quote:
I bet Maradon!'s Mother is proud:
Yeah, some people
quote:
And coming in at #1 is Damnati with "Reply." I'm Casey Casem.
Evolution lacks of a coherency and internal consistency, so the first is out.
Lie. Its mechanisms are both self-consistent and accurately account for the observed phenomena.
quote:
The second fits since it is still largely conjecture and research into it is ongoing, as proven by work being done with the LHC and continuing research into the fossil record.
And so it is clear. You have no idea how science works. Let me state this unambiguously: ALL SCIENTIFIC THEORIES ARE UNDER CONSTANT REVISION AND REFINEMENT. Please understand that scientific theories are not set in stone at some arbitrary designation, just because someone has described a really good theory that explains something well.
quote:
The last two are perfect fits since so much of the actual mechanics of evolution remain a mystery.
Define "so much." While all underlying mechanisms aren't fully understood, each mechanism that is so far reinforces and supports the theory, as does observed evidence.
quote:
Science can claim what it likes about the proof it has for evolution,
Scientists aren't claiming what they like; they're reporting on observed phenomena and describing mechanisms to account for them. Honestly, they don't go around just making shit up to piss off moronic creationists. Rather, the evidence they find has, at every turn, supported the theory of evolution--which just happens to piss off moronic creationists.
quote:
until someone produces a working model of the actual mechanics of evolution that can be demonstrated for every form of life on this planet, it is theory and not fact.
Why do you make this frankly outrageous demand of the theory evolution and not of the theory of gravity? Classical mechanics explains gravity, but quantum mechanics does not. I repeat: there is no working quantum gravity theory yet. Do you think that you can fly now?
quote:
I'm not saying my Flying Spaghetti Monster trumps your Pet Theory, I'm saying your theory is precisely what its name implies: unproven hypothesis. Get over it.
No, you're quite wrong and possibly stupid. Evolution is the theory which best fits the facts. That's really all there is to it. Creationism in all its forms fails to fit the facts for a variety of reasons, so it is and will continue to be rejected.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
the theory of evolution looks at all these facts and says that combined, they can explain that life, if it started simply as one single imperfectly reproducing molecule could have, over eons of time, resulted in the variety of species we currently see. nothing we have seen yet disproves this theory, including the bible, koran, and torah.
different theories, some related to some of the key observable facts on which evolution is based can explain how reproducing molecules could have sprung from the chemical environment that evidentially existed in the early stages of earth's development.
your job, as a person of apparent faith, is to either ignore these facts and live in darkness or reconcile these facts with your personal faith. I have chosen to believe that the bible is not infallible, and that it is far more important to look for the message of the bible rather than to fixate on the words.
the bible says that God created life. it then goes on a long rambling and self contradicting fable about how God did that. we know that that is not exactly how it happened. but that doesn't mean that God wasn't the present as the guiding hand of chance that lead life from that single reproducing molecule into the many varied species that we see today. i choose to believe that he was, but that's because thats what i want to believe, not because i think the theory doesn't work without God. the theory works perfectly fine without God. Blindy fucked around with this message on 03-26-2009 at 10:39 AM.
quote:
Maradon! had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Yeah, some people
haha
"Don't want to sound like a fanboy, but I am with you. I'll buy it for sure, it's just a matter of for how long I will be playing it..."
- Silvast, Battle.net forums
quote:
Pvednes had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
Not a single thing you said there contained any trace of honesty or good faith. You're a liar as well as a fucking idiot, even if you do have the misguided belief that you are capable of using a dictionary.
It is telling that you respond with emotional rhetoric instead of intelligent rebuttal.
quote:
Karnaj had this to say about Optimus Prime:
Why do you make this frankly outrageous demand of the theory evolution and not of the theory of gravity? Classical mechanics explains gravity, but quantum mechanics does not. I repeat: there is no working quantum gravity theory yet. Do you think that you can fly now?
Gravity can be observed by dropping something off the side of your bed or, in fact, just sitting there and realizing you don't float away. It is in no way a comparable theory to evolution, which requires study of mechanics that are either not currently observable or that simply take so long to happen that they cannot be reasonably observed. The closest thing to a practical study of evolution mechanics would lie in animal husbandry, which has only ever produced different types of the same animal and never anything resembling a new species.
quote:
And so it is clear. You have no idea how science works. Let me state this unambiguously: ALL SCIENTIFIC THEORIES ARE UNDER CONSTANT REVISION AND REFINEMENT. Please understand that scientific theories are not set in stone at some arbitrary designation, just because someone has described a really good theory that explains something well.
Umm...Karnaj, this is a bit unlike you. I pointed out earlier in this thread that my beef with Darwinism in its current iteration is the inability of anyone in science to acknowledge that it is remains theory, not proven fact. Theories changes but you sure as aren't seeing changes to the laws of thermodynamics.
quote:
Blindy stopped beating up furries long enough to write:
your job, as a person of apparent faith, is to either ignore these facts and live in darkness or reconcile these facts with your personal faith. I have chosen to believe that the bible is not infallible, and that it is far more important to look for the message of the bible rather than to fixate on the words.
The key thing is to remember that I'm not downing evolution/Darwinism as a model for how things may have come about but, rather, that I am downing the scientific community for its unwillingness to admit its pet theory's flaws and current unproven status. It's not that think there is no chance at all that some variety of evolution could function, it's that I feel current explanations are sorely lacking and that science is too proud of what it's cocked up to work on that.
The common denominator I'm seeing in this thread is a whole lot of invective against the notion of creationism and many assertions that this or that happens with no attempt whatever to support the claims with evidence. The problem with this is not the functionality of Creationism or Darwinism as explanations of the origins of life, it is that there are obvious scientific issues with both ideas and proponents of these ideas are simply unwilling to accept that there needs to be more and better work done to prove their ideas. Scientists won't even allow evolution and Darwinist thought to be questioned, much less allow anyone legitimate to admit to not knowing exactly how it works.
Edit: contradicted myself... Damnati fucked around with this message on 03-26-2009 at 11:10 AM.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java the thoughts aquire speed, the teeth acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
quote:
We all got dumber when Damnati said:
The key thing is to remember that I'm not downing evolution/Darwinism as a model for how things may have come about but, rather, that I am downing the scientific community for its unwillingness to admit its pet theory's flaws and current unproven status. It's not that think there is no chance at all that some variety of evolution could function, it's that I feel current explanations are sorely lacking and that science is too proud of what it's cocked up to work on that.
No. You are showing a complete lack of understand towards the way scientific progress works. Scientists are not only willing to admit flaws in their theories, they are compelled to actively seek them. Your opinion may be that evolution is unproven, but from a scientific standpoint, it is as proven as any theory can be, because there are no current anomalous observations that lead us to believe that it is as a whole not correct. There are some anomalous observations that lead us to believe there are parts of it we don't fully understand, but that isn't the same thing.
quote:
Scientists won't even allow evolution and Darwinist thought to be questioned, much less allow anyone legitimate to admit to not knowing exactly how it works.
Scientists are constantly seeking to refine our understanding of how the particular mechanisms behind evolution function. That is a candid and very real admission, fully visible to all who care to see, that they do not know exactly how it works. We may never know exactly how it works. But we have theories, and the theories we have are supported to all logical satisfaction by what we can observe.
Your mistake is that you think that we need to know exactly how it works for us to operate under the assumption that it works. As Karnaj has pointed out and you have ignored, we know now that the classical Newtonian model of physics is not exactly right, because it fails to predict some observable facts. These are anomalies. However, the classical Newtonian model for physics still sent a man to the fucking moon. So it works. But it isn't exactly right. You are basically arguing that we couldn't ever send a man to the moon. Blindy fucked around with this message on 03-26-2009 at 11:24 AM.
At that point perhaps we can have an informed conversation about current evolutionary theory. Blindy fucked around with this message on 03-26-2009 at 11:32 AM.
quote:
Damnati stumbled drunkenly to the keyboard and typed:
It is telling that you respond with emotional rhetoric instead of intelligent rebuttal.
The reason I'm insulting you here instead is because you haven't said anything honest or intelligent to rebut. Karnaj is butting his head against the wall of your dishonesty and wilful ignorance.
quote:
The propaganda machine of Damnati's junta released this statement:
Gravity can be observed by dropping something off the side of your bed or, in fact, just sitting there and realizing you don't float away. It is in no way a comparable theory to evolution, which requires study of mechanics that are either not currently observable or that simply take so long to happen that they cannot be reasonably observed. The closest thing to a practical study of evolution mechanics would lie in animal husbandry, which has only ever produced different types of the same animal and never anything resembling a new species.
Seriously, stop lying. Just because you've elected to remain ignorant of the volume of observation and experimentation that as confirmed the theory of evolution does not mean it hasn't occurred, or that its results are not valid. Similarly, just because you have no idea how the scientific method works, you don't get to set the goalposts. The theory of evolution and universal common descent has been repeatedly upheld through observation and experimentation, as have the predictions it makes.
quote:
Umm...Karnaj, this is a bit unlike you. I pointed out earlier in this thread that my beef with Darwinism in its current iteration is the inability of anyone in science to acknowledge that it is remains theory, not proven fact. Theories changes but you sure as aren't seeing changes to the laws of thermodynamics.
And you're an idiot for having that beef. Evolution is both fact and theory; the theory predicts very well the results of empirical observation and experimentation, whose data constitute the facts. Further, you cannot challenge a theory without proposing a better one--that is, in fact, how you challenge a theory. What you and almost all other creationists do amount to the following: "Evolution is wrong because." Only young-earth creationists actually advance a theory. It's a horrible theory, but it's still a theory.
Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith
quote:
Liam must think they're pretty smart:
Excuse me gentlemen, I must refer to my thesaurus such that I am able to identify the most appropriate form of diction to employ such that I sound like a pretentious cock.
shut the fuck up grandmafaggot
quote:
Blindy has funnier quote texts than me:
shut the fuck up grandmafaggot
now were talkin!!!
quote:
"In his review in the July 1992 issue of Scientific American, Stephen Jay Gould, whose writings are quoted frequently in the book, complained that the book does not fully cite sources and employs poor chapter transitions; held up Theodosius Dobzhansky as a counterexample to Johnson's assertion that naturalism undergirds Darwinism; criticized Johnson's decision to include recombination as a form of mutation and his assessment of sexual selection as a relatively minor component of Darwinian theory in the late twentieth century; pointed out an error in the use of the term "polyploidy"; stated that Johnson incorrectly refers to Otto Schindewolf as a saltationist, "attacks" outdated statements of Simpson and Mayr; fails to point out that Henry Fairfield Osborn corrected his own mistake regarding Nebraska Man; and stated that Johnson overlooks "self-organizing properties of molecules and other physical systems" that, in Gould's opinion, makes the self-assembly of RNA or DNA plausible. Also, in contrast to Johnson's positions in the book, Gould states that Darwinism's bringing together of "widely disparate information under a uniquely consistent explanation" implies that it is a successful theory, that amphibians have features that imply a "fishy past", and that the genealogical tree of Therapsida is a convincing example of macroevolution."
You're going to have to come to terms with the fact that there is no logical basis for creationism. It wouldn't be called "Faith" if you could back it up.
It doesn't mean that you have to stop believing in an afterlife or that your prayers are listened to. It does mean that creationism has no place in any scientific arena except as just one more proposed hypothesis to be evaluated, which has been done extensively.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/03/25/turtles-all-the-way-down/ Khyron fucked around with this message on 03-27-2009 at 10:18 AM.
quote:
Liam impressed everyone with:
Excuse me gentlemen, I must refer to my thesaurus such that I am able to identify the most appropriate form of diction to employ such that I sound like a pretentious cock.
That's just the way Damnati normally talks, he just always uses big words. At least that's what he said when I brought it up last time.
quote:
Falaanla Marr attempted to be funny by writing:
That's just the way Damnati normally talks, he just always uses big words. At least that's what he said when I brought it up last time.
So, pretentious cock. Yep. 
quote:
If only Taeldian hadn't said this:
God could descend from the heavens tomorrow, and creationism would still have no place in a science class today.
No, because if God was observed that would throw out evolution.
quote:
Check out the big brain on Blindy.!
No, because if God was observed that would throw out evolution.
Not necessarily. God could've created evolution just to fuck with everyone.
"Don't want to sound like a fanboy, but I am with you. I'll buy it for sure, it's just a matter of for how long I will be playing it..."
- Silvast, Battle.net forums
quote:
Blindy. obviously shouldn't have said:
No, because if God was observed that would throw out evolution.
My timeline wasn't really clear there, I guess.
Today, creationism isn't scientific because it's baseless even though God just might descend from the heavens tomorrow.
