Originally posted by googlefudgeTHERE IS NO EVOLUTION - STELLAR OR ANY OTHER KIND. GOD DID IT!
Well we have in astronomy 'stellar evolution' but that doesn't mean it has anything to do
with or is part of biological evolutionary theory.
Evolution has become a popular word.
It is still the case that one requires a different theory describing different mechanisms for
dealing with the formation of the first living organism to the mechanisms ...[text shortened]... pick up.)[/i] than evolution by natural selection acting on variation of inherited
traits.
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God!
Originally posted by VoidSpiritYes it does! Your mind has been corrupted by the devil.
completely wrong. evolution theory is not concerned with how life began, it is only concerned with how life changes over time. the theory of evolution doesn't care if life was created through abiogenesis, or if it was created by a god, or by several gods, or by aliens, or it just spontaneously popped into existence or through some completely unfathomed process.
God did it! HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord!
Originally posted by googlefudgeAbsolutely, that is why God created male and female.
And further the theory of evolution can quite happily cope with a single common ancestor or multiple common ancestors.
Although presently the evidence suggests the former and not the latter.
HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Glory be to God!
2 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeYears ago, there was a supposed Usenet bot (or simulated bot) called Riley M. Sinder that RJ's latest series of posts in this thread remind me of.
You are verging on spam now.
Say something new or shut up.
Perhaps the bot has evolved into RJ?
http://dev.null.org/psychoceramics/archives/1997.03/msg00005.html
Partial quote:
> If the Usenet newsgroup you frequent seems a little more active
> lately, you can thank a team of six UofC psychology graduate students
> researching debating behavior on the Internet.
> The students have created an Internet character, given him an
> unpopular cause, and even created a personality for him as they used him
> to spar with real people all over the world.
> "The results have been fascinating," says team member Ehmed Mudjavi.
> "People have gone to a great deal of trouble to respond to our character,
> and have even gotten really angry at him on occasion."
> The team has dubbed its creation "Riley Sinder," and an account was
> opened up under that name with Netcom, an Internet service provider
> (Riley's e-mail address, r--@n--.com, is based on the UofC lacrosse
> team's colors).
> Since the start of the term, the students have been regularly posting
> under Riley's name to more than a dozen political, religious and
> philosophical newsgroups.
> All the posts argue a single point: that creationism should be taught
> in public school science classes.
Originally posted by JS357a bot would be more intelligent.
Years ago, there was a supposed Usenet bot (or simulated bot) called Riley M. Sinder that RJ's latest series of posts in this thread remind me of.
Perhaps the bot has evolved into RJ?
http://dev.null.org/psychoceramics/archives/1997.03/msg00005.html
Partial quote:
> If the Usenet newsgroup you frequent seems a little more active
> lately, you ...[text shortened]... a single point: that creationism should be taught
> in public school science classes.
2 edits
How many people believe that the process of Leukocyte Extravasation came about gradually by Darwinian random mutation and natural selection on a microscopic level ?
&feature=related
If Charles Darwin had seen this he would have probably thrown his theory into the fireplace to burn.
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillI found these also very interesting.
How many people believe that the process of [b]Leukocyte Extravasation came about gradually by Darwinian random mutation and natural selection on a microscopic level ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GigxU1UXZXo&feature=related
If Charles Darwin had seen this he would have probably thrown his theory into the fireplace to burn.[/b]
Astonishing Molecular Machines
&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=7wpTJVWra7I&NR=1
Originally posted by jaywillyour question is as meaningless as asking "how may people believe this process was created by some intelligent being?"
How many people believe that the process of [b]Leukocyte Extravasation came about gradually by Darwinian random mutation and natural selection on a microscopic level ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GigxU1UXZXo&feature=related
If Charles Darwin had seen this he would have probably thrown his theory into the fireplace to burn.[/b]
what people believe and how many there are is irrelevant. what is relevant is what can be demonstrated.
most of what is happening in the leukocyte extravasation is chemistry and physics at work.
Originally posted by VoidSpiritExplain the chemistry and Physics at work and why is it working.
your question is as meaningless as asking "how may people believe this process was created by some intelligent being?"
what people believe and how many there are is irrelevant. what is relevant is what can be demonstrated.
most of what is happening in the leukocyte extravasation is chemistry and physics at work.
3 edits
Originally posted by VoidSpirit
your question is as meaningless as asking "how may people believe this process was created by some intelligent being?"
what people believe and how many there are is irrelevant. what is relevant is what can be demonstrated.
most of what is happening in the leukocyte extravasation is chemistry and physics at work.
your question is as meaningless as asking "how may people believe this process was created by some intelligent being?"
You can ask that question if you wish. Its not meaningless either.
what people believe and how many there are is irrelevant.
Then what you believe is irrelevant ?
what is relevant is what can be demonstrated.
Right. And you cannot demonstrate that kind of engineering happening without intelligence.
That is one factor in me deciding what it is I choose to believe. Things like this do not happen without intelligence.
Of course to you they do, because of circular reasoning. Ie. You saw it happen and there was no intelligence involved.
most of what is happening in the leukocyte extravasation is chemistry and physics at work.
Its engineering.
And I do not discount the intuitive side of our humanity as you seem to. I think that what people intuitively feel in their gut about something, is relevant. It may not be a matter of popular vote. But I am interested to know what people feel in thier intuitive gut about the matter.
Maybe in that sense I am more a humanist than you.
And for you to say that that is irrelevant is wrong and self defeating. Then what your opinion is from your intuitive sense is irrelevant also.
Originally posted by sonhouseThey should take hints from Mary Shelley's story "Frankenstein" and not make same mistakes that the scientist made !!! They should remember the story of Icarus, too.
http://phys.org/news/2012-06-life-began.html
These guys are giving private money and grants for winning proposals for a scientific study of how life started and it has nothing to do with darwinian evolution.
But seriously speaking, I wish them luck !
Originally posted by RJHindsif you want to be able to understand the physics of it, you'll have to return to school, starting at elementary level, around grade 2, and work yourself up to college level.
Explain the chemistry and Physics at work and why is it working.
but i doubt your intellect is capable of understanding since you can't even pick up the very basic concepts of evolution even after those concepts have been explained to you many times.
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywilli wouldn't ask such meaningless questions.your question is as meaningless as asking "how may people believe this process was created by some intelligent being?"
You can ask that question if you wish. Its not meaningless either.
Then what you believe is irrelevant ?
i have no beliefs.
Right. And you cannot demonstrate that kind of engineering happening without intelligence.
you can't demonstrate it happening with intelligence nor can you demonstrate that it is engineering.
That is one factor in me deciding what it is I choose to believe. Things like this do not happen without intelligence.
your belief is irrelevant. prove it happens with intelligence.
Of course to you they do, because of circular reasoning. Ie. You saw it happen and there was no intelligence involved.
you're the one who believes it happened with intelligence. did you see it happen and know intelligence is involved?
Its engineering.
your opinion is irrelevant. prove it. demonstrate how it is engineering.
And I do not discount the intuitive side of our humanity as you seem to. I think that what people intuitively feel in their gut about something, is relevant. It may not be a matter of popular vote. But I am interested to know what people feel in thier intuitive gut about the matter.
what people believe is interesting but not relevant.
Maybe in that sense I am more a humanist than you.
explain what you mean by humanist and how you are more of it than me.
And for you to say that that is irrelevant is wrong and self defeating. Then what your opinion is from your intuitive sense is irrelevant also.
there are lots of opinions. some are more interesting than others. all are irrelevant.