Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I would be sceptical too, if it weren't for that Pew Forum study I found a few weeks ago that showed 20% of unaffiliated Americans doubted evolution. I don't know if the same goes for other countries like Peru.
That's a big if.
He makes some valid points and it intrigues me. I feel he is consistent in his views even if I disagree with him.
Why do you doubt that?
Yeah, sure. How terrible that humans eat and breathe through the same hole. Lots of other creatures don't do that.I was thinking more along the lines of us breathing and eating through the same hole making it possible to choke.
Or the laryngeal nerve taking a 14 foot detour in giraffe.
Or Ectopic pregnancies
Or the appendix
Or the development of the male testes
The narrow birth canal meaning babies skulls must be in three parts prior to birth leaving weak spots for 12 months
Just off the top of my head
Circular reasoning for one thing.
You are unconvinced by a scientific theory with 150 years of solid science behind it. You remain unconvinced because you don't want it to be true. We call this denial.
Yeah, sure. How terrible that humans eat and breathe through the same hole. Lots of other creatures don't do that.
On the other hand, they don't talk either. It turns out that if you design a windpipe so that you can eat and breathe at the same time, it's hard to talk with it.
It's a horrible handicap to have to stop talking when I eat, but somehow I've managed to survive 41 years under this terrible handicap.
Of course the claim you've made also refutes natural selection. Had it been such a horrible handicap, why did I evolve thus?
Just as Galileo was unconvinced by the heliocentric model despite centuries of data supporting it, so too I am unconvinced by your pathetic theory with a scant 150 years of evidence.
Yeah, sure. How terrible that humans eat and breathe through the same hole. Lots of other creatures don't do that.
On the other hand, they don't talk either. It turns out that if you design a windpipe so that you can eat and breathe at the same time, it's hard to talk with it.
It's a horrible handicap to have to stop talking when I eat, but somehow I've managed to survive 41 years under this terrible handicap.
Of course the claim you've made also refutes natural selection. Had it been such a horrible handicap, why did I evolve thus?
That you have found fellow crackpots does not make you less of a crackpot.
Just so we are clear, you also reject every other single theory in science, correct? You reject the theory of germs, theory of atoms, theory of gravity, etc., correct?
Yes, because modern science is completely comparable to the science of Galileo's time. [/sarcasm]
So do you think panspermia is just an alternative to Darwinian evolution, or do you think there is more evidence in its favour?I consider such theories as the theory of germs, theory of atoms, theory of gravity, and theory of conservation of energy to be unproven, exactly as the theory of evolution is unproven.
Yeah, sure. How terrible that humans eat and breathe through the same hole. Lots of other creatures don't do that.
On the other hand, they don't talk either. It turns out that if you design a windpipe so that you can eat and breathe at the same time, it's hard to talk with it.
It's a horrible handicap to have to stop talking when I eat, but somehow I've managed to survive 41 years under this terrible handicap.
Of course the claim you've made also refutes natural selection. Had it been such a horrible handicap, why did I evolve thus?
So do you think panspermia is just an alternative to Darwinian evolution, or do you think there is more evidence in its favour?
I consider such theories as the theory of germs, theory of atoms, theory of gravity, and theory of conservation of energy to be unproven, exactly as the theory of evolution is unproven.
As such, I don't take kindly to someone implying that I'm an idiot because I'm not on board with the latest scientific fad.
Not necessarily. As I mentioned earlier, there's no reason Darwinian evolution could not have taken place after life first came to Earth, nor does panspermia explain abiogenesis.Sofaman said:How can they be alternatives to one another. They address separate issues
Just as the "scientists" of Galileo's time were unwilling to look through his telescope, so too the scientists of our day are unwilling to consider alternate hypotheses.
As such, I don't take kindly to someone implying that I'm an idiot because I'm not on board with the latest scientific fad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?