deep stuff kilroy0097
15000 die every day due to AIDS.
I wrote a post earlier and it must not have been entered or something. Anyway in that post I placed a defintion of "war" obtained from www.dictionary.com where it was stated in one of the definitions that war is a struggle or conflict between two entities. For example two ant colonies (separate entities) figting over resources (the conflict). Don't try to tell me that I am wrong because I don't "know" the definition of war. All of this coming from you, the same person that doesn't know the definition of billion, and thinks that billions were killed in the holocaust. Nice try though.Saegeblitz wrote:
They don't war. Read the definition of what war is.bs6749 wrote:
Just because ants for example don't have guns, grenade lauchers or any of the weapons that people have when fighting doesn't mean that they don't war against rival colonies. They often war over food and resources to ensure the survival of their colonies.Saegeblitz wrote:
[color=aqua]
No it's not. War is something only humans can do. And by the way, even if Michael Jackson says so, Humans are no race, they are a species divided into races.
I wonder why it is generally assumed that any Aliens would come here to make war? There is the possibility another species would come to find out about us, to start communication and alliance - share technology if possible.
But I sense that would never happen. They'd send an emissary of sorts down, and some one some where is gunna tie it to a dissection table so our scientists can 'better understand'. Then that species will probably blow the fuck out mankind and we'll all die.
OR, that alien race could peek at mankind from light-years away and think ''bugger, what a herd o' twats'' and avoid us completely.
But I sense that would never happen. They'd send an emissary of sorts down, and some one some where is gunna tie it to a dissection table so our scientists can 'better understand'. Then that species will probably blow the fuck out mankind and we'll all die.
OR, that alien race could peek at mankind from light-years away and think ''bugger, what a herd o' twats'' and avoid us completely.
The only thing I can think as a good side of war is the fact that most of inventions and improvements in technology would not have been made without wars.
We are an aggressive bloodthirsty son of a whore species, that's a fact too. However, that does not make war good. If there has been evolution, it has altered the "inner" of us too. Not just the core.
There is no good or sane reason why some are not developed like others. That just is so. Freaks of the nature.
We are an aggressive bloodthirsty son of a whore species, that's a fact too. However, that does not make war good. If there has been evolution, it has altered the "inner" of us too. Not just the core.
There is no good or sane reason why some are not developed like others. That just is so. Freaks of the nature.
Last edited by BudRell (2005-12-13 05:43:14)
Dude! What is it with you and this fucking AIDS kick? Sorry to say it but AIDS is not that big of a deal (at least here in the US). Sure it is bad that many people that have AIDS die each day, but there are only ~1 million infected people in the US. Thats less than .5%. Are you trying to convince everyone with some sort of numbers because I just don't get what you are trying to say. Hepatitis C is more common in the US ~5.5 million people, and nearly all of these are sure to die of liver damage. As of right now there is no cure for Hep C, which is 5 times greater a threat to the people of the US than AIDS. AIDS is treatable, while Hep C is almost sure to kill by damaging the liver. And people with Hep C are way down on the list for transplants if at all because their new liver will be destroyed as well.Saegeblitz wrote:
15000 die every day due to AIDS.
Interesting fact: Nearly all people are infected with a herpes virus.
Haha, that's the most dumbest thing I've ever seen!
So will the Swiss soon be wiped out over time due to evolution?Krappyappy wrote:
evolution requires natural selection.
natural selection requires conflict.
humans can only have meaningful conflict with each other, since no known animal is capable of threatening us.
the human form of conflict is war.
therefore, in order to continue to evolve, humans must keep fighting wars.
it's so simple it's painful. how a self professed student of evolution can fail to understand it is beyond me.
Lack of conflict = no evolution
Yeah and the americans will probably superior soon...
So no evolution leads to death? Look at the sharks people, they haven't changed a shit the last 500 million years or so. Take a look at the human. We have evolved alot the latest time, but we're still the ONLY FUCKING IDIOTS WHO KILL OURSELVES. Realize it people, we are close to killing our host world, no animal does that, no matter how dumb. We are indeed samrt. We don't need any weapons of mass destruction. Take a human and give it a stick.
I don't know who came up with the notion that not evolving leads to death, but this is not right. It also seems like nearly no one in here understands the concept of evolution. To put it simply, INDIVIDUAL ORGANISMS don't evolve. A SPECIES is what evovles. Sure an organism can have mutations in its DNA, but it won't evovle because of these mutations. I am not going to sprout another appendage. My hair color is not going to change from blonde to black (unless I dye it.) Why? Because it is written in my genetic code that I am supposed to have blonde hair.Nehil wrote:
So no evolution leads to death? Look at the sharks people, they haven't changed a shit the last 500 million years or so. Take a look at the human. We have evolved alot the latest time, but we're still the ONLY FUCKING IDIOTS WHO KILL OURSELVES. Realize it people, we are close to killing our host world, no animal does that, no matter how dumb. We are indeed samrt. We don't need any weapons of mass destruction. Take a human and give it a stick.
This point was intended to further your first point, but what do you mean we are the only idiots that kill ourselves? Do you mean suicide, or do you mean kill our own species. I am under the assumption that you believe that we are the only species to kill our own. This is not true. Many fish will eat thier own young. Male spiders are sometimes eaten by the female after mating. Some mother spiders are eaten by their young. Snakes will eat one another. Competing males sometimes fight to the death over females or territory. These are just a few examples but I think that you get my point. They may not do it on such a grand scale as we do but indeed they DO do it.
bs6746 has it almost right. when biologists talk about evolution, they are indeed referring to the species as a whole. but individual organisms do evolve... it is the random changes within each individual, accumulated over time, that results in the species evolving.
so the point about the swiss not evolving is irrelevant. i'm referring to the evolution of the human species as a whole.
as for the lack of evolution equals death, just think about it. if we stopped evolving, we would be the only species to do so. all other living creatures are under constant threat of death from competition and predation, and they are evolving as quickly as they are able to. it would only be a matter of time before we are overtaken by a new, superior species. 99% of all the species that have ever lived have gone extinct, and we will too if we're not careful.
intelligence is somewhat of an evolutionary fluke. thanks to it, we stand a real chance of never going extinct. i suggest we use it.
so the point about the swiss not evolving is irrelevant. i'm referring to the evolution of the human species as a whole.
as for the lack of evolution equals death, just think about it. if we stopped evolving, we would be the only species to do so. all other living creatures are under constant threat of death from competition and predation, and they are evolving as quickly as they are able to. it would only be a matter of time before we are overtaken by a new, superior species. 99% of all the species that have ever lived have gone extinct, and we will too if we're not careful.
intelligence is somewhat of an evolutionary fluke. thanks to it, we stand a real chance of never going extinct. i suggest we use it.
Last edited by Krappyappy (2005-12-13 14:04:09)
Were would my life be without war? No PCgames, no downloading great action movies etc.
No seriously, I actually would like an "Alien" invasion, cause then the world could unite, and we could kick the hell outta them aliens! Its like, when I watched "the thin red line" I always felt sorry for the poor japs getting pwned, but when I saw Starship troopers I just kept on cheering! It was soo kewl watching those aliens being massacred!
No seriously, I actually would like an "Alien" invasion, cause then the world could unite, and we could kick the hell outta them aliens! Its like, when I watched "the thin red line" I always felt sorry for the poor japs getting pwned, but when I saw Starship troopers I just kept on cheering! It was soo kewl watching those aliens being massacred!
No offense meant but I am right. To suggest that an individual organism evolves is not correct. People don't lose the function of their limbs if they don't use them, and certainly if they had children (while in this period of time that they didn't use their limbs) their children would not be born limbless. However, individuals can experience mutations in their genetic code, but these mutations are only passed on to later generations, provided that they are able to sucessfully reproduce. It is one of the fundamental properties behind Darwin's theory of evolution. To believe otherwise is to have a Lamarckian train of thought, which has very, very little supporting evidence (if any at all) compared to that of Darwinism.Krappyappy wrote:
bs6746 has it almost right. when biologists talk about evolution, they are indeed referring to the species as a whole. but individual organisms do evolve... it is the random changes within each individual, accumulated over time, that results in the species evolving.
so the point about the swiss not evolving is irrelevant. i'm referring to the evolution of the human species as a whole.
as for the lack of evolution equals death, just think about it. if we stopped evolving, we would be the only species to do so. all other living creatures are under constant threat of death from competition and predation, and they are evolving as quickly as they are able to. it would only be a matter of time before we are overtaken by a new, superior species. 99% of all the species that have ever lived have gone extinct, and we will too if we're not careful.
intelligence is somewhat of an evolutionary fluke. thanks to it, we stand a real chance of never going extinct. i suggest we use it.
to say that individual organisms do not evolve is incorrect. the evolution of the genetic code takes place on an individual-to-individual level. once the code and mutations have been determined, the organism does not change for the rest of its life. but at the very beginning, during fertilisation, changes do happen.
oh for christs sake... I can't take it anymore. I don't even know exactly what I wrote the last time I posted in this thread. you win. war is good, its preparing our defenses for when the walking great white sharks from pluto come and try to eat us.
and bs6749 - people DO lose the function of their limbs if they don't use them, its called atrophy and you don't have to have a M.D. to know that. There is TONS of evidence to suggest individual organisms evolve, you have some in your own guts I suppose. The human appendix for example. If individuals don't evolve, even in a single life cycle, then how would you explain a blind man's ability to hear above and beyond others? yadada - insert mutliple other supporting points.
am I mistaken or were you just trying to make a case that hepatitis C is worse then AIDS??? I got news for you one of those is much more treatable than the other, and only one has a %100 death rate, I'll let you guess which one that is, but seeing as you weren't aware that people don't lose the use of limbs from not using them I suppose I should give you a hint... AIDS. If I had to choose I can sure tell you I wouldn't pick AIDS.
this thread even has me agreeing with the people I disagree with, and I have no sarcasm left in me, which is a first for me. sadly, I feel if I don't retire from it soon I will EVOLVE into a raving lunatic.
and bs6749 - people DO lose the function of their limbs if they don't use them, its called atrophy and you don't have to have a M.D. to know that. There is TONS of evidence to suggest individual organisms evolve, you have some in your own guts I suppose. The human appendix for example. If individuals don't evolve, even in a single life cycle, then how would you explain a blind man's ability to hear above and beyond others? yadada - insert mutliple other supporting points.
am I mistaken or were you just trying to make a case that hepatitis C is worse then AIDS??? I got news for you one of those is much more treatable than the other, and only one has a %100 death rate, I'll let you guess which one that is, but seeing as you weren't aware that people don't lose the use of limbs from not using them I suppose I should give you a hint... AIDS. If I had to choose I can sure tell you I wouldn't pick AIDS.
this thread even has me agreeing with the people I disagree with, and I have no sarcasm left in me, which is a first for me. sadly, I feel if I don't retire from it soon I will EVOLVE into a raving lunatic.
Last edited by dshak (2005-12-14 01:18:22)
I'm with ya bro.dshak wrote:
oh for christs sake... I can't take it anymore. I don't even know exactly what I wrote the last time I posted in this thread. you win. war is good, its preparing our defenses for when the walking great white sharks from pluto come and try to eat us.
and bs6749 - people DO lose the function of their limbs if they don't use them, its called atrophy and you don't have to have a M.D. to know that. There is TONS of evidence to suggest individual organisms evolve, you have some in your own guts I suppose. The human appendix for example. If individuals don't evolve, even in a single life cycle, then how would you explain a blind man's ability to hear above and beyond others? yadada - insert mutliple other supporting points.
am I mistaken or were you just trying to make a case that hepatitis C is worse then AIDS??? I got news for you one of those is much more treatable than the other, and only one has a %100 death rate, I'll let you guess which one that is, but seeing as you weren't aware that people don't lose the use of limbs from not using them I suppose I should give you a hint... AIDS. If I had to choose I can sure tell you I wouldn't pick AIDS.
this thread even has me agreeing with the people I disagree with, and I have no sarcasm left in me, which is a first for me. sadly, I feel if I don't retire from it soon I will EVOLVE into a raving lunatic.
I ment that there are no for example snakes that try to kill all snakes. But there are some human wackos that try to do so (not kill the snakes).bs6749 wrote:
They may not do it on such a grand scale as we do but indeed they DO do it.
Last edited by Nehil (2005-12-14 14:49:00)
I think that we both we talking about a grown being to begin with unless you think that embryos can fight wars.Krappyappy wrote:
to say that individual organisms do not evolve is incorrect. the evolution of the genetic code takes place on an individual-to-individual level. once the code and mutations have been determined, the organism does not change for the rest of its life. but at the very beginning, during fertilisation, changes do happen.
This is not evolution anyways. It is merely development by means of following the organism's genetic code's instructions. EVOLUTION (SCIENTIFICALLY) IS NOT THE CHANGES IN AN ORGANISM (WHICH ARE MUTATIONS) BUT CHANGES WITHIN A SPECIES.
Yes you are right about atrophy and I didn't mean to post exactly what I wrote. What I meant to say is that the offspring of someone who doesn't use there limbs won't be born limbless because of this. Sorry, my error. I don't consider your example of a blind man having a heightened sense of hearing to be evolution, and I know that most credible scientist would agree with me. It is merely adaption and I can prove this simply. As I stated before, ONLY A SPECIES EVOLVES. This evolution is from new traits (mutations in an organism's own genetic code) being passed on to its offspring. As far as I am aware your blind man experienced NO MUTATION IN HIS GENETIC CODE that would allow for a heightened sense of hearing (this wouldn't even happen anyway). Therefore his children would not have heightened hearing or be a carrier for the trait. Therefore not evolution, sorry. Maybe take a biology class if you want to know some general information...just a suggestion Lamark.dshak wrote:
oh for christs sake... I can't take it anymore. I don't even know exactly what I wrote the last time I posted in this thread. you win. war is good, its preparing our defenses for when the walking great white sharks from pluto come and try to eat us.
and bs6749 - people DO lose the function of their limbs if they don't use them, its called atrophy and you don't have to have a M.D. to know that. There is TONS of evidence to suggest individual organisms evolve, you have some in your own guts I suppose. The human appendix for example. If individuals don't evolve, even in a single life cycle, then how would you explain a blind man's ability to hear above and beyond others? yadada - insert mutliple other supporting points.
am I mistaken or were you just trying to make a case that hepatitis C is worse then AIDS??? I got news for you one of those is much more treatable than the other, and only one has a %100 death rate, I'll let you guess which one that is, but seeing as you weren't aware that people don't lose the use of limbs from not using them I suppose I should give you a hint... AIDS. If I had to choose I can sure tell you I wouldn't pick AIDS.
this thread even has me agreeing with the people I disagree with, and I have no sarcasm left in me, which is a first for me. sadly, I feel if I don't retire from it soon I will EVOLVE into a raving lunatic.
By the way, Hep C. IS more of a threat than AIDS in the U.S., well at least according to my medical micro professor. He's got a Ph.D afterall and attends annual confrences on this subject. I will give you the facts once I find my old notes or am able to contact him. I don't want to post wrong information which may mislead people as you have done.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/marslife.htmldshak wrote:
there hasn't been any bacteria found on the moon. or mars. you "heard" wrong.
http://www.panspermia.org/marslife.htm
Explain, Mr. Hawking.
LOL. Thanks man. I didn't really feel like looking this up because I knew that I and whoever posted before me were correct, and thought no need to try to prove dshak wrong. But it seems that you have and these links further prove my ongoing point that dshak has no clue what he is talking about and simply posts wrong information (usually twice). I do believe dshak has been owned.Psycho wrote:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/marslife.htmldshak wrote:
there hasn't been any bacteria found on the moon. or mars. you "heard" wrong.
http://www.panspermia.org/marslife.htm
Explain, Mr. Hawking.
I don't have time the next few days to post my facts on the Hep C. thing, so it will probabably be this Sat. or Sun. before they are on here. And I do believe that I proved with numbers that Hep C. is worse than AIDS... 5 million or so vs. 1 million. It doesn't take a mathematician to see that it is 5 times more prevalent.
Evolution is a word that is branded about far to frequently.
people don't evolve, they "change".
if I lose a bodily function, I adapt, I don't evolve.
I`d like someone to explain in layman's terms how exactly evolution started.
Mutation is a defect and usually dies. I mean, which line are we going on here? did we start as fish that came on the land? were we simply microbial life that started to have defects and then evolve?
for a species to evolve it has to start somewhere.
heading back to the disease scenario, will ppl eventually develop immunity to our most virulent disease?
how does someone develop immunity to a disease that destroys our immunity for instance ?? ppl with the disease will die.
and their offspring will have a genetic flaw that makes them susceptible to the same problem,
Doctor: "is there is a history of heart disease in your family?"
Patient: "oh don't worry, my 100th progeny is going have a flaw that will make him immune" (the doctor shakes his head despairingly).....
If someone causes me harm, or intends to, I defend myself.
I may hit them with my fist, my foot, my head, I may throw something at them, I may run away.
in any case, I am not making war, I am reacting as my instincts dictate.
those instincts give me a very strong urge for self preservation, fear being the main cause.
fear is healthy, its your body's alarm bell.
in a situation where I can potentially be harmed, I will do whatever I need to do to get away from the situation,
instinctively. and when I am safe from danger, happy that I have survived, do I go looking for this thing that caused me harm and try to make "war" ? it is not instinctive to put ones-self in harms way, to avoid trouble by our internal alarm system, "fear", is. as is also to react, not to harm, but React.
as to war:
If someone causes me harm, or intends to, I defend myself.
I may hit them with my fist, my foot, my head, I may throw something at them, I may run away.
in any case, I am not making war, I am reacting as my instincts dictate.
those instincts give me a very strong urge for self preservation, the same as most other living matter on this planet, fear being the main cause.
fear is healthy, its your body's alarm bell.
in a situation where I can potentially be harmed, I will do whatever I need to do to get away from the situation,
instinctively. and when I am safe from danger, happy that I have survived, do I go looking for this thing that caused me harm & put myself in the same situation to possibly get my own back?
It is not instinctive to put ones-self in harms way, to avoid trouble by our internal alarm system, "fear", Is. as is also to react, not to harm, but React.
To quote John Lennon loosely,
Reporter: "so what your saying is, that when Adolph Hitler marched his troops into Poland we should have just gave him a hug??"
Lennon: "No, but if we`d had hugged him a bit more when he was growing up, maybe he wouldn't have turned out the way he did"
We must remember what kind of world we live I, and its influences.
"I am not bothered how much I get paid, what bothers me is the difference between what I get and what my boss gets"...
A world where a pampered pet`s welfare is placed above that of a homeless person on the street, cannot be at a level of wisdom that would say & act on :-
"hey, how many Einstein's, Newton's, Kings, Ghandi's, Elvis, Lennons etc... have we killed in our wars? I wonder what the world would be like with a few more of those ppl in it. Maybe its time to stop killing each other and start living, and see how it goes!".
I hope one day to live in a world where ppl dont hurt each other, where ppl are honest about who they are. where we work together for each other, im not talking commies or wot-not I just think that ppl all want the same things, just slightly differently, i.e., good home,food in fridge,fun with friends etc...
these things are good, slicing someone's head off with a .50 cal round cos the leader of their country disagrees with someone else oil policy isn't!
I could go on forever on this subject, ill sum it up with this.
Bf is a great game, I like playing it, its fun, but its a game, and its where war should stay.
ill prob get flamed to death now, but i dont care, im too tired.
"Evolution" = Cirular reasoning at its best...?
people don't evolve, they "change".
if I lose a bodily function, I adapt, I don't evolve.
I`d like someone to explain in layman's terms how exactly evolution started.
Mutation is a defect and usually dies. I mean, which line are we going on here? did we start as fish that came on the land? were we simply microbial life that started to have defects and then evolve?
for a species to evolve it has to start somewhere.
heading back to the disease scenario, will ppl eventually develop immunity to our most virulent disease?
how does someone develop immunity to a disease that destroys our immunity for instance ?? ppl with the disease will die.
and their offspring will have a genetic flaw that makes them susceptible to the same problem,
Doctor: "is there is a history of heart disease in your family?"
Patient: "oh don't worry, my 100th progeny is going have a flaw that will make him immune" (the doctor shakes his head despairingly).....
If someone causes me harm, or intends to, I defend myself.
I may hit them with my fist, my foot, my head, I may throw something at them, I may run away.
in any case, I am not making war, I am reacting as my instincts dictate.
those instincts give me a very strong urge for self preservation, fear being the main cause.
fear is healthy, its your body's alarm bell.
in a situation where I can potentially be harmed, I will do whatever I need to do to get away from the situation,
instinctively. and when I am safe from danger, happy that I have survived, do I go looking for this thing that caused me harm and try to make "war" ? it is not instinctive to put ones-self in harms way, to avoid trouble by our internal alarm system, "fear", is. as is also to react, not to harm, but React.
as to war:
If someone causes me harm, or intends to, I defend myself.
I may hit them with my fist, my foot, my head, I may throw something at them, I may run away.
in any case, I am not making war, I am reacting as my instincts dictate.
those instincts give me a very strong urge for self preservation, the same as most other living matter on this planet, fear being the main cause.
fear is healthy, its your body's alarm bell.
in a situation where I can potentially be harmed, I will do whatever I need to do to get away from the situation,
instinctively. and when I am safe from danger, happy that I have survived, do I go looking for this thing that caused me harm & put myself in the same situation to possibly get my own back?
It is not instinctive to put ones-self in harms way, to avoid trouble by our internal alarm system, "fear", Is. as is also to react, not to harm, but React.
To quote John Lennon loosely,
Reporter: "so what your saying is, that when Adolph Hitler marched his troops into Poland we should have just gave him a hug??"
Lennon: "No, but if we`d had hugged him a bit more when he was growing up, maybe he wouldn't have turned out the way he did"
We must remember what kind of world we live I, and its influences.
"I am not bothered how much I get paid, what bothers me is the difference between what I get and what my boss gets"...
A world where a pampered pet`s welfare is placed above that of a homeless person on the street, cannot be at a level of wisdom that would say & act on :-
"hey, how many Einstein's, Newton's, Kings, Ghandi's, Elvis, Lennons etc... have we killed in our wars? I wonder what the world would be like with a few more of those ppl in it. Maybe its time to stop killing each other and start living, and see how it goes!".
I hope one day to live in a world where ppl dont hurt each other, where ppl are honest about who they are. where we work together for each other, im not talking commies or wot-not I just think that ppl all want the same things, just slightly differently, i.e., good home,food in fridge,fun with friends etc...
these things are good, slicing someone's head off with a .50 cal round cos the leader of their country disagrees with someone else oil policy isn't!
I could go on forever on this subject, ill sum it up with this.
Bf is a great game, I like playing it, its fun, but its a game, and its where war should stay.
ill prob get flamed to death now, but i dont care, im too tired.
"Evolution" = Cirular reasoning at its best...?
Last edited by Mrkite007 (2005-12-14 19:29:50)
I don't think that you will get flamed at all. You seems to KNOW that people don't evovle, unlike dshak with his appendix example. What was your point with that by the way? Does the appendix "evolve" into something that I am everyone else are unaware of? Maybe dshak you will see that there are people out there that know the basic principles of evolution, and that you can't fool them that you are right with your nonsense posts that you often post twice. Did I already mention about you double posting? I am not sure so I will merely post it again. Or maybe I will submit this post twice to prove myself to be twice as credible as you. Anyway enough on the topic of you double posting.
hey I know.... please, one more time mention about the double posting thing... which I had nothing to do with. I find generally when people are mad, have their feelings hurt, or just plain don't like what someone else has to say, they tend to do things like that.
both those posted links talk about cirmunstantial evidence and not definitive evidence, and for every link you find for your case I have been able to find counter points. hell the one I linked below comes from the SAME source as one of the other two articles.
Oh, and how exactly do you explain the exceptional development of sensory perception when deprived of sight??? since you are so convinced most credible scientist would agree with you, an argument you support with no evidence by the way. evolution is, at its fundamental base, physical adaptation... so then how would you explain it? please, I'm all ears, educate me oh great mind.
http://www.msss.com/http/ps/life/life.html
- in case your too lazy to look I highlighted a paragraph for you:
The most important result for the detection of life came not from the biology experiment, but from the GCMS. It found no trace of any organic compound on the surface of Mars. Organic compounds are known to be present in space (for example, in meteorites), so this result came as a complete surprise. (this is from the original findings of the Viking mission)
the original post wasn't saying "there was probably once life on mars," the post, which I disagreed with... I think in EXACT words was something like "I heard they found bacteria on mars and the moon." THEY didn't find anything on mars.
BS are very appropriate begining letters for your name. see, look, I can be a know it all asshole to! what fun
also, JACKASS - evidence suggests that the appendix, a completely useless organ, was most likely used to help digest raw meat in prehistoric and early modern humans. interestingly enough there are primitive tribes in South America and Africa which have enlarged appendix and increased blood flow, indicating an intermediate step in the ATROPHY of the organ. conclusive, not a chance, but no less conclusive than the meteor in antarctica.
Nobody, including me, ever said that evolutionary characteristics are passed through a single generation... no really, read back through every post, never said it... however arguing that the process doesn't occur simply because genetic replication doesn't occur in a single generation is assanine and ignorant.
by the way, you're a prick. unlike you, in all of my postings, sarcastic as they were, I never felt small enough to need to attack someone else personally. You come back with "you're wrong and I'm right." yeah, thats a good argument, lots of supporting evidence. WELL DONE.
both those posted links talk about cirmunstantial evidence and not definitive evidence, and for every link you find for your case I have been able to find counter points. hell the one I linked below comes from the SAME source as one of the other two articles.
Oh, and how exactly do you explain the exceptional development of sensory perception when deprived of sight??? since you are so convinced most credible scientist would agree with you, an argument you support with no evidence by the way. evolution is, at its fundamental base, physical adaptation... so then how would you explain it? please, I'm all ears, educate me oh great mind.
http://www.msss.com/http/ps/life/life.html
- in case your too lazy to look I highlighted a paragraph for you:
The most important result for the detection of life came not from the biology experiment, but from the GCMS. It found no trace of any organic compound on the surface of Mars. Organic compounds are known to be present in space (for example, in meteorites), so this result came as a complete surprise. (this is from the original findings of the Viking mission)
the original post wasn't saying "there was probably once life on mars," the post, which I disagreed with... I think in EXACT words was something like "I heard they found bacteria on mars and the moon." THEY didn't find anything on mars.
BS are very appropriate begining letters for your name. see, look, I can be a know it all asshole to! what fun
also, JACKASS - evidence suggests that the appendix, a completely useless organ, was most likely used to help digest raw meat in prehistoric and early modern humans. interestingly enough there are primitive tribes in South America and Africa which have enlarged appendix and increased blood flow, indicating an intermediate step in the ATROPHY of the organ. conclusive, not a chance, but no less conclusive than the meteor in antarctica.
Nobody, including me, ever said that evolutionary characteristics are passed through a single generation... no really, read back through every post, never said it... however arguing that the process doesn't occur simply because genetic replication doesn't occur in a single generation is assanine and ignorant.
by the way, you're a prick. unlike you, in all of my postings, sarcastic as they were, I never felt small enough to need to attack someone else personally. You come back with "you're wrong and I'm right." yeah, thats a good argument, lots of supporting evidence. WELL DONE.
Last edited by dshak (2005-12-14 21:24:00)