Agreed, I don't just do what the Bible says, its mainly just a guideline, its not like I'm some mindless Bible zombie.alpinestar wrote:
I think for my self I do not need books to tell me what to do, Just use common sense btw Im from catholic family.
I think the vikings beliefs are more true than the bible.. hehe..
Seriusly, I dont really care much about religions, all they do is piss people off and start war against eachother.
Seriusly, I dont really care much about religions, all they do is piss people off and start war against eachother.
i don't get it, cpt. that's probably due to my poor english, but anyway... okay, i guess "statis Que" of parents was a joke, right? well... fine, got it. but is it really illegal to teach evolution theory in some states? .cpt.fass1 wrote:
Well I'm in New Jersey I was taught Evolution, but in some states they are making it illegal I belive to hit the "statis Que" of parents.
you know, i laughed when a guy from US asked me if there really where live bears running loose in Moscow, i asked if he was kidding, was surprised when he answered he wasn't, but i thought maybe some other people told him that to make fun of him, so i calmly answered "no, of course not". another guy didn't know if Russia was in Europe or Asia - actually, it's in both, split with Ural mountains so i thought he might have been counfused because of that - well, i don't know much about US geographic layout too i must admit, so that's okay i guess.
but illegal to teach evolution? in United friggin States of America?!? wtf?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
That kind of goes against freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
thought evolution was always true... look at why a girrafes neck is tall, coz it can eat leaves on tall trees... why the cheeter is fast etc etc.
Maybe the giraffe can eat leaves on tall trees before its tall neck initially permits it.
No it doesn't.Vub wrote:
That kind of goes against freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
All that would do would be to ensure that when kids are being taught science in science class, they get told the scientific explanation, not the religious belief of their teacher (ie. freedom of religion). In a religious education class they will be taught the religious belief.
Oh and as far as evolution is only a theory because there is only lots and lots of evidence and no absolute proof. THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE 100% PROOF OF ANYTHING! That's the whole point of science. It's impossible to test all of everything so we take the evidence we have and make the most logical, methodical conclusions we can from them. There is no actual evidence FOR ID. There is no evidence of god. There is no plausible mechanism by which creation could occur. ID is simply not even a scientific theory. It doesn't explain the available evidence, it doesn't occur via an explainable mechanism and it is impossible to prove it now or ever. Saying we all live in the Matrix is exactly as plausible as ID. Neither are provable now or in the future.
Should we teach our kids that we all live in the matrix?
The link I posted is an absolute proof, You can manipulate timings of evolution within an organizm by disabling genes.....:XDR:.PureFodder wrote:
No it doesn't.Vub wrote:
That kind of goes against freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
All that would do would be to ensure that when kids are being taught science in science class, they get told the scientific explanation, not the religious belief of their teacher (ie. freedom of religion). In a religious education class they will be taught the religious belief.
Oh and as far as evolution is only a theory because there is only lots and lots of evidence and no absolute proof. THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE 100% PROOF OF ANYTHING! That's the whole point of science. It's impossible to test all of everything so we take the evidence we have and make the most logical, methodical conclusions we can from them. There is no actual evidence FOR ID. There is no evidence of god. There is no plausible mechanism by which creation could occur. ID is simply not even a scientific theory. It doesn't explain the available evidence, it doesn't occur via an explainable mechanism and it is impossible to prove it now or ever. Saying we all live in the Matrix is exactly as plausible as ID. Neither are provable now or in the future.
Should we teach our kids that we all live in the matrix?
Read it.
Last edited by alpinestar (2006-08-18 08:24:20)
Yeah, but it does not absolutely PROVE that humans have evolved from apes, etc. It only absolutely proves that the genes of mice can be altered.alpinestar wrote:
The link I posted is an absolute proof, You can manipulate timings of evolution within an organizm by disabling genes....
Read it.
Again, human genetic testing on this scale is not allowed and also it proved that by disabling certain genes will give you a mice when it first started growing ears or brain etc etc...AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
Yeah, but it does not absolutely PROVE that humans have evolved from apes, etc. It only absolutely proves that the genes of mice can be altered.alpinestar wrote:
The link I posted is an absolute proof, You can manipulate timings of evolution within an organizm by disabling genes....
Read it.
yes I know, so you do admit that it doesn't prove a thing about humans. THANK YOU!!!alpinestar wrote:
Again, human genetic testing on this scale is not allowed and also it proved that by disabling certain genes will give you a mice when it first started growing ears or brain etc etc...alpinestar wrote:
The link I posted is an absolute proof
Maybe you just need to specify what you thought the link proved. I think i got confused on that, sorry.
The U of U has a reputation for rubbing the state legislators (a.k.a. the Mormon Church) the wrong way. This doesn't surprise me at all. The U has one of the best medical programs in the US.Ikarti wrote:
Liar. I hunted the dinosaurs to extinction.
I'm surprised it came from the University of Utah though. While I was out in Salt Lake the place had a reputation to be slightly religiously skewed, not nearly as much as BYU though.
No, but it provides a parallel with mice and how they have evolved - if mice did it why not humans?AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
yes I know, so you do admit that it doesn't prove a thing about humans. THANK YOU!!!alpinestar wrote:
Again, human genetic testing on this scale is not allowed and also it proved that by disabling certain genes will give you a mice when it first started growing ears or brain etc etc...alpinestar wrote:
The link I posted is an absolute proof
Maybe you just need to specify what you thought the link proved. I think i got confused on that, sorry.
If this testing was conducted on humans it could have some very interesting results. But, mostly because of religious pressure, genetic testing on humans is quite limited - are religious groups scared by what we might find?
1) BECAUSE THEY ARE MICE, show PROOF for humans, sure its a PARALLEL thats great but it does not ABSOLUTELY prove anything about humans as previously stated HELLO.Bertster7 wrote:
1) No, but it provides a parallel with mice and how they have evolved - if mice did it why not humans?
2) are religious groups scared by what we might find?
2) I'm religious, hell test it one anyone you want (NOT ME) have a blast, I love science, In fact...GASP, I believe both Evolutionism and Creationism, OMG.
Sorry if I seem a little flustered, some other people I've been talking with have had their heads up their asses. Anyways yeah.
well come on, since mice and humans and every other being on this planet share the "mechanics" of genes it doesn´t matter if it was proved on a mouse, a bacterium or a human. if you change the genetic code, something in the organism changes too. if you changed enough in a mouses genetic layout you´d get a human growing.AlbertWesker[RE] wrote:
yes I know, so you do admit that it doesn't prove a thing about humans. THANK YOU!!alpinestar wrote:
Again, human genetic testing on this scale is not allowed and also it proved that by disabling certain genes will give you a mice when it first started growing ears or brain etc etc...alpinestar wrote:
The link I posted is an absolute proof
thats´why ppl can use insulin thats manufactured using pigs gland cells, for example.
btw another real proof for evolution is an experiment with little dayflies called drosphila melanogaster. scientists erased the genes that causes them to grow wings, but within a realtively small number of generations (they don´t live too long) these wings came back - and this was tested several times. i´ll post a link when i find one, i remember this from school.
edit: flies evolution stuff www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050204121028.htm
Last edited by [PED] soul76 (2006-08-18 10:23:38)
to illustrate that the difference between human and mouse is irrelevant:
1) I agree, but it does NOT ABSOLUTELY prove it for humans, that it is my ONE AND ONLY POINT.[PED] soul76 wrote:
1) since mice and humans and every other being on this planet share the "mechanics" of genes it doesn´t matter if it was proved on a mouse, a bacterium or a human.
2) if you change the genetic code, something in the organism changes too.
3) if you changed enough in a mouses genetic layout you´d get a human growing.
4) thats´why ppl can use insulin thats manufactured using pigs gland cells, for example.
5) but within a realtively small number of generations (they don´t live too long)
2) You bet, but humans change differently than mice, we don't have the same genes either, so you can't say that changing one gene in a mouse and even if it is the same type of gene in a human, say that it will have the same effect on a human.
3) WOW, you are......just WOW, highly improbably, mice do not have the same layout to begin with, you would need to ADD genes, and I haven't seen any projects that have proven to be able to do that.
4) Agreed, I agree with the point that genes in other animals are similiar and help us but it does not PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that it is the SAME for humans.
5) Wow some evolution, they die quicker! wow.
Bottom line: I belive in evolution I truly do, but I demand evidence, just like any good scientist, and the evidence of a mouse does not cross over for a human, lets start testing humans!
And your point? That the mouse has an ear, ok, on its back, you have no idea how humans would react to a similiar experiment because we are different in so many ways. Like I said ,test humans. Don't assume.[PED] soul76 wrote:
to illustrate that the difference between human and mouse is irrelevant:
http://bioteach.ubc.ca/TeachingResource … mp;Ear.jpg
Good talking with you, I gotta run though, didn't want you to think I ran away or something. Take it easy.
Al
Al
Well isnt evolution theory pretty much prooved? If we look at animals that are from a million years back or so or even more we can see differences from that time and today at the same species. I dont know exactly when but in the past the horses where only as big as todays dogs. There are many many more examples.
If the species move to a different climate or there isnt enough food the animals need to adapt to the new envirement, and they do or else they die and get extinct. Survival of the fittest!
If the species move to a different climate or there isnt enough food the animals need to adapt to the new envirement, and they do or else they die and get extinct. Survival of the fittest!
the point is that these are "human" genes, illustrating that there is no matter which being stuff is tested on, the mechanics work the same way each time.
i agree that this experiment would have a different outcome on a human, but that laws that govern genetics are the same for every being, making evolution possible.
i agree that this experiment would have a different outcome on a human, but that laws that govern genetics are the same for every being, making evolution possible.
thats just a far fetched example, supposed to mean that genetic layouts are a code you can change, and that you´ll get something entirely different if you change enough. sure thing they don´t do it for real, theres no real point. but it would be possible if you had the mind, money, time and no other hobbies.3) WOW, you are......just WOW, highly improbably, mice do not have the same layout to begin with, you would need to ADD genes, and I haven't seen any projects that have proven to be able to do that.
Last edited by [PED] soul76 (2006-08-18 10:36:09)
It is good to debate this topic but most of us intelligent people know only one way out of this street and it is not a biblical one, sorry to be the one to bring the upsetting news
well i wouldn´t go so far as calling the ID and god-hid-those-trex-bones-to-test-our-belief people exactly unintelligent, just somehow misguided :-)
i´m surprised how civil this discussion is though, kudos for everyone.
i´m surprised how civil this discussion is though, kudos for everyone.
Thanks, now we are done, we can close this thred now. hehe. But I guess som religios americans who arn't teached evolution theory in school still don't agree.btw another real proof for evolution is an experiment with little dayflies called drosphila melanogaster. scientists erased the genes that causes them to grow wings, but within a realtively small number of generations (they don´t live too long) these wings came back - and this was tested several times. i´ll post a link when i find one, i remember this from school.
edit: flies evolution stuff www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050204121028.htm
Yeah, someone close this thread. It's been well established that while there is shitloads of evidence for evolution and on some levels conclusive proof of evolution occuring that it has not been conclusively proven that humans did evolve from primates.snuten_i_sjoholmen wrote:
Thanks, now we are done, we can close this thred now. hehe. But I guess som religios americans who arn't teached evolution theory in school still don't agree.btw another real proof for evolution is an experiment with little dayflies called drosphila melanogaster. scientists erased the genes that causes them to grow wings, but within a realtively small number of generations (they don´t live too long) these wings came back - and this was tested several times. i´ll post a link when i find one, i remember this from school.
edit: flies evolution stuff www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050204121028.htm
Although it is the only theory with any tangible evidence to support it some people believe more in a book written hundreds of years ago about events they had no idea about and did not understand.