Recommended Answers
Jump to PostI think in science it is widely known that all cells are intelligent. From what I have learn't from a Biology course, each cell has programmed into it a set of instructions. For example, a human airborn virus is basically a bunch of cells programmed to infect other cells to …
Jump to PostYea. I wonder why those scientest don't test evolution by iscolating living creatures in a controlled environment and see if they adapt to the environment like evolution suggests. That would save the time and effort at looking for fossles to prove evolution.
Er, this has already been mentioned in this …
Jump to PostMaybe we can out with humor
Jump to PostNo evidence, thats the difference between theory and conjecture
Jump to PostI just realised that this thread relates to a movie series called Stargate. For all we know there could be a burried stargate in egypt where 10000 years ago the achients could have enhabited the planet and transported species from a variety of planets from the universe. Crazy theory but …
All 146 Replies
SP clips, on YouTube, always get deleted. A more official link:
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/155351
I strongly believe in evolution and I even suspected of a simular thing happening (common ancestry) before I even heard the first thing about evolution. And the southpark clip is very funny in the way it explains it. But unfortunately only 40% of Americans believe in evolution because it contradicts with the legends of the pesence of a god.
If you watched the response given by the Governor of Louisiana a few days ago, you wonder if there is evolution.
I believe in creation. Simply put, you don't come across a cabin in the woods and think, "wow, it must have built itself!" (Same fits a well designed PC...like mine! hehe) When you look at the fact of how the world works in the design itself, it didn't just happen, it had to be constructed. The exact distance from the sun to survive, not freeze to death or burn up, the oxygen levels not too much not too low, water. These things didn't just POP and now we have a perfect home, it was created.
I believe in creation. Simply put, you don't come across a cabin in the woods and think, "wow, it must have built itself!" (Same fits a well designed PC...like mine! hehe) When you look at the fact of how the world works in the design itself, it didn't just happen, it had to be constructed. The exact distance from the sun to survive, not freeze to death or burn up, the oxygen levels not too much not too low, water. These things didn't just POP and now we have a perfect home, it was created.
You are just trolling, right!? You aren't really dragging out those tired old 'watchmaker' cliches as some sort of disproof of evolution.
The planet did not always have an oxygen atmosphere, it was changed by what we now call extremophiles that 'ate' the old atmosphere and 'shat' Oxygen. wrt "the perfect distance from the sun' - er, we evolved for the environment we have not the environment we wanted (to bastardize an infamous political leader).
Well, just in case you believe what you stated - would you please explain MRSA, fossils, -- well, if you can explain just those 2, I will donate my points to you.
If you watched the response given by the Governor of Louisiana a few days ago, you wonder if there is evolution.
Can you believe how lame that was!! And he was the 'new, improved' Republican and their next presidential candidate. He dropped such a brick, he will probably disappear (unless he joins the Palin ticket).
I believe in creation. Simply put, you don't come across a cabin in the woods and think, "wow, it must have built itself!" (Same fits a well designed PC...like mine! hehe)
Well from my understanding of evolution it is about the development of living organisms and I wouldn't call a PC or a cabin a living organism. There for evolution wins again.
You will probably find that the origin of species is largley impaction on what happened during the time we know as the big bang. The beginning of the universe when planets suddenly came into existance probably from something in the parallel universe going terribly wrong.
Speaking of the Big Bang -- where did that huge gas ball come from anyway? What was there before the BB ? Don't you think we humans are just too ignorant to understand all that yet? Even if God did explain it exactly to us it would have the same affect as us trying to explain TV to Julius Ceasar or even worse to Moses.
Hi, Interesting ideas and all have a point. My own thoughts on the subject: The word 'evolution' is an evolution of the word 'evolve'.
If you take Ford's early Model T automobile and compare it with their present day models -,there is little or no comparison. Yet, that is just the result of - over the years - following up on the original plan or idea, removing weak links; making adjustments and improvments until they reached the present day level. You can call that the evolution of the auto, how it evolved. Humanity and society also, has evolved from a lower or primative state to a rellative higher one. Each one of us, by the very fact of our life's experiences, evolve, from our early attempts at walking to the development of our personality, and the handling of the many difficult, and otherwise, situations that confronts us. Nature and wildlife also, adapt and modify as the neee arises. So, I think evolution is a basic fact of existence, and, if it is presented properly as such, it does not conflict with a belief in a Creator, whether you call that creator God, Yahweh, Allah, or by anyother name. I think that it really hammers home the awesome wisdom of this Creator or First Cause.
So, I think evolution is a basic fact of existence, and, if it is presented properly as such, it does not conflict with a belief in a Creator, whether you call that creator God, Yahweh, Allah, or by anyother name. I think that it really hammers home the awesome wisdom of this Creator or First Cause.
I tend to agree with that, but creationists do not. A true creationist believes God created everything as they appear today -- no evolution involed in the process. They believe in the literal interpretation of the first few verses in Genesis, that the earth and everything on it were created in just 6 earth days. Well, I suppose since God can do anything He could have done things like that, but I doubt that He did. And the scientific studies over the past couple centuries or so have shown that too. Also logic dictates that the earth could not have possibly cooled enough in just 1 day to support life as we know it. In the beginning the earth was just molten lava, very hostil to life. It would have taken several million years to support life.
yep.
take antibiotic resistant bacteria for one example.
Yea, a good example and, when you start using your hands for some hard graft such as shoveling coal or rock climbing; at first the skin will be torn and blisters will appear but, if you continue, nature, or your inbuilt evolutionary clock will kick in and you will develop thicker skin and welts on the parts of the hand where needed.
Yea, a good example and, when you start using your hands for some hard graft such as shoveling coal or rock climbing; at first the skin will be torn and blisters will appear but, if you continue, nature, or your inbuilt evolutionary clock will kick in and you will develop thicker skin and welts on the parts of the hand where needed.
That is not evolution but adaptation; let us not drag Lamarck into this or we won't get anywhere (not that we will anyway). There is no inbuilt evolutionary clock (whatever that is), the body adapts to how it is used. Muscles change according to usage, skin toughens when rubbed.
Just to put a fine point on it - MRSA (Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is a bacterium that causes infections in different parts of the body.) is the result of the misuse of common antibiotics. Currently more people in the US die from MRSA than from AIDS (2005 statistics).
Speaking of the Big Bang -- where did that huge gas ball come from anyway? What was there before the BB ? Don't you think we humans are just too ignorant to understand all that yet? Even if God did explain it exactly to us it would have the same affect as us trying to explain TV to Julius Ceasar or even worse to Moses.
Yeah, the question of first causes has always been an interesting question. That is one of the reasons that the lack of visible anti-matter is puzzling. It has long been accepted that particles can appear in a vacuum as long as there has been no overall change in the total 'energy' in the system - say a proton and an anti-proton or a quark and its anti. The BB theory posits that for all the matter in the universe should be balanced by and equivalent amount of anti-matter.
Some seem to think that 'dark' matter and/or 'dark' energy may be the answer to the missing anti-matter. The search for dark matter has lead to some interesting acronyms.
The two main categories that scientists consider as possible candidates for dark matter have been dubbed MACHOs (Massive Astrophysical Compact Halo Objects), and WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles). Although these acronyms are amusing, they can help you remember which is which. MACHOs are the big, strong dark matter objects ranging in size from small stars to super massive black holes (1). MACHOs are made of 'ordinary' matter, which is called baryonic matter. WIMPs, on the other hand, are the little weak subatomic dark matter candidates, which are thought to be made of stuff other than ordinary matter, called non-baryonic matter. Astronomers search for MACHOs and particle physicists look for WIMPs.
no.. because I look like a rabbit.. (just kidding) ahihihih ...
You should probably start a new thread for this - unless you want to tie this in to Evolution.
Generally speaking dis/belief in evolution has no direct correlation to dis/belief in god - though I am willing to bet heavily on the proposition that 99% of the people who do not believe in evolution believe in god; the obverse is not true.
Yea, I agree, my "inbuilt evolutionary clock" was a bad attempt at a quick metaphor. However, you agree that the scenario I was describing was adaptation and, that is exactly the modus operandi] of evolution: adapt, overcome and develope. Let's be certain just exactly what we are discussing here. The meaning of the word 'evolution', which stems from the word 'evolute', is: To unroll, expand and, when applied to animal and vegetable organisms or their parts: The process of developing from a rudimentary to a complete or more complex state - that that takes place is a ' no-brainer'. But, you cannot develope the argument by sweeping statements like: "Muscles change according to usage" or, explaining away antibiotic resistant bacteria, or MRSA, as the result of bad medical practice. You have to know what is taking place in the processes. All animal and vegetable organisms, even the most primative, are composed of cells that grow, devide, die and renew themselves, and demonstrate an intelligence in the way they build repair the organism, and recact to changes in their environment.
Q: How can you tell when politicians are telling lies>
A: You can see their lips moving.
Yea, I agree, my "inbuilt evolutionary clock" was a bad attempt at a quick metaphor. However, you agree that the scenario I was describing was adaptation and, that is exactly the modus operandi] of evolution: adapt, overcome and develope.
Nope! that is not how evolution works. What you are describing is Lamarckian - a disproven theory that <sort of> says "if you cut the tales off of all the mice, eventually, the mice will breed only tailless mice"
Let's be certain just exactly what we are discussing here. The meaning of the word 'evolution', which stems from the word 'evolute',
evolute means the locus of the center of curvature or the envelope of the normals of a curve". Evolution is the noun form of the verb 'evolve' " to produce by natural evolutionary processes"
is: To unroll, expand and, when applied to animal and vegetable organisms or their parts: The process of developing from a rudimentary to a complete or more complex state - that that takes place is a ' no-brainer'. But, you cannot develope the argument by sweeping statements like: "Muscles change according to usage" or, explaining away antibiotic resistant bacteria, or MRSA, as the result of bad medical practice. You have to know what is taking place in the processes.
I know exactly what I am saying; I am not explaining anything away. I am beginning to think that you do not know what you are talking about.
All animal and vegetable organisms, even the most primative, are composed of cells that grow, devide, die and renew themselves, and demonstrate an intelligence in the way they build repair the organism, and recact to changes in their environment.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here - are you implying that individual cells are intelligent?
Q: How can you tell when politicians are telling lies>
A: You can see their lips moving.
WTF??? Where did this come from? how does it apply to the topic at hand? Are you implying that ventriloquist politicians do not lie?
All animal and vegetable organisms, even the most primative, are composed of cells that grow, devide, die and renew themselves, and demonstrate an intelligence in the way they build repair the organism, and recact to changes in their environment.
I am not sure what you are trying to say here - are you implying that individual cells are intelligent?
I think in science it is widely known that all cells are intelligent. From what I have learn't from a Biology course, each cell has programmed into it a set of instructions. For example, a human airborn virus is basically a bunch of cells programmed to infect other cells to enter the system. Example, if the virus first infects the blood cells like a lot of viruses do, it will get into your system quicker. That is when our immune system gets into place destroying nasty cells and some of its surrounding cells. While the immune system is at work, the virus attempts to effect parts of the body where it can then spread to other humans while doing whatever it was programmed. Some might say this is an effect of creationism where an agent created a virus but I believe it is more likely to be a effect of evolution where somebody sneases then the bacteria that sneasing creates then grows until it form new life or in the above example a virus.
What about the creationist.. they describe the weakness of evo.. bio-molecules opposite on the evo scenario.. they are conflict..
sorry I just don't understand..
I think in science it is widely known that all cells are intelligent. From what I have learn't from a Biology course, each cell has programmed into it a set of instructions. For example, a human airborn virus is basically a bunch of cells programmed to infect other cells to enter the system. Example, if the virus first infects the blood cells like a lot of viruses do, it will get into your system quicker. That is when our immune system gets into place destroying nasty cells and some of its surrounding cells. While the immune system is at work, the virus attempts to effect parts of the body where it can then spread to other humans while doing whatever it was programmed. Some might say this is an effect of creationism where an agent created a virus but I believe it is more likely to be a effect of evolution where somebody sneases then the bacteria that sneasing creates then grows until it form new life or in the above example a virus.
I will accept that cells can follow certain programming using rDNA and RNA to build new proteins; with this I can see how as cells begin to 'network' and eventually build up to intelligence but that is probably for another time. The body is flushed with so many different messages and messengers - it is a magnificent machine. But I can't accept intelligent cells, this might be my age. I googled around a bit and did find some references but no evidence.
I will accept that cells can follow certain programming using rDNA and RNA to build new proteins; with this I can see how as cells begin to 'network' and eventually build up to intelligence but that is probably for another time. The body is flushed with so many different messages and messengers - it is a magnificent machine. But I can't accept intelligent cells, this might be my age. I googled around a bit and did find some references but no evidence.
Debates on evolution that revolve around, whether you believe Darwin's theory of how we came about, or the literal acceptance of the first book of the Christian bible, generally lead nowhere, as participants usually have rigid beliefs, I thinkthis is the best routeto take, as the cell is the building block of life; your at the "coal face"in a manner of speak. You have good input there, and your right, the question of intelligence can come later. Children at play will form themselves into small groups, each group will then take, almost an existence of it own, with an overall mindset and drive to preserve itself, so will a street gang. In a sense, cells in an organism do much the same, there are cells for making bone, cells for making muscle, cells for repairing the body and, cells for fighting off 'outside invasion' - "warrior cells" if you like. Whether the body stays healthy or diseased, how antibiotics work, or not, and the formation MRSA, all depend in how the cells perform.
We were fish then we grew legs as we came out of the water then we changed to dinosaurs then we changed to mammals then we changed to monkeys then we changed to people (watch the simpsons if you got lost)
Nope! that is not how evolution works. What you are describing is Lamarckian - a disproven theory that <sort of> says "if you cut the tales off of all the mice, eventually, the mice will breed only tailless mice"evolute means the locus of the center of curvature or the envelope of the normals of a curve". Evolution is the noun form of the verb 'evolve' " to produce by natural evolutionary processes"I know exactly what I am saying; I am not explaining anything away. I am beginning to think that you do not know what you are talking about.I am not sure what you are trying to say here - are you implying that individual cells are intelligent?WTF??? Where did this come from? how does it apply to the topic at hand? Are you implying that ventriloquist politicians do not lie?
The joke about the politicians was meant to lighten you up man, you sound so angry. And the joke was in the implication that polliticians lie all the time, therefor is their lips move to speak you they ar telling lies - Got it?
The joke about the politicians was meant to lighten you up man, you sound so angry. And the joke was in the implication that polliticians lie all the time, therefor is their lips move to speak you they ar telling lies - Got it?
Did you get my reference about ventriloquists? Politicians who are ventriloquists do not move their lips therefore they do not lie - dude, I get jokes; I make jokes but I try to make appropriate jokes or relevant jokes.
I really do not need someone to 'lighten' me up; just because I question other people's beliefs does not mean I am angry; the anger you see is yours not mine.
What you consider a 'politician' joke is also told about lawyers, salesmen, etc. and really did not strike me as funny when I heard it 30 years ago (I admit I thought it was funny when I first heard it 50 years ago)
I think in science it is widely known that all cells are intelligent. From what I have learn't from a Biology course, each cell has programmed into it a set of instructions. For example, a human airborn virus is basically a bunch of cells programmed to infect other cells to enter the system. Example, if the virus first infects the blood cells like a lot of viruses do, it will get into your system quicker. That is when our immune system gets into place destroying nasty cells and some of its surrounding cells. While the immune system is at work, the virus attempts to effect parts of the body where it can then spread to other humans while doing whatever it was programmed. Some might say this is an effect of creationism where an agent created a virus but I believe it is more likely to be a effect of evolution where somebody sneases then the bacteria that sneasing creates then grows until it form new life or in the above example a virus.
Yea, that is on the right track. The body is composed of cells; these cells are organised in groups; there are cells that only make bone; cells for muscle, hair teeth etc. Then there are armies of cells that act as guardians of the entire body, and which attack any foreign body that infiltrates the system etc. They will faithfully continue to do this until something goes wrong, and their work is knocked out of sync. If throuhg some fault in the system, a virus or bacterial infection forms, the grouping of cells of which it consists will begin working like a seperate entity, and keep building and defending itself. When an antibacterial/viral agent enters the body, it may kill of the 'rogue' cell entity, but if the condition in the system,which caused the virus or bacterial entity persists, then the defense mechanism within these 'rouge' entities will gradually adapt to the new environment and will alter to overcome the effects of the antibacterial treatment, this is what happens in the case of MRSA, and when rats and other insects become immune to poisons. Cancerous growths are the result of cells going haywire ie. when bone growing cells start accumulating in ares of soft tisse for instance, or cells for forming teeth start 'rougue' communities or tumours in the liver etc. If these growths are malign, then they can be safely removed, but it malignant they will have roots which may be removable.
Did you get my reference about ventriloquists? Politicians who are ventriloquists do not move their lips therefore they do not lie - dude, I get jokes; I make jokes but I try to make appropriate jokes or relevant jokes.
I really do not need someone to 'lighten' me up; just because I question other people's beliefs does not mean I am angry; the anger you see is yours not mine.
What you consider a 'politician' joke is also told about lawyers, salesmen, etc. and really did not strike me as funny when I heard it 30 years ago (I admit I thought it was funny when I first heard it 50 years ago)
Yea, that was good thinking, for, if using the rationale of my joke ie. "all politicians lie" then if they happened to be ventriliquuists, they would be blameless. Ah no, I don't think you're angry, just a gutsy poster.
We were fish then we grew legs as we came out of the water then we changed to dinosaurs then we changed to mammals then we changed to monkeys then we changed to people (watch the simpsons if you got lost)
Could it be that the Simpsons have evolved from the Flinstones - by the way - what has happened that family, the las time I saw them I was in Canada.
We were fish then we grew legs as we came out of the water then we changed to dinosaurs then we changed to mammals then we changed to monkeys then we changed to people (watch the simpsons if you got lost)
The interesting thing about mammals is not the 'live young' thing or 'fur thing' - it is actually the jawbone/earbone thing:
Two characteristics of mammals that are at least sometimes preserved in the fossil record are (1) the mammalian middle ear contains a chain of three bones, the malleus, incus, and stapes; and (2) the lower jaw of mammals consists of a single bone called the dentary and is where the teeth are. In the therapsids, immediate ancestors of mammals that dominated terrestrial habitats during the Permian, the middle ears contained just one bone, the stapes, and the lower jaw was made up of several bones.
The question becomes why might these changes have occurred? Speculation follows:
First, the changes in the lower jaw are perhaps not surprising in a group under selection for increased efficiency of biting and chewing. The dentary bears the teeth. Sutures between bones are weak points; therefore, enlargement of the tooth-bearing bone, so that most of the forces resulting from chewing acts upon it alone, makes sense. Similarly, the growth of a coronoid process provided extra space for attaching muscle, especially muscle oriented to increase the strength of the bite at the point where upper and lower teeth meet and reduce the forces operating at the jaw joint itself (e.g., Carroll, 1988, p. 195; Crompton and Hylander, 1986).
Similarly, selection for improvements in hearing sensitivity might have resulted in less-firmly attached quadrate and articular, because this would have enabled them to vibrate more freely, transmitting sound energy from the angular and articular through the quadrate to the stapes.
Changes in the jaw and middle ear may have in a sense been driven by selection for endothermy. Generating the heat to maintain a high body temperature is very expensive; around 70% of the calories consumed by a cotton rat, for example, are used for this purpose (Randolph et al., 1977). This is a cost not paid by ectothermic animals, and assuming it places a premium on efficient use of resources. Endothermy may also be correlated with activity at night, i.e., under conditions when reliance on hearing, smell, and touch may have replaced reliance on sight.
Single boned jaws are not the only route to homeothermic, endothermic lifestyles - birds and dinosaurs took a different path; but it obviously worked for mammals. Crocodilia have the same 5 bones but they are still jaw bones - they have Eustachian tubes but hear sound differently.
But I digress.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.