Evolution - a very bad joke...

[outhouse]

I love our new friend, Gauss, don't you? I think he provides an excellent example of the level of education, knowledge and credulity of a creationist. Never change, Gauss.

My guess is he is very young and has no life experience.

 

[Gauss]

I believe he's rather a Falun Gong follower, and believes we were created by aliens.. or something.


_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

That is not true. Mankind was created by Gods. Aliens are low-level creatures from a previous historic era that try to clone the human body and they control us from other dimensions. Why do you think they hide out? They have a plan and they carry it out. Anyway, these aliens are nothing compared to a genuine cultivator.

Truth about Aliens:

Master Li Hongzhi - the aliens hidden agenda, mankind´s future - TIME ASIA Interview...., page 1

 

[Gauss]

What was "natural" about Noah's flood?

So in other words you really don't know?
I mean you just tossed out a super generic "natural disasters" then started talking about un-natural disasters and what could have happened.

Seems to me that you have done nothing but ratification from the time this 'idea' struck you.

Furthermore, you have not provided anything but conspiracy theories and pseudoscience to support any of it.

I have to agree with you though.
Better get out of the thread now before you lose your last ounce of credibility.

It is called a "natural" disaster in this dimension, of course the true reasons are always that higher dimensions create them since they rule us and judge us depending on the amount of karma accumulated among people. Why does a country with witch religion like voodo get a natural disaster?

Why is it said so many people will die at judgment? Because people have too much karma.

Why are there atheists and God-believers?

It is a reflection of Yin-Yang, positive-negative polarity in nature etc etc.

So if everything is balanced we should have 50% of mankind who are Yin people(more karma than virtue) and 50% Yang people(more virtue than karma).

There is a reason for everything.

Why are some people psychic: Electromyographs Measure Human Energy Fields | Pureinsight

Merry christmas!

 

[Alceste]

I wouldn't say a very bad joke but the best story we have to date for how things came to be like all stories it has flaws.

Ask an evolutionist what will be the next thing to evolve?

Everything is evolving continuously. The question demonstrates a profound ignorance of what the ToE actually predicts.

Ask an evolutionist to explain Big breasted humans.

Most female primates have exaggerated (swollen, colourful, eye-catching, etc) reproductive organs during oestrus. Human females are in oestrus pretty much constantly.

Ask an evolutionist at what point did we become able to diviate from evolution as in (Dogs, Cats, and Horse's) for example. And why don't other animals have the same ablilty. Did apes selectivily breed anything.

Nothing has ever "deviated from evolution" and nothing ever will. Do you mean "ask a biologist to explain when our species / genus / phylum / kingdom diverged from the branch that canines and felines ended up on? A biologist can. It's not a difficult question. You can answer it yourself with ten seconds worth of googling.

Ask an evolutionist about cross species breeding. It doesn't count and only happens rarely in nature and the results are mostly sterile anyway.

You're thinking of mules and suchlike. Their inability to mate and produce viable offspring is further proof of evolution - it is one of those "observed instances of evolution" creationists are always claiming don't exist. I would explain why, but I expect some introductory lessons in what evolution actually is will be needed first.

Ask an evolutionist if they all agree why the (pick you thing) evolved do they all agree it happened the same way.

Ask a Christian if all Christians agree whether or not priests should be allowed to marry, or whether people should use birth control, and you'll find a far more drastic divergence of opinion than you ever would in a room full of biologists.

Its not a joke but an overly exaggerated story about how things came to be.

Try to understand it first, then make your judgment call. The Greatest Show on Earth is an excellent introduction to what evolution is and the evidence supporting it.

 

[darkendless]

Sorry, did not see that one, too many atheists here..

Ie a natural disaster struck them, like Noah´s flood(Atlantis civilization was wiped out), it came during Yu the great´s time - Yu the Great - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
.

I wager a bachelor of Geotechnical engineering/ engineering geology that Noah's flood or indeed a global flood never happened

 

[Starsoul]

This is the ignorance I'm talking about. Science doesn't deal with proof; it deals with evidence. Evolution is a scientific theory concerning many observable facts, and is built on mountains of evidence. It is a fully accepted scientific theory by the entire science community that is associated with biology.

Again, you're conveniently ignoring the Complete scientific verdict on the theory, the statement is inclusive of terms such as 'theory is subjected to change, or be entirely replaced, untill further evidences". What is the difference between evidence and proof? That, evidence isn't measurable as a proof and that can be as doubtful as aliens on mars .

Again, as I said, it's usually good to learn about something before forming opinions. I don't mind someone being ignorant of something, since I'm ignorant of a lot of things, but I don't go around forming opinions on the things I'm ignorant about

Isn't it ignorance to from a firm belief on lack of supportive evidence?

I understand you want to believe evolution is all a conspiracy and such, but that's part of the ignorance. If you take the time to actually understand the theory, you'll realize all of your misconceptions, and you'll learn that the theory is fact.

No it aint no conspiracy, its just a plain ignorance based theory, which asserts its clauses, only until proven otherwise.
Like you mentioned the un-supported claim of Arsenic bacterium as a Very SURE Evidence of evolution, I doubt Ignorance is as much a manner of creationists as you imply : P, i doubt though that you read the Biologist's View on it shortly after the claim. It isn't even close to being called anything close to evolution, but yeah everybody took NASA's word for it right there!

 

[Magic Man]

Again, you're conveniently ignoring the Complete scientific verdict on the theory, the statement is inclusive of terms such as 'theory is subjected to change, or be entirely replaced, untill further evidences". What is the difference between evidence and proof? That, evidence isn't measurable as a proof and that can be as doubtful as aliens on mars .

Look, it's very simple. You dismiss evolution because you don't understand it, or in other words, you're ignorant about it.

Isn't it ignorance to from a firm belief on lack of supportive evidence?

Yes, that could be a form of ignorance. That's why I'm saying you and others should stop doing that.

No it aint no conspiracy, its just a plain ignorance based theory, which asserts its clauses, only until proven otherwise.

Not quite. It's not ignorance-based. It's based on facts and evidence. Yes, it only asserts what it does until shown otherwise, but the major parts of evolutionary theory are facts. It has been tested and retested thousands of times over the course of 150 years. We know all life came from the same organism, and generally how it evolved. There might be some minor changes that come up as we learn more, but the theory isn't going to drastically change because what we know now is based on immense amounts of evidence and fact.

Like you mentioned the un-supported claim of Arsenic bacterium as a Very SURE Evidence of evolution, I doubt Ignorance is as much a manner of creationists as you imply : P, i doubt though that you read the Biologist's View on it shortly after the claim. It isn't even close to being called anything close to evolution, but yeah everybody took NASA's word for it right there!

In a common development with this kind of discussion, you've brought in an example that we haven't even talked about and characterized it in a false way, but said it assuming it was true and we all agree that it is.

I never mentioned that as an example of evolution. It could be used as such, but there are much better examples out there. The ability to use arsenic in place of phosphorous, though, would count as an example of evolution.

Again, another perfect example of ignorance. All I'm saying is learn about something before forming an opinion on it. You clearly haven't done that with evolution. I'd suggest doing it.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Pretty much, but laws aren't necessarily immutable (technically, "the law of gravity" changed when Einstein corrected it... even though socially we still refer to Newton's when we say "the law of gravity," you get what I mean).

Laws are generally mathematical models whereas theories are explanatory models that usually incorporate said laws (theories > laws).

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Revoltingest]

Thanks for the clarification.

That's too calm & civil a response, so I'll start a new argument.

A better clarification of her view:
Murphy's Law: It is what we observe, with no underlying explanation of why this relationship exists.
Perversity of Inanimate Objects: It is a theory explaining why Murphy's law bites inattentive & over-confident design engineers.

I make the following predictions about responses:
Meow Mix will use some big words....which I'll have to look up.
Mball will tell me I'm wrong....without using any poetry.
Reptillian will continue to be one strikingly handsome creature.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I wager a bachelor of Geotechnical engineering/ engineering geology that Noah's flood or indeed a global flood never happened

I'll raise you four degrees in humanities.

 

[tumbleweed41]

That's too calm & civil a response, so I'll start a new argument.

A better clarification of her view:
Murphy's Law: It is what we observe, with no underlying explanation of why this relationship exists.
Perversity of Inanimate Objects: It is a theory explaining why Murphy's law bites inattentive & over-confident design engineers.

Murphy's Law is not an actual Scientific Law.

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to describe, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.
Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse.
Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics, Boyle's law of gases, the law of conservation of mass and energy, and Hook’s law of elasticity.
Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method




Contrast this to "Murphy's Law".
"Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong"
This is an adage, not a statement of fact. It serves as fair warning and provides a basis for redundancy in engineering safety.
Just as "Don't count your chickens before they hatch" is simply an adage warning us that we should not always expect positive results, and "Don't burn your bridges behind you." is an adage warning us that it is a good idea to leave our options open.



Just saying....

 

[Revoltingest]

Murphy's Law is not an actual Scientific Law.

Says who?

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to describe, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don’t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.
Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse.
Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics, Boyle's law of gases, the law of conservation of mass and energy, and Hook’s law of elasticity.
Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method

Murphy's Law comports with your criteria for being a law in science.
It's similar to the Law Of Large Numbers, & has the advantage of a catchy Irish name.

Contrast this to "Murphy's Law".
"Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong"
This is an adage, not a statement of fact. It serves as fair warning and provides a basis for redundancy in engineering safety.

Actually, Murphy's Law makes a clear statement of fact, albeit one less formal & quantitative than boring old Ohm's Law.

Parenthetical aside:
Mr Ohm is still rolling over in his grave for having his name spelled backwards to denote a unit of conductivity.
At least Mr Murphy is spared this indignity.

Just as "Don't count your chickens before they hatch" is simply an adage warning us that we should not always expect positive results, and "Don't burn your bridges behind you." is an adage warning us that it is a good idea to leave our options open.

Actually, the chicken adage is not a statement of fact, but rather an imperative....& good advice.

 

[tumbleweed41]

When citing Murphy's Law,
In an effort to make a thread raw,
It is best to remember,
As we end out December,
That it's simply a man made of straw....

 

[Revoltingest]

When citing Murphy's Law,
In an effort to make a thread raw,
It is best to remember,
As we end out December,
That it's simply a man made of straw....

Mister Murphy developed a law,
universal & lacking in flaw.
Just like Mr Watt,
he's certainly not
a gentleman made out of straw.

 

[Autodidact]

That is not true. Mankind was created by Gods. Aliens are low-level creatures from a previous historic era that try to clone the human body and they control us from other dimensions. Why do you think they hide out? They have a plan and they carry it out. Anyway, these aliens are nothing compared to a genuine cultivator.

Truth about Aliens:

Master Li Hongzhi - the aliens hidden agenda, mankind´s future - TIME ASIA Interview...., page 1

Got that cleared up?

Hey, Gauss, what's a genuine cultivator?

 

[Magic Man]

That's too calm & civil a response, so I'll start a new argument.

A better clarification of her view:
Murphy's Law: It is what we observe, with no underlying explanation of why this relationship exists.
Perversity of Inanimate Objects: It is a theory explaining why Murphy's law bites inattentive & over-confident design engineers.

I make the following predictions about responses:
Meow Mix will use some big words....which I'll have to look up.
Mball will tell me I'm wrong....without using any poetry.
Reptillian will continue to be one strikingly handsome creature.

I don't want to disappoint, so: You're wrong. (Not really, I just hate letting people down.)

 

[Magic Man]

Murphy's Law is not an actual Scientific Law.

Ha! See, you were wrong. Tumbleweed was the one to tell you you're wrong.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Mister Murphy developed a law,
universal & lacking in flaw.
Just like Mr Watt,
he's certainly not
a gentleman made out of straw.

So as not to beat a horse dead,
I suggest that we start our own thread,
We'll discuss Murphy's merrits,
And it's effect upon gadgets,
And put our tangent here into bed

 

[Revoltingest]

So as not to beat a horse dead,
I suggest that we start our own thread,
We'll discuss Murphy's merrits,
And it's effect upon gadgets,
And put our tangent here into bed

Although you'd continue the fun,
as I see it now, we are done.
You've only disputed.
I've not been refuted.
All evidence says that I've won

 

[Magic Man]

I've not been refuted.
All evidence says that I've won

:spit: You're not serious, right?