Lsrcr Forum

GreaTSaN wrote:

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

GreaTSaN wrote:

Now I'm willing to know more about evolution. What does evolution say about human and the origin of life? Also, what are the proves of evolution which makes you believe in that? Now don't come up with fossils because I'm fed of listening to that. Bring some additional proofs which clearly tells us that evolution is real and it is happening. One more thing, have you read the book of Charles Darwin, "The origin of species"?

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

And what's wrong with fossils? What part of it doesn't prove evolution? If you want other proofs, look at how micro-organisms divide and how viruses mutate, especially retroviruses.

I haven't read his book and I don't want to. He could be wrong at many places. As I said, we do not believe in anything a person says, unlike you. But his works were analyzed and corrected and printed later in science books based on the evidences and discoveries. I don't plan on reading that book.

Congratulations we're learning science from Wikipedia now. I hope you go to school and read books rather than relying on Internet or you only read things from Internet which makes you happy?! Please tell me how fossils prove that we human beings evolved from apes? You haven't read anything bro. You didn't read your own religion. You didn't read anything about Bible nor did you read anything about Qur'an you just live on assumptions and what your wikipedia says. You says that you don't believe in whatever you read then why are you reading science books? First go and read what the author of theory says instead of relying on what internet says. You're ready to read what Internet says bad about religion but you're not ready to believe on what Internet says good about religion?! What's your knowledge I wonder? Sorry don't take me wrong but in what standard you are?

Who the hell cares about what the author of these theories say? As long as there are mistakes in it, they can't be fully accepted. Once corrected and satisfy the current laws, they can be accepted and written in the science books.

I see you're running out of valid points and blaming Wikipedia. If you say Wikipedia isn't correct, then please find anything wrong in the references I've given you above and tell me and I'll gladly accept it.

Not gonna waste my time by making a brief explanation. In short, fossils from different ages and places can be analysed and we can understand how an organism has changed in the past in time and according to the different conditions. Not to mention their DNA. Their DNA too can help to understand how they've changed. If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

GreaTSaN wrote:

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

And what's wrong with fossils? What part of it doesn't prove evolution? If you want other proofs, look at how micro-organisms divide and how viruses mutate, especially retroviruses.

I haven't read his book and I don't want to. He could be wrong at many places. As I said, we do not believe in anything a person says, unlike you. But his works were analyzed and corrected and printed later in science books based on the evidences and discoveries. I don't plan on reading that book.

Congratulations we're learning science from Wikipedia now. I hope you go to school and read books rather than relying on Internet or you only read things from Internet which makes you happy?! Please tell me how fossils prove that we human beings evolved from apes? You haven't read anything bro. You didn't read your own religion. You didn't read anything about Bible nor did you read anything about Qur'an you just live on assumptions and what your wikipedia says. You says that you don't believe in whatever you read then why are you reading science books? First go and read what the author of theory says instead of relying on what internet says. You're ready to read what Internet says bad about religion but you're not ready to believe on what Internet says good about religion?! What's your knowledge I wonder? Sorry don't take me wrong but in what standard you are?

Who the hell cares about what the author of these theories say? As long as there are mistakes in it, they can't be fully accepted. Once corrected and satisfy the current laws, they can be accepted and written in the science books.

I see you're running out of valid points and blaming Wikipedia. If you say Wikipedia isn't correct, then please find anything wrong in the references I've given you above and tell me and I'll gladly accept it.

Not gonna waste my time by making a brief explanation. In short, fossils from different ages and places can be analysed and we can understand how an organism has changed in the past in time and according to the different conditions. Not to mention their DNA. Their DNA too can help to understand how they've changed. If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

I'm not running out of valid points. I thought that you've read the books and many other things and turn out your knowledge is just based on internet which is quite funny though. Show me the proof of fossils or source of it where it says or shows us the happening of evolution in humankind from apes. Since you talk about DNA alot, let's discuss it. You might be aware that DNA is the consider and in fact the most complex software in the whole universe? The way DNA is programmed cannot be done just by natural selection. A DNA is something which cannot make a copy of itself or just its properties itself. Human cells are like super super computers and cannot possibly be evolution or natural selection by itself. If we look more into DNA, we see that its structure are so precise and in perfect orders. How come evolution bring new chromosomes? Before I even go into more details, I would like to know what you think about DNA and it's evolution? How come natural selection changes the properties of DNA itself?

At the details about biochemistry molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer. - Richard

GreaTSaN wrote:

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

GreaTSaN wrote:

Congratulations we're learning science from Wikipedia now. I hope you go to school and read books rather than relying on Internet or you only read things from Internet which makes you happy?! Please tell me how fossils prove that we human beings evolved from apes? You haven't read anything bro. You didn't read your own religion. You didn't read anything about Bible nor did you read anything about Qur'an you just live on assumptions and what your wikipedia says. You says that you don't believe in whatever you read then why are you reading science books? First go and read what the author of theory says instead of relying on what internet says. You're ready to read what Internet says bad about religion but you're not ready to believe on what Internet says good about religion?! What's your knowledge I wonder? Sorry don't take me wrong but in what standard you are?

Who the hell cares about what the author of these theories say? As long as there are mistakes in it, they can't be fully accepted. Once corrected and satisfy the current laws, they can be accepted and written in the science books.

I see you're running out of valid points and blaming Wikipedia. If you say Wikipedia isn't correct, then please find anything wrong in the references I've given you above and tell me and I'll gladly accept it.

Not gonna waste my time by making a brief explanation. In short, fossils from different ages and places can be analysed and we can understand how an organism has changed in the past in time and according to the different conditions. Not to mention their DNA. Their DNA too can help to understand how they've changed. If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

I'm not running out of valid points. I thought that you've read the books and many other things and turn out your knowledge is just based on internet which is quite funny though. Show me the proof of fossils or source of it where it says or shows us the happening of evolution in humankind from apes. Since you talk about DNA alot, let's discuss it. You might be aware that DNA is the consider and in fact the most complex software in the whole universe? The way DNA is programmed cannot be done just by natural selection. A DNA is something which cannot make a copy of itself or just its properties itself. Human cells are like super super computers and cannot possibly be evolution or natural selection by itself. If we look more into DNA, we see that its structure are so precise and in perfect orders. How come evolution bring new chromosomes? Before I even go into more details, I would like to know what you think about DNA and it's evolution? How come natural selection changes the properties of DNA itself?

At the details about biochemistry molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer. - Richard

I'd suggest you to read more about DNA. It doesn't matter from where the knowledge is from as long as it's true. Oh and I learnt all these in my school not internet. If you want to see fossils, go to a museum or google images not here. I'm sure you can find out the fossils during the different stages of evolution of humans from apes. DNA is in fact one of the most complex things in the universe. DNA programming was not done just by natural selection. Mutation plays an important role too. You are so wrong DNA cannot make a copy of itself. DNA can replicate itself. Since the beginning of life on earth, it's been billions of years so human DNA literally had billions of years to evolve to its current state and it's enough. Ever heard of chromosomal mutations like trisomy, monosomy, etc? If you want what I think about DNA, use Wikipedia, everything you find there is what I think of DNA. Natural selection is based on mutation. Mutations effects the DNA and the ill-adapted organisms get killed or become unable to reproduce while the better-adapted organisms become more and more common. This is how natural selection effects DNA

You still haven't answered my question-

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

Awaiting your reply. I'm going to sleep soon. If I couldn't reply today, tomorrow, I definitely will.

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

GreaTSaN wrote:

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

Who the hell cares about what the author of these theories say? As long as there are mistakes in it, they can't be fully accepted. Once corrected and satisfy the current laws, they can be accepted and written in the science books.

I see you're running out of valid points and blaming Wikipedia. If you say Wikipedia isn't correct, then please find anything wrong in the references I've given you above and tell me and I'll gladly accept it.

Not gonna waste my time by making a brief explanation. In short, fossils from different ages and places can be analysed and we can understand how an organism has changed in the past in time and according to the different conditions. Not to mention their DNA. Their DNA too can help to understand how they've changed. If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

I'm not running out of valid points. I thought that you've read the books and many other things and turn out your knowledge is just based on internet which is quite funny though. Show me the proof of fossils or source of it where it says or shows us the happening of evolution in humankind from apes. Since you talk about DNA alot, let's discuss it. You might be aware that DNA is the consider and in fact the most complex software in the whole universe? The way DNA is programmed cannot be done just by natural selection. A DNA is something which cannot make a copy of itself or just its properties itself. Human cells are like super super computers and cannot possibly be evolution or natural selection by itself. If we look more into DNA, we see that its structure are so precise and in perfect orders. How come evolution bring new chromosomes? Before I even go into more details, I would like to know what you think about DNA and it's evolution? How come natural selection changes the properties of DNA itself?

At the details about biochemistry molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer. - Richard

I'd suggest you to read more about DNA. It doesn't matter from where the knowledge is from as long as it's true. Oh and I learnt all these in my school not internet. If you want to see fossils, go to a museum or google images not here. I'm sure you can find out the fossils during the different stages of evolution of humans from apes. DNA is in fact one of the most complex things in the universe. DNA programming was not done just by natural selection. Mutation plays an important role too. You are so wrong DNA cannot make a copy of itself. DNA can replicate itself. Since the beginning of life on earth, it's been billions of years so human DNA literally had billions of years to evolve to its current state and it's enough. Ever heard of chromosomal mutations like trisomy, monosomy, etc? If you want what I think about DNA, use Wikipedia, everything you find there is what I think of DNA. Natural selection is based on mutation. Mutations effects the DNA and the ill-adapted organisms get killed or become unable to reproduce while the better-adapted organisms become more and more common. This is how natural selection effects DNA

You still haven't answered my question-

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

If you take your DNA and that of a tree, you'd fine a common ancestor at one point. If evolution is wrong, then how else would you explain this?

Awaiting your reply. I'm going to sleep soon. If I couldn't reply today, tomorrow, I definitely will.

I've ordered some books to read and understand on what you're actually trying to say. I'd get back to it as soon as I'm done with it. Although I've some answers on this but I feel like I could do some mistakes while commenting on this so it is far better if I first confirm of what I know and then I get back on this. Hope you understand.

What is the definition of God?" For a person to say there is no God, you should know what is the meaning of God. If I hold a book and say that ‘this is a pen’, for the opposite person to say, ‘it is not a pen’, you should know what is the definition of a pen is, even if you dont know nor are you able to recognise or identify the object I am holding in my hand. How can you say this is not a pen, You should at least know what a pen means. Similarly for you to say this ‘there is no God’, you should at least know the concept of God. The concept of God would be derived from the surroundings in which you live in. The god that a large number of people worship has got human qualities - therefore he does not believe in such a god. @oggy @immortal

[MOB]ibrar.123 wrote:

What is the definition of God?" For a person to say there is no God, you should know what is the meaning of God. If I hold a book and say that ‘this is a pen’, for the opposite person to say, ‘it is not a pen’, you should know what is the definition of a pen is, even if you dont know nor are you able to recognise or identify the object I am holding in my hand. How can you say this is not a pen, You should at least know what a pen means. Similarly for you to say this ‘there is no God’, you should at least know the concept of God. The concept of God would be derived from the surroundings in which you live in. The god that a large number of people worship has got human qualities - therefore he does not believe in such a god. @oggy @immortal

So what exactly is God?

The proper terminology used, in Islam, for God is “Allah.” There are a number of reasons for having a special word for God. First of all, the term “Allah” means, in Arabic, the one and only universal God or Creator and Provider of the universe. Notice here I am emphasizing the one and only. @oggy bruh.

[MOB]ibrar.123 wrote:

The proper terminology used, in Islam, for God is “Allah.” There are a number of reasons for having a special word for God. First of all, the term “Allah” means, in Arabic, the one and only universal God or Creator and Provider of the universe. Notice here I am emphasizing the one and only. @oggy bruh.

So when people believe in God, they believe in a creator for the Universe, right bro?

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

[MOB]ibrar.123 wrote:

The proper terminology used, in Islam, for God is “Allah.” There are a number of reasons for having a special word for God. First of all, the term “Allah” means, in Arabic, the one and only universal God or Creator and Provider of the universe. Notice here I am emphasizing the one and only. @oggy bruh.

So when people believe in God, they believe in a creator for the Universe, right bro?

Yes bro but the creator is himself the god alone bro nothing can be created on its own.Thats very simple if you make something out of sand or clay and it takes a shape that means you created it (example).Coming towards humans is the same as well.God is the creator the most merciful and the most gracious he is the one who has created us and sent us in this world as a test wether we worship him or choose the wrong path worshiping the devil. He has given us rights either to choose hell fire or heavens.

[MOB]ibrar.123 wrote:

[Lsrcr]Oggy wrote:

[MOB]ibrar.123 wrote:

The proper terminology used, in Islam, for God is “Allah.” There are a number of reasons for having a special word for God. First of all, the term “Allah” means, in Arabic, the one and only universal God or Creator and Provider of the universe. Notice here I am emphasizing the one and only. @oggy bruh.

So when people believe in God, they believe in a creator for the Universe, right bro?

Yes bro but the creator is himself the god alone bro nothing can be created on its own.Thats very simple if you make something out of sand or clay and it takes a shape that means you created it (example).Coming towards humans is the same as well.God is the creator the most merciful and the most gracious he is the one who has created us and sent us in this world as a test wether we worship him or choose the wrong path worshiping the devil. He has given us rights either to choose hell fire or heavens.

Does that mean that the God himself directly created humans and other animals as they are today?