|
p*******r
发帖数: 4048 | 2 I think evolution in general is widely accepted and has a lot of evidence
supporting it, e.g. evolution of bacteria.
However, there is currently no direct evidence I know of which says that
evolution can lead to speciation on a big scale.
So macroevolution is more of a reasonable conjecture right now.
All the current evidence supporting macroevolution does not stand ultimately
to the attack of creationist biologists yet. (Don't discount them, some of
them are very very good at science.)
On the o |
|
|
|
w*********r
发帖数: 3382 | 5 you did better, but i see it is still hard for you to come up with any
plausible argument. and here is why
first of all, "你仅仅因为别人不认同你的事实就认定别人just either bigoted or
plain stupid"-- wrong.
it is not my fact, it is hard physical evidences jointly collected, studied
and presented by thousands of individual scientists over decades through
rigorous peer review systems. and if someone stand in front all these and
pronounce he does not believe any of them without even trying to know the
subject in the f... 阅读全帖 |
|
D*****r
发帖数: 6791 | 6 美国科学院、美国医学科学院 著
晓实 译
（美国科学院出版社2008年1月出版）
序言
科学技术的进展对人类生活有深远的影响。在19世纪，大多数家庭都可能由
于疾病失去一个或更多的孩子。今天，在美国和其它发达国家，儿童死于疾病的
事情已经不多见了。我们每天都依赖应用科学的知识和方法创造的技术。我们日
常使用的计算机和移动电话，我们旅行乘坐的汽车和飞机，我们服用的药物，以
及我们吃的许多食物都部分是基于科研成果创造出来的。科学改善了我们的生活
标准，使人类能够飞入地球的轨道，登上月球，使我们以新的方式来思考自己和
宇宙。
进化生物学一直是，而且将继续是现代科学的奠基石。这本小册子记载了进
化论的知识为人类福祉做出的一些重要贡献，包括预防和治疗人类疾病、开发新
的农业产品和进行工业创新等。广义说来，进化论是生物学中的基本概念，它既
研究过去的生命形态，也探讨今天的生物之间的相互关联和多样性。目前，生命
科学和医学研究的进展都很迅速，这主要归功于进化论知识中所蕴含的原则。这
些知识不仅通过研究日益增多的化石记录得到，现代生物学及分子生物学技术也
为进化的研究做出了同等重要的贡献。当然，像所有... 阅读全帖 |
|
|
|
w*********r
发帖数: 3382 | 9 that's not the point here.
you will always have trouble accepting it if you let your faith take the
wheel and intentionally magnify your doubt and ignore what the findings
indicate. behe practically ignored the 50 something peer reviewed papers and
9 books, didn't he? and not to mention his "all-time effective" weapon of "
irreducible complexity". how long has hebe been using it to defend ID? 20
yrs? and by the way this weapon has been frequently refuted and rejected by
the science community. to... 阅读全帖 |
|
D*****r
发帖数: 6791 | 10 I support evolution because of the evidences in gene homology, fossil
records and comparative anatomy. The strength of proof supporting evolution
is far more rigorous than creationism.
Your applying "rigorous proof-checking" for evolution and then blindly
believing in creationism is the evidence of bigotry. |
|
D*****r
发帖数: 6791 | 11 Evolution's assumption of random direction in mutation is a very weak
assumption. Creationism's assumption of an almighty God is a very strong
assumption. Evolution is supported by the evidences with the help of a weak
assumption. Creationism is supported by the evidences with the help of a
super strong assumption. That is why evolution is a much better explanation
than creationism.
You are questioning a weak assumption and then blindly believing in a strong
assumption.
Claiming it to be a faith... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 12 thanks cutegg for the comments.
I believe Mutation & 相应的环境 are both subject to God's control (a BELIEF).
On the contrary, my understanding of the "evolution theory" is " Mutation是
随机的，但mutation幸存下来，是要适应相应的环境。" -- and in addition, the "
theory" is silent on how the sequence of "适应相应的环境" is created in pre-
historic settings to guide the evolution of species.
So the "evolution theory" really doesn't address the BELIEF of Christianity,
but replace them with ASSUMPTIONS. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 13
No, I agree mutation is random. But as I said 3 times, it doesn't
matter to evolution theory. As long as mutation happens, natural
selection do the rest. I still don't know where you're getting at.
If you like, just assume whatever you like, and see what the
conclusion you can get.
Which evolution books say if mutation is not random then evolution
theory is false? I guess you'll avoid this question for the 15 times. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 14
or
that you somehow refuse to answer). Is it Yes, random, or NO, deterministic?
Given an environment, the outcome is NOT random.
So I guess you mean whether environment change is random or not,
which I've already answered (quantum physics, etc).
theory
title of this thread to Eloihim (真神) 的惡意謊言.
What are we discussing here? If you're not here to challenge
the validity of evolution, what are we talking about?
Why you question randomness if this has nothing to do with
whether evolution theory i... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 15 so what's your concrete proof of the "evolution theory" for YOU other than
the books you have read (a.k.a someone told you so)?
For the shape-of-earth, it can be tested nowadays. Can you test "evoltuion
theory" -- repeating the evolution process in the lab?
If the "evolution theory"is not subject to the same level of rigrous testing
as the "earth-is-round", anyone with a heathly level of skeptism will NOT
hold them as the same level of "truth".
If |
|
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 17
....
why put it aside? IMHO, this is the most important difference between your
athesists' faith in "evolution theory" and my Christian belief and view on
science (including "evolution theory"). Why are you so reluctant to
acknowledge that the "evolution theory" is based on the "randomness"
assumption? |
|
t*******d
发帖数: 2570 | 18 E神 is pretty familiar with the evolution theory. However, he does not know
if you are familiar with the evolution theory. In his effort to dumb down
his explanation of the evolution theory, some words may become less precise.
As to the 2 questions, the answer is Y and Y until proven otherwise.
straight answer. |
|
E*****m
发帖数: 25615 | 19
/N
Yes, random in the sense no one (ok, natural beings) can predict.
Again, even it's not random, evolution works. Evolution does not
need the environments to be random. Actually, evolution works
even better when the environment is controlled(by human, for example).
That's why I don't understand why you think random or not is a
problem. It's pretty irrelevant. |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 20
Other than claiming you have "read" the "evolution theory" and then failed
to answer very basic evolution theory questions, I haven't seen any of your
own "見解".
But at least you have finally realized and acknowledged that your "evolution
theory" is based on the "unknown" root cause assumption.
I guess for you, acknowledging a supernatural unknown is much more "
scientific" than acknowledging God who explicit stated that He created the
Universe in Genesis. |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 21
头上扣。
sorry if I offended you because my disagreement with your enshrined "
evolution theory" belief. But this is the TrustInJesus forum, not
TrustInDarwin.
why does this matter to you? Based on your posts I feel that you are not in
natural science research anyway. My apology if my guess is wrong.
what's your point? This just proves that it is still a work-in-process with
new findings.
do you believe everyting written in textbook? I bet before the scientific
discovery of "round earth", the "fla... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 22
please do not 轉移話題 ---
Just cite ONE example with detailed root causes & mechanics to explain
evolution without using random mutation as an excuse.
If you cannot, just acknowledge that the "evolution theory" is based on the
"random" (unknown cause) mutation assumption, which is the only key difference between "
evolution theory" and Christian belief IMHO. |
|
c******r
发帖数: 889 | 23 There are hundreds of books out there explaining the theory of evolution to
laypeople. Any one of them covers it more thoroughly then what I can put
here in a couple of lines.
I have done my fair share explaining it to people that are interested in
this topic here and there.
You really want to understand it, just go grab a book. If you have some
specific questions, I can try my best to help if I can afford the time.
Let me dig around, see if I can find some of my old stuff on this topic.
Althoug... 阅读全帖 |
|
c******r
发帖数: 889 | 24 The theory of evolution can predict future development. The only reason we
cannot use it for specifics is that we don't have the required computing
power.
If you want to predict the next step of evolution of a specific species, you
have to consider all the mutations that might occur and how they will be
selected. And what the collective mutations would lead to speciation. Also,
you have to simulate all the environmental factors, such as climate, food
source, interaction with other species, human... 阅读全帖 |
|
D*****r
发帖数: 6791 | 25 我现在加了原文的链接：
Regulating Evolution: How Gene Switches Make Life
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=regulating-evo
“知之甚少”特指非编码DNA中的大部分，全文讨论的却是已知的那部分的重要作用。
那句话原文是：
Much of the remaining noncoding DNA does nothing that we know of, but some
of those sequences participate in the very important task of regulating gene
expression. And these regulatory sequences are key to evolution.
from the "experts") -- but this doesn't stop some atheists from embracing
the evolution theory whole-hearted... 阅读全帖 |
|
s*y
发帖数: 933 | 26 原来此进化论非彼进化论。我看见你是从Francis Collins的讲话出发，所以以为你指
的是原版进化论，达尔文的Evolution。见Collin的原话，
Francis Collins: My study of genetics certainly tells me, incontrovertibly
that Darwin was right about the nature of how living things have arrived on
the scene, by descent from a common ancestor under the influence of natural
selection over very long periods of time.
如果你指的是化学进化论，那我要为没有理解对你的用词道歉。不过，也请你不要懒惰
，多打两个字。还有化学进化论这个中文词不很贴切，你指的是Abiogenesis么？如果
是，请不要混淆Abiogenesis和Theory of Evolution。
关于“接受”和“信仰”这两个词，当然这两个有不同的意思... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 27
I'm not claiming "evolution" is pseudo-science, but a good theory has at
least the following attributes:
a) can be repeated & tested in controlled environments.
b) can provide directional/accurate/detailed forecast given controlled
environment variables.
I guess most established natural science laws satisfy these criteria.
for example, the law of gravity, or the law of genetics, or the central
dogma, etc.
Relying on "evolution" (both chemical & biological) theory to explain the
origin of life o... 阅读全帖 |
|
s*y
发帖数: 933 | 28 Well, that's a pretty pompous attitude. I guess in your opinion we should
not study/theorize about how different species came about, the diversity of
life on earth, the fossil records, observed mutations, ...
You brought up the point that most of the biologists you know don't accept
Evolution. And the way you wrote it, you are touting this point to question
the validity of Evolution. That's why I replied with the quote from
Collins, and asked you if you have check out the Biology board. I th... 阅读全帖 |
|
h******d
发帖数: 1891 | 29 看看这个：40％知名科学家相信神。
http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/do-scientists-really-reject-god
The Gallup questions, which deal with views of God's role in evolution,
rather than general belief or disbelief in God, are far less ambiguous. When
these questions were used (Larson and Witham 1997), the answers showed that
a large proportion (40%) of prominent scientists believe in a God that is
sufficiently personal or interactive with humankind that human evolution is
guided or planned.
The title of the recent Larso... 阅读全帖 |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 30 Evolution Articles: Breaking News in Regard to Evidence for Evolution
Biologists at the University of California, Riverside report new evidence
for evolutionary change recorded in both the fossil record and the genomes (
or genetic blueprints) of living organisms, providing fresh support for
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. The researchers were able to correlate
the progressive loss of enamel in the fossil record with a simultaneous
molecular decay of a gene, called the enamelin gene, that ... 阅读全帖 |
|
D*****r
发帖数: 6791 | 31 “Sigmund Freud often remarked that great revolutions in the history of
science have but one common, and ironic, feature: they knock human arrogance
off one pedestal after another of our previous conviction about our own
self-importance. In Freud's three examples, Copernicus moved our home from
center to periphery, Darwin then relegated us to ‘descent from an animal
world’; and, finally (in one of the least modest statements of intellectual
history), Freud himself discovered the unconscious and e... 阅读全帖 |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 32 “Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological
sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the
idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are
legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is
no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural
selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically
inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseu... 阅读全帖 |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 33 Project Steve: A review after 8 years of Creationist’s all defeat.
http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Steve
现在是1100+个叫Steve的科学家签名了，开心 ～～
2009.01 初版，2010-03-18 修订
自2001年起，神创论大本营美国发现研究所（Discovery Institute）发起了一个“科
学家不同意进化论”的签名运动。这项活动要求参加者签名同意这样的说法：
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural
selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the
evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.” [1]... 阅读全帖 |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 34 “Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological
sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the
idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are
legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is
no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural
selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically
inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseu... 阅读全帖 |
|
h******d
发帖数: 1891 | 35 看看这个：40％知名科学家相信神。7%的数据不可靠。
Reports of the National Center for Science Education
Title:
Do Scientists Really Reject God?: New Poll Contradicts Earlier Ones
Author(s):
Eugenie C Scott
NCSE Executive Director
Volume:
18
Issue:
2
Year:
1998
Date:
March–April
Page(s):
24–25
http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/do-scientists-really-reject-god
The Gallup questions, which deal with views of God's role in evolution,
rather than general belief or disbelief in God, are far less ambiguous. When
these questions were u... 阅读全帖 |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 36 怎么又来了，上次纠正过了，给你把数据补全了，是
40%科学家相信神导进化论
55%的科学家相信进化论（没有神参与）
只有5%的做科研的人相信地球10000年
GALLUP EVOLUTION QUESTIONS
Question Scientists Public
1. Special Creation, 10 000 years 5% 46%
2. Evolution, God Guided 40% 40%
3. Evolution, God had no part 55% 9% |
|
J*****3
发帖数: 4298 | 37 笑死我了，还来玩黑白颠倒的吗？
我给你全文吧，这么撒谎的话，是耶稣教的吗？撒谎神不喜悦
这篇文章是基督教手册用来歪曲人类进化不成立的，是JAMES给我了文章的一个LINK，但是文章看不全，我根据作者名字找到了全文，也读了，发现，文章根本没有说进化不成立，他们断章取义，黑白颠倒地撒谎。我BS这种恶心的行为。
“5、大概在97年，一个著名的非基督徒考古学家，在非洲发现的所谓人类化石，把一
直以来公认的人类进化顺序，猿人——直立人——能人——智人，给彻底推翻了。目前
人类进化链条重新归零，变为空白。”
原文
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100506-science-
翻译：
“Even if the new result doesn't quite settle the debate about whether
Neandertals mixed with modern humans, it does underscore how different they
were from our own lineage. And t... 阅读全帖 |
|
|
|
|
|
t*******d
发帖数: 2570 | 42 ☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Judy123 (大肥猫) 于 (Mon Apr 2 00:26:57 2012, 美东) 提到:
序言
科学技术的进展对人类生活有深远的影响。在19世纪，大多数家庭都可能由于疾病
失去一个或更多的孩子。今天，在美国和其它发达国家，儿童死于疾病的事情已经不多
见了。我们每天都依赖应用科学的知识和方法创造的技术。我们日常使用的计算机和移
动电话，我们旅行乘坐的汽车和飞机，我们服用的药物，以及我们吃的许多食物都部分
是基于科研成果创造出来的。科学改善了我们的生活标准，使人类能够飞入地球的轨道
，登上月球，使我们以新的方式来思考自己和宇宙。
进化生物学一直是，而且将继续是现代科学的奠基石。这本小册子记载了进化论的
知识为人类福祉做出的一些重要贡献，包括预防和治疗人类疾病、开发新的农业产品和
进行工业创新等。广义说来，进化论是生物学中的基本概念，它既研究过去的生命形态
，也探讨今天的生物之间的相互关联和多样性。目前，生命科学和医学研究的进展都很
迅速，这主要归功于进化论知识中所蕴含的原则。这些知识不仅通... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 43
I have repetitively stated that IMHO the key "conflict" between evolution
theory and
the Bible is in assumptions -- the root cause/driving force of "variations
", which the modern day evolution theory assumes "random/spontaneous"
mutation (or being silent on this point as some prefer), and Christian
believes in God's deterministic design. It is a difference in belief vs.
assumption.
And even you don't agree, that's my position since I came to this forum.
please state your 一貫的思想 -- for example, ... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 44
"evolution" as a science subject is better discussed in the biology board
but it is not my area of research interests.
"evolution" quoted by non-believers as a "scientific" disapproval of Bible/
Genesis is no longer a science subject, and as a Christian trained in
biology, I have to clarify the common misunderstandings based on my
understanding of both subjects.
I should spend more on bible study posts. not much incremental value from
these "evolution" posts.
Jesus Christ.
hope not. |
|
t*******d
发帖数: 2570 | 45
"
What's the reason behind all these "Evolution theory is just a hypothesis"
threads in this "Trustinjesus" forum, like the one we are in right now?
a) The scientific discussion about the validity of the evolution theory or b
) believers try to justify their belief?
For Christians who are really into biology, please move the discussion to
the "biology" forum, or even better, read some evolution books other than
the brochures handed out by the church. |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 46
"What's the reason behind all ...... a)
The scientific discussion about the validity of the evolution theory or b)
believers try to justify their belief?"
c) to clarify the misunderstanding that leads to the "conflict" between "
evolution theory" and Christian belief -- it is mainly a conflict of
assumption vs. belief but becomes a stumbling block for some
non-believers to accept Jesus as their savior.
"For Christians who are really into biology, please move the discussion
tothe "biology" forum... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 47
exactly. easy said than done. especially in elementary education on subtle
subject like "evolution theory".
like it or not, the "evolution theory" will be instilled in public school
as a doctrine, and quoted by athesits (otherwise has no interests in science
) as "
scienfitic" reason for not following Jesus. Plenty of example on this forum.
exactly, but I'm afraid in the issue of teaching "evolution theory", the
motive is tilting towards ideology than pure pursue of science & knowledge. |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 48
1+1=2 vs. 1+1=10, which one is the 真相? There is only one true meaning, but
the presentation/interprentation depends on your assumption.
so is the connotation for the word "evolution" in the context of "evolution
theory". The theory itself is just a theory about the mechanics of creation,
how you interpret "evolution" depends on your prior belief. |
|
d******r
发帖数: 5008 | 49
猪头们, 你们是不是以为基督教人口多的国家堕胎很低呀.
===========================
(這研究結論是基督徒多的民主美國有較高謀殺率，而愈是信教不虔的民主國家愈少社
會不正常。又以淋病而言，美國青少年的發生率是信教不虔的民主國家的300倍，同時
梅毒在美國的青少年與成人感染率、與少女的墮胎率也是最高的！ )
Societies worse off ‘when they have God on their side’
Times Online, UK
Sep. 27, 2005
Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
www.timesonline.co.uk
ReligionNewsBlog.com • Thursday September 29, 2005
Religious belief can cause damage to a society, contributing towards high
murder rates, abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide,... 阅读全帖 |
|
l**********t
发帖数: 5754 | 50 Thanks for confirming that "evolution theory" does NOT answer the question
on the origin of life.
As to the 2nd question, do you agree that the driving forces of "evolution"
(the cause of mutation & the state of the overall environment for natural
selection) are
exogenous to the "evolution theory" itself (out of the scope of the theory
as you put it earlier), and the outcome are thus non-deterministic within
the theory?
发信人: Eloihim (真神), 信区: TrustInJesus
标 题: Re: 关于眼睛结构的智创论[zz]
发信站: BBS 未名空间站... 阅读全帖 |
|
