Originally posted by scottishinnzAs I said, it doesn't take much in the way of analytical and/or observational skills to detect the vast difference between man and the lower orders. Using a broad brush for the finer details will never result in an accurate picture.
Every species that lives in groups has a code of "right" and "wrong", humans are in no way special in that regard.
Originally posted by UmbrageOfSnowLet us know when the nap is over.
I see no gap. Right and wrong are merely defined by social pressures. We are evolutionarily inclined to be social animals. Modern society was likely induced to form by climate and food pressures, each individual had a better chance to survive in a group than on their own. To survive themselves, those societies must have certain similair rules, other ...[text shortened]... .
Explaining the world is simply a by-product of our sentience and our monkey-like curiosity.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHRubbish. We are all on a continuum. The fact that we are at one end, due to our big brains, is irrelevant.
As I said, it doesn't take much in the way of analytical and/or observational skills to detect the vast difference between man and the lower orders. Using a broad brush for the finer details will never result in an accurate picture.
Originally posted by scottishinnzYou're either completely blinded by bias or wholly disingenuous. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself which more accurately applies. For it takes one or the other persuasion to conclude that all that separates the qualities, attributes, etc., of a man and a monkey is ascension wrought by time.
Rubbish. We are all on a continuum. The fact that we are at one end, due to our big brains, is irrelevant.
Such a thought is rubbish to an absurd degree, totally unsupported by even a superficial observation.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWelcome to Freaky's house of waffles.
You're either completely blinded by bias or wholly disingenuous. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself which more accurately applies. For it takes one or the other persuasion to conclude that all that separates the qualities, attributes, etc., of a man and a monkey is ascension wrought by time.
Such a thought is rubbish to an absurd degree, totally unsupported by even a superficial observation.
Don't let anything so insignificant as facts get in the way of your polemic session, Freak-boy.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHJust because you want it to be so, or just because you hope that it is so, doesn't make it so. You of all people should know that.
You're either completely blinded by bias or wholly disingenuous. I'll leave it to you to decide for yourself which more accurately applies. For it takes one or the other persuasion to conclude that all that separates the qualities, attributes, etc., of a man and a monkey is ascension wrought by time.
Such a thought is rubbish to an absurd degree, totally unsupported by even a superficial observation.
What surprises me about you is your obvious intelligence and yet your absolute close mindedness when it comes to evolution.
I'll ask again just in case you missed it first time around, what is the problem with evolution? Why does it matter so much to you to find a flaw in this particular one out of any scientific theories?
Originally posted by amannionI have no bone to pick with the theory, nor do I have a pet theory which receives preferential treatment. On the contrary, I think it important for all ideas to be able to withstand at least minimal scrutiny. Evolution, as a means of producing the variety currently evident, is woefully inadequate.
Just because you want it to be so, or just because you hope that it is so, doesn't make it so. You of all people should know that.
What surprises me about you is your obvious intelligence and yet your absolute close mindedness when it comes to evolution.
I'll ask again just in case you missed it first time around, what is the problem with evolution? Why ...[text shortened]... it matter so much to you to find a flaw in this particular one out of any scientific theories?
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat crap. It explains the whole of modern biology in a logical systematic way.
I have no bone to pick with the theory, nor do I have a pet theory which receives preferential treatment. On the contrary, I think it important for all ideas to be able to withstand at least minimal scrutiny. Evolution, as a means of producing the variety currently evident, is woefully inadequate.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhat obvious shortcomings? 3050 posts and you still haven't named one.
Despite its obvious shortcomings. Sure: why not leave it alone and quit picking on it, right?
Pray tell, if evolution isn't true, how do you explain the fact that our chromosome 2 looks a lot like a consolidation of primates chromosomes 2 and 13, telomeres and all? How do you explain the fact that cladistics works? How do you explain the fact that we found 7 transitory forms between land dwelling and sea dwelling whales?
Oh wait, I already know your answer.
Goddunit.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOkay, let's assume there are some inadequacies in the theory. (Although what these might be I'm not sure.) So what?
I have no bone to pick with the theory, nor do I have a pet theory which receives preferential treatment. On the contrary, I think it important for all ideas to be able to withstand at least minimal scrutiny. Evolution, as a means of producing the variety currently evident, is woefully inadequate.
Are you suggesting that all scientific theories be complete in some way? That there is no room for problem areas? That there is no room for further work on scientific theories?
Originally posted by scottishinnzI should mention also, that we have one less pair of chromosomes than all other primates, i.e. 46 as opposed to 48.
What obvious shortcomings? 3050 posts and you still haven't named one.
Pray tell, if evolution isn't true, how do you explain the fact that our chromosome 2 looks a lot like a consolidation of primates chromosomes 2 and 13, telomeres and all? How do you explain the fact that cladistics works? How do you explain the fact that we found 7 transitory ...[text shortened]... land dwelling and sea dwelling whales?
Oh wait, I already know your answer.
Goddunit.