Dinosaurs on the Ark: How It Was Possible

[trophy33]

You miss my point. For the second time, I am not making any claims on Buddhism and modern science beyond their compatibility. The link was on Modern Reception which I meant to be a window into their compatibility.

Yeah, I probably miss the point. I do not see any compatibility between science and buddhism, just some scientists using some buddhist statements as allegory. But these statements were not about the same things, like dead people are not electrons.

Its like saying that "in the beginning was the logos" is compatible with modern science, because some scientists say that in the beginning was information. It sounds nice, but John 1:1 is not about information, its about Jesus.

 

[renniks]

Then your definition is in error too. Learn the basics, ignorance is not a virtue.

You are being ignorant. No need for insults.

 

[VirOptimus]

You are being ignorant. No need for insults.

No I’m not.

And you are ignorant about evolution and science in general, thats supported by your posts.

 

[renniks]

No I’m not.

And you are ignorant about evolution and science in general, thats supported by your posts.

Again, ignorant insults. I understand evolution. I don't believe that the theory works. Two different things entirely.

 

[VirOptimus]

Again, ignorant insults. I understand evolution. I don't believe that the theory works. Two different things entirely.

No you dont understand it, at all.

 

[renniks]

No you dont understand it, at all.

You read minds through the internet. Wow, that's impressive.

 

[HitchSlap]

Again, ignorant insults. I understand evolution. I don't believe that the theory works. Two different things entirely.

No one who understands evolution says that.

 

[HitchSlap]

You read minds through the internet. Wow, that's impressive.

It's inherent in your posts.

 

[VirOptimus]

You read minds through the internet. Wow, that's impressive.

No need, I just read your posts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Again you contradict yourself. Gravity, for example, isn't a fact. We only know that what we call gravity acts certain ways. Doesn't mean that the way we think it works is right.
And certainly evolution isn't fact but theory.

No, gravity is a fact. Try stepping off of a cliff claiming that it is not a fact.

One does not have to fully understand something for it to be a fact. You would make the term meaningless.

LOL, you do not even know what a theory is. You are claiming that evolution has been confirmed when you admit that it is a theory. Evolution is of course a fact, and the theory of evolution explains that fact.

 

[Hans Blaster]

No, gravity is a fact. Try stepping off of a cliff claiming that it is not a fact.

Failure to understand the *fact* of gravity has a strong selective pressure against. Evolution for the win!

 

[SelfSim]

Again you contradict yourself. Gravity, for example, isn't a fact. We only know that what we call gravity acts certain ways. Doesn't mean that the way we think it works is right.

The way we think it works, (where 'works' there means what has been extensively tested), is all that matters when it comes to facts.

 

[dlamberth]

No, gravity is a fact. Try stepping off of a cliff claiming that it is not a fact.

And win the Darwin award in the process.

 

[Hans Blaster]

And win the Darwin award in the process.

Only if they haven't reproduced first. Having offspring is a disqualifier for the Darwin Award.

 

[AV1611VET]

Only if they haven't reproduced first. Having offspring is a disqualifier for the Darwin Award.

Interesting award in light of:

New research suggests Charles Darwin may have been a human example of this own theory about plants: that inbreeding has negative effects on the health of offspring. Darwin married and had 10 children with his first cousin Emma Wedgwood. Only seven children survived past age 10 and three of the survivors may have been infertile. Host Guy Raz speaks with Tim Berra, professor of evolution at Ohio State University, about the "inbreeding coefficient" theory that Darwin proved through his work and his own life.

SOURCE

 

[renniks]

No, gravity is a fact. Try stepping off of a cliff claiming that it is not a fact.

One does not have to fully understand something for it to be a fact. You would make the term meaningless.

LOL, you do not even know what a theory is. You are claiming that evolution has been confirmed when you admit that it is a theory. Evolution is of course a fact, and the theory of evolution explains that fact.

Fact:
noun
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.

Theory:
a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained
example: "Darwin's theory of evolution"

People on this thread:"Let's just pretend these words mean the same thing."

 

[Hans Blaster]

Interesting award in light of:

SOURCE

Since you didn't get it from my previous post...

The Darwin Award is given (posthumously) to those whose mind-numbingly dumb actions remove them from the gene pool and thereby prevent their bad (idiot) genes from propagating. Natural selection at work.

 

[AV1611VET]

Since you didn't get it from my previous post...

The Darwin Award is given (posthumously) to those whose mind-numbingly dumb actions remove them from the gene pool and thereby prevent their bad (idiot) genes from propagating. Natural selection at work.

I got it the first time.

Darwin's mind-numbingly dumb act of marrying his first cousin removed six of his ten children from the gene pool and thereby prevented their bad (idiot) genes from propagating. Natural selection at work.

The only thing different I see is that the Darwin Award is posthumous.

Incidentally, do Buddhists who self-immolate qualify for the Darwin Award?

 

[trophy33]

Darwin's mind-numbingly dumb act of marrying his first cousin removed six of his ten children from the gene pool

4 children are still more than most of us will ever have ;-)

 

[AV1611VET]

4 children are still more than most of us will ever have ;-)

That's true! You gotta point there!