Not really politics, but Evolution... (cont. a thread)

Page 4 of 14 First ... 23456 ... Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    True, but without a mechanism the claim is is nothing more than an observation that seems to fit the facts as we know them.
    Not really. We knew for millenia that fragile objects break under less force than rigid objects but we didn't know why.
    If a scientist came out and said "We know steroids melt your liver, we're just sure as to how yet,"
    Again, you can easily prove that an action causes and effect or that something preceeded another without understanding the mechanism**. In this case, take anadrol, watch tumors develope consistently over time, conclude anadrol causes liver dysfunction and even liver tumors.

    And, to the rest of it, OF COURSE there are plenty of reasonable explainations as to the origins of the universe, etc, and I honestly believe that supernatural powers are a reasonable answer.

    The whole purpose of this thread was to show that its not even disputed that evolution has occured, its just many of the mechanims of evolution that are being debated over. It wasn't supposed to be about the origins of the universe or anything like that.

    **That is, if you can accept 99.9...9% probability as proof, otherwise, nothing is for certain.


  2. Have you studied anything about the sex pilli on bacteria in your biology classes yet. While they are very very primative compared to our gentials they do share a common function, to take in and share different genetic material.

    Quote Originally Posted by Whiskey Steve
    Keep in mind im not trying to be a perv in this post.

    When we are talking about neccesity, what neccessitates a penis? "
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    Not really. We knew for millenia that fragile objects break under less force than rigid objects but we didn't know why.
    Again, you can easily prove that an action causes and effect or that something preceeded another without understanding the mechanism**.
    But that mechanism is key to explaining a lot about the process. How some objects are more rigid than others, or only rigid in one way, but will crumble or break when pressure or a shearing force is applied in another way. Without the mechanism all you have is observation.

    In this case, take anadrol, watch tumors develope consistently over time, conclude anadrol causes liver dysfunction and even liver tumors.

    And, to the rest of it, OF COURSE there are plenty of reasonable explainations as to the origins of the universe, etc, and I honestly believe that supernatural powers are a reasonable answer.

    The whole purpose of this thread was to show that its not even disputed that evolution has occured, its just many of the mechanims of evolution that are being debated over.
    Odd how a discussion this long errupts over something that's basically agreed upon. Would you agree, though, that a lot of people take evolution on faith the same way they take religion on faith, without having the slightest clue as to what's involved? I guess my main problem with evolution isn't with the theory itself, but those who expound on it in public and think their literal belief in the process, without understanding it, is somehow superior than someone's similar belief in creationism. Chosing to worship 'science' is no different than worshipping God in my opinion. In the way of many religious people, believers in evolution refuse to admit any possible alternatives.

    **That is, if you can accept 99.9...9% probability as proof, otherwise, nothing is for certain.
    I doubt my own existence at times, so I'm hard to convince of anything.

  4. Some good postings guys. Keep it up, I like it!
    Recent log:http://anabolicminds.com/forum/supplement-reviews-logs/213350-lean-efx-refined.html

  5. Quote Originally Posted by Matthew D
    Have you studied anything about the sex pilli on bacteria in your biology classes yet. While they are very very primative compared to our gentials they do share a common function, to take in and share different genetic material.
    Not to offend anyone (seriously) but I have not gone into great depth in my study of evolution. (Again no offense) But why would I, when I believe in another explanation that has no holes in it? I study evolution the same way would study Phrenology. But to answer your question, no, I have not. That is why I have remained (for the most part) out of this thread (even though I caused it, lol).

    I guess you could call me closed minded. But did Edison (actually Tesla, but he was murdered and his ideas where stolen) keep searching for a material to use that would not burn in a light bulb once he found one?....I believe I have found the truth and until I find a flaw in it(i do not believe there is one) I need not search further.

    I think science's only purpose is to improve our quality of life. But with the blessings it brings it also brings curses, for example:the machine gun(to save lives, lol) and nuclear missels.

    Again no offense. Im just throwing out some thoughts for you.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Whiskey Steve
    I think science's only purpose is to improve our quality of life. But with the blessings it brings it also brings curses, for example:the machine gun(to save lives, lol) and nuclear missels.
    Hey, I like nukes.

  7. lol

    Where is you sig from CDB?

  8. Yes Edision and Tesla both keep trying to find answers about things.. that is the nature of science and the reason I mentioned sex pilli on bacteria is that they serve the same funcition as genitals in higher organisms.. a way of transferring gentic material from one organism to another.. Steve, no offense but if you don't know anything about the subject, then why wade into the middle of it? Science's mission is our attempt to explain what is going on around us in the universe.. that is the accepted definition of science..
    While I know a bit about Phrenology I would not wade into a discussion of it without first doing a ton of study about it..

  9. gees, sorry bro. you asked me a question and I explained my reasoning. And I do not have a vast knowledge of Evolution theory so I have stayed out of this thread.....and i will continue to stay out of it. (easy, easy, i meant no offense I just offered my thoughts).....

    and using Telsa as an analogy was a bad idea and i knew someone would call me on it..... anywho
    why are you defending phrenology...lol
    Im out

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Whiskey Steve
    lol

    Where is you sig from CDB?
    Paradise Lost, just after the great fling down I believe. Satan is the ultimate individualist in my opinion. I don't really belive in God, not in the Judeo-Christian sense so don't think I'm committing a sin by using him as an example of good. I love the idea that he refused to bow down to anyone, even though his actions led to him paying the ultimate price. But then again, even if you are a believer in Judeo-Christian faith, maybe even Satan can be redeemed eventually.

    I had a very brief fling with satanism when I was young. Literal mock God kind of satanism. I realized two things: one, when it comes to women there's healthy pale and just plain pale; and two, defining yourself in opposition to something makes you an automatic loser, because what you're rebeling against is in the end still defining your actions.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Paradise Lost, just after the great fling down I believe. Satan is the ultimate individualist in my opinion. I don't really belive in God, not in the Judeo-Christian sense so don't think I'm committing a sin by using him as an example of good. I love the idea that he refused to bow down to anyone, even though his actions led to him paying the ultimate price. But then again, even if you are a believer in Judeo-Christian faith, maybe even Satan can be redeemed eventually.

    I had a very brief fling with satanism when I was young. Literal mock God kind of satanism. I realized two things: one, when it comes to women there's healthy pale and just plain pale; and two, defining yourself in opposition to something makes you an automatic loser, because what you're rebeling against is in the end still defining your actions.
    You make some beautiful points.

    And I think it is because of that philosophy that when you become a 13th(i think) level Mason they "reveal" to you that satan is the Christ. (thats just what I have heard)

    buy anywho, im out

    (I am not calling you a mason btw,, im just saying what I think members might find interesting)

  12. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Satan is the ultimate individualist in my opinion. I don't really belive in God, not in the Judeo-Christian sense so don't think I'm committing a sin by using him as an example of good...
    If you don't believe in God then you can't believe in sin either
    Without God there is only good and evil as it is perceived and defined by each individual, and even then they may only be defined as what is convenient and inconvenient. God is the arbiter of absolutes. Without Him, it's all relative.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    Paradise Lost, just after the great fling down I believe. Satan is the ultimate individualist in my opinion. I don't really belive in God, not in the Judeo-Christian sense so don't think I'm committing a sin by using him as an example of good. I love the idea that he refused to bow down to anyone, even though his actions led to him paying the ultimate price. But then again, even if you are a believer in Judeo-Christian faith, maybe even Satan can be redeemed eventually.

    I had a very brief fling with satanism when I was young. Literal mock God kind of satanism. I realized two things: one, when it comes to women there's healthy pale and just plain pale; and two, defining yourself in opposition to something makes you an automatic loser, because what you're rebeling against is in the end still defining your actions.
    If you stick to a strict " rules of the opposite " philosophy then by natural progression you will eventually become what you oppose ....but you have to admit it is great fun to play the devils advocate( not the movie) at parties, especially when the other people don't realise your playing opposites with them.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by CDB
    But that mechanism is key to explaining a lot about the process. How some objects are more rigid than others, or only rigid in one way, but will crumble or break when pressure or a shearing force is applied in another way. Without the mechanism all you have is observation.
    Please refer to your last statement (3rd quote)
    Odd how a discussion this long errupts over something that's basically agreed upon. Would you agree, though, that a lot of people take evolution on faith the same way they take religion on faith, without having the slightest clue as to what's involved? I guess my main problem with evolution isn't with the theory itself, but those who expound on it in public and think their literal belief in the process, without understanding it, is somehow superior than someone's similar belief in creationism. Chosing to worship 'science' is no different than worshipping God in my opinion. In the way of many religious people, believers in evolution refuse to admit any possible alternatives.
    I agree to a degree, and yes, I'm disgusted by people who start claiming they know science and start trashign religion when they know nothing of either. Its just plain stupid.

    And, there is definitely an element of faith in a lot of science based works, but in most cases (and in my case) you have to have "faith" that 99.9...9% is enough to claim proof. Otherwise, NOTHING is for certain.

    They can prove with as close as you can get to 100% certainty we've evolved from organism x into y and z, and even including the mechanism of evolution won't increase the odds much because we wont' "know" it happened unless we can witness it, and even then, our eyes are the most deceiving of our senses. So, we never "know" anything, but we have a level of confidence that's infinitely higher in our assertions about science and evolution than people do in regards to things like god's existence and the creation of adam and eve, etc.
    I doubt my own existence at times, so I'm hard to convince of anything.
    I don't have any problem believing you on this statement, haha. But, if I may make a suggestion....Please put the Matrix back on the shelf now

  15. Quote Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
    I don't have any problem believing you on this statement, haha. But, if I may make a suggestion....Please put the Matrix back on the shelf now
    No Matrix here my friend, just a ****load of LSD and philosophy courses when I was young.

  16. The path is narrow and few will find it.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by SOWarrior
    The path is narrow and few will find it.
    That's beautiful... now if you have anything to add to the substance of the thread, please let me know

  18. Easy Kwyck.

  19. Think of this...

    Thousands of Muslams (no, not just them, several other cultures) have given there life to islam. This includes recent terrorist attacks, and the war in which the conquered much of spain, france, and other parts of western Europe in the medival ages.

    Why did they die for there cause? They THOUGHT it was the real truth. THOUGHT being the key word. None of those people witnessed the acts of Muhammad.

    After christ's death, the appostles(sp?) died for there cause. The difference, they would know if what they were dieng for was real or not real. They witnessed the resurection of jesus. They would KNOW if jesus was the savior or not. They KNEW what they were dieng for as they were being burned, beaten, and stoned to death. Why would they die for somethign that they KNEW wasn't real?

  20. Quote Originally Posted by SOWarrior
    The path is narrow and few will find it.

    This is my life motto.

    If I didnt have to fight like dog in the alley trying to get a piece of meat for every inch of muscle and every lb of strength I have, it wouldn't be so rewarding, because it would be easy and a everyone could do it.

    If following god was easy and I could do things that I would like to do but knew were wrong, it wouldnt be so rewarding.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by spatch
    They KNEW what they were dieng for as they were being burned, beaten, and stoned to death. Why would they die for somethign that they KNEW wasn't real?
    I might add being crucified upside down or being skinned alive.....

  22. Quote Originally Posted by Whiskey Steve
    I might add being crucified upside down or being skinned alive.....

    And there is NO WAY in hell someone would go through with that for someting they KNOW was a crock.

  23. As much as I completely agree, Spatch, it would probably be best to keep discussion on-topic (Evolution) so the thread doesn't go where it will get closed.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by TheCrownedOne
    As much as I completely agree, Spatch, it would probably be best to keep discussion on-topic (Evolution) so the thread doesn't go where it will get closed.
    your right this wont be good.


    I do have a few questions about evolution though.

    1) If proteins can only be made by DNA and DNA is itself a protein... how did that happen

    2) How do you explain the process of though?

  25. Quote Originally Posted by spatch
    your right this wont be good.


    I do have a few questions about evolution though.

    1) If proteins can only be made by DNA and DNA is itself a protein... how did that happen

    2) How do you explain the process of though?
    Deoxyribose nucleic acid is a template( blue print ) for molecular level protien structures. It is the lattice which influences the behavior of other cells at the molecular level. Some of the molecules are directed toward protien structures. Which can then become more complex structures through simple chemical bonding. While other molecules are directed toward the replication of the template(the DNA itself) This discovery helped cement the soundness of the evolutionary theory. That is one of the reasons why many creationist challenge the functionality of DNA. Oddly enough it seems to function intelligently, so it can also lend credence to the ID theory. The uniqueness of DNA to its respective owner could also be taken as the proof of a soul to some degree. I would like to think that there is room for both evolutinary theory and the existance of a soul within the scientific world.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Not really a powerlifter but heres my max bench video.
    By Konvicted in forum Powerlifting/Strongman
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 03:24 AM
  2. is something wrong with this site it says im not logged in but
    By Outside Backer in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-26-2005, 06:33 PM
  3. Not an Anabolic, but ?? about Clen vs ECA
    By Guido in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-01-2005, 06:14 PM
  4. Noobie here....well not really.
    By JTrans in forum General Chat
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-15-2004, 11:27 PM
  5. M1T not really working??
    By WannaGro in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-13-2004, 05:26 PM
Log in
Log in