Teacher fired for conceiving child out of wedlock

[PLC1]

If the theory of evolution has been proven beyond a doubt why is it still called a theory?

C'mon, Pan, you know the answer to that one. What is a scientific theory? What does it take to prove/disprove one?

And if it is true that we all evolved from pond scum so to speak why has the sturgeon not changed or evolved in over 25 million years

There are many species of sturgeon, due to the fact that it has been a successful organism for many millions of years. The process is called speciation. Many other organisms have been around for hundreds of millions of years, too, and have evolved many different species.

Genus homo, on the other hand, has been around only a couple of million years, and has evolved only a few species, all of which are extinct but one.

and why are is every T Rex skeleton the same as every other T Rex skeleton?

Because if it looked different, it wouldn't be a T Rex skeleton, but that of some other animal.

and all other skeletons for that matter.... Are we really that unlucky that we never find animals in the process of evolving? We just keep finding the skeletons of fully evolved things.

Are you serious? We have seen evolution happen in real time, just among simple organisms. The reason it hasn't been observed in higher animals is that it takes longer than people have been around to observe it.

To put the time line in perspective:

The Grand Canyon of the Colorado is about 5,000 feet deep, and has been eroding at the rate of one inch every thousand years. The start of said erosion marks the end of the age of the dinosaurs, about sixty million years ago.

They were around for another sixty million years before that.

The last 0.15 inches of that mile marks the beginning of the theory of evolution.

The last 200 inches marks the time of the beginning of homo sapiens.

Surely, you aren't going to support the "creationist" view that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, are you?

 

[Pandora]

C'mon, Pan, you know the answer to that one. What is a scientific theory? What does it take to prove/disprove one?



There are many species of sturgeon, due to the fact that it has been a successful organism for many millions of years. The process is called speciation. Many other organisms have been around for hundreds of millions of years, too, and have evolved many different species.

Genus homo, on the other hand, has been around only a couple of million years, and has evolved only a few species, all of which are extinct but one.






Because if it looked different, it wouldn't be a T Rex skeleton, but that of some other animal.



Are you serious? We have seen evolution happen in real time, just among simple organisms. The reason it hasn't been observed in higher animals is that it takes longer than people have been around to observe it.

To put the time line in perspective:

The Grand Canyon of the Colorado is about 5,000 feet deep, and has been eroding at the rate of one inch every thousand years. The start of said erosion marks the end of the age of the dinosaurs, about sixty million years ago.

They were around for another sixty million years before that.

The last 0.15 inches of that mile marks the beginning of the theory of evolution.

The last 200 inches marks the time of the beginning of homo sapiens.

Surely, you aren't going to support the "creationist" view that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, are you?

So sturgeons are perfected so they stopped evolving and other things are still evolving? How do you know a skeleton that doesn't look like a T Rex really is a T Rex in the middle of evolving?


No I do not think the world is 6 thousand years old, and I never understood why christians think it is.

It does say in Gen that the world was created in 6 days but its very clear they are not talking about our version of a day.


God, according to Genesis makes the sun and the moon on the 4th day but made grass on the 3d day. On the 6th day he makes Adam, Adam his time to name every animal and figure out he is alone before God makes Eve and its said to all have happened on the 6th day. So His days are obviously not the same as one of our days.

It could easily be talking about millions and or billions of years but honestly I do not have a problem with God making all life on earth in one second not to mention one day, we are talking about God after all and He could make a tree that looks 100 years old as easily as He could make a seed.


I have no problem with the theory of evolution in the aspect that birds on one island will develop one type of beak to be able to crack the nuts on its island and another same species bird will develop an entirely different beak on another island to obtain the nuts from another type of tree. I also have no problem in my understanding that all dogs come from wolves, even poodles

Where I have the problem is the big bang. Who made those two particles and who made the space for them to travel at high speeds and once they banged together how out of nothing did everything happen.

Another problem I have with the pond scum theory is this. So lets say some genetic thing randomly develops out of pond scum. What are the mathematical chances of another thing genetically similar to the first randomly develops in the same area and at the same time that they can mate and pro create a species? This would have to happen thousands of times for the various animals and not to mention for human beings to develop.

So, I am sorry but I do not have enough faith to believe in evolution as it has been presented to me.

 

[numinus]

The teacher has a long shot at best.

The suggestion here is that the courts mandate how a private organization run their own business, especially in a matter that is stated in its contract with an employee. If the private organization were not a christian school, say, a modelling agency -- would an employee have any cause to file suit if, say, she got a bit fat?

And one cannot even argue that the conditions of the contract are, themselves discriminatory since it bears directly to her position as a teacher. How is a teacher supposed to teach the values the school espouses when she cannot even follow these values, herself? Its like a math teacher who doesn't know math.

 

[numinus]

Where I have the problem is the big bang. Who made those two particles and who made the space for them to travel at high speeds and once they banged together how out of nothing did everything happen.

There is nothing knowable prior to the big bang or even an infinitessimally small fraction of a second after the bang because the field equation breaks down to an irrational quantity at that event horizon.

Space-time expansion occured as soon as it was released from the effects of infinite gravity -- again, according to the same field equation.

Another problem I have with the pond scum theory is this. So lets say some genetic thing randomly develops out of pond scum. What are the mathematical chances of another thing genetically similar to the first randomly develops in the same area and at the same time that they can mate and pro create a species? This would have to happen thousands of times for the various animals and not to mention for human beings to develop.

How evolution actually explains the mechanism of descent from a common ancestor may not be entirely clear presently but there are very compelling evidences that it did take place. The fact that we share 98 percent (some estimates could reach as high as over 99 percent) of our genome with that of a chimpanzee could hardly be ignored.

The question you have regarding it is not fatal to the theory itself.

So, I am sorry but I do not have enough faith to believe in evolution as it has been presented to me.

Of course you have questions about evolution. The only way you could prove evolution as fact is when you see it actually happening. Obviously, anyone would have a problem with that.

What you need to understand, though, is that it is the most plausible theory explaining the origins of the species and it starts at the point were rudimentary forms of life are already present. How these rudimentary forms of life came about, while an entirely valid related question, isn't part of the premise of the theory.

 

[PLC1]

So sturgeons are perfected so they stopped evolving and other things are still evolving?

No. Sturgeon have evolved into 24 different species over the past 150 million years. No doubt there are more species that have become extinct. Since the sturgeon doesn't have a bony skeleton, it wouldn't have left a whole lot of fossils behind. It hasn't stopped evolving, nor has any other organism.

Mayflies (ephemeroptera) go back even further, to the time of amphibians. There are hundreds if not thousands of species. There are many examples of organisms that have been around a long time.

Geneticists can now determine how long an species has been around by the genetic diversity it displays.

How do you know a skeleton that doesn't look like a T Rex really is a T Rex in the middle of evolving?

To determine whether a fossil is an intermediary between two different species, paleontologists look for common features. Your question doesn't make sense to me.

No I do not think the world is 6 thousand years old, and I never understood why christians think it is.

I don't either.

It does say in Gen that the world was created in 6 days but its very clear they are not talking about our version of a day.

It is also clear that Genesis was written at a time before modern science, but yes, it is clear that the Earth was not created in so limited a time frame.

It could easily be talking about millions and or billions of years but honestly I do not have a problem with God making all life on earth in one second not to mention one day, we are talking about God after all and He could make a tree that looks 100 years old as easily as He could make a seed.

If you go with the God can do anything idea, then anything is possible. The fossil record is clear that the Earth was not created all at once. It is also clear that mature trees grow from seeds, even if you buy the idea that god could decree that one just appear all at once.

I have no problem with the theory of evolution in the aspect that birds on one island will develop one type of beak to be able to crack the nuts on its island and another same species bird will develop an entirely different beak on another island to obtain the nuts from another type of tree. I also have no problem in my understanding that all dogs come from wolves, even poodles

Neither do I, nor that birds most likely evolved from dinosaurs, or that humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor.

Where I have the problem is the big bang. Who made those two particles and who made the space for them to travel at high speeds and once they banged together how out of nothing did everything happen.

I don't even claim to understand the big bang idea.

It doesn't have anything to do with evolution, anyway.

Another problem I have with the pond scum theory is this. So lets say some genetic thing randomly develops out of pond scum. What are the mathematical chances of another thing genetically similar to the first randomly develops in the same area and at the same time that they can mate and pro create a species? This would have to happen thousands of times for the various animals and not to mention for human beings to develop.

Firstly, "pond scum" does not reproduce sexually.

Secondly, if an organism is slightly different, it can still reproduce with other members of its species. The differences, if they enhance survival, will be passed on to its descendants. Over time, differences accumulate to the point where the new species can no longer mate with earlier species, but it takes a long time for that to happen. A sexually reproducing organism doesn't suddenly become so different from its fellows that it can not mate with them. If it did, it would die out in a generation.

So, I am sorry but I do not have enough faith to believe in evolution as it has been presented to me.

It is not a matter of faith, but of scientific understanding.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

why is it when science can't give a 100% responce, only there best theories...turning abck to a mythical super powerfull thing called God...just did it..is a logical response..

I thought this was funny
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm

 

[PLC1]

why is it when science can't give a 100% responce, only there best theories...turning abck to a mythical super powerfull thing called God...just did it..is a logical response..

I thought this was funny
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm

Gravity is just the power of god holding us to Earth. If God released her grip, we'd just float off into space.

 

[numinus]

why is it when science can't give a 100% responce, only there best theories...turning abck to a mythical super powerfull thing called God...just did it..is a logical response..

I thought this was funny
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p67.htm

That is because some people do not know how to confine their inquiries within their respective fields.

If you were to ask a metaphysical question within the scientific method, then you are simply barking at the wrong tree. It is an exercise in circular logic that is ultimately futile. Why ask about the fundamental nature of existence using science when its method already PRE-SUPPOSES the fundamental nature of existence?