSponges (Porifera), the earliest multicellular animals, develop from cell colonies. Sponges are the simplest and most primitive animals, having partially-differentiated tissues but no muscles, nerves, internal organs, or capacity for locomotion.
JellyfishFollowing sponges, Cnidaria (jellyfish, etc.), Ctenophora, and other multicellular animals appear in the oceans. Cnidaria and Ctenophora are some of the earliest creatures to have neurons, in the form of a simple net, with no central nervous system. They possess muscular tissue and digestive systems with mouths. Unlike sponges, these animals have structured bodies with organs and radial symmetry.


FlatwormFlatworms (Platyhelminthes), the earliest animals to have a rudimentary brain and the simplest animals with bilateral symmetry, develop. They are also the simplest animals to have organs that form from three germ layers (triploblasty). There are still no organisms with a true circulatory or respiratory system.

The Ozone layer forms, allowing for the first major excursions onto the land. The second supercontinent, Pannotia, forms, then breaks up by 540 Ma.

542–530 Ma
TrilobiteThe Cambrian explosion, a rapid set of evolutionary changes, creates all the major body plans (phyla) of modern animals. The cause of this huge expansion in the variety of life forms is still a matter of scientific debate. Arthropoda, represented by an abundance of trilobites, is the dominant phylum. Anomalocaris is a predator up to 2 meters in length.[7]
The worm-like organisms develop more highly specialized and advanced structures, such as the circulatory system of acorn worms, which features a heart that also functions as a kidney. Acorn worms have a gill-like structure, similar to that of primitive fish, used for breathing. Acorn worms are thus sometimes said to be a link between vertebrates and invertebrates.

PikaiaPikaia, a small swimmer and the earliest-known animal with a notochord, is believed to be the ancestor of all chordates and vertebrates. The lancelet, a species still alive today, retains some of the features of the primitive chordates, and resembles the Pikaia in many ways. Another early chordate-like fossil is from a conodont, an "eel-shaped animal of 4–20 cm long" with a pair of huge eyes and a complex basket of teeth.

The first known footprints on land date to 530 Ma, indicating that early animal explorations may have predated the development of terrestrial plants.[8]

505 Ma
AgnathaThe first vertebrates appear: the ostracoderms, jawless fish (Agnatha) such as Haikouichthys and Myllokunmingia. They have cartilaginous internal sekeltons, and lack the paired (pectoral and pelvic) fins of more advanced prehistoric fish. They are precusors of the Osteichthyes (bony fish), and are related to present-day lampreys and hagfishes.
488 Ma
PlacodermiThe first of the seven major extinction events over geological time occurs at the Cambrian-Ordovician transition.
Soon after, the first of the jawed fishes, Placodermi, develop. Their jaws evolve from the first of their gill arches.[9] Their head and thorax are covered by articulated armored plates, while the rest of the body is scaled or naked.

475 Ma The first primitive plants move onto land,[10] having evolved from green algae living along the edges of lakes.[11] They are accompanied by fungi, and very likely plants and fungi work symbiotically together; lichens exemplify such a symbiosis.
450 Ma Arthropods, with an exoskeleton that provides support and prevents water loss,[12] are the first animals to move onto land.[13] Among the first are Myriapoda (millipedes and centipedes), later followed by spiders and scorpions.
Over the next ten million years, the two Ordovician-Silurian extinction events occur. Taken together, these constitute the second mass extinction event.

400 Ma The first insects evolve, the wingless silverfish, springtails (no longer considered insects), and bristletails. First sharks appear.[14] First Coelacanth appears; this order of animals had been thought to have no extant members, until living specimens were discovered in 1938. It is often referred to as a living fossil.
375 Ma Tiktaalik is a genus of sarcopterygian (lobe-finned) fishes from the late Devonian with many tetrapod-like features.
370 Ma Cladoselache, a shark, is a high-speed predator.[15]
365 Ma The Late Devonian extinction is the third mass extinction.
New insect species evolve on land and in fresh water from the myriapods.


PanderichthysSome lobe-finned fish (Sarcopterygii) develop legs and give rise to early four-limbed tetrapods: Ichthyostega, Acanthostega and Pederpes finneyae. Initially aquatic, dwelling in shallow, swampy freshwater habitats, these fishes use their fins as paddles to assist in navigating shallow waters choked with plants and detritus—the likely origin of front limbs bending backward at the elbow and hind limbs bending forward at the knee. Eventually, these tetrapods use their rudimentary legs to move out onto land for brief periods, probably to hunt insects. Lungs and swim bladders evolve.

Primitive tetrapods developed from a fish with a two-lobed brain in a flattened skull, a wide mouth, and a short snout, whose upward-facing eyes show that it was a bottom-dweller, and which had already developed adaptations of fins with fleshy bases and bones. The "living fossil" coelacanth is a related lobe-finned fish without these shallow-water adaptations. Amphibians today still retain many characteristics of the early tetrapods.

360 Ma Plants evolve seeds, structures that protect plant embryos and enable plants to spread quickly on land.
Creation of Woodleigh crater (100 km wide) and Siljan Ring (40 km wide, Dalecarlia, Sweden).

360–286 Ma The golden age of sharks[16].
350-250 Ma Karoo Ice Age, beginning with early Carboniferous and ending with late Permian. Two particular periods in which much of Gondwanaland is glaciated from an early centre in Africa and South America, and a later centre in India and Australia, caused by polar wandering
300 Ma The supercontinent Pangea forms and will last for 120 million years; this is the last time all of the earth's continents fuse into one. Evolution of the amniotic egg gives rise to the Amniota, reptiles, who can reproduce on land. Insects evolve flight, and include a number of different orders (e.g. Palaeodictyoptera, Megasecoptera, Diaphanopterodea, and Protorthoptera) Dragonflies (Odonata) still resemble many of these early insects. Vast forests of clubmosses (lycopods), horsetails, and tree ferns cover the land; when these decay they will eventually form coal and oil. Gymnosperms begin to diversify widely. Cycads, plants resembling palms, first appear.
280 Ma The Protodonatan dragonfly Meganeura monyi is among the biggest insects that ever lived, with a wingspan of about 2 feet. Vertebrates include many Temnospondyl, Anthrachosaur, and Lepospondyl amphibians and early anapsid and synapsid (e.g. Edaphosaurus) reptiles.
256 Ma Diictodon, Cistecephalus, Dicynodon, Lycaenops, Dinogorgon and Procynosuchus, are a few of the many mammal-like reptiles known from South Africa and Russia. Pareiasaurs were large clumsy herbivores. The first Archosauriformes.
250 Ma The Permian-Triassic extinction event wipes out about 90% of all animal species; this fourth extinction event is the most severe mass extinction known.
Lystrosaurus is a common herbivore that survives the extinction event. The archosaurs split from other reptiles. Teleosts evolve from among the Actinopterygii (ray-finned fish), and eventually become the dominant fish group. Atmospheric oxygen, at 10%, is one third of its former level, so animals with air sac breathing systems will do well (present-day bird respiration exemplifies the air sac system). Some spores of bacteria Bacillus strain 2-9-3 (Sali bacillus marismortui) are trapped in salt crystals known as halite in New Mexico. They are re-animated in AD 2000 and have multiplied rapidly. Currently the world oldest living organism. [17]

220 Ma The climate is very dry, and dry-adapted organisms are favored: the archosaurs and the Gymnosperms. Archosaurs diversify into crocodilians, dinosaurs, and pterosaurs.
From synapsids come the first mammal precursors, therapsids, and more specifically the eucynodonts. Initially, they stay small and shrew-like. All mammals have milk glands for their young, and they keep a constant body temperature. Also, one of a pair of autosomes acquires gene SRY (derived from the SOX3 gene of the X chromosome) to become the Y chromosome, which has been decreasing in length since. Gymnosperms (mostly conifers) are the dominant land plants. Plant eaters will grow to huge sizes during the dominance of the gymnosperms to have space for large guts to digest the poor food offered by gymnosperms.

208-144 Ma Second major spread of sharks[18].
200 Ma Fifth mass extinction event occurs at the Triassic-Jurassic transition.
Marine reptiles include Ichthyosaurs and Plesiosaurs. Ammonites and belemnites flourish. Dinosaurs survive the extinction and grow to large size, but the thecodonts, or "socket-toothed" reptiles, die out. Modern amphibians evolve: the Lissamphibia; including Anura (frogs), Urodela (salamanders), and Caecilia. Geminiviridae, a diverse group of viruses, are traceable to this epoch or earlier[19].

180 Ma The supercontinent Pangea begins to break up into several land masses. The largest is Gondwana, made up of the land masses which are now Antarctica, Australia, South America, Africa, and India. Antarctica is still a land of forests. North America and Eurasia are still joined, forming the Northern supercontinent, Laurasia.
164 Ma The oldest swimming mammal, Castorocauda lutrasimilis, is the immediate predecessor of modern mammals such as the platypus and echidna.
160 Ma 3 metres long, Guanlong wucaii - meaning crested dragon from the five colours, Xinjiang province in northwestern China, is the oldest Tyrannosaur.
150 Ma Giant dinosaurs are common and diverse - Brachiosaurus, Apatosaurus, Stegosaurus, Allosaurus, along with smaller forms like Ornitholestes and Othneilia. Birds evolve from theropod dinosaurs. Archaeopteryx is an ancestor of birds, with claws, feathers but no beak.
135 Ma New dinosaurs Iguanodon, Hylaeosaurus, etc. appear after extinction of Jurassic forms. Microraptor gui, a 77 cm long dinosaur in Liaoning, Northeast China, has bird-like feathered wings on 4 limbs.
133 Ma Jeholornis prima, primitive bird in the Jiufotang Formation of north-eastern China eats seeds. The bird has large, strong wings, and also had a long, bony tail, like many dinosaurs.
130 Ma Angiosperm plants evolve flowers, structures that attract insects and other animals to spread pollen. This innovation of the angiosperms causes a major burst of animal evolution and co-evolution.
128 Ma One early tyrannosaur is Dilong paradoxus in Lioning Province of China. Has feathers and a small body of 5 feet (1.5 m) long.
125 Ma Eomaia scansoria, a eutherian mammal, which leads to the formation of modern placental mammals. It looks like a modern dormouse, climbing small shrubs in Liaoning, China. The parrot-beaked Psittacosaurus is the ancestor of the later horned dinosaurs.
123 Ma Sinornithosaurus millenii is a dinosaur in Liaoning, China that has primitive feathers not used for flight. Other dinosaurs with feathers are Sinosauropteryx (most primitive feathers, simplest tubular structures) and Changchanornis. Have common ancestor with Archaeopteryx. Other dinosaurs include Polacanthus (armoured herbivore) and Eotyrannus (early tyrannosaur).
110 Ma Sarcosuchus imperator, eight metric tons, 12 m long, head 2 m long, largest crocodile. Carnivorous dinosaurs included the "raptor" Deinonychus and sail-backed semi-aquatic spinosaurs, herbivores include the tallest known sauropod Sauroposeidon proteles, as well as the bulbous-nosed iguanodont Altirhinus (ancestral to duck-bills) and the armoured Sauropelta.
100 Ma The giant theropod dinosaurs Carcharodontosaurus and Giganotosaurus are even bigger than Tyrannosaurus.
88 Ma Breakup of Indo-Malagasy land mass.
80 Ma Many kinds of sauropod, duck billed, horned and meat-eating dinosaurs; half of all known dinosaur species are from the last 30 MY of the Mesozoic, after the rise of the angiosperms. India starts moving to Eurasia.
75 Ma Oviraptor was one of the most bird-like of the non-avian dinosaurs. Last common ancestor of humans and mice [20].
65 Ma The Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction event (sixth extinction event) wipes out about half of all animal species including all non-avian dinosaurs, probably because of a cooling of the climate precipitated by the giant impact of an asteroid: iridium powder from the asteroid forms a layer that covers the whole Earth. Creation of the Chicxulub Crater (170 km across, now half-submerged off the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico).
Without the presence of the giant and diurnal dinosaurs, mammals can increase in diversity and size. Some will later return back to the sea (whales, sirenians, seals) and others will evolve flight (bats). A group of small, nocturnal and arboreal, insect-eating mammals called the Archonta branches into what will be the primates, treeshrews, and bats. Primates have binocular vision and grasping digits, features that help them to jump from one tree branch to another. One example of a proto-primate is Plesiadapis which is extinct by 45 million years ago.

60 Ma Creodont, meat eater, northern hemisphere, extinct by 5.2 million years ago, possible ancestor of Miacids.
55 Ma Australia breaks away from Antarctica. Proto-primates first appear in North America, Asia, and Europe. One example is Carpolestes simpsoni at Clarks Fork Basin of Wyoming. It has grasping digits but no forward facing eyes. Another (earliest?) euprimate Teilhardina asiatica (Hunan, China) is mouse-sized, diurnal, and has small eyes. Mako Sharks are the probable ancestor of the Great White Shark [21].
50 Ma The evolution of the horse starts with Hyracotherium: the size of a fox with large nails instead of hoofs. Ancestor of whales (which include dolphins), Ambulocetus natans (Pakistan) probably walks on land like the modern sea lion and swims like modern otters. It has webbed feet that give it added power when swimming, and still hears directly from its ears. Pezosiren portelli, ancestor of modern manatees, walks like a hippo and swims like an otter. Miacids include Miacis, a five-clawed ancestor of all dogs, cats, bears, raccoon, fox, hyena, jackal, civet; it is a meat-eating, weasel-like tree climber.
48.5 Ma Gastornis geiselensis (Europe, USA), 1.75 m tall carnivorous bird, is a top predator
46.5 Ma Rodhocetus, ancestor of whale, successor to Ambulocetus, no longer needs to drink fresh water.
43 Ma Earliest elephant, Moeritherium (Egypt): 1m tall, size of a large pig, eats soft, juicy plants. It has a long nose, but no trunk nor tusks.
40 Ma Primates (order) diverge into suborders Strepsirrhini (lemurs and lorises) and Haplorrhini (tarsiers, monkeys and apes); the latter is diurnal and herbivorous.
37 Ma Basilosaurus, up to 20 m long, snakelike ancestor of whales, has reduced but well-developed hind limbs. Hears from sounds transmitted to middle ears through vibrations from lower jaws. In Egypt's 'Whale Valley', what would later be the Wadi Hitan desert is underwater, teeming with Basilosaurus isis which had no blowhole but had to raise its head above water to breathe. Early ancestors of strepsirrhines primate appear in the Egyptian desert, Biretia fayumensis and Biretia megalopsis.[22].
35 Ma Grasses evolve from among the angiosperms.
30 Ma Haplorrhini (suborder) splits into infraorders Platyrrhini (New World monkeys) and Catarrhini (Old World primates). New World monkeys have prehensile tails and migrate to South America. Catarrhines stay in Africa as the two continents drift apart. One ancestor of catarrhines might be Aegyptopithecus. New World monkey males are color blind. Haplorrhines: Bugtipithecus inexpectans, Phileosimias kamali and Phileosimias brahuiorum, similar to today's lemurs, live in rainforests on Bugti Hills of central Pakistan. Ancestor of all cats, 9 kg Proailurus, lives in trees in Europe, goes extinct 20 million years ago.
27.5 Ma Indricothere, rhino relative, 4.5 m tall, tallest mammal on land, lives in Mongolia.
27 Ma Phorusrhacos longissimus (Terror Bird) 2.5 m tall in the Americas. Extinct by 15,000 years ago.
25 Ma Catarrhini males gain color vision but lose the pheromone pathway [23]. Catarrhini splits into 2 superfamilies, Old World monkeys (Cercopithecoidea) and apes (Hominoidea). The Old World primates do not have prehensile tails (e.g. Baboon); some do not have tails at all. All hominoids are without tails.
22 Ma India collides with Asia, causing the rise of Himalaya and the Tibetan plateau. Cut off from the humidity, Central Asia becomes a desert. Appearance of deinotherium, ancient elephant, extinct by 2 million years ago. Evolving from an animal that looks part dog, part bear and part raccoon, the dawn bear (Ursavus elmensis) is the ancestor of all bears living today. It is the size of a fox, hunts in the tree tops, and supplements a diet of meat with plant material and insects. The first group, the Ailuropodinae, follows a plant-based diet, branches off, and only one member, the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), survives today.
21 Ma A mongoose-like creature floats to Madagascar from Africa on a raft of vegetation. It becomes the ancestor of all carnivorous mammals there.

20 Ma The African plate collides with Asia. Cynodictis, ancestor of dogs, has a shortened fifth claw which foreshadows the dewclaw (vestigial) of modern dogs. They look like the modern day civet and have feet and toes suited for running. The two superfamilies of carnivores (canines and felines) are distinct by this time. Gomphotherium, ancient elephant.
19 Ma Megatherium americanum (giant sloth 6m long). Extinct 8000 years ago.
16 Ma Squalodon shows early echolocation of whales. Megalodon is a gigantic shark the size of a bus [24]; it has a long reign and disappears suddenly about 1.6 Ma.
15 Ma Apes from Africa migrate to Eurasia to become gibbons (lesser apes) and orangutans. Human ancestors speciate from the ancestors of the gibbon. Orangutans, gorillas and chimpanzees are great apes. Humans are hominins.
13 Ma Human ancestors speciate from the ancestors of the orangutan. A relative of orangutans: Lufengpithecus chiangmuanensis (Northern Thailand). Pierolapithecus catalaunicus, Spain, possibly common ancestor of great apes and humans.
10 Ma The climate begins to dry; savannas and grasslands take over the forests. Monkeys proliferate, and the apes go into decline. Human ancestors speciate from the ancestors of the gorillas. This is the heyday of the horses as they spread throughout the Northern hemisphere. After 10 Ma they decline in the face of competition from the artiodactyls. Tomarctus, ancestor of dogs, is an extremely dog like animal.
7 Ma Biggest primate Gigantopithecus is 2 m tall and lives in China (Gigantopithecus blacki), Vietnam, and northern India (Gigantopithecus bilaspurensis). Extinct by 300,000 years ago.
5.6 Ma Drying up of the Mediterranean Sea (the Messinian Event).
5 Ma Volcanoes erupt and create the small area of land that joins North and South America. Mammals from North America move South and cause extinction of mammals there.
Human ancestors speciate from the ancestors of the chimpanzees. The latest common ancestor is Sahelanthropus tchadensis (Chad, Sahara, west of Rift Valley). The earliest in the human branch is Orrorin tugenensis (Millennium Man, Kenya). Chimpanzees and humans share 98% of DNA: biochemical similarities are so great that their hemoglobin molecules differ by only one amino acid. One group of chimps can have more genetic diversity than all of the six billion humans alive today, due to later population bottlenecking on the human lineage. Both chimpanzees and humans have a larynx that repositions during the first two years of life to a spot between the pharynx and the lungs, indicating that the common ancestors have this feature, a precursor of speech.

4.8 Ma Chimpanzee size hominim genus, Ardipithecus walks upright
3.7 Ma Some Australopithecus afarensis leave footprints on volcanic ash in Laetoli, Kenya (Northern Tanzania).
3.5 Ma Orangutans diverge into Bornean (Pongo pygmaeus) and Sumatran (Pongo abelii) sub-species. Great white sharks appear.
3 Ma The bipedal australopithecines (early hominins) evolve in the savannas of Africa being hunted by Dinofelis. Species include Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus bosei. Other genera include Kenyanthropus platyops.
Gorillas die out on the South bank of the Congo River. North and South America become joined, allowing migration of animals. Modern horses, Equus first appear. Deinotherium (4 m tall), is a gigantic cousin of the elephant, with downward pointing tusks in the lower jaw.

2.5 Ma Smilodon (Saber-toothed cat) appears.
2.2 Ma Gorillas diverge into the Western lowland (Gorilla gorilla) and Eastern (Gorilla beringei) sub-species.
2 Ma Homo habilis (handy man) uses primitive stone tools (choppers) in Tanzania. Probably lives with Paranthropus robustus. Emergence of Broca's area (speech region of modern human brain). Homo species are meat-eating while Paranthropus eats plants and termites. Some chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) at the Southern part of the Congo River branch off to form the Bonobos (Pan paniscus/pigmy chimps). Bonobos live in female dominated society. Saber Tooth moves from North America to South America.
1.8 Ma Homo erectus evolves in Africa and migrates to other continents, primarily South Asia.
1.75 Ma Dmanisi man/Homo georgicus (Georgia, Russia), tiny brain came from Africa, with Homo erectus and Homo habilis characteristics. An individual spent the last years of his life with only one tooth by depending on the kindness and compassion of others to obtain sufficient sustenance.
The glyptodon, a giant armadillo the size of a Volkswagen Beetle, lives in southern Peru.

1.6 Ma Biggest marsupials: Appearance of Giant Short-faced Kangaroo (Procoptodon goliah) in Australia, extinct by 40,000 years ago. At 2 m to 3 m tall and weighing 200 kg to 300 kg, it is the largest kangaroo ever known. Wombat-like Diprotodon optatum, 2,800 kg, 3 m long, Australia, extinct by 45,000 years ago.
1.5 Ma Marsupial lion (Thylacoleo carnifex or Leo) appears in Australia and goes extinct by 46,000 years ago.
1 Ma Genus Canis (coyotes, jackals, wolves, dingoes, domestic dogs) develops as a branch from Tomarctus. The gray fox, Urocyon cinereogenteus is the most primitive canid still alive today.

800 ka Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) moves to Arctic North America.
780 ka The Earth's last (most recent) geomagnetic reversal.
700 ka Common genetic ancestor of humans and Neanderthals.
500 ka Homo erectus (Choukoutien, China) uses charcoal to control fire, though they may not know how to create or start it.
400 ka Eastern gorillas (Gorilla beringei) diverge into the eastern lowland (G. beringei graueri) and mountain (G. beringei beringei) sub-species. Giant deer Megaloceros giganteus, Ireland; the antlers together span about 3.6 m or larger, extinct by 9.5 ka.
355 ka Three 1.5 m tall Homo heidelbergensis scramble down Roccamonfina volcano in Southern Italy, leaving the earliest known Homo footprints, which were made before the powdery volcanic ash solidified.
250 ka The Polar Bear evolves from an isolated high latitude population of Brown Bears.
195 ka Omo1, Omo2 (Ethiopia, Omo river) are the earliest known Homo sapiens.
160 ka Homo sapiens (Homo sapiens idaltu) in Ethiopia, Awash River, Herto village, practise mortuary rituals and butcher hippos. Their dead bodies are later covered by volcanic rocks.
150 ka Mitochondrial Eve lives in Africa. She is the last female ancestor common to all mitochondrial lineages in humans alive today.
130 ka Homo neanderthalensis (Neanderthal man) evolves from Homo heidelbergensis and lives in Europe and the Middle East, buries the dead and cares for the sick. Has hyoid bone (60,000 yrs ago, Kebara cave, Israel), used for speech in modern humans. (Today humans use roughly 6000 spoken languages). Uses spear, probably for stabbing rather than throwing. FOXP2 gene appears (associated with the development of speech).
100 ka The first anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) appear in Africa by this time or earlier; they derive from Homo heidelbergensis. Homo sapiens (humans) live in South Africa (Klasies River Mouth) and Palestine(Qafzeh and Skhul), probably alongside Neanderthals. Modern humans enter Asia via two routes: one North through the Middle East, and another further South from Ethiopia, via the Red Sea and southern Arabia. (See: Single-origin hypothesis). Mutation causes skin color changes in order to absorb optimal UV light for different geographical latitudes. Modern "race" formation begins. African populations remain more 'diverse' in their genetic makeup than all other humans, since only a subset of their population (and therefore only a subset of their diversity) leaves Africa. For example, mtDNA shows that an individual with English ancestors is more similar genetically to an individual with Japanese ancestors than are two individuals drawn from two African populations.
82.5 ka Humans in Zaire fish using sharp blades spears made from animal bones.
80 ka Humans make bone harpoons in Katanda, Democratic Republic of Congo.
74 ka Supervolcanoic eruption in Toba, Sumatra, Indonesia, causes Homo sapiens population to crash to 2,000. Six years without a summer are followed by a 1,000 year ice-age. Volcanic ash up to 5 m deep covers India and Pakistan.
70 ka The most recent ice age, the Wisconsin glaciation, begins.
Humans in the Blombos cave in South Africa make tools from bones, show symbolic thinking by creating ochre paintings. They also collect and pierce holes through sea shells to make necklaces. Giant beavers (Castoroides ohioensis, Toronto, Canada) largest rodents, length up to 2.5 m, dies out 10,000 years ago.

60 ka Y-chromosomal Adam lives in Africa. He is the last male human from whom all current human Y chromosomes are descended.
50 ka Modern humans expand from Asia to Australia (to become today's Indigenous Australians) and Europe. Expansion along the coasts happens faster than expansion inland. Woolly rhino (Coelodonta antiquus) in Britain.
40 ka Cro-Magnon Humans paint and hunt mammoths in France. They have extraordinary cognitive powers equivalent to modern humans, which enable them to become predators/hunters at the top of the food chain. Extinction of gigantic marsupials in Australia, probably due to humans, results in the lack of domesticated animals, partially leading to the relatively primitive lifestyle of the humans there, later, when compared to the rest of the world.
32 ka First sculpture found in Vogelherd, Germany. First (bird bone) flute found in France. Stone tools in Kota Tampan, Malaysia.
30 ka Modern humans enter North America from Siberia in numerous waves, some later waves across the Bering land bridge, but early waves probably by island-hopping across the Aleutians. At least two of the first waves left few or no genetic descendants among Americans by the time Europeans arrive across the Atlantic Ocean. Humans reach Solomons. Humans move into Japan. Bow and arrows used in Sahara (grassland). Fired ceramic animal models made in Moravia (Czech Republic).
28 ka Oldest known painting: in the Apollo 11 Rock Shelter[25]. Namibia, Africa. A 20 cm-long, 3 cm-wide object found in Hohle Fels Cave near Ulm in the Swabian Jura in Germany is the earliest sculpted stone penis[26].
27 ka Neanderthals die out leaving Homo sapiens and Homo floresiensis as the only living species of the genus Homo. Czech invented textile and pressed weaving patterns into pieces of clay before firing them.
25 ka Throwing sticks for hunting animals made from mammoth tusk (Poland).
23 ka Venus of Willendorf, a small statuette of a female figure, discovered at a paleolithic site near Willendorf, Austria, dates from this era.
20 ka Humans leave foot and hand prints in Tibetan plateau. Oil lamps made from animal fats on shells used in caves in Grotte de la Mouthe, France. Bone needles used to sew animal hides. (Shandingdong Man, China). Microblade culture (Northern China). Mammoth bones used to build houses (Russia).
18 ka Homo floresiensis existed in the Liang Bua limestone cave on Flores, remote Indonesian island.
15 ka The last Ice Age ends. Sea levels across the globe rise, flooding many coastal areas, and separating former mainland areas into islands. Japan separates from Asia mainland. Siberia separates from Alaska. Tasmania separates from Australia. Java island forms. Sarawak, Malaysia and Indonesia separate. The cave paintings of Lascaux and Altamira were produced. Sedentary hunter-gather societies develop in the Natufian culture of the Near East - an essential precursor to later agricultural societies.
14 ka Megafauna extinction starts (continuing to current day), where over 100 large mammal species disappear possibly caused by the expanding human population.
11.5 ka Extinction of the Sabertooth (Smilodon).
11 ka Human population reaches 5 million. Extinction of Homo floresiensis.
Extinction of woolly mammoth. Domestication of dogs (first domesticated animal) from Gray Wolf subspecies (Canis lupus pallipes). All modern dogs today (5 main groups, about 400 breeds) belong to a single subspecies Canis lupus familiaris.

10 ka Humans in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East develop agriculture. Plant domestication begins with cultivation of Neolithic founder crops. This process of food production, coupled later with the domestication of animals caused a massive increase in human population that has continued to the present. Jericho (modern Israel) settlement with about 19,000 people.
10 ka Sahara is green with rivers, lakes, cattles, crocodiles and monsoons. Japan's hunter-gatherer Jomon culture creates world's earliest pottery. Humans reach Tierra del Fuego at the tip of South America, the last continental region to be inhabited by humans (excluding Antarctica).
8 ka Common (Bread) wheat Triticum aestivum originates in southwest Asia due to hybridisation of emmer wheat with a goat-grass, Aegilops tauschii.
6.5 ka Two rice species are domesticated: Asian rice Oryza sativa and African rice Oryza glaberrima.
3 ka Humans start using iron tools.
AD 1 Human population 150 million.
AD 1835 Human population 1 billion.
AD 1969 Humans walk on the moon.
AD 2006 Human population approaching 6.5 billion[27].
Holocene extinction event continues with the observed rate of extinction rising dramatically in the last 50 years. Most biologists believe [28] that we are at this moment at the beginning of a tremendously accelerated anthropogenic mass extinction. E.O. Wilson of Harvard, in The Future of Life (2002), estimates that at current rates of human destruction of the biosphere, one-half of all species of life will be extinct in 100 years.

[edit]
See also
Extinction events
Fossils and the geological timescale
Geologic time scale
List of archaeological periods
List of prehistoric mammals
Prehistoric life
Period (geology) - a list of geological periods
Timeline of human evolution
History of Earth
[edit]
References
^ "However, once the Earth cooled sufficiently, sometime in the first 700 million years of its existence, clouds began to form in the atmosphere, and the Earth entered a new phase of development." How the Oceans Formed (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)

^ " Between about 3.8 billion and 4.5 billion years ago, no place in the solar system was safe from the huge arsenal of asteroids and comets left over from the formation of the planets. Sleep and Zahnle calculate that Earth was probably hit repeatedly by objects up to 500 kilometers across" Geophysicist Sleep: Martian underground may have harbored early life (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ Walker, Gabrielle, (2003) "Snowball Earth: The Story of the Great Global Catastrophe that Spawned Life as we know it" Bloomsbury ISBN 0747654337
^ John, Brian (Ed)(1979) "The Winters of the World: Earth under the Ice Ages" Jacaranda Press ISBN 047026844-1
^ "'Experiments with sex have been very hard to conduct,' Goddard said. 'In an experiment, one needs to hold all else constant, apart from the aspect of interest. This means that no higher organisms can be used, since they have to have sex to reproduce and therefore provide no asexual control.'
Goddard and colleagues instead turned to a single-celled organism, yeast, to test the idea that sex allows populations to adapt to new conditions more rapidly than asexual populations." Sex Speeds Up Evolution, Study Finds (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ " What, then, was the selective advantage that led to the evolution of multicellular organisms?" From Single Cells to Multicellular Organisms (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ "The evolutionary foundation for the organization of many animal body plans is segmental—we are made of rings of similar stuff, repeated over and over again along our body length" Pycnogonid tagmosis and echoes of the Cambrian
"Pycnogonids are primitive chelicerates related to ticks and mites, and they make their living as predators and scavengers. This one, Haliestes dasos, is the oldest sea spider known." Haliestes dasos, a sea spider
"If you were a trilobite or other small Cambrian animal, you did NOT want to see this coming" The Anomalocaris Homepage (animation)
^ "The oldest fossils of footprints ever found on land hint that animals may have beaten plants out of the primordial seas. Lobster-sized, centipede-like animals made the prints wading out of the ocean and scuttling over sand dunes about 530 million years ago. Previous fossils indicated that animals didn't take this step until 40 million years later." Oldest fossil footprints on land

^ 1
^ "The oldest fossils reveal evolution of non-vascular plants by the middle to late Ordovician Period (~450-440 m.y.a.) on the basis of fossil spores" Transition of plants to land
^ "The land plants evolved from the algae, more specifically green algae, as suggested by certain common biochemical traits" The first land plants
^ "The waxy cuticle of arachnids and insects prevents water loss and protects against desiccation" Natural history collection: arthropoda
^ "For hundreds of millions of years, animal life resided only in the oceans. And then about 400 million years ago, fossil tracks suggest that an animal called a eurypterid left the water to walk on land. Maybe it was fleeing enemies, maybe it was searching for an easy meal, or maybe it was seeking a safe place to lay its eggs." The shape of life. The conquerors. PBS
^ "The ancestry of sharks dates back more than 200 million years before the earliest known dinosaur. Introduction to shark evolution, geologic time and age determination
^ "Cladoselache was something of an oddball among ancient sharks. A four-foot (1.2-metre) long inhabitant of late Devonian seas (about 370 million years ago), it exhibited a strange combination of ancestral and derived characteristics. Ancient sharks
^ "Sharks have undergone a lot of evolutionary experimentation since their earliest beginnings. Over hundreds of millions of years, sharks were tested by a mercurial and often violently changeable environment." A Golden Age of Sharks
^ “Here we report the isolation and growth of a previously unrecognized spore-forming bacterium (Bacillus species, designated 2-9-3) from a brine inclusion within a 250 million-year-old salt crystal from the Permian Salado Formation. Complete gene sequences of the 16S ribosomal DNA show that the organism is part of the lineage of Bacillus marismortui and Virgibacillus pantothenticus.” Isolation of a 250 million-year-old halotolerant bacterium from a primary salt crystal (URL accessed on April 30, 2006)
^ "The second major radiation of sharks occurred during the Jurassic Period, 208 to 144 million years ago. At this time, pterosaurs ruled the skies and the first birds were taking to the air." The Origin of Modern Sharks (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ "Viruses of nearly all the major classes of organisms—animals, plants, fungi and bacteria/archaea—probably evolved with their hosts in the seas, given that most of the evolution of life on this planet has occurred there. This means that viruses also probably emerged from the waters with their different hosts, during the successive waves of colonisation of the terrestrial environment." Origins of Viruses (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ "A comparison of the two genomes reveals that both have about 30,000 genes, and they share the bulk of them—the human genome shares 99% of its genes with mice. Humans and mice diverged about 75 million years ago, too little time for many evolutionary differences to accumulate." Comparing genomes
" Their conclusion: although the mouse and human genomes are very similar, genome rearrangements occurred more commonly than previously believed, accounting for the evolutionary distance between human and mouse from a common ancestor 75 million years ago." The Hindu
"Mice have many more olfactory genes compared to the human. Smell matters for mice, especially for sex and mating; they also have more genes involved in reproduction (such as aphrodisin, which stimulates mating behaviour in males) and immunity" San Francisco Chronicle
^ "I also wish to completely dispel the myth that the modern Great White evolved from the megalodon shark. Is the proper way to do this to write this paper, publish it in a scientific journal, and subject it to peer review—yes? Is that what I am doing—no.......because I think there is no way to "win" with the opinions on this one as set in stone as they seem to be (on both sides)" Origin of the Modern Great White Shark (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
"'Most scientists would probably say the Great Whites evolved from the megalodon line, which existed from two million to twenty million years ago. They were huge sharks, approximately the length of a Greyhound bus and possessing teeth that were up to six inches [150 mm] long,' explains Ciampaglio. 'However, our research, which is based on analyzing fossils of several hundred shark teeth, shows that the Great White shares more similarities with the mako shark.'"Great White Shark Evolution Debate (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
".. most paleontologists agree [.. ] that Megalodon is not a direct ancestor of the modern White Shark, more like a great uncle or aunt." The Origin of Megalodon (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)

^ "Researchers have discovered fossilized remains of two previously unknown primate species that lived 37 million years ago in what is now the Egyptian desert." "The discovery, researchers say, is evidence that the common ancestor of living anthropoids arose in Africa and that anthropoids have been evolving on the now separated Africa-Arabia landmass for at least 45 million years." New Primate Fossils Support "Out of Africa" Theory (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ " Once humans could see in color the visual inspection of a potential mate yielded far more useful information and at a greater distance than was the case with scents. As a result of natural selection color-seeing primates came to have neuronal wiring that caused them to place much more importance on appearance in mate choice. In Zhang's view it is therefore not coincidental that around the time human males developed the ability to see color humans also lost the ability to respond to pheromones" Evolution Of Color Eyesight Led To Loss Of Pheromone Response (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ ""'At a length of 50 feet (15 metres) and a mass of over 52 tons (47 tonnes), it would take more than a mere morsel to satisfy the megalodon.'"" The Origin of Megalodon (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ "These stones were found in association with charcoal which has been dated to between 19,000 and 26,000 years old (Wendt 1974, 1976). Border Cave in Kwazulu has yielded engraved bone and wood dated between 35,000 and 37,500 years old (Butzer et al 1979); and a 20,000 year old incised stone was found at Matupi Cave, Zaire (Van Noten 1977)." Introduction to upper palaeolithic art (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ "The 20 cm-long, 3 cm-wide stone object, which is dated to be about 28,000 years old, was buried in the famous Hohle Fels Cave near Ulm in the Swabian Jura. " Ancient phallus unearthed in cave (URL accessed on January 9, 2005)
^ An United States Census Bureau estimate of the number of people alive on Earth at any given moment. United States census bureau
^ The American Museum of Natural History National Survey Reveals Biodiversity Crisis (URL accessed on February 23, 2006)
[edit]
External links
Berkeley Evolution
Tolweb - Tree of Life
A more compact timeline
Palaeos - The Trace of Life on Earth
University of Waikato - Sequence of Plant Evolution
University of Waikato - Sequence of Animal Evolution
editBasic topics in evolutionary biology
Processes of evolution: adaptation - evidence - macroevolution - microevolution - speciation
Mechanisms: selection - genetic drift - gene flow - mutation
Modes: anagenesis - catagenesis - cladogenesis
History: History of evolutionary thought - Charles Darwin - The Origin of Species - modern evolutionary synthesis
Subfields: population genetics - ecological genetics - human evolution - molecular evolution - phylogenetics - systematics - evo-devo
List of evolutionary biology topics | Timeline of evolution | Timeline of human evolution

"I imagine God delving on how he is going to design something before embarking on the task and then using the power and wisdom available to him to accomplish that task."
You see that's where your argument hits a snag. You talk about the actions of a being that you can't even prove exists. Your entire thrust hinges on a creator or designer that seems to be "the little man who wasn't there".
Do I call that into question? Hell yes I do! I say he doesn't exist and you claim he not only exists but he said "poof", waved a wand or just plain thought the world and mankind into being. And there. By golly, is another snag.
Since you brag about how educated you are perhaps the addage; " the burden of proof is upon the one making the claim" might ring a bell.
Hello! We're still waiting for that proof.
This is the proof that you supplied. "Who is he? He is the creator. What is his name. "I am that I am" "I yam what I yam" that's your proof? I'm not even sure that Popeye didn't say it first just after he downed a can of spinach. Some proof!! Let me make a statement. "You can not show proof that creation, a creator or a designer either happened or exists."
Now if you can do away with the insults and put downs long enough to rebut that statement with PROOF that it's incorrect I'm waiting to hear it. In the meantime go back and read the "Time Line of Evolution" again, Or is that all lies also?

Some choice- Quote scripture you believe is true Or quote some scientific evidence that you believe to be true! I guess they're can be no happy medium. Where humans will always go WRONG is to presume they know what the creator is thinking and how he works. The funny part about this is that we can get so righteously angry at any that dispute our point of view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Some choice- Quote scripture you believe is true Or quote some scientific evidence that you believe to be true! I guess they're can be no happy medium. Where humans will always go WRONG is to presume they know what the creator is thinking and how he works. The funny part about this is that we can get so righteously angry at any that dispute our point of view.

---

Tally,

" Quote scripture you believe is true Or quote some scientific evidence that you believe to be true!"

There's a big difference here. One believes or has faith that scripture is true but when one's confronted by scientific evidence he has the "evidence" to prove a fact. ** Evidence** The data on which judgement can be based or proof established.
Starman claims that evolution never happened. I challenged that and then asked him for evidence/proof to back up his claim that evolution never occurred and Creation most certainly did and it was orchestrated by a Creator/Intelligent Designer. Instead of proof of his claim I get attacks on myself and evoluation. If he doesn't have the answer or if there is. Indeed, no answer to be found just let him say so and end this debate

I believe that the Creator used evolution to develop the life he put on earth, and whether it was a pool of goop or a real person named Adam, his hand was surely behind the whole thing. Now the way man(ancient man) viewed and interpreted these things he saw or believed is another matter all together as in many cases his limited knowledge didn't always allow him to grasp the truth and I've always thought that his use of the fact was not to enlighten but to control the masses for presumably the sake of his survival. I think every bible written by man has the same goals in mind to control the masses and organize the power so it stays in certain hands and justifies the actions of the ruling class over the worker class. I also think this same thinking goes on to this day. So take man out of the equation we see a lot of isolated tribes of humans trying to eek out an existence the best way they can and they have come a long way in the 1000 years so those tribal rules seem so inadequate to form the basis for mans new-found knowledge. One of my problems with the bible for instance is the literal interpretation put on it by some and the way that over the years it was a man or men who decided who and what the bible talks about. Being a spiritual person I sort of reject religion as being man-made and subject to mans flaws but I also can see the wisdom in the jist of all the good books as a general way for society to behave toward one another. Until I find out different I can say that the God that I understand is the Creator of everything and the only evidence I can submit is to just look around and behold HIS works!:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedball1

Tally,

" Quote scripture you believe is true Or quote some scientific evidence that you believe to be true!"

There's a big difference here. One believes or has faith that scripture is true but when one's confronted by scientific evidence he has the "evidence" to prove a fact. ** Evidence** The data on which judgement can be based or proof established.
Starman claims that evolution never happened. I challenged that and then asked him for evidence/proof to back up his claim that evolution never occurred and Creation most certainly did and it was orchestrated by a Creator/Intelligent Designer. Instead of proof of his claim I get attacks on myself and evoluation. If he doesn't have the answer or if there is. indeed, no answer to be found just let him say so and end this debate

---

No need to end the debate on my account, just keep posting in response to those who wish to continue discussing it with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedball1

"I imagine God delving on how he is going to design something before embarking on the task and then using the power and wisdom available to him to accomplish that task."
You see that's where your argument hits a snag. You talk about the actions of a being that you can't even prove exists. Your entire thrust hinges on a creator or designer that seems to be "the little man who wasn't there".
Do I call that into question? Hell yes I do! I say he doesn't exist and you claim he not only exists but he said "poof", waved a wand or just plain thought the world and mankind into being. And there. by golly, is another snag.
Since you brag about how educated you are perhaps the addage; " the burden of proof is upon the one making the claim" might ring a bell.
Hello!! We're still waiting for that proof.
This is the proof that you supplied. "Who is he? He is the creator. What is his name. "I am that I am" "I yam wot I yam" that's your proof? I'm not even sure that Popeye didn't say it first just after he downed a can of spinach. Some proof!! Let me make a statement. "You can not show proof that creation, a creator or a designer either happened or exists."
Now if you can do away with the insults and put downs long enough to rebut that statement with PROOF that it's incorrect I'm waiting to hear it. In the meantime go back and read the "Time Line of Evolution" again, Or is that all lies also?

---

To me this is not a life or death issue.
I think you need someone who will show as much dedication as you do to the subject and who is willing to engage in the type of give and take you seem to require.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Starman,
You missed my point. But its getting off topic. My daughter is being taught how to teach. What she is being taught is to teach free thinking. Letting studenjts learn by discovery and experience. Now just depositing knmowledge into their heads.

---

I didn't say that there were not teachers out there who might be learning how to teach others how to think. All I said was that it isn't and hasn't been part of the children's curriculum in public schools in the USA. I had three kids of various ages in school and none of them were taught how to reason. During that time I also made comparisons of my children's curriculum with other curriculums ion other schools. In fact, there was a yearly comparison provided for parents in order for us to compare how our kids stacked up with others in the USA. In none of those curriculums was their and mention of a course in logic, ethics, or how to reason.

Sure, learning via experience has always been valued and there are courses which apply this now and then. But much more is needed. A full focus on ethics, and logic is needed. A class devoted for each in order for the student to be thoroughly versed in these when he becomes of age to marry have a family and job and enter the full responsibility of being a citizen. This concentrated effort on these two essential subjects which Plato saw as very important for proper citizen development is not present in our educational system. Which leads of course to irrationalities being put forth as reasons for behavior and the irrational behavior lowering the quality of life not only for the students themselves but for those who must have them as neighbors, fellow workers, wives husbands sons daughters fathers mothers and so on. It also makes for a bad democracy since it makes citizenry susceptible to inane political arguments. Maybe that's the reason why people are kept unable to reason properly by those in power.



BTW

The effects of this are really disconcerting. Things claimed as facts are accepted simply because they are taught by the highly educated. Relevant counterarguments are summarily ignored as not counting or are viewed as personal attacks. Fallacious reasonings go unrecognized and are practiced as if they were a virtue. When brought to light, anger flares up followed by a barrage of sarcasms. In short, if they can't out reason you they will out insult you but they will have satisfaction. The frustratingly sad thing about it is that one knows that the people doing this really mean no harm and are just doing the best they can with what they were equipped and are really not to blame.

These are symptoms of a deficiency in our educational system. Perhaps it will change or is in the process of changing now and your daughter will be part of that change for the better.


Excerpt

Faith-Based Evolution
By Roy Spencer :

Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years. And finally, despite my previous acceptance of evolutionary theory as "fact," I came to the realization that intelligent design, as a theory of origins, is no more religious, and no less scientific, than evolutionism.
In the scientific community, I am not alone. There are many fine books out there on the subject. Curiously, most of the books are written by scientists who lost faith in evolution as adults, after they learned how to apply the analytical tools they were taught in college.

http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyKQ...x%3fid=080805I

If you are a producer or reporter who is interested in receiving more information about this article or the author, please email your request to [email protected]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wizzkid89

I agree with scott and the psi42, ID can't be taught as a science because you use logic in trying to explain it instead of cold hard facts, and any kind of science has studies that have been done to prove it or at least create theories. And psi is totally right when saying if it doesn't use the scientific method then it isn't science, so all in all, is ID a science no, could it be taught sure, would it be interesting, who knows?

---

I thought that observation and conclusions based on what is observed was part of the scientific method, as scientists observe an arrowhead and conclude it is the product of intelligent design because it's form has a purpose which indicates forethought and planning.

EVOLUTION IS A RELIGIOUS FAITH
Both evolutionists and scientists are agreed on this point: Evolution is a religion, and it must be accepted by faith. This is science vs. evolution; this is the Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.. . certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone. . Exactly the same sort of faith which it... Evolution is based on faith alone, for there is not fact to...
www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/21soc04.htm


Scientists Speak Out About Evolution
http://www.aboundingjoy.com/scientists.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wizzkid89

I agree with scott and the psi42, ID can't be taught as a science because you use logic in trying to explain it instead of cold hard facts, and any kind of science has studies that have been done to prove it or at least create theories. And psi is totally right when saying if it doesn't use the scientific method then it isn't science, so all in all, is ID a science no, could it be taught sure, would it be interesting, who knows?

---

I thought that observation and conclusions based on what is observed was part of the scientific method, as scientists observe an arrowhead and conclude it is the product of intelligent design because it's form has a purpose which indicates forethought and planning.

(Sir Fred Hoyle)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious."

Starman,
First, I wish to thank you for your courteous response. In return for that kindness let me share a little bit of my life with you.

I retired as a plumbing construction foreman in 1988. I used to drive by the Sarasota Women's Health Clinic and see 50 to 75 protesters with signs and gross pictures ganging up on a single female as she attempted to enter the clinic compound.
One day I stopped and listened to what they were shouting at the girls. "Whore! slut! murderer! were just a few of the nasty things that were heaped on them as they walked in. They were throwing tiny plastic dolls dipped in red fingernail polish in open car windows as they drove into the parking lot.
When I volunteered as a escort the next day I had no idea it would last for thirteen years and that I would end up working with our local police and be responsible for sending a lot of the protesters to jail. In 1993 when the "lifers" begain killing doctors and escorts, the clinic put me on staff as head of security and chief escort.
In my job I have gone head to head with most of the heavy hitters in abortion protesting. Randel Terry of Operation Rescue, Flip Benham of Rescue America, Joe Scheidler of The Pro-Life Action League, Tom and Linda McGlade of Missionaries for Life to name a few. All used guilt as a club and religion as a threat. I'll not go into the insults, the threats, the stalking of both are patients and staff members, except to say the threats, intimidation, guilt and physical violence were just some of the weapons used against clinic staff and patients.
In my job I have been attacked three times, shot at twice, went through four bomb scares and had two anthrax letters come to our office, one of which we opened and got white powder on myself and the office manager. The letter inside the envelope condemed abortion and informed us we had just been exposed to anthrax and were going to die. It took three days for Hazmat to analyze the substance and report it was harmless. Have you any idea the terror involved in not knowing if you would live or die?
In my capacity as head of security, I have sent many protesters to jail and spent a lot of free time in court testifying against them. Some for violent action but most for harassment and trespass after warning. I kept at my job because I believe in women's rights. For far too long they were second class citizens, not being able to vote, own property or have control over their own bodies.
Women have fought too long and hard, have suffered too many hardships attaining these rights to have even one of them taken from them.
I'm retired again. I've run my race and looking back on it, remembering the hundreds of frightened girls I've escorted past screaming whackos, I can feel proud that in my small way I have helped keep women's rights where they belong. With women, and not with some middle-aged white man shouting threats and insults outside a clinic. .

If I seem passionate about the subject it's because for years I was the object of attack by fundamentalist Christians. So I apologize for any hurt feelings that may have resulted from our interchange. You have posted articles copied from the religious web site, Abounding Joy. I could retaliate by pasting up excerpts from secular web sites but I blew my wad when I put up the Time Line of Evolution.
By now you must realize it's useless for this debate to continue. I'm not going to change your view and you certainly aren't going to change mine. I haven't had so much fun since I left the abortion and religious chatt rooms. It's been a blast debating with you but now I remember why I left the chatt rooms in the first place. Nobody won any converts, debates went on for weeks with no resolve and the "nonproductivity" became overpowering. I believe "spinning your wheels" is the term I'm searching for and I'm beginning to get the same feeling here. Tell me the truth! Have I convinced you to have a change of heart? No? Then this entire debate has been a lesson in futility hasn't it Starman? Just as all the countless debates on the subject that I've been a participant in. I can see no reason to continue a debate where no one wins and emotions get frayed. While it was fun for a while I'm getting the impression that we're "beating a dead horse" by continuing.
You have a great week end. Tom

It becomes clearer now why debates always have a moderator managing a beginning, middle and end and polls are limited to certain definable demographics... since given enough time or ground one can always make the numbers work for their side.

And they can write forever too!

I am holding a ball in my hand about 4 feet off the ground. I let go of the ball and what happens? It drops to the ground.

Why does this happen? Because there are laws of gravity. Laws that have been proven because they are constant and irrefutable. The ball never falls up, it drops.

Who created the laws of gravity? I don't know. I have seen no proof one way or another. I know what I believe but there is no proof like there is that the ball will drop.

According to a strict interpretation of the Bible, the world is only a few thousand years old (counting back the begats). Yet scientifically proven methods, such as carbon dating, show that its actually millions of years old.

The point is that there are irrefutable scientific facts. The Theory of Evolution fits those facts. No other theory does.

To Talaniman,
My BELIEFS are pretty close to yours. However, you can't say; "scientific evidence that you believe to be true". By its very definition scientific evidence is factual. Its not subject to belief. One may believe (or not) in conclusions based on the evidence, but not the evidence itself. And that's where Starman's arguments break down. He seems to think that scientifical proven facts are subject to belief. Either that or he can't separate the facts from the conclusions and merges them together.

The point that Tom and I have tried to make is that the facts are separate. The facts are facts. We may not disagree with the conclusions some people derive from those facts.

As for me (and I think Tom as well), until and unless someone can come up with a viable theory that better fits the facts, or proof of some other theory, we feel that Evoultion makes the most sense.

My only point was it is all subject to the limit of our intelligence as ancient man knew nothing of gravity or the sun being the center of the solar system but he did his best with what he had and even though we have more info at our disposal we still cannot connect all the dot For example it is a scientific fact that we share 98% the same DNA with the apes so many have said we have evolved from primates and have been looking for the missing link for ages but have not found it. So the conclusion while it has a strong argument is not a fact but a belief based on given facts pending MORE evidence. As we wait for more evidence or discover more of Gods design we can only be human and speculate, facts notwithstanding.:cool: :)

Not trying to convince anyone of anything just expressing myself and staying busy till the grandkids get here and the world as I know it changes-Now that's a fact!

Good post Scotty!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

I am holding a ball in my hand about 4 feet off the ground. I let go of the ball and what happens? It drops to the ground.

Why does this happen? Because there are laws of gravity. Laws that have been proven because they are constant and irrefutable. The ball never falls up, it drops.

Who created the laws of gravity? I don't know. I have seen no proof one way or another. I know what I believe but there is no proof like there is that the ball will drop.

According to a strict interpretation of the Bible, the world is only a few thousand years old (counting back the begats). Yet scientifically proven methods, such as carbon dating, show that its actually millions of years old.

The point is that there are irrefutable scientific facts. The Theory of Evolution fits those facts. No other theory does.

To Talaniman,
My BELIEFS are pretty close to yours. However, you can't say; "scientific evidence that you believe to be true". By its very definition scientific evidence is factual. Its not subject to belief. One may believe (or not) in conclusions based on the evidence, but not the evidence itself. And that's where Starman's arguments break down. He seems to think that scientifically proven facts are subject to belief. Either that or he can't separate the facts from the conclusions and merges them together.

The point that Tom and I have tried to make is that the facts are separate. The facts are facts. We may not disagree with the conclusions some people derive from those facts.

As for me (and I think Tom as well), until and unless someone can come up with a viable theory that better fits the facts, or proof of some other theory, we feel that Evoultion makes the most sense.

---

The Bible doesn't say that the earth is several thousand years old. That's a biblical misinterpretation.



Of course there are irrefutable facts as detected by our subjective senses.
I do see these so called irrefutable facts you allude to and accept perceived facts as facts. I just don't agree that these so-called facts prove evolution/ The sad truith is that facts can be, have been, and are manipulated in such ways as to create the illusion of supporting an idea. In short the patient is stretched or shortened to fit the bed as convenience presents itself. It's done all the time in politics where the same fact is interpreted in several different ways as convenience dictates. True, that is a social science, but facts are facts.

How many times have evolutionists asserted that a certain fossil represented one of mankind's ancestors and then several years later said it wasn't? Evolutionists have even put forth hoaxes as fact and only discovered them to be hoaxes later when these were examined as they should have been examined before blindly accepting them as fact.

During that interval those who consider evolutionist scierntific oipinion sacrosanct would celebrate the discovery and use it to refute the Genesis account. Then suddenly what had been put forth as irrefutable fact, had to be rejected for what it was, an overzelous misinterpretation of facts to support an idea.


There are also the cases where facts not fitting the idea are either discarded or ignored. Example? The remains of modern humans found alongside their supposed simian ancestors. I don't think that ignoring such evidence makes for trust in the people doing the research. Do you?

BTW
Neither do I see any reason why I should totally ignore, as evolutionists do, the scientific opinion of fully qualified scientists who are not evolutionists. Turning a deaf ear or calling them fanatics doesn't refute their views. It only shows the irrational approach which many evolutionists have toward the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

The Bible doesn't say that the earth is seven thousand years old. That's a biblical misinterpretation.


Actually, I can't be merging facts with conclusions because I know the difference between the two. Actually, I do see the facts brought to my attention. I just don't agree that they prove evolution. I also see the conclusions you say I don't see or understand as for what they are,
interpretations of facts strung out in a convenient way to support an idea which is simply that--an idea. In short the patient is stretched or shortened to fit the bed as convenience presents itself.

The facts which are found and put forth as inevitably supporting evolution because the person finding these things has evolution in his mind before he finds them and then tries to niche them into the pattern he thinks already is there. If the facts don't fit he ignores it just as they have the remains of modern humans found alongside their supposed simian ancestors.

BTW

You seem to be isolating me as some kind of anomaly. That's really unfair since there are countless others, far more educated than you and I who refuse to accept what you say I am blind to. I suppose thery are blind as well? The reason evolutionists downplay their scientifically based opinions is because they tag them as fanatics even before they speak their minds. Which to me, with all due respect,smacks of brainwashing.

---

You got to admit once people get a notion in their heads it takes a lot of dynamite to get it out so we humans are doomed to move slowly into enlightenment. In the mean time anyone with a pet theory can voice it and sound like they know what their talking about and right or wrong till all the evidence is in its so much yakety yak! Even and some here have admitted it, evolution may fit the parameters but there are still more facts to be brought to light. I think the original question ask if evolution or intelligent design should be taught. Teach them both with the disclaimer WE STILL DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speedball1

Starman,
I can see no reason to continue a debate where no one wins and emotions get frayed. While it was fun for a while I'm getting the impression that we're "beating a dead horse" by continuing.
You have a great week end. Tom

---

I understand how you feel about the fanatics you mention. It reminds me of the film Contact based on the book written by the late Carl Sagan where a religious fanatic places a bomb for some religious reason he cooked up. I also understand that many religious people might feel strongly about abortion. But that doesn't justify acts of terrorism or the taking of human life. As a matter of fact, it contradicts what they are fighting for by showing disregard for human lives. It also contradicts what Jesus said about treating others. So they are wrong on both counts.

Yes, I know that debates are unproductive and that's why I have avoided them for the past thirty years and continue to do so. How I got involved in this one after so long beats me. In any case, it was an interesting conversation. As to the effects of the debate, I remain as I started just as you do. LOL

In any case, my apologies as well if I was rude in any way.

Have a great day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

For example it is a scientific fact that we share 98% the same DNA with the apes so many have said we have evolved from primates and have been looking for the missing link for ages but have not found it. So the conclusion while it has a strong argument is not a fact but a belief based on given facts pending MORE evidence.

---

Exactly my point! Sharing 98% of DNA with apes is a fact. That we evolved from them is a conclusion based on that fact.

But, I again say that the Theory of Evolution is the only one that fits the facts. I believe in Evolution because I have looked at the facts and decided that it fits. Not because teachers and other scientists have said it fits, but because it makes the most sense to me. I've read some of the attempts to refute the theory and none make the same level of sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

The Bible doesn't say that the earth is several thousand years old. That's a biblical misinterpretation.

---

So how old does the Bible indicate the world is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

Of course there are irrefutable facts as detected by our subjective senses.
I do see these so called irrefutable facts you allude to and accept perceived facts as facts. I just don't agree that these so-called facts prove evolution/

---

See there you go again. You agree there are irrefutable facts, but then you refer to "so-called facts". Effectively denigrating and denying these facts. You can't have it both ways.

You are entitled to believe whatever conclusions you want to believe about the facts. But what I've seen, throughout this thread, is a denial of the facts on which Evolution is based.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

BTW
Neither do I see any reason why I should totally ignore, as evolutionists do, the scientific opinion of fully qualified scientists who are not evolutionists. Turning a deaf ear or calling them fanatics doesn't refute their views. It only shows the irrational approach which many evolutionists have toward the subject.

---

Who says you should? Who says Tom or I or anyone believing in Evolution does? And what does referring to some evolutionists as irrational do? Since there is NO absolute proof of Creationism, it would seem that creationists are the irrational ones since their beliefs are not based on factual evidence.

Let me suggest a statement from you that I could accept.
While I understand there is proven scientific evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution, I have read a significant body of writings that refute Evolution. I've also seen factual evidence that refutes some of the evidence used to prove Evolution. Therefore, I don't believe in Evolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

You got to admit once people get a notion in their heads it takes a lot of dynamite to get it out so we humans are doomed to move slowly into enlightenment. In the mean time anyone with a pet theory can voice it and sound like they know what their talking about and right or wrong till all the evidence is in its so much yakety yak! Even and some here have admitted it, evolution may fit the parameters but there are still more facts to be brought to light. I think the original question ask if evolution or intelligent design should be taught. Teach them both with the disclaimer WE STILL DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH!

---

You hit the nail right on the head. Only the evolutionist side is being taught while the other side is shunted aside as if of no consequence. It stands to reason that such a policy will have an effect on how children view religion.
If we deny that it has this effect then we would have to deny that children are very susceptible to teachings by what they consider authority figures.
Furthermore, they are told to answer evolution questions in the affirmative regardless of parental religious teachings. So your suggestion would certainly balance the playing table.

The Rutherford Institute - Commentary
Our children should be given a choice. At least, they will be getting both sides of a fundamental question.


Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute and author of the award-winning Grasping for the Wind.

http://www.rutherford.org/articles_d...?record_id=316

[QUOTE=ScottGem]Exactly my point! Sharing 98% of DNA with apes is a fact. That we evolved from them is a conclusion based on that fact.

But, I again say that the Theory of Evolution is the only one that fits the facts. I believe in Evolution because I have looked at the facts and decided that it fits. Not because teachers and other scientists have said it fits, but because it makes the most sense to me. I've read some of the attempts to refute the theory and none make the same level of sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

So how old does the Bible indicate the world is?

---

It doesn't give a specific age for the earth.

Quote:

---

See there you go again. You agree there are irrefutable facts, but then you refer to "so-called facts". Effectively denigrating and denying these facts. You can't have it both ways.

---

No denigration intended. Just that all we know is sense based and as such it is open to perceptual interpretation. But assuming that we are perceiving things as they are, then there are definitely facts. But the assumption is necessary nevertheless.

Quote:

---

You are entitled to believe whatever conclusions you want to believe about the facts. But what I've seen, throughout this thread, is a denial of the facts on which Evolution is based.

---

Not at all! I recognize the facts you mention. Perhaps an example will clear this up. Take the upright walking simian creatures claimed to be our ancestors. The fact is that these creatures existed and that their skeletal structure indicates an upright walking manner. Accepted! What is not accepted is the evolutionist interpretation of that fact as making these creatures our ancestors. Hope that clears it up. That's the common fallacy of considering something the cause of something else simply because it has temporal priority.

post hoc fallacy
Post hoc fallacy. The post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this) fallacy is based upon the mistaken notion that simply because one thing happens after another, the first event was a cause of the second event.
www.skepdic.com/posthoc.html

Quote:

---

Who says you should? Who says Tom or I or anyone believing in Evolution does? And what does referring to some evolutionists as irrational do? Since there is NO absolute proof of Creationism, it would seem that creationists are the irrational ones since their beliefs are not based on factual evidence.

---

Your interpretation of what constitutres factual evidence. Interpretation of facts is not equivalent to factual evidence.

Quote:

---

You are entitled to believe whatever conclusions you want to believe about the facts. But what I've seen, throughout this thread, is a denial of the facts on which Evolution is based.

---

Not at all! I recognize the facts you mention. Perhaps an example will clear this up. Take the upright walking simian fossils claimed to be our ancestors. The fact is that these creatures existed and that their skeletal structure indicates an upright walking manner. Accepted! What is not accepted is the evolutionist interpretation of that fact as making these creatures our ancestors. Hope that clears it up. That's the common fallacy of considering something the cause of something else simply because it has temporal priority.

post hoc fallacy
Post hoc fallacy. The post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this therefore because of this) fallacy is based upon the mistaken notion that simply because one thing happens after another, the first event was a cause of the second event.
www.skepdic.com/posthoc.html

Scott

Quote:

---

Exactly my point! Sharing 98% of DNA with apes is a fact. That we evolved from them is a conclusion based on that fact.

---

That we come from apes is not a fact only a theory

Starman

Quote:

---

Interpretation of facts is not equivalent to factual evidence

---

This I agree with and that interpretation is opinion and not fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Scott

That we come from apes is not a fact only a theory

---

That's what I said and what I have been saying.

Starman,
I agree the bible doesn't give a specific age of the Earth. However, if one calculates based on the begats (which is what I said) then the indication is several thousand years.

You may think you aren't denying the facts, but that's not what's coming out of what you write. Let me show an example. You state: "Your interpretation of what constitutres factual evidence. Interpretation of facts is not equivalent to factual evidence." This was in answer to my asking 'who says you should ignore anti-evolution scientists?'. But all I have ever stated in this thread, is that I believe in Evolution based on scientific facts. I have said very little about what factual evidence I am considering. I have been very adamant that you are entitled to your interpretation. It has been YOUR assumption that I am part of the brain washed you refer to who have not considered other interpretations or other facts that might not support Evolution.

No one is denying that children should be given a choice. The difference is in WHERE the choice should be given. Since Creationism is based primarily on faith and religion, then it should be taught as part of religious teachings. In America, with separation of church and state, it does not belong in publicly funded schools. Which finally brings us around to the original question.

Tally,
I can see a "glitch" in your statrment, "I think the original question ask if evolution or intelligent design should be taught. Teach them both with the disclaimer WE STILL DON"T KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH!"
( Scottgem covered this as I was writing this post, but I'll put it up anyhow.)

Is it your contension that the Christian Religion should be taught in the public school system and paid for with tax dollars? The Religious Right have been attempting to force Creation in science and biology clases for years. You have just hit the same snag that is the main pitfall for Creationists. Creation demands a Creator just as Intelligent Design demands a Designer. What does a teacher say when a young fundamentalist brings up the "question", "Who is the Designer?"
And the teacher answers, "WE STILL DON"T KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH!" Well that kid knows the "truth" he was brought up to believe every word in the Bible is the literal Word of God. Wouldn't that be denying the Bible? The literal word of God that this pupil was brought up to believe? No, you can't mix religion with science and come up with a plan that pleases everyone
And what of kids of different religions and beliefs? And the kids that were brought up as freethinkers. The atheists and agnostics? What are they? Chopped liver?
This is why the framers of the Constitution, in all their wisdom, wrote in the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
Now you can try as you might to deny that creationism has anything to do with religion but there's that pesky "snag" again. Who is the Designer? If you answer that with a "I don't know" then you aren't teaching are you? And if you answer God or a Supreme Being then you have just established a government backed religion.
Bottom line. Religion, faith and belief belong in the Church. Established facts, logic and reason belong in the classrom.

Speedball1-You open a lot of issues so let me attempt to sort them out. In America all religion should be discussed and the fact that none can be in our schools is to the detriment of our young generation. Religion should be as free in the school as out as I think this would promote the tolerance a free multicultural nation deserves instead of this Politically correct nobody says nothing in school about GOD attitude we have now, just my opinion! I also think that in a free and open debate many views will be presented and no matter how blue in the face you get eventually you come to YOU STILL DON"T KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH! The truth is tho, we don't know do we? . So to teach anything ,but the truth is not teaching either its brainwashing! And just for arguments sake just because it is discussed in schools doesn't mean that it is backed by the government, And since when is declaring ones opinion establishing a government backed religion.? For to long we in America have been so afraid to express ourselves that we have been whupped in to silence by those who wish to silence anything that their so called bibles are against. That is not how a free society works in my book. That is also not how the tolerance for others works in my book either. And when little Johnny says he knows the truth you know good and well he is just parroting the parents. Which brings me to the whole crux of the problem, NOBODY is humble enough to admit the truth or else we could all be comfortable saying I DON"T KNOW!

Tally,

"just for arguments sake just because it is discussed in schools doesn't mean that it is backed by the government, And since when is declaring ones opinion establishing a government backed religion."

If you teach Creationism in the public school system then you bring a Christian concept of how mankind came into being into a classroom and pay for it with tax dollars. And if you attempt to tapdance around the word "teach" by calling it a "discussion" or a "opinion" it doesn't change a thing.
You're still inserting a religious concept into the classrom. And that, my friend, is called proselytizing.

" Religion should be as free in the school as out"
And here we agree. But not just one religion, and not in a science or biology class but in a separate class devoted to comparative religions.
I would like to see ALL religions taught. Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Wican plus the ancient mystery and pagan religions.
The Religious Right is dead set against this.
Tally, you sound open minded enough to agree that one religion should not be the only one brought into the classroom. Teaching all religions would not be "establishing just one" so I think the First Amendment wouldn't apply.

It would appear that you and I aren't that far apart. Regards, Tom

" Religion should be as free in the school as out-I mean't all religions sorry. I said before I think it important that our children be exposed to all that America has to offer as tolerance is the key to future peace I believe.

ID believers think it can be taught as science because they think that science is based on "faith".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

The same can be said, with more basis, about religion. Religion is based on faith. Faith is drummed into people during their more impressionable years.

What I see the fact here is that you see the Theory of Evolution as attacking your beliefs in the Bible and religion. Therefore, to reinforce your belief, you have to attack Evolution. I prefer to look at the body of scientific evidence. When I do I see how that evidence fits the points of Evolution and I choose to accept Darwin's ideas as the most likely.

I don't now and never have put my faith in religion. I've indicated why in other posts I've placed on this site. If you want to put your faith in it, your are welcome to. But when you try to deny the scientific evidence. When you try to denigrate in the name of supporting your faith, I will dispute you.

BTW
What inconsistency?

---

Inconsistency is when scientists apply a certain method to Evolution and refuse to acknowledge the same method when it is applied to creation.

The problem here, actually, is that you keep seeing this as a contest in denigration and attacks. That makes the whole discussion untenable and best left alone. Perhaps you are judging my motives based on your own?

Are you trying to reinforce YOUR belief in Evolution by denigrating and attacking religion? Not everyone has the same motives so the wise thing to do is not to egocentrically jump to that conclusion.


BTW
As I said before: it's not the evidence which I disagree with-it's the evolutionist interpretation of the evidence which is made to appear to support evolution when there are other possibilities of which I will not go into because that might trigger more accusations ad infinitum and since I have high blood pressure I might wind up evolving into a corpse. Now you wouldn't want that right?


Not all scientists accept evolution as the following quotes from respected scientists proves:

"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man." Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency. Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact, were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma", p.10)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't know how long it is going to be before astronomers generally recognize that the combinatorial arrangement of not even one among the many thousands of biopolymers on which life depends could have been arrived at by natural processes here on the earth. Astronomers will have a little difficulty in understanding this because they will be assured by biologists that it is not so, the biologists having been assured in their turn by others that it is not so. The 'others' are a group of persons who believe, quite openly, in mathematical miracles. They advocate the belief that tucked away in nature, outside of normal physics, there is a law which performs miracles (provided the miracles are in the aid of biology). This curious situation sits oddly on a profession that for long has been dedicated to coming up with logical explanations of biblical miracles... It is quite otherwise, however, with the modern miracle workers, who are always to be found living in the twilight fringes of thermodynamics." (Sir Fred Hoyle)


"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)

http://www.aboundingjoy.com/scientists.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

Inconsistency is when scientists apply a certain method to Evolution and refuse to acknowledge the same method when it is applied to creation.

---

Refuse or just don't accept? As Tom keeps saying there is no scientific proof of a Creator. Absent that, how can any scientific proofs be made for Creationism or Intelligent Design?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

The problem here, actually, is that you keep seeing this as a contest in denigration and attacks. That makes the whole discussion untenable and best left alone. Perhaps you are judging my motives based on your own?

---

Frankly I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion. All my posts here have been simply a statement of why I believe in evolution and attempts to refute claims that the Theory of Evolution is totally unfounded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

Are you trying to reinforce YOUR belief in Evolution by denigrating and attacking religion? Not everyone has the same motives so the wise thing to do is not to egocentrically jump to that conclusion.

---

No, my feelings about religion have little to do with my feelings about Evolution. I have said several times that I don't believe that Evolution is in direct contradiction to the Bible, except for a literal interpretation. My belief in Evolution is because it's the only theory that is supported by a preponderance of scientific fact. Something I have stated several times and something I don't see refuted, by anything other than rhetoric.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starman

BTW
As I said before: it's not the evidence which I disagree with-it's the evolutionist interpretation of the evidence which is made to appear to support evolution when there are other possibilities of which I will not go into because that might trigger more accusations ad infinitum and since I have high blood pressure I might wind up evolving into a corpse. Now you wouldn't want that right?

---

And I've responded to this by suggesting that you review what you've said. Because much of what you have said seems to be denigrating the scientific facts, not just Evolutionist interpretation of them. If you want to disagree with Evolutionist interpretation that is your right. But then deal with the interpretaions not the facts themselves.

As for your quotes. It is my experience that support against Evolution is an highly emotional charged since anti-Evolutionists feel its an attack on their religious beliefs. Ergo, even normally rational scientists may succumb to emotional rhetoric.

By ScottGem

Quote:

---

Refuse or just don't accept? As Tom keeps saying there is no scientific proof of a Creator. Absent that, how can any scientific proofs be made for Creationism or Intelligent Design?

---

Because science cannot prove or disprove doesn't mean it cannot exist. I wake up every day to the proof that the Creator does indeed exist. No matter how much science you apply or use to refute, anyone who believes can always stand firm in their convictions. Now making an argument for certain theories such as creationism or evolution is a different matter with the same answer:There may indeed be physical evidence that points in a certain direction and logical minds can make the leap of faith to any conclusion they wish but it is only speculation or opinion, absent of hard fact for example-Man came from the apes and no evidence connecting the two has ever been found so this statement even with all the evidence is only an opinion, learned or not. If you flip the coin over And I will concede that my relationship with a God of my understanding is also an opinion(mine) and has nothing to do with any one else's way they wish to think. So you may be able to quote scripture or publish scientific fact the sad(real) truth is it only means something to YOU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

by ScottGem

Because science cannot prove or disprove doesnt mean it cannot exist.

---

Agreed. But that leaves it up to the individual to choose whether to believe only in what can be proven or to rely on their faith as proof.