Universal Common Ancestor/The experiment

[Asana Bodhitharta]

Originally all things were in the same basic environment, right? The whole evolutionary tree came from a single environment and from a universal common ancestor, right? All the survival pressures would be equal in that case, right? Why is it rational to believe in a Universal common Ancestor and irrational to believe in God. In affect, in regards to life on earth you assign God like equations onto this Universal Common Ancestor(Creator of all living things) So, from one cell in one environment this cell(UCA) branched off almost "intuitively" into the proper components for an eco system ie.. branching off into plant life and trees as the need for organisms with a need for more oxygen rich environment came about. evolutionists say that this UCA was alive 4 billion years ago but also insists that 500 million years ago almost all known animals appeared on earth(including the extinct ones). Do these numbers really add up?Like why are there still bugs? Why haven't they evolved to more complex organisms in hundreds of millions of years and how come scientists have found a 100 million year old bee that is still a bee. Was that type of bee around 500 million years ago and if not what did the bee evolve from and why has it stopped evolving for 100 million years? If a bee didn't evolve for 100 million years why is it that evolutionists say that Man which is a lot more complicated evolved during the same time the bee remained the same?Also, nothing(no animal of any kind) is creative and they never have been.Universal Common Ancestor = Our Father which art in heaven.Don't be duped by irrational pseudo science anymore.If you accept the UCA as being rational and reasonable you must accept the belief in God as being rational and reasonable.No, The Real Universal Common Ancestor created all things and there was nothing that was made without UCA making it. The UCA created everything with purpose. The UCA has no need for Macroevolution when The UCA creates HE(HU) simply says be and it is. UCA forms and then brings to life what UCA wills. UCA could not be a bunch of chemicals because UCA created the chemicals. Edited by: Asana Bodhitharta at: 12/10/06 6:34 pm

[Asana Bodhitharta]

You already believe in The UCA don't you? One of The UCA's most fascinating creatures is the Water Bear. Have you ever heard of the water bear? It is quite amazing and has remained the same for over 1.5 billion years it has always been a water bear. www.astrobio.net/articles...l-Body.jpg www.astrobio.net/articles...s-Head.jpg No Macroevolution for this little beauty and I'll tell you Why, The reason is because THE REAL UCA is God.

[Thinker102]

Quote:Originally all things were in the same basic environment, right? The whole evolutionary tree came from a single environment and from a universal common ancestor, right? All the survival pressures would be equal in that case, right? No.The whole evolutionary tree did not come from a single environment.Consider the part of the world I live in (Alaska): Every few decades, we get a major volcanic eruption. These have been known to blow the tops off of entire mountains, and scatter volcanic ash across thousands of square miles. this volcanic ash greatly affects soil fertility.We also get earthquakes - lots of them, some very powerful.There have also been several ice ages just within the past 30,000 years or so. (whats left of the last glaciers from the last ice age are scattered across the state; I live within a hundred miles or so of what amounts to a mini `ice sheet'). Ice ages create droughts by tying up water within ice. In southern climes, they also compress climate zones.Now this is within a fairly small part of the world - Alaska. Lifeforms caught up in those changing conditions (major volcanic eruptions, ice ages, ect) have the choice to adapt or die.Try contrasting that with a part of the world that does not have active volcanoes, rarely if ever gets an earthquake, and where glaciation is unknown. The life there would not have to adapt to those conditions, and would remain static.

[Frank 013]

AsthmaQuote:Originally all things were in the same basic environment, right? The whole evolutionary tree came from a single environment and from a universal common ancestor, right? All the survival pressures would be equal in that case, right? No one knows. Life could have sprung forth from several places at once or several places over time as well. We just don't know much about the origin of life at this point. This is a different pursuit of study than evolution by the way.Quote:Why is it rational to believe in a Universal common Ancestor and irrational to believe in God. Well Asthma that's because we have physical evidence for common ancestry and none for god. And the first is in no way evidence of the latter.Quote:So, from one cell in one environment this cell (UCA) branched off almost "intuitively" into the proper components for an eco system ie.. branching off into plant life and trees as the need for organisms with a need for more oxygen rich environment came about.This does not seem to be the case at all, hundreds of thousands of species died off in the millions of years before the first plants ventured on to land. Evolution is trial and error and consists of mostly error. It is wasteful and only the fit enough survive. Take a real look at evolution, it is far from intuitive.Quote:Like why are there still bugs? Why haven't they evolved to more complex organisms in hundreds of millions of years and how come scientists have found a 100 million year old bee that is still a bee. First of all most of the insects that have survived to the present day have evolved to some degree. Most have become smaller. But more importantly insects are "specialized" animals, and specialized animals do not adapt to change very well, they tend to die off instead. The insects that were lucky enough to survive would not be expected to change much; such is the fate of specialized species.Quote:Also, nothing (no animal of any kind) is creative and they never have been.This is so false it is bordering on retarded, humans are animals and we are very creative. But I will guess you meant other animals.Chimps and other apes are creative problem solvers even using tools to get food in some cases.Whales and dolphins have creative and learning capability at least as good as humans, and they are very creative talking, playing and it appears laughing. Quote:Universal Common Ancestor = Our Father which art in heaven.No, it does not. Quote:If you accept the UCA as being rational and reasonable you must accept the belief in God as being rational and reasonable. Please refrain from telling us what we must accept, your connections are groundless and require irrational leaps of logic.Watch as I whip the zombie dog!Later Edited by: Frank 013 at: 11/26/06 12:58 am

[Asana Bodhitharta]

Quote:This is so false it is bordering on retarded, humans are animals and we are very creative. But I will guess you meant other animals.Chimps and other apes are creative problem solvers even using tools to get food in some cases.Whales and dolphins have creative and learning capability at least as good as humans, and they are very creative talking, playing and it appears laughing. Animals are not "creative". Man is creative and you can see the evidence for mans creativity in the arts. Man also continues to innovate his mode of living, working, traveling...etc. All animals do only what it is their purpose to do and nothing more. That doesn't mean that animals aren't smart it just means their not creative. We were made in the image of creative intelligence. You don't call that evidence?The Quaran says it best:010.101 Say: "Behold all that is in the heavens and on earth"; but neither Signs nor Warners profit those who believe not.

[Frank 013]

Creative The dictionary defines the word creative as 1. able to create things. Animals all over the world create things. Ants modify their environment by building colonies, beavers build dams. This is creative.And 2. using or showing use of the imagination to create new ideas or things.The chimp using primitive tools example falls into this category, creative problem solving is creative. It is not at the level of human creativity but it is creativity nonetheless. Whales and dolphins have shown even more creativity than the chimp example when confronted with problems. In fact I would guess that they would score higher than you on the creative hierarchy. Quote:We were made in the image of creative intelligence. You don't call that evidence?You have yet to show that the above statement is true on any level whatsoever. It is an unfounded claim based on ignorance of the world around us.You keep insisting on a connection that you have yet to show. Another flawless victory for Frank!Later

[Asana Bodhitharta]

1. able to create things.And 2. using or showing use of the imagination to create new ideas or things.Every animal does only what it has already been doing since their creation. We learn from studying these animals how to do things like "build a damn" or create an assembly line like ants do. The chimp has always been able to use primitive tools. Dolphins and Whales have always done certain things that would be able to help man out. All animals were created to help man in one way or another. Men can get inspired by the birds and make a plane, get inspired by the speed of a cheetah and create all types of motor vehicles that are far more swift. Man can look at the elephant and learn how to create a powerful crane to make buildings. These are unique Human qualities.When I wrote about predator/prey relationships proving that Macroevolution is a myth, tell me can you tell me of one predators prey that has ever evolve to escape being prey? No?You can rant but you can't win because facts are facts whether you admit them or not. Macroevolution is a myth God created all these beautiful creatures. God created you.

[Frank 013]

Quote:The chimp has always been able to use primitive tools.Where the heck do you get your information? The use of tools by chimps is a relatively new advancement for them. They have not always been able to use tools. In fact the use of tools is so new to chimps that it has not spread through their entire species yet. It is a taught skill that must be passed down from the other family members.And how would you explain the use of sign language by primates?Studies have been done it is not just mimicking. Signing primates ask for specific items and foods. They understand the signs of affection and respond correctly to questions asked of them. This is creative learning. Quote:When I wrote about predator/prey relationships proving that Macroevolution is a myth, tell me can you tell me of one predators prey that has ever evolved to escape being prey?Wow, another transparent falsehood. (You are just full of these aren't you?) There are many animals that have evolved from prey to predator, humans being the most noteworthy. The great sperm whales that now hunt giant squid evolved from land animals that were herbivores, and prey to certain other animals, they are closely related to elephants and hippos. Asthma, if you are going to debate a subject Please, Please, Please, learn about it before making a fool out of yourself. later

[Asana Bodhitharta]

Researchers: Wild gorillas seen using toolsFrom Wikinews, the free news source you can write!Jump to: navigation, searchOctober 1, 2005A female gorilla using trunk as a stabilizer during food processing at Mbeli BaiWild gorillas were seen using tools, researchers for the U.S. based Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) said.Images show one female gorilla apparently using sticks to test the depth of water, another female made a bridge with a stump detached from a bush to help her cross muddy ground, and a female using a stump from a bush as support as she dug for herbs.Thomas Breuer, of the WCS operating in the Republic of the Congo, called the discovery "truly astounding" and added that it was "quite surprising to me and my team to make this observation". Only wild chimps, orangutans, and captive gorillas were previously known to use tools, meaning that now all of the four great apes were oberserved using tools, suggesting that the usage of tools might predate the evolution of modern humans.They have always used tools just like I said. Sign language and hand commands are easy to teach most any animal. Dogs for the blind know how to cross the street and help blind people do all sorts of things.Quote:The great sperm whales that now hunt giant squid evolved from land animals that were herbivores, and prey to certain other animals, they are closely related to elephants and hippos. Remember what you said about evidence? They believe whales were land animals once but they have no verifiable evidence and in every case concerning Macroevolution there is no verifiable evidence. You know that Macroevolution is non-observeable so how come you insist on believing something that goes against your own guidelines of what you will or won't believe?

[Frank 013]

Asthma, you do know that micro and macro evolution are the same thing right? With longer periods of time in between.By the way there is observable evidence, in the whale's skeleton, it has a pelvis which suggests that it was once a land animal, and in the fossil record.You might also check into the more recent discoveries made it DNA and genome research that further substantiate these conclusions.In fact if you go back far enough into an animal's evolutionary past you would find that nearly all were prey animals at one time or another. You so quickly dismiss the chimps learning sign language do you not realize that that very subject was the first step in higher communication with animals?When was the last time a Seeing Eye dog asked someone for an apple? Later