The tip of the ice berg

[AV1611VET]

Evolution by natural selection is the current front-runner in the "mountains of evidence" category -- does that make it correct? No, but it means that any potential challengers have quite the mountain to climb.

Yup -- and the theory of evolution is so complex now it needs computers to store all its information.

And computers are built on silicon.

And silicon is mined from sand.

Which brings us to what Jesus said:

Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Evolution is a house built on sand by atheists.

And it's due for a fall when Jesus comes back.

 

[BPPLEE]

Evolution says a tornado tore through a junkyard and built the car's driver.

And it seems there are some who are determined to make everyone believe it whether you want to or not

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yup -- and the theory of evolution is so complex now it needs computers to store all its information.

And computers are built on silicon.

And silicon is mined from sand.

Which brings us to what Jesus said:

Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

Evolution is a house built on sand by atheists.

And it's due for a fall when Jesus comes back.

That is the saddest attempt at humor I've seen on these boards in a long time...

...unless, of course that was a legitimate attempt at a clever sermon... which makes it even sadder.

 

[BPPLEE]

Oh, you were doing so well until you dredged up the tired old "tornado in a junkyard" trope... would it kill you to be original?

How about you define "life" in your own words, then?

I think we can agree on something else. I believe in natural selection. I believe the animal best suited to its environment survives and breeds and passes on its traits to the next generation and change occurs that way. But that doesn't explain how an ape like creature evolves into a man. Who is better suited to live in the wild an ape or a man?

 

[BPPLEE]

That is the saddest attempt at humor I've seen on these boards in a long time...

...unless, of course that was a legitimate attempt at a clever sermon... which makes it even sadder.

I liked it AV. Don't let the critics get you down

 

[AV1611VET]

I liked it AV. Don't let the critics get you down

Thank you, LEE!

 

[BPPLEE]

Oh, you were doing so well until you dredged up the tired old "tornado in a junkyard" trope... would it kill you to be original?

How about you define "life" in your own words, then?

Life is what distinguishes plants and animals from other matter including the ability to grow and reproduce. For instance a rock doesn't grow or reproduce. But you would have to include more than just plants and animals. There are other things that can grow and reproduce

 

[AV1611VET]

That is the saddest attempt at humor I've seen on these boards in a long time...

...unless, of course that was a legitimate attempt at a clever sermon... which makes it even sadder.

I've only been using it for awhile -- like since 2006.

And who's gonna use this computer in the end times?

Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Also, are you familiar with the fact that silicon is mined from sand?

Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I think we can agree on something else.

I think we can agree that if even you want to distance yourself from that trope, you must realize how asinine it really is.

I believe in natural selection. I believe the animal best suited to its environment survives and breeds and passes on its traits to the next generation and change occurs that way.

But that doesn't explain how an ape like creature evolves into a man. Who is better suited to live in the wild an ape or a man?

I can think of several terms here that you're going to have to be more specific about, before you can graduate from "believing" in something to "understanding" it.

Those three terms are ape, man, and "the wild."

Let's start with "the wild."

You said something good here: "I believe the animal best suited to its environment survives and breeds and passes on its traits to the next generation and change occurs that way."

Now, the next step is to realize that an animal's environment is in a constant state of change... and what was "suitable" a year ago can quickly become a death sentence.

Now, what happens to a species if its environment changes faster than they can pass on their traits?
Answer: it goes extinct.

UNLESS, of all the possible traits that an animal can develop, there was one that gave the animal the ability to adapt to changing conditions in its environment in its current generation?

Well, there is -- and it so happens that a long time ago, a group of ape-like ancestors developed this trait, and they've been running with it ever since:

Intelligence.

You think apes are better suited for living in "the wild" than humans? Then help me out here:

Gorillas: Critically endangered
Chimpanzees: Endangered
Orangutans: Critically endangered
Bonobos: Endangered

Humans: Doing just fine; thanks for asking.

And why are the four (other) types of great apes on the brink? It comes down to three things: hunting, habitat loss, and habitat fragmentation.

... and guess who's responsible for all three?

"The wild" is a mythical place these days -- the only reason these or any other animals even have an environment is because we allow them to have one...


... and we're not all on the same page about allowing them, are we?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Life is what distinguishes plants and animals from other matter including the ability to grow and reproduce. For instance a rock doesn't grow or reproduce. But you would have to include more than just plants and animals. There are other things that can grow and reproduce

Exactly -- I was going to point out that fire can grow and reproduce quite nicely... so you're going to have to do better than "grow and reproduce" if you want to define "life."

Doing it by examples isn't going to cut it -- we need a definition.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I've only been using it for awhile -- like since 2006.

You think admitting that is going to make it sound less pathetic?

 

[Tanj]

I think the best evidence you have for evolution is the fossil record.

You are wrong. The best evidence we have for evolution is genetics.

But I don't believe that men and apes evolved from a common ancestor not just for religious reasons I just don't think it can be proven.

Genetics makes it so blindly obvious that we did evolve from a common ancestor that religious reasons are all that is left.

 

[BPPLEE]

I think we can agree that if even you want to distance yourself from that trope, you must realize how asinine it really is.






I can think of several terms here that you're going to have to be more specific about, before you can graduate from "believing" in something to "understanding" it.

Those three terms are ape, man, and "the wild."

Let's start with "the wild."

You said something good here: "I believe the animal best suited to its environment survives and breeds and passes on its traits to the next generation and change occurs that way."

Now, the next step is to realize that an animal's environment is in a constant state of change... and what was "suitable" a year ago can quickly become a death sentence.

Now, what happens to a species if its environment changes faster than they can pass on their traits?
Answer: it goes extinct.

UNLESS, of all the possible traits that an animal can develop, there was one that gave the animal the ability to adapt to changing conditions in its environment in its current generation?

Well, there is -- and it so happens that a long time ago, a group of ape-like ancestors developed this trait, and they've been running with it ever since:

Intelligence.

You think apes are better suited for living in "the wild" than humans? Then help me out here:

Gorillas: Critically endangered
Chimpanzees: Endangered
Orangutans: Critically endangered
Bonobos: Endangered

Humans: Doing just fine; thanks for asking.

And why are the four (other) types of great apes on the brink? It comes down to three things: hunting, habitat loss, and habitat fragmentation.

... and guess who's responsible for all three?

"The wild" is a mythical place these days -- the only reason these or any other animals even have an environment is because we allow them to have one...


... and we're not all on the same page about allowing them, are we?

Then is evolution a bad thing? It hasn't worked out so well for the apes. If they go extinct is that just part of the process? Seems like we would be wasting our time trying to save them

 

[AV1611VET]

Exactly -- I was going to point out that fire can grow and reproduce quite nicely... so you're going to have to do better than "grow and reproduce" if you want to define "life."

Doing it by examples isn't going to cut it -- we need a definition.

QV please:

Life is essentially a complex form of persistent oxidation/reduction (redox) chemistry, similar in principle to fire (combustion), but at much lower temperatures.

 

[BPPLEE]

I think we can agree that if even you want to distance yourself from that trope, you must realize how asinine it really is.






I can think of several terms here that you're going to have to be more specific about, before you can graduate from "believing" in something to "understanding" it.

Those three terms are ape, man, and "the wild."

Let's start with "the wild."

You said something good here: "I believe the animal best suited to its environment survives and breeds and passes on its traits to the next generation and change occurs that way."

Now, the next step is to realize that an animal's environment is in a constant state of change... and what was "suitable" a year ago can quickly become a death sentence.

Now, what happens to a species if its environment changes faster than they can pass on their traits?
Answer: it goes extinct.

UNLESS, of all the possible traits that an animal can develop, there was one that gave the animal the ability to adapt to changing conditions in its environment in its current generation?

Well, there is -- and it so happens that a long time ago, a group of ape-like ancestors developed this trait, and they've been running with it ever since:

Intelligence.

You think apes are better suited for living in "the wild" than humans? Then help me out here:

Gorillas: Critically endangered
Chimpanzees: Endangered
Orangutans: Critically endangered
Bonobos: Endangered

Humans: Doing just fine; thanks for asking.

And why are the four (other) types of great apes on the brink? It comes down to three things: hunting, habitat loss, and habitat fragmentation.

... and guess who's responsible for all three?

"The wild" is a mythical place these days -- the only reason these or any other animals even have an environment is because we allow them to have one...


... and we're not all on the same page about allowing them, are we?

And that trope was from someone that believed in evolution. His point was that it happened anyway

 

[BPPLEE]

You are wrong. The best evidence we have for evolution is genetics.



Genetics makes it so blindly obvious that we did evolve from a common ancestor that religious reasons are all that is left.

I wouldn't try to argue with you.

 

[BPPLEE]

QV please:

Thanks AV

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then is evolution a bad thing?

Depends on who you ask.

It hasn't worked out so well for the apes.

It hasn't worked out so well for 99.9% of all the species that have ever lived on this planet... but that's how natural selection is:

The winner is the one that survives.
The losers, well... you do the math.

If they go extinct is that just part of the process?

If we drive them to extinction, then we're the ones responsible...

... I'm assuming that you believe in responsibility... or is that for the other guy?

Seems like we would be wasting our time trying to save them

In the same sense that it's a waste of time to do anything, since everyone -- including you -- is going to die someday anyway.

Or you might see something, decide it shouldn't be happening, and decide to do something about it.

I think it's called "morality," or something like that.

 

[TLK Valentine]

QV please:

QVed it -- make a point?

 

[BPPLEE]

Depends on who you ask.



It hasn't worked out so well for 99.9% of all the species that have ever lived on this planet... but that's how natural selection is:

The winner is the one that survives.
The losers, well... you do the math.



If we drive them to extinction, then we're the ones responsible...

... I'm assuming that you believe in responsibility... or is that for the other guy?



In the same sense that it's a waste of time to do anything, since everyone -- including you -- is going to die someday anyway.

Or you might see something, decide it shouldn't be happening, and decide to do something about it.

I think it's called "morality," or something like that.

This is true. Most sense you've made yet. I almost have to give you an agree rating