OT: MCCAIN TAKES 10-POINT LEAD OVER OBAMA

[Anonymous]

[quote=bobl]To esmith,

Maybe you shouldn’t generalize. I think Palin was a great pick and I am a Christian, who happens to have 2 Masters and am 1 year away from a Computer Science PhD. I am also a successful software consultant and make more money that most doctors, so I don’t consider myself uneducated or stupid.

There are plenty of intelligent people who actually have the guts to question the status quo in the scientific commmunity and research the claims of ancient literature including the Bible as well as dig into the logic behind all of the evolution hype. When I was a kid, the earth was 2 billion years old, now what is it – 4.6 billion? I haven’t gotten that much older. They keep having to extend time to allow for all of the impossibilities of life growing in complexity when all evidence is that things left to themselves breakdown.

Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.

As far as creating the earth in 6 days, God could have done it in 6 seconds, and it still would look like it took several billion years to us, God invented time, so he can do what he wants with it. Your whole generalization is one based on believing what you hear rather than really investigating the facts and not allowing for the supernatural to exist.

Go study all the facts behind those who ridicule Christianity including the convoluted theories for the empty tomb and the lame explanations for why a handful of individuals would change the world of their time and die for something that was a lie. Look at some of the great scholars of history and of modern times such as Newton, C.S. Lewis, and see if you can refute their logic.[/quote]

Haha…so you think the evolution of an eye is impossible but some invisible entity that made the universe and earth in 7 days is true?

I think you wasted alot of money getting that education pal.

[Dukehorn]

bobl

Where are you getting that PhD from? I’ll make sure my start-up clients avoid hiring anyone from that school.

Obviously, the ability to make money has nothing to do with the ability to understand science.

Anyway, the 2008 Republican Platform on human embryonic stem cells is to ban all research including privately funded research. Unfortunately, they still haven’t addressed the issue of throwing IVF embryos in the trash after the families are done. Odd, isn’t it.

PS The creationists abandoned the eye argument around 10 years ago (sort of like how they avoid talking about our vestigal tailbone). Stay on the agenda, it’s about intelligent design as a whole–avoid using actual body parts as creationism examples because science does advance (which sort of explains the 2 billion to 4 billion difference–better science). Seriously, with all these advances in the world of chip design/manufacture, you can’t comprehend advances in the life sciences (like PCR, RNAi)? Don’t be a tool….

[Dukehorn]

bobl

Where are you getting that PhD from? I’ll make sure my start-up clients avoid hiring anyone from that school.

Obviously, the ability to make money has nothing to do with the ability to understand science.

Anyway, the 2008 Republican Platform on human embryonic stem cells is to ban all research including privately funded research. Unfortunately, they still haven’t addressed the issue of throwing IVF embryos in the trash after the families are done. Odd, isn’t it.

PS The creationists abandoned the eye argument around 10 years ago (sort of like how they avoid talking about our vestigal tailbone). Stay on the agenda, it’s about intelligent design as a whole–avoid using actual body parts as creationism examples because science does advance (which sort of explains the 2 billion to 4 billion difference–better science). Seriously, with all these advances in the world of chip design/manufacture, you can’t comprehend advances in the life sciences (like PCR, RNAi)? Don’t be a tool….

[Dukehorn]

bobl

Where are you getting that PhD from? I’ll make sure my start-up clients avoid hiring anyone from that school.

Obviously, the ability to make money has nothing to do with the ability to understand science.

Anyway, the 2008 Republican Platform on human embryonic stem cells is to ban all research including privately funded research. Unfortunately, they still haven’t addressed the issue of throwing IVF embryos in the trash after the families are done. Odd, isn’t it.

PS The creationists abandoned the eye argument around 10 years ago (sort of like how they avoid talking about our vestigal tailbone). Stay on the agenda, it’s about intelligent design as a whole–avoid using actual body parts as creationism examples because science does advance (which sort of explains the 2 billion to 4 billion difference–better science). Seriously, with all these advances in the world of chip design/manufacture, you can’t comprehend advances in the life sciences (like PCR, RNAi)? Don’t be a tool….

[Dukehorn]

bobl

Where are you getting that PhD from? I’ll make sure my start-up clients avoid hiring anyone from that school.

Obviously, the ability to make money has nothing to do with the ability to understand science.

Anyway, the 2008 Republican Platform on human embryonic stem cells is to ban all research including privately funded research. Unfortunately, they still haven’t addressed the issue of throwing IVF embryos in the trash after the families are done. Odd, isn’t it.

PS The creationists abandoned the eye argument around 10 years ago (sort of like how they avoid talking about our vestigal tailbone). Stay on the agenda, it’s about intelligent design as a whole–avoid using actual body parts as creationism examples because science does advance (which sort of explains the 2 billion to 4 billion difference–better science). Seriously, with all these advances in the world of chip design/manufacture, you can’t comprehend advances in the life sciences (like PCR, RNAi)? Don’t be a tool….

[Dukehorn]

bobl

Where are you getting that PhD from? I’ll make sure my start-up clients avoid hiring anyone from that school.

Obviously, the ability to make money has nothing to do with the ability to understand science.

Anyway, the 2008 Republican Platform on human embryonic stem cells is to ban all research including privately funded research. Unfortunately, they still haven’t addressed the issue of throwing IVF embryos in the trash after the families are done. Odd, isn’t it.

PS The creationists abandoned the eye argument around 10 years ago (sort of like how they avoid talking about our vestigal tailbone). Stay on the agenda, it’s about intelligent design as a whole–avoid using actual body parts as creationism examples because science does advance (which sort of explains the 2 billion to 4 billion difference–better science). Seriously, with all these advances in the world of chip design/manufacture, you can’t comprehend advances in the life sciences (like PCR, RNAi)? Don’t be a tool….

[DWCAP]

[quote=bobl]
Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.
[/quote]

I am a biologist, and I can tell you that the above (which I somehow missed) is total BS. The problem is that you are starting with the end result, and then demanding that evolution work backwards to nothing. As if somehow the human eye were the pinical of evolution and its end ‘goal’ from the beginning. Considering that is how many people who perscribe to this kind of nonsense feel, that they are the end all be all of the world blessed by the almighty himself, it is understandable. But it just isnt true that the human eye is in anyway special.

The point of an eye is to precieve light. Even damaged human eyes may still able to achieve this. This perception of light is critical to many body functions, most especially reproductive systems. Often it is changes in the amount of light observed that tell animals to begin or end mating seasons. These early “useless” eyes are actually extreamly critical in maintaining the animal, espeically in mammals. (Those of you with SAD may be experiencing exactly this kind of hormonal change.)
Early “eyes” were mearly to detect light. Perhaps the animal wanted to move toward areas where sunlight would warm the water, or where photosynthesis could be performed, or maybe away from the light so it couldnt be “seen” by preditors. It isn’t hard to imagine an arms race of preditor vs prey breaking out, where preditors keep developing better and better eyes to detect prey, and prey developing better and better eyes to avoid being eaten. This can be seen today in the fact that preditors have eyes close together on the front of their face, which allows for better depth preception while prey have eyes that are further spread out on the skull to allow for the max field of view.
If you are unable to imagine this war, it works by natural variations within populations. One prey animal who happens to have slightly wider field of view survives attack while its neighbor, who didnt, doesnt. Obviously wider eyed animals mate more since they are the only ones around anymore, and the population evolves. Then the preditor, hungry because everyone sees them, evolves better eyes (over generations) which allow them to see the prey from farther away and approach better. The ones who have better eyes eat, those that dont die, and the preditor population evolves. Each step is small, random, and totally reversable if situtations warrent it. Welcome to evolution.

Given enough time, and the right set of stimuli (ice age, preditor,…..) evolution could develop something for just about any need we can think of. It just may not be in the form you want it to be in.

[DWCAP]

[quote=bobl]
Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.
[/quote]

I am a biologist, and I can tell you that the above (which I somehow missed) is total BS. The problem is that you are starting with the end result, and then demanding that evolution work backwards to nothing. As if somehow the human eye were the pinical of evolution and its end ‘goal’ from the beginning. Considering that is how many people who perscribe to this kind of nonsense feel, that they are the end all be all of the world blessed by the almighty himself, it is understandable. But it just isnt true that the human eye is in anyway special.

The point of an eye is to precieve light. Even damaged human eyes may still able to achieve this. This perception of light is critical to many body functions, most especially reproductive systems. Often it is changes in the amount of light observed that tell animals to begin or end mating seasons. These early “useless” eyes are actually extreamly critical in maintaining the animal, espeically in mammals. (Those of you with SAD may be experiencing exactly this kind of hormonal change.)
Early “eyes” were mearly to detect light. Perhaps the animal wanted to move toward areas where sunlight would warm the water, or where photosynthesis could be performed, or maybe away from the light so it couldnt be “seen” by preditors. It isn’t hard to imagine an arms race of preditor vs prey breaking out, where preditors keep developing better and better eyes to detect prey, and prey developing better and better eyes to avoid being eaten. This can be seen today in the fact that preditors have eyes close together on the front of their face, which allows for better depth preception while prey have eyes that are further spread out on the skull to allow for the max field of view.
If you are unable to imagine this war, it works by natural variations within populations. One prey animal who happens to have slightly wider field of view survives attack while its neighbor, who didnt, doesnt. Obviously wider eyed animals mate more since they are the only ones around anymore, and the population evolves. Then the preditor, hungry because everyone sees them, evolves better eyes (over generations) which allow them to see the prey from farther away and approach better. The ones who have better eyes eat, those that dont die, and the preditor population evolves. Each step is small, random, and totally reversable if situtations warrent it. Welcome to evolution.

Given enough time, and the right set of stimuli (ice age, preditor,…..) evolution could develop something for just about any need we can think of. It just may not be in the form you want it to be in.

[DWCAP]

[quote=bobl]
Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.
[/quote]

I am a biologist, and I can tell you that the above (which I somehow missed) is total BS. The problem is that you are starting with the end result, and then demanding that evolution work backwards to nothing. As if somehow the human eye were the pinical of evolution and its end ‘goal’ from the beginning. Considering that is how many people who perscribe to this kind of nonsense feel, that they are the end all be all of the world blessed by the almighty himself, it is understandable. But it just isnt true that the human eye is in anyway special.

The point of an eye is to precieve light. Even damaged human eyes may still able to achieve this. This perception of light is critical to many body functions, most especially reproductive systems. Often it is changes in the amount of light observed that tell animals to begin or end mating seasons. These early “useless” eyes are actually extreamly critical in maintaining the animal, espeically in mammals. (Those of you with SAD may be experiencing exactly this kind of hormonal change.)
Early “eyes” were mearly to detect light. Perhaps the animal wanted to move toward areas where sunlight would warm the water, or where photosynthesis could be performed, or maybe away from the light so it couldnt be “seen” by preditors. It isn’t hard to imagine an arms race of preditor vs prey breaking out, where preditors keep developing better and better eyes to detect prey, and prey developing better and better eyes to avoid being eaten. This can be seen today in the fact that preditors have eyes close together on the front of their face, which allows for better depth preception while prey have eyes that are further spread out on the skull to allow for the max field of view.
If you are unable to imagine this war, it works by natural variations within populations. One prey animal who happens to have slightly wider field of view survives attack while its neighbor, who didnt, doesnt. Obviously wider eyed animals mate more since they are the only ones around anymore, and the population evolves. Then the preditor, hungry because everyone sees them, evolves better eyes (over generations) which allow them to see the prey from farther away and approach better. The ones who have better eyes eat, those that dont die, and the preditor population evolves. Each step is small, random, and totally reversable if situtations warrent it. Welcome to evolution.

Given enough time, and the right set of stimuli (ice age, preditor,…..) evolution could develop something for just about any need we can think of. It just may not be in the form you want it to be in.

[DWCAP]

[quote=bobl]
Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.
[/quote]

I am a biologist, and I can tell you that the above (which I somehow missed) is total BS. The problem is that you are starting with the end result, and then demanding that evolution work backwards to nothing. As if somehow the human eye were the pinical of evolution and its end ‘goal’ from the beginning. Considering that is how many people who perscribe to this kind of nonsense feel, that they are the end all be all of the world blessed by the almighty himself, it is understandable. But it just isnt true that the human eye is in anyway special.

The point of an eye is to precieve light. Even damaged human eyes may still able to achieve this. This perception of light is critical to many body functions, most especially reproductive systems. Often it is changes in the amount of light observed that tell animals to begin or end mating seasons. These early “useless” eyes are actually extreamly critical in maintaining the animal, espeically in mammals. (Those of you with SAD may be experiencing exactly this kind of hormonal change.)
Early “eyes” were mearly to detect light. Perhaps the animal wanted to move toward areas where sunlight would warm the water, or where photosynthesis could be performed, or maybe away from the light so it couldnt be “seen” by preditors. It isn’t hard to imagine an arms race of preditor vs prey breaking out, where preditors keep developing better and better eyes to detect prey, and prey developing better and better eyes to avoid being eaten. This can be seen today in the fact that preditors have eyes close together on the front of their face, which allows for better depth preception while prey have eyes that are further spread out on the skull to allow for the max field of view.
If you are unable to imagine this war, it works by natural variations within populations. One prey animal who happens to have slightly wider field of view survives attack while its neighbor, who didnt, doesnt. Obviously wider eyed animals mate more since they are the only ones around anymore, and the population evolves. Then the preditor, hungry because everyone sees them, evolves better eyes (over generations) which allow them to see the prey from farther away and approach better. The ones who have better eyes eat, those that dont die, and the preditor population evolves. Each step is small, random, and totally reversable if situtations warrent it. Welcome to evolution.

Given enough time, and the right set of stimuli (ice age, preditor,…..) evolution could develop something for just about any need we can think of. It just may not be in the form you want it to be in.

[DWCAP]

[quote=bobl]
Try evolving an eye. The eye is useless unless the entire infrastructure is complete. All the intermediate forms of that are useless. Why would any animal undergo the baggage of thousands or millions of years of useless intermediate forms in the hope that someday a developing component would become useful? The whole thing is so illogical, it is repulsive to me. But take God out, and I guess that’s your only choice.
[/quote]

I am a biologist, and I can tell you that the above (which I somehow missed) is total BS. The problem is that you are starting with the end result, and then demanding that evolution work backwards to nothing. As if somehow the human eye were the pinical of evolution and its end ‘goal’ from the beginning. Considering that is how many people who perscribe to this kind of nonsense feel, that they are the end all be all of the world blessed by the almighty himself, it is understandable. But it just isnt true that the human eye is in anyway special.

The point of an eye is to precieve light. Even damaged human eyes may still able to achieve this. This perception of light is critical to many body functions, most especially reproductive systems. Often it is changes in the amount of light observed that tell animals to begin or end mating seasons. These early “useless” eyes are actually extreamly critical in maintaining the animal, espeically in mammals. (Those of you with SAD may be experiencing exactly this kind of hormonal change.)
Early “eyes” were mearly to detect light. Perhaps the animal wanted to move toward areas where sunlight would warm the water, or where photosynthesis could be performed, or maybe away from the light so it couldnt be “seen” by preditors. It isn’t hard to imagine an arms race of preditor vs prey breaking out, where preditors keep developing better and better eyes to detect prey, and prey developing better and better eyes to avoid being eaten. This can be seen today in the fact that preditors have eyes close together on the front of their face, which allows for better depth preception while prey have eyes that are further spread out on the skull to allow for the max field of view.
If you are unable to imagine this war, it works by natural variations within populations. One prey animal who happens to have slightly wider field of view survives attack while its neighbor, who didnt, doesnt. Obviously wider eyed animals mate more since they are the only ones around anymore, and the population evolves. Then the preditor, hungry because everyone sees them, evolves better eyes (over generations) which allow them to see the prey from farther away and approach better. The ones who have better eyes eat, those that dont die, and the preditor population evolves. Each step is small, random, and totally reversable if situtations warrent it. Welcome to evolution.

Given enough time, and the right set of stimuli (ice age, preditor,…..) evolution could develop something for just about any need we can think of. It just may not be in the form you want it to be in.

[ocrenter]

we can see evolution in human populations as well.

most obvious is the development of sickle cell and thalassemia in areas with malaria where these genetic disorders actually confer survival advantage. and therefore the population actually develop more folks with these conditions.

another is the “islander metabolism.” due to the feast and famine type of condition in small islands, as well as lack of significant farming which means in general less carbohydrate in traditional diet, islanders evolve by selecting for folks that can be the most efficient at storing energy from the least amount of nutrient. it is no wonder that once those of islander ancestry are exposed to plentiful carbohyrate, the entire society become morbidly obese.

[ocrenter]

we can see evolution in human populations as well.

most obvious is the development of sickle cell and thalassemia in areas with malaria where these genetic disorders actually confer survival advantage. and therefore the population actually develop more folks with these conditions.

another is the “islander metabolism.” due to the feast and famine type of condition in small islands, as well as lack of significant farming which means in general less carbohydrate in traditional diet, islanders evolve by selecting for folks that can be the most efficient at storing energy from the least amount of nutrient. it is no wonder that once those of islander ancestry are exposed to plentiful carbohyrate, the entire society become morbidly obese.

[ocrenter]

we can see evolution in human populations as well.

most obvious is the development of sickle cell and thalassemia in areas with malaria where these genetic disorders actually confer survival advantage. and therefore the population actually develop more folks with these conditions.

another is the “islander metabolism.” due to the feast and famine type of condition in small islands, as well as lack of significant farming which means in general less carbohydrate in traditional diet, islanders evolve by selecting for folks that can be the most efficient at storing energy from the least amount of nutrient. it is no wonder that once those of islander ancestry are exposed to plentiful carbohyrate, the entire society become morbidly obese.

[ocrenter]

we can see evolution in human populations as well.

most obvious is the development of sickle cell and thalassemia in areas with malaria where these genetic disorders actually confer survival advantage. and therefore the population actually develop more folks with these conditions.

another is the “islander metabolism.” due to the feast and famine type of condition in small islands, as well as lack of significant farming which means in general less carbohydrate in traditional diet, islanders evolve by selecting for folks that can be the most efficient at storing energy from the least amount of nutrient. it is no wonder that once those of islander ancestry are exposed to plentiful carbohyrate, the entire society become morbidly obese.

[Author]

Posts