NCclimber 0 #76 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. It's almost painful to read stuff like this in the 21st Century. Good thing it is just "almost". If it really was painful to you, I might think you're one of those inflexible zealots I was referencing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #77 November 13, 2006 QuoteThat's the thing about evolution. Most of what we find can fit into it, because it's a loosely-woven set of theories that seem to fit together. It doesn't exclude the possibility of intelligent design, it just doesn't consider it. Because, well, if it can't be understood and studied, then it's not part of the study. The reason that it is not considered is because it doesn't fit the desired results of their agenda, which, as a large part, is to discredit all religion as a vital part of the human phyche. Just because something cannot be understood or physically observed doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. We can't even figure out how the thought processes of the human brain function. We can't see them, or touch them, yet we do not deny their existance, as fleeting as they are. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #78 November 13, 2006 QuoteI wonder why a Blue Whale has hips then? Keep digging dude, keep digging. Because it's not a fish, but a mammal?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #79 November 13, 2006 I suppose by those very simplistic definitions one might call me a theistic. I believe in God; and I believe in evolution. They are not mutually exclusive, imo. Being that neither belief is simplistic, I wouldn't even call myself a theistic. I don't debate this subject, however. I might ask a question here and there, but that's as much as you'll get out of me.Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,440 #80 November 13, 2006 QuoteJust because something cannot be understood or physically observed doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. But if there also isn't any physical evidence of its existence, that does mean that studying it isn't a part of the study of physical phenomena. There are a lot of studies of the neurons firing in the human brain; I read something interesting Saturday morning about the fact that people who are speaking in tongues have different parts of their brains firing than when they are singing or speaking. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #81 November 13, 2006 QuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Where? It's even more amusing to watch the other side make claims without even posting a quote made by me..... kinda diminishes your claim to that of vacant. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #82 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Where? It's even more amusing to watch the other side make claims without even posting a quote made by me..... kinda diminishes your claim to that of vacant. I replied to your post because it was the last one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #83 November 13, 2006 QuoteWe can rule out any god's intervention in chemistry we see today, and someday I believe we will be able to rule out god's intervention in biology as far back as we wish to go. I believe in God, the human mind, logic & science. I wonder, though: Do you think it is vain to think we are/will become so all-knowing as to officially rule out any other greater force/existence? I think too often disbelievers think of God as merely a miracle-worker. It's tough to believe in miracles with all the science to prove how they happened... I think of God on a much, much smaller & far more powerful level.Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #84 November 13, 2006 QuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #85 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods. I see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #86 November 13, 2006 QuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. No more amusing than those wacky "gravitationists." Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #87 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods. I see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? Fabricating straw men seems to be a strength of yours. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the existence of gods, how likely is it that gods exist?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #88 November 13, 2006 >Actually, I do understand, but change is so miniscule that it can't >be measured or observed. In recorded history, we have observed dozens of organisms speciate - become so different that they can no longer interbreed, and are therefore separate species. That's a pretty significant change. > Once again, everything has its seed within itself[think DNA ]. That's right! And we have the same body-segmentation gene (the HOX gene) that flies, starfish and otters have - since we all started with the same basic genetic "tools." >A blue whale has never had legs and walked on the land. Uh, they have hips and whale embryos have rear leg buds - just like we have little toes but can't use them to pick things up. >A seal, on the other hand, has the best of both worlds, but it's flippers >have always be flippers. Next time you're at a zoo, look at the otters, manatees, hippos, seals and sea lions there. You'll see flippers in all forms, from basic hands (otters) to flippers that are almost exclusively for water propulsion (manatees.) Evolution prepares organisms for all manner of niches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #89 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. It's almost painful to read stuff like this in the 21st Century. Good thing it is just "almost". If it really was painful to you, I might think you're one of those inflexible zealots I was referencing. Good point. So let me fix my own post. Quote It's almost fucking painful to read stuff like this in the 21st Century. There. Much better. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #90 November 13, 2006 >For some reason this doesn't seem to be a two way street. Well, if Dan BC went to a local DZ, and he offered to coach 4-way there, it would probably be a one way street (at least when it came to 4-way.) Doesn't mean he's arrogant, but he has been training this stuff most of his life, and is one of the best FS jumpers in the world. A jumper with 10 jumps who claims "that Dan BC is a jerk! He didn't take me seriously when I said that you can't launch 8-ways from Otters" is going to be laughed at. Similarly, if a bible-thumper who's never taken anything beyond high school biology is arguing with a molecular biologist about evolutionary biology, it's going to be pretty one-way. And if that bible thumper claims that he knows for a fact that evolution can't possibly happen, and that that biologist is rude to insist he knows better - he's going to be laughed at. Doesn't mean the religious guy wrong about his faith, or about god. It just means he doesn't know as much about biology as someone who's studied it for most of his life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #91 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods. I see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? Fabricating straw men seems to be a strength of yours. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the existence of gods, how likely is it that gods exist? Speaking of strawmen, when did I mention God (or gods) in this thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #92 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods. I see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? Fabricating straw men seems to be a strength of yours. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the existence of gods, how likely is it that gods exist? Speaking of strawmen, when did I mention God (or gods) in this thread. Apparently you need a lesson in what a "straw man" is. I guess you are just good at making them by accident.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #93 November 13, 2006 I think a few of our more prolific posters are just bummed that their strawmen couldn't vote last Tuesday..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #94 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteIt is amusing to watch so many of the evolutionists act like their theory is absolute, indisputable fact. Well, at least there's a body of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There's no evidence whatsoever supporting the existence of gods. I see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? Fabricating straw men seems to be a strength of yours. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the existence of gods, how likely is it that gods exist? Speaking of strawmen, when did I mention God (or gods) in this thread. Apparently you need a lesson in what a "straw man" is. I guess you are just good at making them by accident. I thought is was basically a misrepresentation of an opponent's position. Is this wrong? Considering you seem inclined to throw around the term, how about explaining how your replies quoted in this post are not strawmen. From what I read, every one of your replies is a strawman. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #95 November 13, 2006 Quote Once again, everything has its seed within itself[think DNA ]. A blue whale has never had legs and walked on the land. A seal, on the other hand, has the best of both worlds, but it's flippers have always be flippers. And you have evidence of this?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #96 November 13, 2006 Maybe they can chew on this one for a hint.... http://polarmet.mps.ohio-state.edu/ASPIRE_99/seals/science/evxt.htm Although we may have to wait a few million years to see truly marine pigs and sheep, at the present time we can observe the evolutionary result of millions of years of adaption to the ocean in four groups of mammals: cetaceans, sirenians, pinnipeds, and sea otters. The different length of time each group has inhabited the ocean is generally reflected in its degree of aquatic specialization and dependency on land. Thus among the marine mammals, in relation to cetaceans and sirenians, the amphibious pinnipeds have evolved more recently. To provide a basis of comparison with the pinnipeds, I give a brief evolutionary history and basic description of the other marine mammal groups in the following paragraphs. The cetaceans (from the Latin cetus, "whale or sea monster") have lived longer in the sea than any other mammal. Accordingly, they show the most pronounced adaptation to an exclusively oceanic existence, as is evident in their complete lack of dependence on land and in the design of their bodies, which are sleekly streamlined, with rigid foreflippers and no hind limbs. Cetaceans are believed by many scientists to have descended from a primitive artiodactyl, or even- toed, ungulate (hoofed mammal) that lived some sixty million years ago during the Paleocene following the extinction of the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous period. Another line of evidence based on molecular studies, however, suggests that cetaceans evolved much more recently (Lowenstein 1985a). The earliest fossils of toothed whales (odontocetes) and baleen whales (mysticetes) appeared roughly 27-30 million years ago in the Oligocene period. According to molecular evidence presented by Lowenstein, the odontocete and mysticete whales diverged some 20-25 million years ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #97 November 13, 2006 QuoteI see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? It makes it far more probable.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #98 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteI see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? It makes it far more probable. Especially given that humans havbe been looking for evidence of the existence of gods for thousands of years and have come up short. Maybe applying Bayes Theorem to the situation would help. Except, of course, it's "just a theorem".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #99 November 13, 2006 QuoteQuoteI see. Since there is a more evidence for your belief, then that makes it true? It makes it far more probable. I agree, but just because one explanation is superior to others, that doesn't make it absolute, indisputable fact. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,990 #100 November 13, 2006 >that doesn't make it absolute, indisputable fact. There are no indisputable facts in science. There are theories that have been tested and found to be valid; others that have been tested and found to be invalid. For example, it is not an absolute, indisputable fact that gravity always works. But the smart money is still on using a parachute when you skydive. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
