Zamorakshadow

THIS. The 100% player made market was just beautiful to see. So were the "Fast Free Law Runes". Though, people will always chose convenience over nostalgia. IF there was a GE on other cities ( obviously including Falador), and if GE-guided prices were removed, than very likely Falador W2 would return. But the way things are today, we are gonna have to handle the lag on the Varrock GE forever.

He said it would take a few days to implement Wildy, staking & trade ( since they still have those saved and only need to put them back), but he said it would take "a while" to move the minigames and quests away from the Wild. Though he said they'd get the whole team working on it to do it quickly. So i believe we are gonna get it by late January/early February. Perhaps we'll get Free trade and staking before we get Wildy back, since those wouldn't require any change and would take a few days to be 100% ready. I just hope they move the BH crater and bring Wildy back to it's former proportions, i miss the Bone Yard and the Battle Field... As for the scamming argument happening here: We have 2 trade screens, flashing red signs, the Wildy Wall ( that shouldn't exist IMO) and the GE will still be here. Scamming won't be NEARLY the same problem it used to be. Children that get scammed in these conditions are likely under 13, and in my opinion they shouldn't even be playing in the first place ( freaking "Quick Chat..."). Also, if your child gets scammed, you can now give him money to help him. And hell, most veteran players i know actually laugh when they think of the first mith scimitar they got scammed off. Being scammed is a bad way of learning things, but learning things as a new player used to be the coolest part of being a newbie, and this has died ever since Jagex started completely bubble wrapping new players. Not saying anti-scamming measures are bad, just saying there is TOO MUCH protection of newbies: Make a new account and play with it for a while to see for yourself. I found the system treating me like a baby to be offensive. Voting "No" for free trade/wild/staking over scamming alone is a bad choice. Free trade will bring A LOT of good things: Kill merch clans, kill 76k trickers, bring old RCing back ( the assyst syste just isn't the same thing...), make the Wilderness EXCITING again (used to be my favorite place when i was a newbie, even if i lost Silverlight 4 times in there), make Staking exciting and profitable again, maybe make transformation skills profitable again ( hello smithing!) whit out their reliance on the GE, bring oldschool trading back ( Varrock W1 and Fally W2 were simply beautiful things...), make the reward system of PVP stop being so problematic ( winning 1M by making the guy lose 76k doesn't work, and in it's time this system caused deflation and then inflation), bring gift giving and drop parties back... The only problems that will come back will be RWT and bots ( and NO ONE that cares about the game wants that), but if Jagex believes they can fight them this time, why not give it a try? R.I.P: Iron longsword i lost to those Monks of Zamorak. DAMN YOU ZAMORAK WINE!

Funny you think free trade would cause inflation, when the PVP worlds and the GE were pretty inflationary. Does anyone remember how PVP worlds first caused Deflation because it was adding items into the economy ( Dragon Full Helm fell from 40m to 13m!), and then Inflation when Jagex substituted item drops with Statuettes? Not to mention the 76k trick... And also, Free trade would finally kill Merch Clans. The current system distorts prices more than anything. 1k Laws example is also bad, if anything getting runes would be EASIER, because the old Runecrafting would come back with free trade. All you need is 26 pure ess's and you'll be able to get all the Law Runes you want. Prices surely will raise for a while when Wildy is back, but the raise won't last for long, things will eventually stabilize. The High leveled content will be moved from the Wilderness. I don't see any reason for why it has to be there, and if you think it does, than be ready to face risk. And FFS half of your argument relies on stereotyping PKers. I'll admit PKers aren't the most polite group ever, but the "Community" isn't much better than what it was back in 2006 when i first started playing, and building your whole argument based on stereotypes sounds immature to me. If anything the number of kids has only increased in the last years. As for the PKers trolling here and the Skillers getting mad, CALM DOWN PEOPLE. You're just being trolled. This IS the internet afterall. Again, you people are stereotyping all PKers based on a single troll on TIF forums. IT'S A TROLL. Getting worked up over something so small and stereotyping millions of players over it isn't exactly a sign of the "Maturity"you people like to use like an argument. Truth is: The Wilderness is supposed to be DANGEROUS. It always was. The Revenants are a pathetic joke, and only pose a real danger in f2p. Lurers are indeed morons, but we have the freaking Wildy Wall for that (though it is unnecessary and caused trouble, IMO. Before it was added we still had a pop-up warning before the Wildy entrance and it worked fine for anyone with a brain). You can call PKers that target skillers and people doing TT "Bullies morons immature kids etc etc", and several of them are that indeed, but in the end: People who enter the Wilderness, regardless of their objective are there to face DANGER and get a REWARD. Green dragons and Clue Scrolls co-existed with PKers for YEARS, and everything always went FINE. Will also be better for you skillers than what it used to be, since green dragons exist in other areas now. If anything Green Drags and Clue Scrolls will be more valued now. Also, for the joy of the skillers, transformation skills like Smithing can possibly become profitable again whit out their reliance on the GE. Most of the things you go to the Wildy for today will also be moved, so no problem there. The ONLY argument against Wildy and Trade that is actually valid is the "RWT and bots would come back" one, but since Jagex believes they can fight them today ( RWT being banned in China, better anti-bot technologies, banks not threatening Jagex anymore, and all that), the argument is still problematic. And curiously, it is the only argument i haven't seen ITT...

Actually, i'm pretty sure he did... Read the Old Testament and he says stuff worse than that...

There's a small difference between not being able of contacting a site and not contacting... erm... God. Well, in the Old Testament stories he kills a few Million people , not to mention all the [cabbage] that was done in his name, there are lots brainwashed religious people ( like the woman who didn't get a job because she though God would giver her food -.-) that only get trouble because of their fanaticism ( next time i hear of a Jehovah Witness that died because he didn't want a blood transfusion i'll go mad), and idk about where you guys live, but around HERE religion is THE biggest scam of all time. Save a few nice churches, the preachers around here are big scammers.

Wow.... long time reading about Quantum Mechanics, Particle Physics ,String Theory, Loop Gravity Theory, and when i finally think i might be understanding it you guys come and make me even more confuse :?

Who the hell said Big Bang theory talks about particles colliding? Big Bang Theory shows that the Universe expanded from a singularity 15 bilhon years ago. Scientists don't know what caused it, but they are trying to find out though. I heard about String-Theory / M-Theory talking about our Universe ( and possible other Universes) being the result of the shock of P-Brane, but String Theory isn't proven ( Hell, String Theory is just a mathematical model that makes accurate mathematical predictions and wierd untested non-mathematical predictions), and i don't knowmuch about it, so i'm not gonna go in detail about it. And i'm not even sure if there is a "nothing" in Science. I heard that there are particles that come out of nothing and dissapear right after, coming and dissapearing all the time ( i don't know much about this though, anyone can confirm this pl0x?), not to mention how 96% of our Universe ( what we used to think was "Nothing") is now known to be made of Dark Matter and Dark Energy ( and we have no idea what the hell that is...). So, i don't know if Science taught us you can't create something from nothing, not only because particles seem to come from nothing all the time, but because i don't even know if there is a "Nothing" at all :blink: Aargh, Physics make my head hurts :-?

Have you watched the videos i posted in response to you? Or even read my response at all ( please do read it, took some time to write that :evil: )? Abiogenesis is proven possible, and it is also proven possible that this "1 cell" can form Multicellular beings with sexual reproduction ( which accelerates Evolution, a lot), complex genetic code and a primitive brain. And all of thoose formed over 2 bilhon years ago. Bilhons, if not trilhons of other generations made theese things more and more complex in theese 2 bilhon years of Evolution. The idea of everything being the result of a simple cell evolving is pretty wierd, but the experiments show it is possible. Good to see that you are a rational human being though :thumbup: Yay for Agnostics. Believing in the same thing you do; does not make you a rational human being. He doesn't believe the same thing i do -.- BUT, he was able of reading the full Bible ( something almost no Christians do theese days -.-), question his beliefs, and actually think about it. Doubting stuff, researching about it, and coming to a conclusion. EDIT: And has he already said, he was open minded. That is something i value A LOT, since no one seems to be capable of admitting they might be wrong or considering other hipothesis for once.

Have you watched the videos i posted in response to you? Or even read my response at all ( please do read it, took some time to write that :evil: )? Abiogenesis is proven possible, and it is also proven possible that this "1 cell" can form Multicellular beings with sexual reproduction ( which accelerates Evolution, a lot), complex genetic code and a primitive brain. And all of thoose formed over 2 bilhon years ago. Bilhons, if not trilhons of other generations made theese things more and more complex in theese 2 bilhon years of Evolution. The idea of everything being the result of a simple cell evolving is pretty wierd, but the experiments show it is possible. Good to see that you are a rational human being though :thumbup: Yay for Agnostics.

Wow, complicated. Good i like complicated stuff :thumbup: Now, this first video here shows not only A LOT of evidence for Evolution, but lists transitional fossils from primitive Jawless Fish to Humans: [hide]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj587d5ies[/hide] Now, the history of the Universe, from Big Bang to us: Big Bang to Solar System: [hide] The Big Bang was an expansion of the Universe from a singularity that happened 15 bilhon years ago. We know it happened, because all predictions made on Big Bang Theory ( galaxies moving away from the same point, abundance of basic chemicals, background radiation) are right. In the beggining, the Universe was very hot, but as it expanded it started to cool down. The matter in that time used to be just loose protons, neutrons and electrons flying around, and once the Universe cooled, they joined togheter making Hydrogen and Helium. atoms. At that time, over 90% of all matter was HYdrogen, and the rest Helium. Gravity pulled Hydrogen and Helium togheter to form gigantic clouds. Someone who knows how stars form would know what happens next. Stars form when Hydrogen starts "fusion", and fusion only starts in extreme conditions. Inside the clouds, there was an enourmous heat and pressure, and the clouds were always spinning faster and faster, until Hydrogen entered fusion. "Fusion" is when two atoms fuse to form a heavier atom of another element, and releasing enourmous heat and energy in the proccess. When 2 atoms fuse in the cloud, the heat they release make closer atoms fuse, and the chain reactions makes the whole cloud become a star. The first stars formed a few milhons of years after Big Bang. Now, stars are the "element" factories in the universe. Fusion creates new heavier elements, and the Hydrogen fusion of the stars started creating all elements of the Periodic Table, Oxygen, Carbon, Iron, Sulphur, all known elements started being made inside the Stars. When the Hydrogen of the star ends, it collapses and blow up, throwing all theese elements into space, and the shockwave of the explosion makes near HYdrogen clouds spin faster, accelerating the procces of making new stars. Theese new elements started making everything we know: Metals made rocks, that formed asterois, comets and planets, Oxygen and Hydrogen made water, Carbon made organic molecules... Anyone with basic Chemistry knowledge knows how all theese elements make everything around us. 10 bilhon years after the Big Bang, our Solar System first formed out of a Hydrogen cloud and heavier elements.[/hide] Solar System to first forms of life: [hide]Our solar System formed just likeany other star and planets: A hydrogen cloud made a star, and the heavier elements created the planets. Our Sun formed 10 bilhion years after the Big Bang and formation of the first stars, so there was a lot of theese new elements. Our Solar System is very rich in both Water and Organic Molecules ( both very common in the Universe), and this is what would make life first appear. This video explains how life (possibly) first formed out of theese Organic Molecules: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg[/hide] Evolution of Early life: [hide] This series of videos explain how the Genetic Code, Meiosis ( "primitive sex"), "modern" sexual reproduction and the brain first formed after that unicelular vesicle formed in the primitive Earth. I'll have to leave them in link form, because there is a limit on how many media files we can put -.- Note that the creator of the videos also had a video on how multicelular life first formed, but he had to remove it, because it contained the results of a scientists research that were still unpublished. He is going to re-upload the video soon whitout theese unpublished results, though. Anyway, it is proven possible that unicelular life can form multicelular: There was an algae that in response to predation was OBSERVED to form multicelular life. [/hide] So, after multicelular life with primitive brains, sexual reproduction and a genetic code first formed, there is no limits to where Evolution can lead it to, especially since all of this formed Milhons, if not Bilhons of years ago. It would be a matter of time until creatures as complex as us would form. Since the first video i showed has a list of transitional species between primitive jawless fish and us, i don't think i need to explain anything more. I'll also link you to the first video of the "Made Easy" series of the Youtube user potholer54, that explains the History of the Universe from Big Bang to us:

People go gay because they have an alteration on their brain. Nothing unscientific, nothing supernatural. When did science go wrong to you? Also, how come Science ( backed up by evidence, peer-reviewed countless times) deserve no "faith" in it, when Religion ( no evidence, been wrong lots of times in the past, surely more than science) is chosen by you? Doesn't make sense to me. And even if Science did go wrong in the past, Big Bang has enough evidence for us to be sure it happened, and Evolution is the most important Theory of Biology, if not science. Evolution is proven by mountains of evidence and explains enourmous amounts of facts, Evolution is A FACT, wheter there is a God or not, and anyone who denies it has no idea on the implications for denying it. Pretty much, sums up most of my point.

"God gene" is a gene that makes you "feel" like there is supernatural stuff all around you. "god gene" is just the nickname of it. The way it spreaded through the population is explained by Evolution. "God gene" is just a gene that gives people a prediposition to believing in the supernatural and believing they can "feel it". The gene is NOT supernatural, it's just a gene that controls how your brain works and makes you believe in Supernatural stuff. And as i said, Evolution explains how it was spreaded in the population. Big Bang is a proven scientific fact backed up by a lot of evidence. And NO, believing in Big Bang DOES NOT mean you don't believe in God, it just says that the Universe expanded from a singularity 15 bilhons of years ago. Lots of people believe that God created the Universe via the Big Bang. I admit that God creating the Universe via Big Bang is a possibility, but there is no evidence for that, so i won't believe until such evidence is found. What we do know is: Evolution and Big Bang are proven scientific facts, wheter there is a God or not.

Well, theese things are going to be a mistery for a long time, and since they can't be proven right or wrong since they are "supernatural", they don't fit in science. Though, i'll still stand by my point, theese allucinations and "feeling" mistic stuff around you are explained by both genetics and psycology ( and no, i do not take all my info from wikipedia).

Well, i don't really think there is any "scientifical empirical evidence" for the supernatural, but i won't say that ghosts are completely impossible. I just don't really trust Discovery Channel's haunted-stuff shows... I used to watch them, but now i think it's just bs. Though, the god gene + placebo effect + delusion + mind playing tricks on you + sometimes, schizofrenia = Explanation for most, maybe not *all*, but surely *most* people who claim to "feel" ghosts, gods, spirits, demons or thetans. EDIT: I do know wikipedia is full of bs, i just searched through wikipedia because, like you, i don't feel like doing big searches for information this time in the morning. Though, i have read in magazines, other scientific sites, and even from people in this thread about the God Gene, and it *is* true and it *does* cause people the illusion of "something mystic" happening to them. That wikipedia article seems to be for the most part right.

To add to "evidence for supernatural is just rubbish that exists out of allucination" subject, it is proven by science that there is a "faith gene" or "god gene", that makes people believe in things supernatural around them, and makes them "feel" theese things. In fact, how this gene spreaded through the population is explained by evolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_gene Anyway, if you pick someone with a lot of this gene, brings him to spend the night in a house, and tell him that the house is built over a graveyard and that the house is said to be haunted, he will start being afraid, and he will most likely start "feeling" things around him. When fear start building up... well, he will think that he "feels" ghosts. But it's only his mind playing tricks. Christians claim to "feel" the Holy Spirit, Muslims claim to "feel" Allah, and even Scientologists claim to "feel" the Thetans that are controlling them. I believe this is a mix of: 1: This gene, making them believe in the supernatural and making them "feel" it. 2: Delusion. Being convinced that there is something since early will brainwash people into thinking they "feel" it. 3: Some wierd sort of "placebo effect".

Hey Warrior, if you wanna do research, watch the videos i posted ( in "hide" tags) on my first post of this page. They explain how sexual reproduction evolved, how life first formed, and how the brain first formed. In fact, go to youtube and search for the user named "cdk007". He is a scientist that makes videos about Biology and evolution, and made the videos i posted here, and i gotta say, he is freaking awesome.

When you mentioned "why monkeys aren't evolving to humans today?", well, sorry, but i gotta say you don't know much about Evolution at all >.< Evolution never stopped, it's still happening, but it's very slow. It's like taking a picture from you one day,and taking a picture 24 hours later. You won't be very different. But if you take a picture of a newborn baby, and take a picture of him 10 years later, he will be very different. It takes time for things to change. Humans did not evolve from monkeys, monkeys and humans have a common ancestor. This ancestor species, one group was separed from the other, both in different environments, and both evolved in different ways. Monkeys aren't as smart as humans, but they are waay stronger than us and are adapted to their environment. Humans are pathetically weak compared to other animals, but we compensated that with our brain evolving. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RbPQG9WTZM It is possible for a "primitive brain" to form, after it, it just needs to evolve and get more complex as milhons of years and thousands of generations pass. "Love", "language", are all reactions of hormones and ions in our brains, and they formed as our brain evolved and became more and more complex. Animals also feel love and have their language. Elephants mourn the deaths of other Elephants ( they are, in fact, VERY sentimental), and they have a language to warn other Elephants of danfer. Dolphins call eachother by "names". A dog will love his owner. Monkeys have "body language" like us humans. Humans have a bigger sense of "morality", because humans are apes, and apes are sociable species that look for safety in numbers. In order to survive, we evolved to try to get along with others of our species, to not to harm them, and to punish those who do. And it is proven that we ARE moven by instinct, all the time.

Evolution is still happening... If it wasn't happening, you would look EXACLY like your parents, in each and every possible small characteristic. Love came when our brains formed. The origin of the brain is explained by Evolution, i even left a link to a video about the origin of the brain in my last post here... If you think that humans aren't driven by instinct, or that animals haven't learned love OR language... you have A LOT to study. It is actually proven that humans and monkeys behave in very similar ways, in fact. It is proven that "The annoying boss" at work behaves exacly the same way as monkey species alpha male. Animals have languages, Dolphins even call eachothers by names! Monkeys have body languages, and Elephants have "sounds" that they make to warn about danger, and when they hear it the elephants organize themselves to protect the children. And animals do love. If an elephant in a group of elephants die, they will be around his body mourning his death for hours. Also, dogs love their owners, or you think your pets feel nothing for you?

[hide]1. Mutations have been observed, but an animal turning into a whole different kind of animal has not. (Just so we're on the same page, I'm not disputing microevolution.) The lack of evidence alone is reason enough not to believe that evolution is a proven fact. 2. The transition from asexual creatures to creatures who need both a male and female in order to reproduce makes very little sense at all. There had to be two animals that randomly generated these "opposite gender genes" from asexual parents in the same lifespan as each other, they had to find each other on this huge planet earth, and have intercourse in order to pass the gender genes down (and the genes had to be successfully carried down into the offspring and so forth). It's also pretty hard to believe that wings randomly and successfully came to be, given all the complications to aerodynamics. 3. There is a lack of transitional creatures in our fossil records. Why don't we see species of animals all with "half-wings" or other useless body parts? Even Darwin himself said, several generations ago, that if we don't find enough inter-species fossils then his theory would collapse. It's 2009 now and we're still searching. I have every right to be skeptical, especially when the person who proposed the theory even agrees with me. 4. The Law of Biogenesis VS The Theory of Evolution. There is plenty of evidence for Biogenesis - every living creature we have observed had parents. As for evolution, the only things we have to work with are conjectures about "patterns of progression". 5. Humans look for patterns where they do not exist. For example: the Mother Mary on someone's toast and seeing pictures in the clouds. Evolution sounds exactly like this. People putting skeletons next to each other, seeing some similarities, and then inferring that there is a pattern showing some sort of "progression". 6. Evolution proposes that my great-great-great etc. grandfather was a single cell. My body is composed of millions. Where did all the millions of extra cells come from? What about the DNA? 7. There is no need for evolution to exist. It is not the only possible explanation for why our bodies are so fine-tuned for survival, if you would even call it that. Again, I'm not saying evolution is an impossibility. It just surprises me how many people have such faith in this theory (enough that they even claim they're 100% sure about it) while they dismiss anything else without sufficient evidence to be entirely false. Evolution is exactly like God of the Gaps, but with the "God" part taken out.. Wishful thinking in order to try and explain a mystery without using the word "god", although the amount of support for each type of explanation are severely lacking. Belief in evolution and god are quite similar in this respect[/hide] Okay, here we go... 1: Speciation/Macroevolution HAS been observed in nature, in lab, and in the fossil record. Hathorn fly, Culex Pipiens - Culex Molestus... Not to mention, it is logical to assume that Microevolution + Time = Macroevolution. Scientists don't even use the terms "micro" and "macro" anymore, they know that one will lead to another. Also, there is a lot of other evidences for evolution. Every year countless of studies on genetics show common descent among close species ( Retroviruses, Wobble Gene Sequence and Intron Gene Sequence are good examples). 2:[hide] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w0FiwfyUMM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxysZmNsyDk[/hide] Theese two videos, one show how Meiosis ( "primitive" form of sex) first originated, and the other shows how Sexual Reproduction could have evolved from Meiosis to how it is now. 3: There are A LOT of transitional fossils... In fact, *all* existent fossils are transitional fossils. Just put all fossils in Chronologic order, and see the intermediate features they have. My favorite example of fossils is the horse evolution: Hyracotherium - Orohippus - Epihippus - Mesohippus - Miohippus - Kalobatippus - Parahippus - Merychippus - Hipparion - Pliohippus - Dinohippus - Plesippus - Equus. 4: [hide]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg[/hide] Biogenesis isn't 100% true, this video in the hide tag is about the Scientists leading model on Abiogenesis Theory, that was proven right by Dr. Jack Szostak's research. Abiogenesis is possible. 5: They don't just put skeletons in a pile and look for similarities. They are scientists, they do research, not guesses. If you put all fossils in chronological order you will see small changes piling up with time and intermediate features existing. 6: The DNA forming naturally isn't really hard, one of the DNA bases is proven to form naturally, in fact. DNA is just a kind of molecule that can organize itself in patterns and make copies of itself. The "milhons" of extra cells came from 3.6 bilhon years of evolution. Unicelular beings forming multicelular life is proven possible ( in fact, there was an algae specie that was observed to form a multicelular being in a few dozen generations), after multicelular beings first form, it isn't hard to imagine the amount of cells that make them multiplying... You know, one single mutation on someone can make a person have hundreds or thousands of cells more than the others ( it's called "tall people"...), milhons of cells appearing in 3.6 bilhons of years sounds plausible to me. 7: It is not the only explanation, but it is backed up by mountains of evidence, from transitional fossils to genetic studies, and it explains all relevant facts and is contradicted by none. Sounds good to me. Also, someone earlier said a brain can't come from Evolution... [hide]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RbPQG9WTZM[/hide] This video shows how a primitive brain can form, after this, all it needs is a few milhons of years of evolution. Something being complex isn't proof against evolution, in fact it is evidence for it, because incredibly complex characteristics are predicted by evolution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg Scientists don't know how life formed, but they know many ways life could have formed. This is the best model we have so far. Abiogenesis might not have been observed, since it only works on primitive-earth conditions, but our existence is proof that life formed some way, and this is a possible one, especially since Evolution has been observed both in fossil record and in nature.

As for the Universe being fine-tuned, there are Scientists ( mostly String-Theorists, i think) that believe there are other Universes with different laws, so it isn't impossible to imagine universes with laws that allow life to exist. Even heard around of String Theorists telling that the Big Bang ( and the beggining of other Universes of this "Multiverse") might have been caused by the shock of two P-Branes ( don't ask me whats that though, String Theory is confuse >.<). Ugh, physics... I know Big Bang Theory says the Universe expanded from a singularity, but when did Stephen Hawking discover the Universe had a beggining? Source pl0x?

Lol, if any scientist was able to proove Evolution wrong, he would get 10 nobel prizes for it. Here's some evidence for you to try to prove wrong ( even though you problably can't): 1: Transitional fossils. We have thousands of fossils, found in proper order and with clearly intermediate features, showing macroevolution. One example of them is the clear Evolution from reptile to bird, Coelophysis - Deinonychus - Oviraptor - Lisboasaurus - Archeopteryx - Sinornis - Ambiortus - Hesperornis - Ichtyornis. And this is only ONE example of them, we have thousands. 2: Biogeography, that shows species location matching an Evolutionary origin. 3: Retroviruses, that in close species ( such as primate species, AKA, us and the monkeys) have insertion in the exacly same genes, pointing at a common descent. 4: Both Wobble gene sequence and Intron Gene sequence, that also points to a common descent in close species. 5: Dozens of other studies on animal genome, that point to a commom descent between lots of species. 6: Observed Macro evolution, both in Lab and in Nature (Speciation, and Culex Pipiens - Culex Molestus) Humans ARE still Evolving. Evolution takes milhons of years to happen. Hundreds, if not thousands of generations are needed for any big change happening. And there is no freaking limit on Gene changes, where do you people get that information?

I think you have nothing better to do than be an [wagon]. Why don't you go onto the Food thread and criticize what I had to eat today. How was I being an [wagon]? I just said your post had flaws and I would let other people explain them, because I knew others would do done a better job then me. Yeah and you know what? Whatever some has to say about my "flaws" is going to be wrong to me. You know why? Because this thread is based merely on opinion. And if you don't know much about this subject how would you know if what I had to say was wrong? Stop that before this place becomes a flamewar -.- And this thread is not based merely on opinion, as scientific facts are based on evidence, and they are being discussed and put to test in this thread. This is kind of off-topic since the thread wasn't about arguing Science Vs. Religion in the first place, but any argument in the internet with "Big Bang" and/or "Creationism" in the name is bound to become like that... It is almost a rule of the internet.

Ohaithere :) [hide] [/hide] First off, believing in Evolution in Big Bang does not mean a higher power doesn't exist. Big Bang claims that the universe expanded from a singularity 15 bilhon years ago, Abiogenesis explains the origin of life, and Evolution explains the diversity and complexity of life once it exists, it is possible to believe a God created the Universe via Big Bang, and in fact most religious scientists ( and there are a lot of religious scientists) do. Now, there are milhons of planets in our galaxy alone, nevermind the universe. Is is obvious that at least one ( or a bilhon...) planet would have liquid water, being neither too cold nor too hot. That isn't a "coincidence", it's... obvious. DNA, water cycles, etc, may all seem very complex, but if you understand the laws of physics and chemistry, it's not really complex. In a universe made of elements with different properties, that fuse to create even more elements and that combine with eachotherm creating lots lots of possible combinations with different properties, EVERYTHING is possible. Well, maybe not "everything", some laws of physics just can't be broken, but you got my point. Now, instincts, emotions, etc, all came from evolution. Evolution it isn't an "accident", as natural selection brings order to the randomness of evolution. Instincts and thoughs first formed when the brain started forming... i'll leave a link to a video explaining the evolution of the brain: Note that the creator of the video has a "Origin of" series, and videos of that series soon to be uploaded are about the origin of morality and cognition, which seem to talk about the points you made better. I highly recommend the videos of that guy to ANYONE, he is freakin awesome :P With the Origin of the brain and thoughs, instincts and behaviour patterns would soon appear thanks to Evolution and Natural Selection, if you understand a lot of Evolution very well it is easy to understand. In fact, the way we think and behave is proof of evolution. It is proven that "The annoying boss at work" behaves exacly like the Alpha Male of primate species, because of Evolutionary Behaviour. The one that acts like "The boss" will get more power, get more ladiez, have more children, and spread his genes. Human behaviour is programmed by Evolution, because the goal of every living being is to reproduce and spread his genes. Men are programmed by Evolution to find women with big breasts hot, because big breasts are are a sign of fertility, and the man want his children to have the best genetics possible. A bird will live with a partner to spread his genes. A baby will cry when hungry because Evolutions programs him to survive, and made him call the attention of the parents ( programmed to MAKE him survive) by crying. Even the existence of religion has been explained by Evolution. There is a gene that makes people more religious, and it was selected for in the Nat. Selection because it was more of a "storytelling gene", the ones who told better stories got better along with the other people ( which is very important to ape species, that are VERY social), had more children, and spread the "storytelling" gene along. Soon "storytelling" became religion. This all may have sounded like a giant red herring, but my point is, instincts and human/animal behaviour patterns appear by Evolution, and this has been explained by science. All you need is a brain.

Stone, since i originally intended for you to see this, and i'm not sure if you have, i'll repost the video: [hide]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj587d5ies&feature=player_embedded[/hide] The first minut sounds like Ad Hominen, but after the first minut the video gets interesting, and after 5:50 it starts showing the evidence to how we know the Earth is 4.6 bilhon years old. If you are an actual rational person who sees the both sides of the argument as you claim to be, i hope you at least think about it and if you still think the video is wrong i hope you check all that evidence yourself. But, saying "No one will change my mind" only makes me see you as a close-minded creationist, and arguing with you is pointless. I sincerely hope you aren't like that. You may believe in God ( most of the evolutionist scientists do), but at least look at the evidence for Evolution & Others, and think about it, isn't it possible that God created the world via Big Bang, and that the Bible is metaphorical? Also, by doing that with light, God would plant evidence against what he says, if he truly loved us and wanted us to believe him, wouldn't he put evidence FOR him instead? I don't see how an all-loving merciful God could me deceitful. EDIT: I don't see how that Isaiah passage even is a prophecie, i agree that some prophets have made mistakes and lots of prophecies of the Bible seemed to went wrong, but saying that Damascus will end some day and call that a prophecie is like saying " Someone somewhere in the world is going to die tomorrow. Z0mg i can see the future!". Someday, Damascus will end up destroyed (especially since the Sun will eventually blow up...), that is just logic, not prophecie.