55 replies to this topic

[dot]

[wattle]

You don't get to be a doctor without knowing how bacteria evolve. There are many Muslim doctors. You don't get to be a genetecist, biologist, zoologist, veterinarian without knowing that evolution is the best explanation for how things got to be as the are. There are many Muslim genetecists, biologists, zoologists, veterinarians. Not sure why this article is in the 'Refuting Non Muslims' section.

[dot]

Bacteria doesn't evolve. It was long proven that, in a completely sealed environment, bacteria cannot develop.

Since mediaeval times, spontaneous generation, the theory that non-living matter could come together to form living organisms, had been widely accepted. It was believed that insects came into existence from leftover bits of food. It was further imagined that mice came into being from wheat. Interesting experiments were conducted to prove this theory. Some wheat was placed on a dirty piece of cloth, and it was believed that mice would emerge in due course.

Similarly, the fact that maggots appeared in meat was believed to be evidence for spontaneous generation. However, it was only realized some time later that maggots did not appear in meat spontaneously, but were carried by flies in the form of larvae, invisible to the naked eye.

Even in the period when Darwin's Origin of Species was written, the belief that bacteria could come into existence from inanimate matter was widespread.

However, five years after the publication of Darwin's book, Louis Pasteur announced his results after long studies and experiments, which disproved spontaneous generation, a cornerstone of Darwin's theory. In his triumphal lecture at the Sorbonne in 1864, Pasteur said, "Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment."

[wattle]

Bacteria evolves from one sort of bacteria to another.

Darwinism says nothing about how life first appeared on this planet, it is about how life evolves. 'Evolves' means changes, not comes into being.

[Skenderbeu]

Bacteria evolves from one sort of bacteria to another.

Darwinism says nothing about how life first appeared on this planet, it is about how life evolves. 'Evolves' means changes, not comes into being.

Sure there are variety between species, but there is no evidence proving organisms can change from one species to a completely different species.

[wattle]

There is sufficient evidence to convince the vast majority of scientists qualified in the relevant fields that evolution is the theory that best fits the facts. That is undeniable. If you think that all these scientists are mistaken or lieing, you really need to come up with some evidence of it.

[bint Ali......ÈäÊ Úáì]

ok.then can you name a few of these evidences?

[wattle]

The simplest thing for you to do is to type 'evolution' into Wiki. I'm sure they have a good article.

My point is that the vast majority - probably very nearly 100% - of people qualified in fields affected by the theory of evolution, accept that evolution is the best explanation to fit the facts. science is hugely competitive. If there was any fundamental flaw in the theory it would have been discovered, studied and accepted. It hasn't been.

[David M.K.]

Sorry dot but evolution is quite real. Bacterial/Viral resistance to drugs, carnivorous deer in response to a nutrient deficiency in the local plants, dinosaurs going from being reptiles to being birds (proven by the ability to reverse this process), ect.

[bint Ali......ÈäÊ Úáì]

i must say.evolution to some extent makes sense. for example the survival of the fittest part.but when it says that life on earth, including the complex organisms have the same ancestor then we have a problem

[wattle]

You might have a relgious problem, but there's no scientific problem.

[Skenderbeu]

Sorry but there is not sufficient proof of species changing to others there is proof of variation among species though, but that is not the same.

[David M.K.]

Sorry but there is not sufficient proof of species changing to others there is proof of variation among species though, but that is not the same.

Yes it is. Take small changes in large enough quantities and you get a big change. And yes there is evidence, see my reptile to bird example.

Edited by David M.K., 09 January 2010 - 03:51 PM.

[Skenderbeu]

Yes it is. Take small changes in large enough quantities and you get a big change. And yes there is evidence, see my reptile to bird example.

What would occur to make a reptile sprout wing like organs to fly, when those wings would not work unless they are exact for flying, sure thy could have evolved wing-like limbs but that would only be a hindering mutation which would not survive to pass down, and even if it passes down you would need another mutation to make it even more capable of flying which would be inferior to say a reptile having a mutation suited to ground.

[wattle]

Random mutation is what would "make" a reptile develop webbing between some limbs. Gliding is an advantage.

[bint Ali......ÈäÊ Úáì]

if you are so sure that one species can change in to other by random mutation then why dont you name a few species with proof that they have been mutated like that?

You might have a relgious problem, but there's no scientific problem.

yes we have a religious problem ....and there is no scientific proof solid enough to prove what you are saying.if you think i am mistaken why dont you show us proof.

[wattle]

Yes, I'm sure that webbing can form - it happens to humans. Genetic mutations in all animals are fairly common - the problem is that most of them aren't advantageous. But some are.

As I said, you really should read the Wiki article on evolution for a brief introduction to the subject. (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Evolution"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Evolution[/url]

[bint Ali......ÈäÊ Úáì]

you have not answered properly to my question.i was not asking to explain the theory.all what i want is an example of aspecies evolved from another species.

BTW it is called evolution theory not fact.

[wattle]

You didn't read the Wiki article, did you? It explains that EVERYTHING in science is a theory. Science works by establishing theories which fit the known facts. If different facts arise which the theory cannot account for, the theory is modified or scrapped for a new theory. The theory of evolution fits the known facts and has done for a long time. It is a very robust theory.

Newton's theories about gravitation and motion fit the facts for a very long time, until Einstein came along with a theory which fit both the old facts and the newly-discovered facts. Now Einstein's theories are the best fit for the known facts. Possibly new facts will become know (possibly soon, from the CERN project), which will require Einstein's theories to be modified or scrapped. That's how science works.

As for how new species form, you've already been told in this thread that many small changes add up to large changes. If being a fast swimmer was a strong enough advantage to humans, then the occasional people born with webbing between their fingers would eventually become the different group of humans. As their children would almost all be born with webbing between their fingers, they would be a different species.

[bint Ali......ÈäÊ Úáì]

so you dont know of an example do you?