Home | Community | Message Board

Avalon Magic Plants
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: TheCow]
    #8447728 - 05/26/08 05:38 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

TheCow said:
he merely asked why there are still fish, or why there are alligators even though they have been roughly the same for a million years. why don't all primates turn into humans, blah blah. ill hit this up in a bit




Oh, I must have been thinking of a different thread.

But whatever, obviously this is a simple question, and it does infact realte to the tree I posted earlier.

If an animal can survive in its present state then it will. It will survive untill it can no longer, and then it will be extinct. A crocodile or whatever will continue to live forever if it is able. That some relatives of it may undergo signifigant change doesn't effect the crocodile itself. If it can fill a niche and live and reproduce without need for change, it will not change. I think this is in fact the situation w/ crocodiles. I don't think there has been much change from the old crocs to the current ones, apparently they are successful, why should they change if there's no advantage to it?

It can become extinct either because of changing environmental conditions, other animals not sharing a close link to it out compete it ( by predation or dominating commonly-needed resources), or it can become extinct cuz animals w/ a close phylogenetic link to it also outcompete it.

I suppose the question comes from the belief that if an animal or its common close ancestor evolves to a different form that is more succesful that should mean that the other unevolved animal should also evolve. Species will continue to live untill they can no longer live. That another closefly related species may be superior to it doesn't alter this basic fact: Things live untill they can't.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAegentMonty
Stranger?
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/03/08
Posts: 147
Loc: Oregon
Last seen: 15 years, 8 months
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: TheCow]
    #8447736 - 05/26/08 05:39 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

TheCow said:
he merely asked why there are still fish, or why there are alligators even though they have been roughly the same for a million years. why don't all primates turn into humans, blah blah. ill hit this up in a bit




I answered it. In the middle of page one. then the original poster referred to everyone in a thread as a dumb ass for not answering his question. Someone else also answered it below his comment, and a mod linked him to information about his question. I think it was answered at least one other time. I don't know why people keep saying it hasnt been answered.

Edited by AegentMonty (05/26/08 05:43 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibledeimya
tofu and monocle
 User Gallery


Registered: 08/26/04
Posts: 825
Loc: ausländer.ch
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8448074 - 05/26/08 07:03 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Yes, sorry, I did come unnecessarily charged with assumptions and pride in my post.

I understand that you understand the gap thing, so then what I really don't understand, and somehow oppose, is the need to carry around the concept of a creator which ends up being pushed further away each time something new emerges and is explained. Your stance seems to be that instead of putting it at the limit of our current knowledge, you simply push it as far as your imagination goes and leave it there, sitting unperturbed well beyond the realm of any future explanation. Such a ultimate creator is a non-explanation and is thus irrelevant or unanswerable. Or worst, it produces more questions than it answers.

On the other hand, an acceptable creator could be one of similar upbringing to us, with a natural history of its own, in which case the explanatory quest doesn't stop at its discovery, but should go beyond it also. As important as this fact would be for understanding the past of life on earth, as some kind of experiment or whatnot, it would still be a mere step in the chain.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: deimya]
    #8448295 - 05/26/08 08:02 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

deimya said:
Yes, sorry, I did come unnecessarily charged with assumptions and pride in my post.

I understand that you understand the gap thing, so then what I really don't understand, and somehow oppose, is the need to carry around the concept of a creator which ends up being pushed further away each time something new emerges and is explained. Your stance seems to be that instead of putting it at the limit of our current knowledge, you simply push it as far as your imagination goes and leave it there, sitting unperturbed well beyond the realm of any future explanation. Such a ultimate creator is a non-explanation and is thus irrelevant or unanswerable. Or worst, it produces more questions than it answers.

On the other hand, an acceptable creator could be one of similar upbringing to us, with a natural history of its own, in which case the explanatory quest doesn't stop at its discovery, but should go beyond it also. As important as this fact would be for understanding the past of life on earth, as some kind of experiment or whatnot, it would still be a mere step in the chain.




As I think you acknowledge, both atheism and creationism are pure beliefs. There can be no proof of either, and both are utterly unscientific, since there can be no direct observations or experiments to demonstrate either theory. This is kinda my pet peave w/ atheists, they proclaim themselves above the pettyness of belief without proof, while engaging in the exact same thing themselves- belief without proof any form of a testable hypothesis. Agnosticism is understandable for these folks, atheism isn't.

I don't think I've pushed my invocation of god further then necessary, I've put him where I think he's needed for me to understand the world. It is a guilty pleasure that lets me resolve my questions about the origin of life, the universe, and consciousness and satisfies my desire that their be something greater than us that created the universe.

What makes me believe in god is that I refuse to believe consciousness, matter, and life just exist without being created. This is an argument from ignorance, but I acknowledge that and don't claim for it to be persuasive.

The irreproducibly complex arguments made by creationists are usually stupid, but I adopt a form of that in explaining the origin of life. I don't believe that living systems came to be on their own. Even the simplest of systems reminiscent of life, viruses, are entirely dependent upon the actions of much more complex systems to exist, and yet viruses aren't alive. Even thought viruses aren't alive, they have a huge, from general organic chemistry standpoints, genome, coat, and many large expressed proteins.

Now take the simplest form of life, a single celled prokaryote. Even their simple genome is gigantic from normal chemical perspectives. The thing can't live wihout a means to produce energy, requiring metabolic processes practically identical to our own in terms of their complexity at the fundamental level- ignoring the higher level regulations we have. Even the archaea with their weird respiratory needs are similar. They all require a constant supply of enzymes and protein structures to live. How did these form and agregate on their own by pure chance?

My avatar is a DNA clamp bound to DNA, it has not yet recruted the DNA polymerase enzyme. This is just one of the complex reactions needed toeven begin to replicate DNA in simple prokaryotes. I'm sure your knowledgeable enough about enzymes from your discussion here to realize how complex and large these somewhat-simple-appearing components actually are when you view the chemical structures rather than just the broad domains represented in my avatar. This is another one of the complexities that need exist for even simple life to exist.

I think its easier to believe god made these things.

I'm aware of the theories about how life may have sprung from lighning strikes in primordial seas. I'm aware of simple things like self-agregating plasma membranes and such that recruit other molecules to them and occasionaly break off in a primitive form of reproduction, but this is a far cry from anything capable of metabolism and self replication of complex parts, among which certainly aren't plasma membranes which are very simple.

I also know that the above discussion is a logical fallacy, similar to the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. If you take a marble and roll it down the street it will roll some path. If you look at the end, ignorant of the path, and someone tells you, accuratly, how it rolled, you could say: my god! That is impossible! The chances of that exact path happening is astronomical by my calculation.

So I don't pretend that there's any reason to adopt my viewpoint beyond an explanation for the unknown, I just think it nicely explains how life, matter, the universe and other stuff exists, and it fits w/ my need for their to be a god.


Indeed, there can be no proof of god or his absence. The whole concept is utterly unscientific. I just think it answers the questions I need answered and fits in with my need for a creator.

Edit: fixed description of my avatar

Edited by johnm214 (05/26/08 09:35 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineheilfire
the candy man
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/07/08
Posts: 223
Loc: Rhode Island
Last seen: 2 years, 8 months
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8448343 - 05/26/08 08:17 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

"atheism is a belief" lol

atheism is a lack of a belief in god. this is a very common misconception. we feel the same way about god as you do about santa. we dont believe against him. we just lack the belief of him.

you should look up the evolution of the eye or whale or horse.


--------------------
You swallow propaganda like a birth control pill,
Sellin' your soul to the eye on the back of the dollar bill

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: heilfire]
    #8448541 - 05/26/08 08:59 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

There is evidence against the existence of santa, so its not the same. Atheism is a faith based ideology.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: heilfire]
    #8448685 - 05/26/08 09:32 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

heilfire said:
"atheism is a belief" lol

atheism is a lack of a belief in god. this is a very common misconception. we feel the same way about god as you do about santa. we dont believe against him. we just lack the belief of him.

you should look up the evolution of the eye or whale or horse.




Why should I look up the evolution of the eye or whale or horse? What does that have to do w/ anything I'd care about?


And what is the difference between your belief system and agnosticism? If you merely lack a belief than you are agnostic by definition.

So do you believe that god does not exist?



As diecommie says, there is a difference between a testable hypothesis, santa fables, and a purely faith-based belief system

If you believe god does not exist, demonstrate to me how you can scientifically support this.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineDude96
Stranger


Registered: 05/25/08
Posts: 487
Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Last seen: 13 years, 9 months
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: Ego Death]
    #8448761 - 05/26/08 09:53 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Evolution is essentially just an organism which has been isolated within its own species mutating in some way. This mutation if beneficial will help this species survive, and through natural selection new species are born.

Thats it in a nutshell, nothing ever stops evolving, a prime example of human evolution is as follows:


Appendix: Once contained a bacterial flora which was essentially a 'back up' if the bacteria within our intestines was killed by something, something fairly high in chlorine concentration for example. Since we no longer eat wild food the appendix serves no function and no longer is a relevant organ. Eventually it is assumed we will lose our appendix as it is useless and in some cases detrimental to our existance.

Humans used to have linked collar bones and i believer one rib above that for protection of the neck, however in a time where greater mobility is much more beneficial than this slight armor plating of a very exposed area humans evolved to no longer needs this plating.

An example in nature is the river dolphin, the boto, of the amazon. Unlike marine dolphins due to long term isolation it is not even of the same Family anymore, it lacks a dorsal fin and does not have fused vertebrates.

So yea, that was me rambling a bit about things no ones probably interested in...but yea, thats evolution for ya =)


--------------------
"We cross our bridges when we come to them and burn them behind us, with nothing to show for our progress except a memory of the smell of smoke, and a presumption that our eyes once watered."
-Tom Stoppard

"He who makes a beast out of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
-Samuel Johnson

I will be a cancer upon you, ravaging all that you love and sundering your beliefs. Then, and only then, once you have fallen so far and are but a shell of that which you once were, I will grant you your every dream.
Only to crush them all before your eyes. You doubted my willpower, you abused my generosity, and now you will recognize my cruelty.
-Anonymous

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinerev 766
gum flappin' scallywag
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/08/08
Posts: 886
Loc: $tate of Inebriation, Pat...
Last seen: 3 months, 30 days
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8448764 - 05/26/08 09:55 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:



If you believe god does not exist, demonstrate to me how you can scientifically support this.




um...i'm not an atheist, but considering the scientific evidence if you don't either have faith or just some need to believe there is something more then you should be an atheist. the bible has been completely disproved. if i had references i would cite them, but genesis speaks loud and clear.


--------------------
praise "Bob"
did you mean shmooed-R.I.P.

"drought besets the mind, decay besets the man"-me

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineIdiot
I Am Moron!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 11/27/05
Posts: 6,554
Loc: 41.90231, 12.45390 Flag
Last seen: 2 months, 5 days
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: deimya]
    #8448830 - 05/26/08 10:15 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

AegentMonty said:
There are poisonous mushrooms. some plant in nature is the most dangerous plant in the world to humans. SOme plant is the most agreeable and healthy as well. All others fall somewhere in between. He took an example of one of the most agreeable plants and used it as some absurd proof God exists, ignoring all of the dangerous things in nature. "SOMETHING GOOD EXISTS THAT IS EASY TO EAT AND TASTES GOOD AND IS HEALTHY, THEREFOR GOD MUST EXIST"



Quote:

deimya said:
Also this video is the most stupid thing I ever saw. Seriously, we've been fruit eaters for millions of years now. Doesn't he also know that a banana is more easily ripped open from the other side ? Try it, it's fun ! Where's the "atheist nightmare" he's referring to ? Is this some kind of inside joke ? Is it like "if you don't believe in creationism you can't understand why it's the atheist's nightmare" ? :lol:




That video is pretty old and therefore has already been [url=
&feature=related]debunked[/url], but when people claim this as evidence of creation just try to explain it in a different way.  Say maybe that our digestive system was able to come up with a efficient manner of converting sugars to energy quicker than it did for converting botulinum to energy so it stuck with that.


--------------------

Customize your Shroomery experience!
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: rev 766]
    #8448872 - 05/26/08 10:30 PM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

rev 766 said:um...i'm not an atheist, but considering the scientific evidence if you don't either have faith or just some need to believe there is something more then you should be an atheist. the bible has been completely disproved. if i had references i would cite them, but genesis speaks loud and clear.





The bible has nothing to do with it. Anything it says is irrelevant, we are not talking about christianity here.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: rev 766]
    #8449222 - 05/27/08 12:13 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

rev 766 said:
Quote:

johnm214 said:



If you believe god does not exist, demonstrate to me how you can scientifically support this.




um...i'm not an atheist, but considering the scientific evidence if you don't either have faith or just some need to believe there is something more then you should be an atheist. the bible has been completely disproved. if i had references i would cite them, but genesis speaks loud and clear.




This is a red herring at best, or a strawman.

What does disproving the bible have to do w/ scientific evidence tending to show there is no god?

The rest of your message is indecipherable.

Edited by johnm214 (05/27/08 12:16 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinerev 766
gum flappin' scallywag
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/08/08
Posts: 886
Loc: $tate of Inebriation, Pat...
Last seen: 3 months, 30 days
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8449246 - 05/27/08 12:24 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

the point i was trying to make is that science is able to explain our origins and that of the universe. it's fine to believe in god if you have faith, but there is no proof. there is proof that god may not exist and that it doesn't have to exist for life to.


--------------------
praise "Bob"
did you mean shmooed-R.I.P.

"drought besets the mind, decay besets the man"-me

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: rev 766]
    #8449281 - 05/27/08 12:36 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

that's fine, but I don't think science can explain the origin of life. Feel free to prove me wrong w/ some experimental data or something. Its all vague hypothesises. This doesn't mean they're wrong, but its far from evidence of any particular mechanism being the origin of life.

And I also disagree that their is proof god may not exist. Show me/us this proof.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: rev 766]
    #8449342 - 05/27/08 01:04 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

the point i was trying to make is that science is able to explain our origins and that of the universe.




I dont think science can explain the origin of the universe. The process of the bang can be explained with great detail, but the origin or cause of it is completely unknown and there is no evidence to support or refute any hypotheses about the origin of the bang.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinerev 766
gum flappin' scallywag
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/08/08
Posts: 886
Loc: $tate of Inebriation, Pat...
Last seen: 3 months, 30 days
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: DieCommie]
    #8449436 - 05/27/08 01:59 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

i cannot continue this discussion. i am at a lack of online references, and am beginning to respond with to much emotion. all i will say is this, if science can't explain something now, it will soon. i think if you really do some research and look into all of this, you will see that everything you are asking proof of has already been proven. if i knew which way to point you i would do so gladly, but if you really cared about knowledge you would find it. belief is the opposite of knowledge, and that's why i find beliefs to foster ignorance. once you believe in something you quit looking for better explanations. while i think the explanations that science have given us so far are pretty good, i'm open to the fact that they may change. however, no evidence has ever pointed me in the direction of faith. while i maintain my agnosticism, it is despite my empirical knowledge. have fun with this one.


--------------------
praise "Bob"
did you mean shmooed-R.I.P.

"drought besets the mind, decay besets the man"-me

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8449478 - 05/27/08 02:16 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

johnm214 said:My avatar is a DNA clamp bound to DNA, it has not yet recruted the DNA polymerase enzyme.  This is just one of the complex reactions needed toeven begin to replicate DNA in simple prokaryotes.  I'm sure your knowledgeable enough about enzymes from your discussion here to realize how complex and large these somewhat-simple-appearing components actually are when you view the chemical structures rather than just the broad domains represented in my avatar.  This is another one of the complexities that need exist for even simple life to exist.

I think its easier to believe god made these things.



It is easier to believe that. But it doesn't mean it's correct.

Quote:

this is a far cry from anything capable of metabolism and self replication of complex parts



DNA and proteins? Yes. But RNA is capable of self replication. RNA can encode information, like DNA, but it can also catalyse reactions, like proteins. If you just focus on DNA and proteins, then yes, it seems unlikely that life could have formed by chance. But when you consider RNA, it's suddenly a lot more straightforward. There is no need for God to fill in this particular gap.

If your avatar was of a ribosome you might see things from a different perspective :smile:

Quote:

DieCommie said:
I dont think science can explain the origin of the universe.  The process of the bang can be explained with great detail, but the origin or cause of it is completely unknown and there is no evidence to support or refute any hypotheses about the origin of the bang.



Exactly! And I'm happy for religious people to believe that God created the universe (via the big bang), and they can even argue that God created life using evolution as his tool. That's fine, and it's not incompatible with science. It's what most Christians believe too (it's both Catholic and Anglican policy).
"Creationism" as a term, does not refer to this. It specifically, or at least in the usage I'm familiar with, refers to the belief that God created all the plants and animals as described in Genesis.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: rev 766]
    #8449489 - 05/27/08 02:24 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

not to bring more fallacy into this thread, but I don't think your on solid ground accusing diecommie or myself from being blind to science or not being educated. Commie is a physics major, and I'm a biochemistry major, and I think we both have a reasonable grasp on the topics of which we've spoken in the last few posts.

That your getting emotional suggest your at a loss for evidence in support of your position.

There's been no evidence that life can spontaneously form beyond what's allready been spoken of in this thread, lightning strikes in water w/ ammonia, carbon dioxide, and oxygen dissolved in it. The self-replicating structures I believe I've mentioned are also not even close to a living system and have nothing that could be called a metabolism or any regulatory functions. Other than that some folks have shown some organic molecules to be able to form self-catalyzing systems, again, far from anything that could support a living system.

There's also no evidence available or able to be available re: the position that god doesn't exist. Its a purely speculative endeavor, and just as much beholden to faith as a theist philosophy.

And for your lack of online refrences, your not limited to that. Show any evidence that god doesn't exist or whatever. We've got journal access and can get most stuff you'd dig up pretty easily.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblejohnm214
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8449549 - 05/27/08 03:11 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:


DNA and proteins? Yes. But RNA is capable of self replication. RNA can encode information, like DNA, but it can also catalyse reactions, like proteins. If you just focus on DNA and proteins, then yes, it seems unlikely that life could have formed by chance. But when you consider RNA, it's suddenly a lot more straightforward. There is no need for God to fill in this particular gap.

If your avatar was of a ribosome you might see things from a different perspective :smile:





I'm not aware that an RNA strand can self replicate itself in biological systems, or even in vitro beyond a vary limited difusion and association to a template w/out any ligating of the sugar backbone.  If your referring to ribozymes that can catalyze short length RNA elongation on a primed RNA template, than sure, this can be done, but I believe at present its efficiency and fidelity aren't suggestive of a self sustaining system.  Course this doesn't disprove its possible, just that we've not created such a system yet.

While ribozymes can function as the polymerases in these systems, I don't see how that solves the problem- you just switch from protein-based to RNA-based enzymes.  You still need to have ready, from square one, the ribozyme polymerase, and the template, and the primer, and the nucleotidetriphosphates and the stable environment, and something to make use of this system, all from unintelligent and 'blind' chemical reactions, before this system can begin to operate.  Thought I'll acknowledge this is a much simpler system than we observe in today's DNA-based life.


But then its not impossible, as I've acknowledged elsewhere, and an RNA model is much easier to buy than the considerably more complex DNA-based systems of today's life.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezouden
Neuroscientist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 7,091
Loc: Australia
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
Re: Evolution is bull [Re: johnm214]
    #8449577 - 05/27/08 03:37 AM (15 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

While ribozymes can function as the polymerases in these systems, I don't see how that solves the problem- you just switch from protein-based to RNA-based enzymes. You still need to have ready, from square one, the ribozyme polymerase, and the template, and the primer, and the nucleotidetriphosphates and the stable environment, and something to make use of this system, all from unintelligent and 'blind' chemical reactions, before this system can begin to operate. Thought I'll acknowledge this is a much simpler system than we observe in today's DNA-based life.


But then its not impossible, as I've acknowledged elsewhere, and an RNA model is much easier to buy than the considerably more complex DNA-based systems of today's life.



This last sentence is what I was hoping you'd say. This means that if I found evidence which eliminated more of your objections (for example, I believe that in the famous Miller experiment that you eluded to earlier, nucletides were formed as well as petides, though I haven't looked this up), then you would again respond by saying it is "much easier to buy".

Each part of the evolutionary process - including the very start - has a theory, or several theories, to explain it, and there is no need to say that "God did it". You should be very careful with playing the God-of-the-gaps game, because a paper could be published in Nature tomorrow that shrinks the gaps a little bit further.


--------------------
I know... that just the smallest
                                                part of the world belongs to me
You know... I'm not a blind man
                                                    but truth is the hardest thing to see

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Evolution
( 1 2 3 all )
newuser1492 4,801 57 10/08/05 03:54 PM
by H_Wrabbit
* Humans Are Evolving More Rapidly Than Thought Possible DiploidM 1,800 13 04/12/06 09:08 AM
by defcheck
* Arctic fossils mark move to land asd11 602 1 04/06/06 04:07 PM
by Wysefool
* WHY has life evolved?
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
RebelSteve33 15,445 112 11/11/06 10:43 PM
by Ravus
* Evolution question... lamarboarder1 1,229 7 10/09/05 09:17 AM
by phi1618
* Gene Variation Implies evolving Brain lightemup 701 1 09/10/05 11:38 PM
by krishnamurti
* Evolution: Sea Urchins and Humans Genetically Similar DiploidM 1,105 10 11/14/06 09:22 PM
by Silversoul
* Evolution, specializtion, and natural selection SeussA 1,206 7 10/02/05 12:36 PM
by trendal

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
14,182 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.