Embryology and Miracle

Status
Not open for further replies.
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#41
Don't waste your time. As Ayn Rand said, "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone."
دو سئوال هم برای شما
نظریه داروین به اثبات رسیده یا نه ؟
باز سئوال تکراری به ناچرال و شاهین سی
چرا تکامل تا رسیدن به کمال امروزی یعنی انسان با هوش تنها از یک شاخه حرکت کرد ست
یعنی ساده تر بگویم
بیش از صد ها ملیارد جانور در زمین زیسته اند و منقرض شده اند
اگر بنا بر اصل ژن باهوش و جهش باشد ایا نباید موجودات باهوش دیگری که هم سطح انسان یا حتی برتراز انسان ها وجود داشته باشند؟؟؟!!!آ
لطفا جواب دهید تا برایتان بگویم چرا نظریه داروین را قبول ندارم
همانطور که گفتم نظریه داروین با قران و ایت قرانی در تضاد نیست
من شخصا انرا قبول ندارم
والا اگر فردا روشن شود که این نظریه صد در صد درست است از ایمان من کاست نخواهد شد
زیرا باز تکرار می کنم با قران در تضاد نیست
منتظر جواب هر سه شما دانشمندان روز هستم

گریگوری یفیموویچ راسپوتین
 

Attachments

Dec 12, 2002
8,517
1
usa
#42
the things have been offered in heaven should be updated .
1- new comuter games ( every day some of the best technology they could come up with .
2- the race car you can drive and go as fast as 6,700 miles an hour without even getting speeding tickets .
3- instead of sex with those girls they should have love program .
4- eating honey and milk should be replaced with much better food offering .
5- every one should be able to fly in all 80 f temerture all day day long .
 

houman

Bench Warmer
Oct 14, 2004
947
0
Dallas, TX
#43
GP, the answer to your questions are easily accessible on any reputable book on the subject, or any reliable internet resource on the genus homo. As others have put, there is absolutely no point in a back and forth argument with someone who is obtuse, and is impermeable to any logic and reasoning... it's a waste of time; time that can be spent enlightening young minds, not those whose minds have been wasted.

If you're really interested in the subject, pick up a biology book, and quit linking to or citing individuals with ulterior motives.
 

R_E_Z_A

IPL Player
Jan 16, 2004
2,916
0
#44
GP, the answer to your questions are easily accessible on any reputable book on the subject, or any reliable internet resource on the genus homo. ..... pick up a biology book,......
Sorry to jump in here, but general has a valid question. Refereing him to books or journals shows either you guys dont know what he is saying or dont know the theory of evolution itself. Azizam, no book or biologist can give a definit answer to the question, they can only come up with theories.

By the way I myself think the theory of evolution is the best we have now, and makes more sense than any other theory.
 

houman

Bench Warmer
Oct 14, 2004
947
0
Dallas, TX
#45
Sorry to jump in here, ...
No, the questions he is posing, like why is it that there are no smarter beings than humans, is not an insightful question; or why is it that chimpanzees are still around and are not evolving. Of course there is no definite answer to some legitimate
questions on evolution, but there are answers with a high strength of inference. My issue with GP is that from the line of his questioning it is crystal clear that he hasn't studied the subject, and is just throwing spitballs to see what sticks. Hence, if he is really interested in the subject, he can do some reading, then come back and ask rational questions.
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#46
The answer to his question is simple. Just because he thinks he has an IQ of over 150 and is smarter than everyone else on this board, or that human beings are smarter than chimps, it doesn't mean either one is true. In fact, I can say with certainty that in an evolutionary sense, Timsar is no smarter than a chimp - they have both adapted to their environments, survived, and are both here at this juncture in time - evolution does not pick one to be "smarter" than the other, or more evolved than the other. Of course I used Timsar as an example not to mean any offence but because he asked the question, as this applies to all of us including myslef. The human definition of intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with the evolutionary theory about other species, even it may be a part of our evolutionary development.
 

Natural

IPL Player
May 18, 2003
2,559
3
#47
ناچرال
تو مثل اینکه ندیده غیب گفتی
من کجا گفتم نظریه تکامل می گه که همه موجودات باید در یک زمان تحول پیدا کنند
من می گویم اگر انسان از موجودی بوسیله یک جهش بوجود امده
چرا در بین این ملیاردها موجود که در روی کره زمین زیسته اند ونابودشدهاند جهش های دیگری که باعث بوجود امدن یک موجود باهوش دیگر در سطح هوش انسان باشد انجام نشده ؟؟؟
فهمیدی من چی میگم یا برات ساده تر بگم
حالا بیا و از زبان من حرف بزن

خلاصه مطلب
اگر جهش باعث شده که موجودی با هوش مثل انسان از موجود دیگری بوجود اید
چرا فقط یک بار ؟!!!آ
You are looking at it in a totally wrong way.


First of all, evolution hasn't all of a sudden stopped, we are just seeing one slide of its several million year old history... there will probably be another several million years, where we might see other intelligent species, or not... only time will tell. either way, it doesn't mean we are any more special than an ant or a cheetah in the eye of evolution. So your assumption of humans being the only intelligent species is misguided.

Second of all, intelligence is not the end product of evolution. Evolution has no end product - all it does is drive continual adaptation. Every species on the planet must find a way to survive, some it happens by having force, others, speed, ours is rational thought. We did not evolve faster or better, we evolved in a different way, as other species did in their own ways.

you can ask the same question about cheetah, why are cheetahs the fastest animals on the planet.. how come out of all these species only cheetahs have become the fastest... you see where I'm going with this? you question is not as intelligent as you think it is.

That's why I agree with Houman, you seem to have no knowledge on the subject...
 
Last edited:

nimnimak_11

Bench Warmer
Aug 6, 2009
758
0
#48
age az man beporsi ke man migam khoda confuse hast , shayadam ziyad mikeshe nemidoonam, be JC mige sharab bokhor, be Mohammad mige harame, make up your mind dude.
This will sound crazy but what if.........It's actually not haram and it's just a mistransaltion or interpretation or like not even related to the actual scripture? Because i actually think alcohol is not "haram" in the scripture.
 

nimnimak_11

Bench Warmer
Aug 6, 2009
758
0
#49
so GP jaan, lets see here, this God guy created men, then decided we need people to show us how its done and be GOOD ! then he sends JC and Co. but suddenly 1400 years ago decided ok that's enough, how come no one is coming now? isnt world a MUCH dirtier place now than then? how come no one can "OPEN THE SEA" now? what happened? is he sleeping? and whats the POINT of this? he created us then is seating and watching us and waiting for us to make a mistake so he can burn us in hell? this guy is EXTREMELY bored if you ask me
Good points.


I don't get why we weren't just left to use our heart reason and logic to get us to be good or progress in creation. Since you could always argue we have been given reason heart and logic thus what's the point of a "divine scripture"?

Vali keep in mind (from a philosophical pov) and IMO that this is subjective and too ambigious and their may be things that we don't know. It might be that the scriptures were needed at that time and are not needed now i don't know or it might be that they were meant to have signs in them to direct towards God again i don't know since i already think there are signs in the Universe to acknowledge purpose or design.
A question like this is i think hard because there are so many possible answers.

But if you look at something like the embryology thing posted, that's IMO less subjective because you can kinda just narrow it down to like three or four possibilities:

1) it's from aliens
2) its knowledge copied from others
3) it's divine
4) It's just a good guess (but i think logic would deny this)

Do you get what i mean?

I disagree with you when you say the world is a dirtier place now compared to the past. There are lots of things which we have bettered and developed by following and better understanding the laws in the universe.

About the last part of your post:

Have you ever thought of that which sustains you to be God? I mean basically everything that sorrounds you and beyond in other words that which encompasses all things. I say this because i think you've already formed an image of God based on humans. IMO you should look at what it is you actually submit(can't think of a better word) to in your life.

If you sleep or your skin recovers after a cut, that's because the laws of your sustainer/ the sustainer/ nature/ life....whatever you wanna call it has placed. It could be that this sustainer is intellegent or not (that's like a whole philosophical debate) but what i'm saying is assuming that this sustainer is intellegent, it would seem logical that for going against a law, there will punishments. Ie: if you don't sleep for two days you will punished by the laws of your sustainer that's my version of hell. I strongly reject fire, shackles and any otherthing on these lines in the Quran to be true of that which borught us into being. I reckon these are not literal. There is actually a verse in the scripture which does point to this.

Historically the book was after all written by a man with an arabic tongue in which it could even have a different accent or dialect in comparison to the arabic used today.

About the opening of the sea, at the moment, I actually don't believe that either. I think it's against the laws of the sustainer that something like this happens.

Oh and if i'm responding to you, it's because it was the easiest to read and reply to in comparison to other posts.
 
Last edited:

R_E_Z_A

IPL Player
Jan 16, 2004
2,916
0
#50
No, the questions he is posing, like why is it that there are no smarter beings than humans, is not an insightful question; or why is it that chimpanzees are still around and are not evolving. Of course there is no definite answer to some legitimate
questions on evolution, but there are answers with a high strength of inference. My issue with GP is that from the line of his questioning it is crystal clear that he hasn't studied the subject, and is just throwing spitballs to see what sticks. Hence, if he is really interested in the subject, he can do some reading, then come back and ask rational questions.
Actually his question is very rational to me. Some biologists have been asking this question from early days of the theory. If I understood him correctly, he is asking why for example we can see different species of similar animals (similar abilities) but we dont see different species with similar abilities (thinking) as humans.

Good science should allow all different kinds of questions about an unproven theory, this is what helps science progress.
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#51
GP, the answer to your questions are easily accessible on any reputable book on the subject, or any reliable internet resource on the genus homo. As others have put, there is absolutely no point in a back and forth argument with someone who is obtuse, and is impermeable to any logic and reasoning... it's a waste of time; time that can be spent enlightening young minds, not those whose minds have been wasted.

If you're really interested in the subject, pick up a biology book, and quit linking to or citing individuals with ulterior motives.
هومن
این جواب سئوال من نیست
من از شما دو تا سئوال کردم شما در جواب من را به کتبی در این رابطه حواله می کنید؟؟؟
اگر طریقه بحث کردن این باشد که هر کسی می تواند بیاید ودر جواب سئوال من و شما ما را به کتابخانه کنگرس حواله کند
شما جوابی ندارید بدهید بگویید ندارم


خلاصه مطلب
جواب سئوال من داده نشد


بله جانم
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#52
Just a clarification for those struggling with the BASICS: Evolution is NOT a theory, it is a PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT. The phrase, "theory of evolution" does NOT suggest that evolution itself is a theory, rather that there are theories on the MODES through which it occurs. To put it in real simple terms with the hopes that this will finally sink in, an apple is a fruit and that's a FACT. One may THEORIZE on how a fruit like apple developed to be an apple. If someone asks the question "how come an apple exists, even though there are oranges" it is neither a thought provoking question worthy of an answer to most people in the world, nor questioning the validity of evolution as a scientific fact, nor proof of the existence of God or miracles! It is just a silly question - and one that you'd expect to be posed by 13 year old kids who get stoned for the first time, not by grown men who claim to know the inticacies of the universe and God itself!
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#53
The answer to his question is simple. Just because he thinks he has an IQ of over 150 and is smarter than everyone else on this board, or that human beings are smarter than chimps, it doesn't mean either one is true. In fact, I can say with certainty that in an evolutionary sense, Timsar is no smarter than a chimp - they have both adapted to their environments, survived, and are both here at this juncture in time - evolution does not pick one to be "smarter" than the other, or more evolved than the other. Of course I used Timsar as an example not to mean any offence but because he asked the question, as this applies to all of us including myslef. The human definition of intelligence has absolutely nothing to do with the evolutionary theory about other species, even it may be a part of our evolutionary development.
خوب
اینطور که پیداست تو هم جوابی نداری او امدی وقت ما را تلف کنی
 

shahinc

Legionnaire
May 8, 2005
6,745
1
#54
اگر فرض کنیم که میمون ها در طی ملیون ها سال به انسان تبدیل شده اند
می پرسم پس بقیه میمون ها چرا به موجودات پیشرفته تری تبدیل نشدند
I can not get over this question from man with IQ 200. I think it deserves a :monk2::monk2::monk1::monk1:

Reza Jan, What is your education level ?? Do you find these questions valid as well ;) ;)
If you say yes, then I have to suspect to ham mesleh oni ke tazeh be darak vasel shodeh az oxford madrak dari ;)
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#55
You are looking at it in a totally wrong way.


First of all, evolution hasn't all of a sudden stopped,
...
به قول پویا
عزیز جان برادر کی گفت که تکامل توقف کرده ؟>!!!!ا
من همچین حرفی را زدم ؟؟؟
:rolleyes:
عجب
we are just seeing one slide of its several million year old history... there will probably be another several million years, where we might see other intelligent species, or not... only time will tell. either way, it doesn't mean we are any more special than an ant or a cheetah in the eye of evolution. So your assumption of humans being the only intelligent species is misguided.

Second of all, intelligence is not the end product of evolution. Evolution has no end product - all it does is drive continual adaptation. Every species on the planet must find a way to survive, some it happens by having force, others, speed, ours is rational thought. We did not evolve faster or better, we evolved in a different way, as other species did in their own ways.

you can ask the same question about cheetah, why are cheetahs the fastest animals on the planet.. how come out of all these species only cheetahs have become the fastest... you see where I'm going with this? you question is not as intelligent as you think it is.

That's why I agree with Houman, you seem to have no knowledge on the subject...
ناچرال
شما می فرمایید که ممکن است ملیونها سال دیگر با پیشرفت تکامل موجودات باهوش دیگری بوجود ایند
افرین الان داری کم کم جواب سئوال من را می دهید
ولی باز برگردیم به ملیاردها سالی که بجز یک جهشی که تبدیل به وجود امدن انسان شده جهش دیگری نبوده که حیوانی را در سطح انسان بوجود اورد
بنده این سئوال برایم پیش امده
چرا؟
چرا فقط یک بار اتفاق افتاده در چند صد هزار سال قبل
چرا تنها یک حیوان جهش بسوی هوشیاری و تفکر ما نند انسان پیدا کرده
چرا حیوانات دیگری این جهش را نداشته اند
مثلا دیاناصور ها تبدیل ب پرنده و خزنده و ابزیستان شده اند
درست
خوب چرا از این ملیارد موجودات که تکامل داشته اند یکی در میان انها جهشی مثل جهش انسانها نداشته اند
فقط گردن دراز کرده اند و دندان هایشان کوتاه شده و خرطو م هایشان بلند و از این تکامل های دو زاری
برای من مثل چیتاها را میزنید !!!ا
من می توانم بگویم حیوانات سریع تر از چیتاها وجود داشته اند
چنانکه اکنون هم حیواناتی هستند که سرعت بسیار بالایی دارند و کم بیش می توان سرعت انها را با چیتا ها مقایسه کرد
چنانکه حیواناتی هم هستند که برتریهای زیادی به انواع دیگر حیوانات دارند
ولی ایا حیوانی را می شناسید که با انسان انرا مقایسه کنیم ؟
خیر نیست جانم و نبوده
در بین این ملیاردها موجود که همه هم در اصل از تک سلولیها بوجود امده اند و نسبت خانواده گی دارند چرا فقط یکی از انها تکاملی هوشمند داشته
من کتب تکامل را خواندم جوابی نگرفتم
می گویید امکان دارد ملیونها سال دیگر چنین جهشی بوجود اید
مثلا دلفین ها کم کم تبدیل به موجودات سازنده ای شوند
قبول
ولی دوست عزیز سئوال من در مورد اینده و پیشگویی نیست سئوال من در مورد گذشته است


خلاصه کلام
چیتا ها رقیب دارند انسانها خیر


متشکرم
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#56
Actually his question is very rational to me. Some biologists have been asking this question from early days of the theory. If I understood him correctly, he is asking why for example we can see different species of similar animals (similar abilities) but we dont see different species with similar abilities (thinking) as humans.

Good science should allow all different kinds of questions about an unproven theory, this is what helps science progress.
قربون ادم چیز فهم
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#57
I can not get over this question from man with IQ 200. I think it deserves a :monk2::monk2::monk1::monk1:

Reza Jan, What is your education level ?? Do you find these questions valid as well ;) ;)
If you say yes, then I have to suspect to ham mesleh oni ke tazeh be darak vasel shodeh az oxford madrak dari ;)
شاهین
من بیسواد
شما که سوات دارید جواب بدهید
که چرا موجود دیگری جهشی مثل انسانها نداشته اند ؟؟؟
حالا حتما می ایی و چهار تا میمونک می زنی و استروپوم می نویسی

خلاصه مطلب
سئوال را جواب دهید

بله جانم
 
Jun 9, 2004
13,753
1
Canada
#58
If someone has an answer to these deep philosophical questions, I wouldn't mind an answer to my earlier thought provoking example as well. How come an apple exists, even though there are oranges? How come an apple is smarter than an orange? And how come apples made an evolutionary jump that oranges didn't? These are very serious questions and a lack of answer for them, suggests a low IQ from the audience! ;)
 
May 9, 2004
15,166
179
#59
If someone has an answer to these deep philosophical questions, I wouldn't mind an answer to my earlier thought provoking example as well. How come an apple exists, even though there are oranges? How come an apple is smarter than an orange? And how come apples made an evolutionary jump that oranges didn't? These are very serious questions and a lack of answer for them, suggests a low IQ from the audience! ;)
بی هنر
این جوابی که تو داده ای ربطی به سئوال من نداد
اگر یک موجود سازنده مثل انسان وجود داشت که مثلا خزندگان یا ابزیان یا پرنده گان جهش پیدا کرده بود ولی در برخی از صفات با هم فرق داشتند و من سئوال کرده بودم انوقت
این مثال سیب و پرتقال شما درست بود
ولی هیچ موجودی نبوده و نیست که همتای انسان باشد
پرتقال یک میوه است میوه های زیادی هستند که صفات کاملا شبیه به پرتقال را دارند

من در مورد هوش سازنده صحبت می کنم
حیوانات صفات مشابهی دارند
میو ها صفات مشابهی دارند
همچنین گیاهان
ولی هیچکدام مانند انسان هوش سازنده ندارند یک میکانیزم غریزی دارند که حالا یا بوسیله تکامل یا هرچیز دیگری بوجود امده
من می پرسم چرا تنها انسان است که چنین جهشی داشته شما برای من مثال سیب و پرتقال می زنید ؟!!!آ



خلاصه کلا م
جوابتان به سئوال من جاهلانه بود
 
Status
Not open for further replies.