/sci/ - Science & Math

talkorigins.org
There are even android and iPhone apps to help you with this.

/thread

>>2362327

WHY DOES IT MATTER

WHY THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER

IF HE ANNOYS YOU, WHY THE FUCK DO YOU HANG OUT WITH HIM ANYWAYS

Its just a therie.

I'm a Christian. I don't believe there's any need for this supposed separation between biblical teachings and science. God was trying to convey to SHEPHERDS how the world was created, get too technical and they wouldn't understand. Part of the problem also lies in how many millenia passed between when the Bible was written and today.

I'll give you an example. In the 1950s the main Christian church in Norway or Finland or something, one of the three Scandinavian countries, I'll make you look it up. Anyway, they decided that baptism didn't make much sense in the bible so they DELETED every reference to baptism in the bible.

WHAT THE FUCK? And do you think the last century was the only time people edited the bible without any authority from God whatsoever?

We understand this, biblical scholars understand this. The Bible was accurate when it was first written but fools have come in and made changes. The people who don't understand this are troll preachers of some Christian religions that think if they blabber nonsense bullshit about the bible being 100% accurate they'll gain control over morons.

Goddamn it even the Catholic church admits that evolution makes sense. I wish I could find Christians that troll people about shit about evolution being false and punch them in the face. It makes it seem like all Christians are rednecked retards who don't believe in science and that simply isn't true.

>>2362372
What gets me is plenty of scientist are religious that do their job and don't deny what IS out there.

>>2362372
then i look forward to you not knocking on my fucking door every Saturday morning good sir

>>2362327
What website is that laptop on?
Is that MySpace?
I am really curious as to what is going on in this picture, and believe its contents may be more interesting than the trolling in this thread.

There is four countries in Scandinavia..

Don't. He has a right to believe what he wants, you have the right to believe what you want.

Don't be a dick.

>>2362372
>> God was trying to convey to SHEPHERDS how the world was created, get too technical and they wouldn't understand.

Seriously if god can't explain something as simple as evolution to sheep herders, I have a pretty good reason to doubt his qualifications for being god.

Or fuck why couldn't god have explained simple things like germ theory or antibiotics?

Seriously, it ain't that hard to explain evolution to sheep herders.

>>2362530
>herp
You're dumb. I don't care how good you are at learning science or math or anything, you're dumb.

>>2362530
Well, maybe things aren't always what they appear at face value.
People understand these things now, don't they?
That whole thing about the journey being important, not the destination and all that jazz.

Unless he talks about this all the goddamn time, find something else to do. There's no real point in trying to convince the willfully ignorant. The basic idea of evolution is drop-dead simple, the only difficulty people seem to run into is a sense of scale where they can understand how helpful changes would be preserved, but not how that would, given time, lead to drastically different lifeforms (hence herp derping about microevolution vs. macroevolution). If you think this guy is actually interested in learning something and you aren't just doing this because you can't stand it when people are wrong, then you should probably first try to enhance his ability to conceive of things on that kind of time scale. Examples of large changes occuring do to small changes over time are good, like the formation of the grand canyon. Though a lot of fundies now seem to think that that was created in a short flood, because geology is apparently anathema.

>>2362558
so god basically trolled us?

>>2362564
indeed

Oh dear this thread seems to be full of fail.

Using genetics of course!
The evidence for evolution lies very well seated in genetics. Back in the old days of biology life on earth was speculated to have evolved from organisms we found fossilized in the strata of the earth. Geology, paleontology and evolution were very closely. Mendelian genetics could predict how population changes could occur due to environmental pressures, and the missing link was all the rage.

Fast forward a bit and we're using molecular biology in medicine, law, forensics and phylogenetics. That last one, phylogenetics is very important to our understanding of evolution. One example of the way we can determine the way animal life has evolved is ERVs. There are thousands of regions of all animal's DNA which have tiny chunks of code ripped straight from viral DNA. This happens when a virus accidentally infects a germ-line cell, a sperm or egg, and the replication of viral DNA cannot create new viruses. Instead the virus leaves behind the DNA as an Endogenous Retrovirus (endo-from outside, genous- the genome, Retrovirus-reverse virus). This only matters to evolutionary science because we share thousands of these ERVs with other organisms, in the same descending pattern of occurrence as other genetic indicators of common ancestry.

Another interesting link is defunct genes. All Humans carry a broken copy of the gene that makes Vitamin C. Great apes have the working copy. Chickens have a gene for expressing teeth as well as a bony tail, but they don't express unless humans force them to.

Cont>

<cont

Another piece of the puzzle of life is highly conserved genes. Some genes are so vital to cellular machinery in animals that all animal life contains the DNA that codes for it. Cytochrome C is an example of a conserved gene. The protein Cyt C codes for is used in the electron transport chain of mitochondria, essentially it is part of the way cells use food as energy. The special thing about Cyt C is that because it is used by literally all Eukaryotes/animals, it's DNA is very similar in all animals, it provides the same protein for every cell. It can do this because the mutations in it's code aren't enough to change the protein's structure in a significant way, and if the protein did change more than a little, an animal would die, preventing that gene from being passed on to the next generation. When we compare the Cyt C gene to hundreds of species of animals and organize them by the number of exact matches in the genetic code. In the case of human Cyt C only 4 nucleotide bases are different in chimpanzees.

<cont2

This change doesn't even change the amino acids produced by the gene so the proteins are actually exactly the same. But not all organisms have the same Cyt C gene, this is another case where when we organize the matches to their closest organisms we get the same tree of life evolution predicts and that other lines of evidence predict. Some claim this is evidence for a common designer, but we already know that Cyt C can function just fine with a few different amino acids in animals that don't appear to be closely related, because it's at a cellular level, all animals need it to live so designing them in this branching hierarchy is pointless unless a designer wanted to confuse a group of biochemists. If we study the rate of mutation in Cyt C we can also get a rough estimate of how long ago two species diverged based on their protein sequences. The dates achieved by this are very close to the radiometric methods used by paleontologists, further providing and supporting evidence of common ancestry.

The list goes on and on.

ignore him
get him fired
get a better job

choose one or several

I'll just leave this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgyTVT3dqGY

>>2362580
I thought we paleontologists used carbon dating on dinosaurs though!

I kid, it's refreshing to see that much truth.

Of course creationists are skilled at failing to understand things. It's an important skill for the religious mind.

>>2362589

The transitional forms in the fossil record are so much more interesting than the genetic evidence of evolution, just less concrete. There are so few fossil remnants of ancient life, and yet we still have a huge pile of ancient creatures, some so bizarre they seem alien to us. The transitional forms are an exercise in comparative morphology, which is really only useful once evolution is clearly established fact and the evidence for common ancestry is left without reasonable doubt.

They try to find out what features of a group of animal were first derived from an ancestral group. This gives us a way to classify organisms based on their physical characteristics, but only when those characteristics are present in a way that forms a pattern with it's other characteristics. It's explained pretty well in that Youtube link of a DonExodus video.

DNA.
Comparative DNA makes absolutely no sense without evolution.

Evolution doesn't support the idea of "Heaven".
Either go full retard or accept religion doesn't make sense and abandon it.

hey, i think i have the same laptop

>>2362647
That's so logical and well constructed it brings tears to my eyes.
MASSIVE SARCASM VOICE.

>>2362661
Thanks for the contribution.

>>2362683
Your mother.

>>2362647

It is true that Evolution doesn't support the idea of heaven.

Similarly, Evolution doesn't support ANY of the following: Newton's laws, general or special realtivity, the idea that the sky is blue, or the double helix structure of DNA.

>>2362695
How can I respond to this? I can't understand how could someone fucking respond to this in a civil way. It display ignorance on the highest scale. I mean, shit, at least I READ THE BIBLE before I dismissed it.

No words, no face. You win. 10/10.

>>2362739

Dude, those statements are completely true. Because the theory of evolution has exactly nothing to do with those things. It in no way suggests any of them to be false. I was making fun of an extremely stupid comment which suggested that because evolutionary theory didn't support something completely outside of its scope of relevence that that thing must be false. The idea of heaven is flawed for other reasons, but the fact that a theory does not support a claim does not mean it necessarily contradicts that claim.

Thanks for making me explain the joke.

...ahem, there are three countries in Scandinavia region.
Norway, Sweden & Denmark. Wikipedia, what a wonderful place.

higher niggers to rape his wife/sister/mother when they are most fertile
point to half nigger baby as evidence of evolution.

>>2362773
The idea of evolution not supporting heaven comes from the fact that we are animals. We evolved to get here and are still evolving.

Is god using chromosomes to draw a line who gets into heaven? When did the gates first open? What happens in the far future when homo sapiens is calling themselves something else, no more heaven?
Or do proto-humans and future-humans still go to heaven? If so, do animals go to heaven too, even though they have no capability to believe in God? If thats the case, why even have religion, everyone is safe anyway. I want to believe in God, sure, I want to live forever in a fairy land. But at the moment, it doesn't seem even slightly plausible.

>testament herger
God is speaking to me through captcha? Praise jesus!

Show him this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk

Also troll him on vestigial organs. Human embryos have yolk sacs early in development and we even have two degraded yolk genes in our genome.
Also before we genetically engineered bacteria to make human insulin for us in the mid 80s insulin dependent diabetics took swine or bovine insulin because it was similar to human insulin.

Evolution is not true no body ever seen it.

>>2362912
no one has ever seen your brain.
It also doesn't exist by your standards.

>>2362821
>>2362821

The idea of evolution not supporting the idea of heaven comes from the fact that no facet of evolutionary theory makes any claims with regard to heaven. The theological issues you brought up are valid, but are not in any way part of evolutionary theory. Again, I feel the need to stress that not supporting something and contraindicating it are two completely different things.

Evolution DOES contraindicate the idea that humans were created in their modern form a priori six thousand years ago. Please don't put words into Evolution's mouth. It didn't do anything to you.

>>2362918
yeah but we can prove the brain exist. Im just saying evolution may not be true after all it seems just like here say

just dont, unless it directly effects how he does his job (e.g. biology high school teacher) it is not going to really effect his job, if he keeps telling you your wrong when your discussing it with other people tell him to fuck off, and dont bother talking to him about it

>>2362931
this guy gots it correct. I use to be one of you evolutionist and i noticed evolution is just for assholes to have so called proof in not a god. Listen for thousands of years people believe in god and suddenly a druggie called charlie darwin who was scared of hell made some bullshit up

>>2362927
Might not be true after all?
The theory of evolution by natural selection has been around for 150 years and the evidence in favor of it has just been getting larger and larger. The evidence in favor of it was even substantial in Darwin's time.
Mendelian genetics and the new synthesis plus the genetic evidence in DNA with new fossils discovered every year just keeps making a sure thing ... more of a sure thing.

>>2362946
and jesus died for your sins about 2000 years ago

>>2362952
I don't know how to respond to this but thanks for the laugh.

>>2362956
its okay god bless

Evilution life came from a rock

The truth God designed us with a purpose

What is more reasonable

I'm sorry, I'm new to /sci/ here (I suppose /sci/ is new anyways) but has /sci/ always had missionaries?

>>2362924
>The idea of evolution not supporting the idea of heaven comes from the fact that no facet of evolutionary theory makes any claims with regard to heaven.
Untill... now? Just because it may have not been voiced in the fear of pissing off the religious majority in the world, doesn't mean the contradiction isn't there. We can barely teach evolution in the school.

>The theological issues you brought up are valid, but are not in any way part of evolutionary theory. Again, I feel the need to stress that not supporting something and contraindicating it are two completely different things.
We're not yet living in '1984'. In order to see humans as Gods precious, heaven deserving jewels you have to, at least temporarily, ignore evolution. Doublethink is the only way (THAT I KNOW) for religion to co-exist with science.

>Please don't put words into Evolution's mouth. It didn't do anything to you.
It crushed my dreams of sweet life-forever after death. ;_;


But hey, I know religious debates are just fun and games, play with me, whats the harm done? Not like anyone changes their opinions.

>>2363012
hey i am becoming religous i think. and you no evolution is a bunch of tom foolery . When you consider that satan wants you to not believe in god you relize atheist are just devil worshipers.

>>2363036
I have to admit; this Satan guy seems to be pretty much solid with his shit, how come you don't worship him?

>>2363048
because his main goal is to have us be in hell with him because he is jelly and wants be like god.

don't justify him with an argument. If someone believes that stuff, they've failed

>>2363088
not really. Maybe he believe in the more supported and logical truth of creation.