Why do you believe in the evolution theory?

whois · Mar 17, 2015

bhsmte said:
Is there a reason you can not explain why her work goes against evolution?

i never said it did.
it went against what was thought to be evolution.
and they didn't want to hear it.
oh poo poo honey, go play with the kids.
they scorned her research so much that she quit publishing it.
they didn't know what they were talking about, and when someone comes along that DID know, well we can't have that now can we.

the conclusion still stands:
if it goes against what we think we know, we don't want to heart it.
you got hard core data? we still don't want to hear it.

bhsmte · Mar 17, 2015

whois said:
i never said it did.
it went against what was thought to be evolution.
and they didn't want to hear it.
oh poo poo honey, go play with the kids.
they scorned her research so much that she quit publishing it.
they didn't know what they were talking about, and when someone comes along that DID know, well we can't have that now can we.

the conclusion still stands:
if it goes against what we think we know, we don't want to heart it.
you got hard core data? we still don't want to hear it.

Clue me in here, I am confused.

You claim you never stated her position went against evolution and then you make statements like; we have this theory that doesn't work?????????

Since you have also stated, you don't care whether either Nobel or Mcclintock agree that evolution happens, why do you cite their opinions at all?

Poo poo honey go play with the kids????

Mature, very mature.

whois · Mar 17, 2015

bhsmte said:
Clue me in here, I am confused.

why ain't i surprised?

You claim you never stated her position went against evolution and then you make statements like; we have this theory that doesn't work?????????

you are confusing two separate issues, two different discussions, two entirely different topics.
no, i won't explain them to you yet again.

Since you have also stated, you don't care whether either Nobel or Mcclintock agree that evolution happens, why do you cite their opinions at all?

because the question is wholly irrelevant to the discussion.

honestly, i'm getting to the point to where i will not answer any more of your irrelevant nonsense.

bhsmte · Mar 17, 2015

you are confusing two separate issues, two different discussions, two entirely] different topics.

Clarify please; it isn't important to you whether the people you cite, agree that evolution happens?

Do you believe that evolution happens? Because if you don't, the people you cite, disagree with you.

honestly, i'm getting to the point to where i will not answer any more of your irrelevant nonsense.

If you haven't noticed, I am not the only one asking these types of questions. When you make the type of statements you make, you will be asked to support them.

Split Rock · Mar 17, 2015

JacksBratt said:
Evolution is not needed to explain these questions. Both camps have answers. Both camps will say the other is wrong.

Strange then that you had no answers to most of my questions....

Split Rock · Mar 17, 2015

whois said:
true to a certain extent.
barbera mcclintock is a good example of this.
if material is presented that goes against current evolution dogma, it is scorned and ridiculed, even though it has solid evidence.

do you really call this unbiased?

Show us the solid evidence. Don't just cite one or two papers you cannot even explain, that don't even have any original research.

whois said:
will you people please read the material i present?

Why should we.. you apparently don't even read it..

JacksBratt · Mar 18, 2015

Loudmouth said:
Agriculture and medicine are the two big ones. We didn't evolve to eat tons of processed foods, corn, and simple sugars. We have removed some selective pressures through medicine, such as making insulin available to type I diabetics.

The diseases that you are talking about are as much a product of the environment as they are genetics.

I guess, then, we don't have to worry. The new environment will selectively allow some humans to survive while others cannot. Some may even evolve into some alter humanoid creature that will stomach the new foods, no?

This demise will soon be a thing of the past, all thanks to evolving of the human version 2015.03 to version 2016.01.

Can I download a patch or am I doomed in my older version of hardware?

TLK Valentine · Mar 18, 2015

JacksBratt said:
I guess, then, we don't have to worry. The new environment will selectively allow some humans to survive while others cannot. Some may even evolve into some alter humanoid creature that will stomach the new foods, no?

This demise will soon be a thing of the past, all thanks to evolving of the human version 2015.03 to version 2016.01.

Can I download a patch or am I doomed in my older version of hardware?

Alas, you're doomed. Your children, however, may be an upgrade...

Loudmouth · Mar 18, 2015

JacksBratt said:
I guess, then, we don't have to worry. The new environment will selectively allow some humans to survive while others cannot. Some may even evolve into some alter humanoid creature that will stomach the new foods, no?

We have to worry about humans evolving as much as we have to worry about the Earth moving about the Sun. Evolution is an unavoidable consequence of imperfect replication and competition.

Humans may or may not evolve relatively different morphology or physiology. We can look back and see where evolution has been, but it is hard to predict where it will go since it is a stochastic process.

Can I download a patch or am I doomed in my older version of hardware?

Individuals don't evolve. Only populations evolve, and they do so over generations. Barring advances in genetic manipulation, you are born with the only genome you will ever have.

Split Rock · Mar 18, 2015

whois said:
i never said it did.
it went against what was thought to be evolution.
and they didn't want to hear it.
oh poo poo honey, go play with the kids.
they scorned her research so much that she quit publishing it.
they didn't know what they were talking about, and when someone comes along that DID know, well we can't have that now can we.

It went against traditional views of genetics and the nature of the genetic material. Not evolution.

whois said:
the conclusion still stands:
if it goes against what we think we know, we don't want to heart it.
you got hard core data? we still don't want to hear it.

Show me a geneticist today that does not believe transposons move in the genome. If the hard evidence is there, then your hypothesis or theory will win out. That is the bottom line.

Split Rock · Mar 18, 2015

JacksBratt said:
It doesn't show that I came from a rock.

And this proves that your great grandfather was an amoeba?

Again, this proves that all life came from a puddle?

Again, this proves that all life came from a puddle?

Again, this proves we all came from an amoeba?

Because an amoeba evolved into a horse?????

No answers... just creationist rhetoric about "you say we come from a rock/ puddle/ amoeba."

justlookinla · Mar 18, 2015

Split Rock said:
No answers... just creationist rhetoric about "you say we come from a rock/ puddle/ amoeba."

Science is ignorant concerning what life came from. They have plenty of guesses and suppositions though.

Loudmouth · Mar 18, 2015

justlookinla said:
Science is ignorant concerning what life came from. They have plenty of guesses and suppositions though.

Do we have to know the ultimate origin of nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen in order to know that lightning is produced by thunderclouds?

justlookinla · Mar 18, 2015

Loudmouth said:
Do we have to know the ultimate origin of nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen in order to know that lightning is produced by thunderclouds?

That's how life was first formed?

Loudmouth · Mar 18, 2015

justlookinla said:
That's how life was first formed?

Apparently, reading comprehension is not one of your strong suits.

justlookinla · Mar 18, 2015

Loudmouth said:
Apparently, reading comprehension is not one of your strong suits.

Apparently non-answers are one of your best skills.

HitchSlap · Mar 18, 2015

JacksBratt said:
Because it requires an outside force, a designer, a creator.

How can you be so sure?

Loudmouth · Mar 18, 2015

justlookinla said:
Apparently non-answers are one of your best skills.

Answer the question.

Do we have to know the ultimate origin of nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen in order to know that lightning is produced by thunderclouds?

justlookinla · Mar 18, 2015

Loudmouth said:
Answer the question.

Do we have to know the ultimate origin of nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen in order to know that lightning is produced by thunderclouds?

Answer the question, do we know how first life was created?

whois · Mar 18, 2015

Split Rock said:
Show me a geneticist today that does not believe transposons move in the genome. If the hard evidence is there, then your hypothesis or theory will win out. That is the bottom line.

i understand that.
look what happened to this woman.
she presents research that went against the then current dogma, yes dogma.
they scorned her so much that she just threw up her hands and quit publishing her work.
there was absolutely no cause for this to happen, especially when she had the research as proof.
being sceptical is one thing, but what happened to mcclintock went further than that.

what would cause these people to shun this research?
scientists do not rely on buzzwords like "ridiculous" or "ludicrous".
my guess is that it smashed their world view of evolution.
by the sound of it, i assume it meant the end of "gradual change".
also, it would imply some kind of intelligence at work because some genes are never mutated, hox genes i believe.

Why do you believe in the evolution theory?

rational

Newbie

rational

Newbie

Conflation of Blathers

Conflation of Blathers

Searching for Truth

I've already read the books you want burned.

Contributor

Conflation of Blathers

Conflation of Blathers

Regular Member

Contributor

Regular Member

Contributor

Regular Member

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Contributor

Regular Member

rational

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency