Godwin's Law smites this thread

[Meshach]

Your other two choices are vegetable and mineral... so which are you?

It is unfortunate that you limit yourself to just those three choices. I on the other hand know of a fourth. But then you have to know God.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is unfortunate that you limit yourself to just those three choices.

Science is myopic.

I on the other hand know of a fourth. But then you have to know God.

 

[Danyc]

Darwin?

You mean that guy who wrote, The Preservation of Favoured Races would resoundingly condemn Eugenics?

How easily Satan works upon Christians.

How many times have you had this explained to you? No longer can this be a mistake on your part. You're lying purposefully. Last time I checked, your idol was God, not The Great Deciever.

 

[Naraoia]

.... the Marxist liberal-lefties.

Isn't "Marxist liberal[anything]" an oxymoron?

 

[peadar1987]

Do people actually think if they can "prove" evolution is "evil", that it will disprove the theory? Animals in the wild eat their young and kill for sport. It's distasteful, but it doesn't prove that nature doesn't exist.

And I suggest you read your own holy book for some wonderful demonstrations of pure evil, many of which are endorsed, or even performed, by your "merciful" god.

 

[Split Rock]

Glad to hear you admit that.

I shows we aren't animals after all, and that chickens shouldn't look at us as their natural predators?

Or does that term apply to we at the top of the food chain?

That's the funny thing, AVET. We are just like any other animal in most ways. We breathe like other animals. We eat like other animals. Heck we even procreate like other animals. Strange, huh?

 

[AV1611VET]

That's the funny thing, AVET. We are just like any other animal in most ways. We breathe like other animals. We eat like other animals. Heck we even procreate like other animals. Strange, huh?

With several exceptions, I'm sure:

1. We're not galliforms 'natural predators'.
2. We're not forests 'natural destroyers'.
3. It's considered wrong for us to kill each other for sport (for some reason).
4. A host of other things we don't seem to share with our ancestors because we're considered a 'higher form of life'.

In other words, we're considered animals insofar as it's wrong to consider us animals?

 

[Cabal]

With several exceptions, I'm sure:
[*]We're not galliforms 'natural predators'.
[*]We're not forests 'natural destroyers'.

Well, they end up dead and their resources used for our benefit, so the end result is just the same, it's just that we have more direct control over the numbers of our prey also.

[*]It's considered wrong for us to kill each other for sport (for some reason).

No, but we do spend a lot of time killing each other based on pointless tribalism.

[*]A host of other things we don't seem to share with our ancestors because we're considered a 'higher form of life'.
[/LIST]

No, things are just complicated somewhat when you have intelligence and sentience, but the basic principles are still in there to some degree.

 

[Gracchus]

I shows we aren't animals after all, and that chickens shouldn't look at us as their natural predators?

Your other two choices are vegetable and mineral... so which are you?

Actually, under the modern classification system of life, there are three other choices: Fungi, aerobic bacteria, and anaerobic bacteria. Mineral is not one of the biological kingdoms.

 

[marlowe007]

Isn't "Marxist liberal[anything]" an oxymoron?

Yes, in the sense that early Marxism was a critique of classical liberal economics.

But for whatever reason, the terms "liberal" and "marxist" are used interchangeably nowadays...

 

[ReverendDG]

With several exceptions, I'm sure
We're not galliforms 'natural predators'.

we pretty much eat anything, so we aren't natural predators of anything, what ever "natural predator" means to you.

We're not forests 'natural destroyers'.

what does that even mean AV? what animals are natural destroyers? termites aren't "natural destroyers" of trees after they are dead anymore than we are when they are alive, they just happen to eat dead tree material we use to make houses with

It's considered wrong for us to kill each other for sport (for some reason).

what animals kill their own for sport AV? i've never heard of any animals that do that
there are animals that play with their prey or what might be thought of as for fun, but never any of their own group.
we do that as well, fox hunting, boar hunting, and other things.
we don't hunt our own, because, they.are. our. own. this should be obvious here AV, if you hunt your own people, you can't form any groups to survive.

A host of other things we don't seem to share with our ancestors because we're considered a 'higher form of life'.

we are highly developed in ways our ancestor species weren't, but pretty much every development is a matter of degree, rather than sudden poofing of something new.

In other words, we're considered animals insofar as it's wrong to consider us animals?

i'm not sure what you mean?
as far as i'm aware, other than a highly developed neocortex and advanced vocal system(which are both degrees of what other animals have), we are pretty much the same.
we are unique, but pretty much every other animal species is unique, we just fit a niche no other animal can.

 

[AV1611VET]

we don't hunt our own, because, they.are. our. own. this should be obvious here AV, if you hunt your own people, you can't form any groups to survive.

.

Male lions who take over another male's territory (after winning a fight) will usually kill the other male's cubs - this is to prevent the other male's genes from being passed down...

 

[Meshach]

i'm not sure what you mean?
as far as i'm aware, other than a highly developed neocortex and advanced vocal system(which are both degrees of what other animals have), we are pretty much the same.
we are unique, but pretty much every other animal species is unique, we just fit a niche no other animal can.

Using this definition, think about it really closely. Then consider God. It will make it easier to determine the difference.

 

[Split Rock]

With several exceptions, I'm sure:

1. We're not galliforms 'natural predators'.
2. We're not forests 'natural destroyers'.
3. It's considered wrong for us to kill each other for sport (for some reason).
4. A host of other things we don't seem to share with our ancestors because we're considered a 'higher form of life'.

In other words, we're considered animals insofar as it's wrong to consider us animals?

I did write "in most ways," so of course I recognize there are some things unique to us humans. Otherwise, we wouldn't be our own species, right? At one point in time we were indeed galliforms 'natural predators." Now we raise them, so I'm not sure its correct to call us "natural predators," but we at least were at some point. Not sure why you are calling us "natural destroyers" of the forest... is that a category other animals belong to?" And no, we are still animals, even if we have our own unique attributes... all animals do.

 

[lawtonfogle]

So creos like to claim that evolution causes Nazism. I found an interesting quote about that today (thanks to Aron-Ra's vids).

"Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law - one may call it an iron law of Nature - which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind." -Hitler, Mein Kampf, Volume I, Chapter XI

ps. expanding the quote.

"The fox remains a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. The only difference that can exist within the species must be in the various degrees of structural strength and active power, in the intelligence, endurance, etc., with which individual specimens are endowed. It would be impossible to find a fox which has a kindly and protect disposition towards geese, just as no cat exists which has a friendly disposition toward mice. ...The act which brings about such a development is a sin against the will of the Eternal Creator."

emphasis added

Well this is just great!

Thanks to the theory of gravity, I'm going to have to start throwing people off of high up balconies.

 

[AV1611VET]

At one point in time we were indeed galliforms 'natural predators." Now we raise them, so I'm not sure its correct to call us "natural predators," but we at least were at some point.

We raise them to eat them.

Not sure why you are calling us "natural destroyers" of the forest... is that a category other animals belong to?"

​

 

[AV1611VET]

Thanks to the theory of gravity, I'm going to have to start throwing people off of high up balconies.

Didn't nature at one time cause heavier people to hit the ground first?

 

[Cabal]

Didn't nature at one time cause heavier people to hit the ground first?

Nope.*

*Depends on how much of a factor air resistance is though.

 

[AV1611VET]

Didn't nature at one time cause heavier people to hit the ground first?

Nope.

You mean all the scientists who taught that, taught wrong?

 

[Assyrian]

.

Male lions who take over another male's territory (after winning a fight) will usually kill the other male's cubs - this is to prevent the other male's genes from being passed down...
​

You mean like a Wicked Stepfather?