Evolution
For Oranjeboom, If he has a sence of humor anymoar
Evolution
- Videos
- Pictures
- Games
- Flash
- Mature 18+
- Free Porn
- MuchoWear
-
subscribe to mucho |
Got MySpace? Add us! |
Submit Content
|
|
Popular Searches
- japanese
- rape
- vivica fox sex tape
- sex
- hentai
- anal
- blowjob
- asian
- orgasm
- porn
- lesbian
- caught masterbaiting
- cum
- paris hilton
- incest
Recent Searches
- basshunter porn video
- gymp
- mature
- best boobs of ggw
- eva wyrwal
- french kiss
- turkish vintage porn
- matar
- wierd-al nirvana
- russian in park
- tranvesties
- boobs in slow
- ARABIC
- rare tits
- class fap
Get stoned, turn up the volume- The Ultimate Rube Goldberg Machine
priceless
World Evolution
Evolution in 6 minutes
evolution of looting
Evolution of a Playboy Covergirl
Slob Evolution|
|
Comments to Evolution
this guy is obviously a tard! Yak where's my monkey video, that explains how this guy is still a monkey
Yak should only allow creationism propaganda through. That way, he can really piss off Hank.
BTW, Hank. This guy sure has a point.
Don't you agree? huh?
Yak, unlike you Oranje doesn't seem to mind that Peoples' Views Differ from his sometimes. If that wasn't the case then you probably would have gotten the banhammer long ago. Thank god for that Huh.
And because i know that you haven't a sense of humor,This was all in fun MOARON.
Now you can fuck off
The grammar and spelling nazis will have a heyday with that one^. MOARON^^^!!!
^Thats part of it you MOARON, Now you can go jump in the middle of someone else's coversation that you nothing about.
drumrave the one thats already on here?
its already on here.
That no transistional species argument is pure crap. Only full formed types my ass. There are all kinds of proto-types of animals now living, proto-horses, proto-elephants, whales, cat and dog species, etc.... If there are two sets of fossils they ask for a transistional species. If you show these fuckers one transistional species between the two, they want two more transistional species now, because there are two new gaps now. It goes on forever.
I'm reading a book right now by the guy that developed the theory of punctuated equilibrium, Stephen Jay Gould.
Whether it was slow and gradual, or punctuated bursts is irrelevent to creationism being nothing but pure nonsense. Scientific theories and knowledge grows and changes. This is a good thing. Religious dogma claims it already knows the answers and therefore does not seek new knowledge. They try to pick away at science, but they produce no new knowledge themselves.
Crocodiles have been here for 200 million years they are top predators in their environment, there isn't a smarter creature that can challenge them for their place at the top of their food chain and they havent evolved (or even tried) into the Giant meat eating fuckers like there ancestors 65 million years ago. Lazy fucks need to get with the program.
What's your fucking point, nigger?
Orrr... the creationists are right and God made everything in 6 days (Which He did, btw...).
Crocodilia have evolved, resulting in the different alligator, crocodile, gharial and caiman families. Generally, they are also smaller than most of their prehistoric ancestors, which suggests they have evolved to suit their environment.
Think again, natas.
Another thing with these stupid ass creationists is that they try to sound "scientific." Their whole belief system is anti-science, but since science is so widely respected they try to dress creationism in scientific sounding clothes.
Their recent shit is "Creation Science", which is anything but science, but they are fighting to get it taught in schools alongside evolution.
They have probably won a few court cases in backward ass southern states and a few conscientious teachers have probably lost their jobs for refusing to teach that garbage in science class.
Creationists probably still think the Earth is flat too.
My current reading is all over this shit. I read Dawkins' The God Dilusion last summer. This winter I read The Selfish Gene by Dawkins, Why People Believe Weird Things by Shermer, and am currently reading The Mismeasure of Man by Gould.
I have another one coming up called Why Darwin is Important, by Shermer also.
I've also been reading up on the scientific method, atheism, and secular humanism. Also, started reading Skeptic magazine.
Interesting stuff.
Don't Know Anything About Mythology is a good one for a view of the begining of most religions and Flood: A Scientific Account of a Biblical Event is an excellent book with plenty of science disproving the myth of a worldwide flood. Those two books shined some interesting light on my thinking early on.
I was reading a book on mythology by Joseph Campbell late last year, but put it down halfway and haven't picked it back up yet.
I feel like posting a 10 minute long video called "Evolution for Dummies" showing how gradual evolution is proven, but I doubt the mucho crowd would be into that.
Go for it. It'll only take an hour to load.
Post it, Jones, I want to see how the creationist brigade tries to explain it all away.
Posted, my bet is they won't watch it and just start making up stuff.
Good boy!
*pat, pat*
Have a biscuit. :)
figures you would put that book down by Joseph Campbell. Would not go with your anti religious views I guess. It's funny though you got halfway through it before you realized that.
It doesn't go against any of my views. He says that the myths that make up religion are just metaphors that we use to understand the world and the rituals of religion are markers we use to transition from one phase of life to another.
He thinks all religions are right, metaphorically.
I really enjoyed what I read and will definitely finish it.
You neither know me nor Campbell's ideas, it seems.
K-Billy, why don't you enlighten us with some of the "good arguments" from the creationist side that you were talking about the other day?
I just read an article in Ultimate Grappling about strength and conditioning using medicine balls. It was a pretty good read.
yes please k-billy
sounds fantabulous irish
It was, dik.
lol @ 1rish trying to get involved in intelligent debate.
OK, about my question on when evolution started. You said it's has nothing to do with where life started, but how life goes on. Fair enough. But that's like saying Guns dont kill people, people kill people. You have to start from somewhere, and if scientists cant figure out but only just speculate how life started, you are off to a bad beggining.
Science estimates for all the necessary proteins to form to create life the chance of that happening is 10 to the 67th to 1. Those are incredible odds.
"These are against even a small protein forming by time and chance, in an ideal mixture of chemicals, in an ideal atmosphere, and given up to 100 billion years (an age 10 to 20 times greater than the supposed age of the Earth)."
Plus, there is that whole Parent thing. Also, there is the complexity of the DNA strand.
"Many scientists are convinced that cells containing such a complex code and such intricate chemistry could never have come into being by pure, undirected chemistry. No matter how chemicals are mixed, they do not create DNA spirals or any intelligent code whatsoever. Only DNA reproduces DNA."
The website i pulled this from gave a pretty quick synopsis for the arguments for Intelligent design. Give it a read. I have to go to work, but will check back here in about 6 hours.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/origin-of-life.html
lol @ Oranje and his same old tired bullshit.
Now, i'm not saying that i believe in this stuff hank, but when you get to thinking about where life actually came from and how current science really has no substantial answers, then you may begin to see my interest in the ID argument.
I mean, why discount the theory, when science cant give us a straight answer?
I also want to get it straight that i am not arguing for religion.
Current science has no answer to the origin of life, yet. Just sit back, and have a think about how long it will take to reverse engineer billions of years of evolution. It's not going to be done with the odd late shift and a couple of weekends, is it?
No, I don't see your interest at all. But, basically all your arguments are saying is that "this, this and this are so improbable that God must have done it." It's the same shit I mentioned below. Science and evolution has produced a ton of proof on how the world works. Creationists just point at the knowledge gaps and say, "Look, you can't explain that yet." Well, if we left it to religion nothing would ever get explained. Also, a creationist referring to probabilities is fucking ridiculous as they are definitely on the short end of the probability stick.
Also, dude, that's two days in a row where you came out with some really fucking stupid analogy.
"when evolution started. You said it's has nothing to do with where life started, but how life goes on. Fair enough. But that's like saying Guns dont kill people, people kill people."
This is just dumb. One is nothing like the other.
Yes Fugs, and it will NEVER get done if you say, "God did it." and stop looking for the answers.
"I mean, why discount the theory, when science cant give us a straight answer?"
Because the theory is a dead end. It goes absolutely fucking nowhere. Science grows, builds on itself, progresses. It improves our understanding of the world in very real, substantial ways.
Ok fugs, but why base a model on something where the science is sketchy and claim it to be the truth? Reminds me of the argument for man made global warming.
I wasn't being mean Irish, I was joking.
You people sooooooo moody!
K-Billy, you spoke about scientists taking time to answer all the questions...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/3351245/Large-Hadron-Collider-Particle-accelerator-to-recreate-birth-of-universe.html
Things obviously take time when it comes to the intricacy of the universe and evolution.
People used to think the earth was flat, UNTIL we were able to prove it isn't.
People used to think that the sun orbited the Earth UNTIL we were able to prove it doesn't.
You see where I'm going with this?
For one, K-Billy, "the truth" is not a scientific term. It's a religious term.
For two, evolution is an extremely well supported theory supported by many different fields of science. Calling it "sketchy" is ridiculous.
Just because all questions aren't answered today, it doesn't mean they will not be.
People are impatient.
Especially people who want to 'disprove' the theory of evolution by saying, "See science hasn't got an answer."
"for two" lol
Can i just say that i come to Mucho to be entertained by irrelevent bollocks , if i wanted to learn stuff then i would have stayed in class instead of sneaking out of school on friday afternoons
What is funny about "for two"?
HankChinaski says:
evolution is an extremely well supported theory supported by many different fields of science. Calling it "sketchy" is ridiculous.
Taking an extremely well supported theory as fact (Which is what you are doing) Is just as idiotic.
Also the fact that you people seem to insist that the people who dont believe the "evolution theory" believe in "god".
And if you could just look past the creation of earth man etc and look at the fact that before the "big bang" there was nothing absolutely nothing, and now there's everything is pretty amazing.
You didn't do that as a joke, Hank?
Just the general consensus would have it as 'for one' & 'secondly'.
What a surprise you feel that way, fries.
For one, I never said it was "fact", but is very, very probable. Gravity is "just" a theory, as well. So what? Does that mean it lacks credibility. Choosing evolutionary theory over the alternatives is an easy choice as the alternatives are...well, god. That's about it.
For two, If you want to call it Intelligent Design to attempt to distance yourself from religion that's understandable, but who is the designer? God.
Allright then, fuck off if you can't do any better than that.
Also, yeah, yeah, amazing. So what? What's your point, 666ASSHAT666?
Oranje, no, that's the way I say it. I'm sure I'm not the only one.
People always assume that the way they say something is the way everyone says it, or the only correct way.
NATAS, I refer your dumb ass back to this:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/3351245/Large-Hadron-Collider-Particle-accelerator-to-recreate-birth-of-universe.html
Anybody notice that this fags name is SATAN backwards? Wow, that's witty.
It should be TNUC backwards.
fries, if you want to be entertained by irrelevant bollocks, put your hand down your pants.
har har de har...
I just thought you did it as a joke, that is all.
For one, I never said it was "fact", but is very, very probable. Gravity is "just" a theory, as well. So what? Does that mean it lacks credibility.
I agree with you, All im saying is that you cant give that same view at the possibility of God creating everything. Theres not solid proof of that either but it doesn't mean it is impossible.
Aaww poor hank dont get so upset that it took you so to catch my name. You fucking dumb ass
Yes it does. There being no god renders that 'theory' impossible.
Well, for one, don't say "either". There is lots of solid proof (not necessarily absolute, but very convincing) for evolution and gravity.
For two, of course it's not impossible, but that doesn't mean anything. A giant in another galaxy could have created this galaxy by a giant cosmic fart. It's possible. So what? That theory along with your god theory are equally improbable in my mind. And the god theory can't be proven or disproven. It's completely outside the realm of science. It's purely faith-based and much as creationist fuckers want to believe, science is not based on faith. It's based on data, observable for the most part.
You and K-Billy's "Keep your mind open. We don't really know. It might be god." is just crap.
I'm not upset, xxCUNTxx. What makes you think that? Because I find you to be an annoying idiot? I don't follow your logic there.
Oranjeboom says:
Yes it does. There being no god renders that 'theory' impossible.
If thats the case then the "theory" of the big bang would be impossible as well.
You just outed yourself as believing in or the possibility of God. Good one.
You and monkeyboy hank have a good time.Im going to gym so wont be able to reply for few hours. And don't forget, MOAR!! MOAR!!
NATAS, you're right about saying it doesn't mean it's impossible that God created the 'everything' in much the same way as you or I can't prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist. But they're both improbable to the point where arguing for their sakes' is, quite rightly, seen as idiotic by normal critical thinkers. Any argument for a god is weak, particularly an argument for ID. Give up, get a life. Religion is simply a means of exerting control over hoi polloi and for offering some child-like comfort in tough times. It should NOT venture into the scientific arena.
this is the final thing i have to say on this,
If i believe in God, creationism, or intelligent design as a possobility of how we came to be who gives a fuck. It does not mean that i believe evolution an impossible case for the reason we are here, In fact im fine with either one being the case. You on the other hand believe in evolution and only that, There is absolutely no other explanation you would even consider. Not once in this or any other thread have i said i believe in God or I think evolution was impossible, And i posted this video just to get you going Oranje as i knew all to well it would. To To easy. Know go find some other thread and go berzerk forcing your opinions on everone.
So.....god didn't actually invent anything? Like an ancient Thomas Eddison then
Well this is the last thing i have to say. To let everyone know, I didn't post this video to start a debate on religion and evolution i did it for the simple fact of getting "Oranjebooms goat" and it worked better than i expected. And credit to -Morph- as he was the only one to catch it, Maybe people should try reading the video descriptions a little more...GOOD DAY
Wow, you sure played him like a fiddle.
I don't believe in anything, you fucking insulting twat. I, almost certainly, know more about more religions than you ever will and I will entertain (at least for some time) almost any hypothesis. You say 'evolution' like it's a religion; a dogma. That's not only deeply offensive but clearly ludicrous.
But, and let this be heard, it's the weak-willed namby-pamby fucking fence-sitters like YOU who are the main enablers of stupid shit like ID being taught in schools. I don't hate religious people, I don't hate atheists/secularists/skeptics. I hate wishy-washy faggots with stupid, childish nicknames (that's rich!) saying, "Yeah, but, no, but yeah, but..." who call themselves Agnostic.
So there.
Gravity has never been explained, only described. No one can really answer the fundamental questions of what matter, time, energy are. All the answers just go in circles.
People, as a whole, never thought the world was flat. As far back as any evidence of civilization goes, it's also clear that they new the damn world was round.
It might be really slim odds that things could combine to form life, but there's a lot of chances for it to happen. The odds of a particular person winning a lottery jackpot is almost 0, but that doesn't mean that no one ever wins.
If the world is too complex to simply exist without an intelligent creator... then how does this creator manage to exist?
There really are no answers. If you go and study physics at the master's level, things get more fucked up and the whole world goes to shit. At that point all you can do is just say "I don't fucking know" to all questions of god and existence.
Whammy!
natas, you are one ignorant motherfucker.
here's a little education for you el_wanko. matter, time and energy explained for you:
mat⋅ter   [mat-er]
–noun
1. the substance or substances of which any physical object consists or is composed: the matter of which the earth is made.
2. physical or corporeal substance in general, whether solid, liquid, or gaseous, esp. as distinguished from incorporeal substance, as spirit or mind, or from qualities, actions, and the like.
3. something that occupies space.
omfg... that's WHAT matter is... no circles there...
time   [tahym]
noun, adjective, verb, timed, tim⋅ing.
–noun
1. the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another.
2. duration regarded as belonging to the present life as distinct from the life to come or from eternity; finite duration.
3. (sometimes initial capital letter) a system or method of measuring or reckoning the passage of time: mean time; apparent time; Greenwich Time.
well shit... another what answered... with no circles...
en·er·gy (ěn'ər-jē)
n. pl. en·er·gies
The capacity for work or vigorous activity; vigor; power. See Synonyms at strength.
Exertion of vigor or power: a project requiring a great deal of time and energy.
Vitality and intensity of expression: a speech delivered with energy and emotion.
Usable heat or power: Each year Americans consume a high percentage of the world's energy.
A source of usable power, such as petroleum or coal.
Usable heat or power: Each year Americans consume a high percentage of the world's energy.
A source of usable power, such as petroleum or coal.
Physics The capacity of a physical system to do work.
please read the physics one a couple times to make sure you understand that there's again, no circles and the what is explained...
dumbass. go to fucking school
Whammy!
Here we go again. para-bellum if you would pull your head out of your ass you would see that i have said nothing as to what side of the fence im on in this little debate nor am i sitting on the fence either. You just decided to choose for me and then spew your pathetic bullshit at me. It looks to me as though your talking about yourself and found this an easy way to vent your frustration rather than face them. So move on, get a life, and stop being a fucking fence sitter.
But don't forget para-bellum that god loves you know matter what.
AAAAH SKEET SKEET SKEET SKEET
matter time and energy are simply words and definitions given to things in order to explain things scientifically in a theory or equation. if you are like the religious people, you don't understand that, and you think that if something is not likely to happen, yet does happen, that it must be gods doing. people who believe in science like to create formulas to prove or disprove things. which is why we needed the measurement of time. it also currently makes everything in physics (up until quantum physics) fit VERY VERY VERY well together. unlike religion.
if you want to believe in make believe people with super powers that created the universe, go ahead.. but don't be alarmed when people don't want to agree with you.
Saying god did something is a cop out for trying to find out a reasonable explanation for something you dont understand. Not only that it only raises more questions, "If god created life, then who or what created god?" If Protein strands being formed in the primordial ooze is too improbable for you to believe why is a all powerful omnipotent being any less probable?
1 & 2. Matter is a physical substance. That's more of a synonym that a definition. If someone asks what dirt is, you might say it's "what the ground's made out of" or "soil" or "earth". All describing the same thing but not shedding on any light on what that thing is. A better definition would be to explain what the dirt is composed of so that someone could understand where it came from, what it's properties are, how to make more, etc. To call it "soil" is useless because someone can ask what soil is and you just say "dirt." That's circular.
3. Matter takes up space. So WTF is space? That's a huge question. I guess it's something matter takes up. Or it's the thing that requires time for matter to cross when it has momentum. Space and Time are the weirdest to try to define. You can define a second as 1/60th of a minute (time in terms of time) or in other ways like distance/velocity (these all give you circles.)
Yak's definition is basically the best. These are concepts that we don't truly grasp, but we can observe them very easily and represent them in equations with symbols to make predictions.
Dirac's equation, probably the most-fucked up simple equation ever, tells us that there is basically nothing. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle can show that you can never point to a point of space and say it is empty. It is never empty. There is more energy that we have no access to within the "empty space" represented by the orbit of a hydrogen electron, then there is energy we can see in the entire universe. What we actually do see (and what we are) seems to be leftover crap from the 99.9999....% of the universe that is in balance.
New experiments in quantum entanglement are suggesting that space/distance don't really exist.
Read up on it. The equations are beautiful and the ideas are mind-blowing. Sorry Deja it's not fucking grade 3 where you pull out your dictionary and say you have the answer.
I don't like math.
Math is the only thing there is to like, Hank. Apart from lady bits. Physics, Chemistry, Life. All Math. esp if you define mathematics as 'logic'.
^^^^You dumbass, NATAS! You gave yourself possible options of your belief structure - God, Creationism or ID. They all boil down to the same thing. It's fairly obvious which side of the fence you're sitting on by dint of your Freudian slant. You're not very good at playing the Devil's Advocate (if that's what you're trying to do) either. I didn't spew any bullshit back then, just brought something home for you.
Quantum isn't oldskool math. It's mostly about a few equations that describe the universe. You can plug numbers into them if you want, but the real interesting stuff is in the predictions they make without numbers. You might solve the equation in a way that agrees with how we see the universe, but the equation may have more than one solution. It's like how if you notice that a square with sides length 3 has an area of 9, so you describe the area of a square with the equation (Length x Length = Area), then someone points out that if you throw -3 into that equation you still get 9, so there are now two solutions for L where LxL=9.
In quantum you get a second solution and it has huge implications. The Dirac equation suggests our universe has a mirror image anti-matter universe, and also the testable concept of a positron (which was found.) Take this things farther and the idea of infinite different universes arises. This is where all the sci-fi ideas come from.
Best idea is to drop the god/no god crap and think about how anything can exist. Think about what it means for something to have existed forever, or for nothing to have ever existed. It fucks with your head.
The last thing I've read was the serial number at the end of the condom I put on to fuck some whore the other night.
Very Nietzsche-esque, Wankee. But, you are wrong. Einstein described the Mass-Gravity correlation, and how it fits into the four fundamental interactions of nature;
Weak Nuclear Force,
Strong Nuclear Force,
Electromagnetism, and
Gravity
Dont get caught up in Spin 0, spin 1/2 or spin 2 or the various flavors of Fermion/Boson quantum interactions. Just accept it. God did it. End of story. Easy, no?
Well, now that thats settled...
^^^^ I tried telling them that 10hrs ago and not all but most of them just dont want to hear or think about that aspect of it because there theory of evolution only discusses the history of life, as for them looking into anything beyond that would tell them what they already know but just refuse to believe. And before you flip your lid,im not referring to that as being God either.
Math is boring. I prefer literature.
Our galaxy is contained within a circular container resembling a marble inside a bag full of other galaxy-containing marbles.
Actually if you listen to the likes of Stephen Hawkins (quite a clever chap, despite his bodilly disadvantages) the universe is in fact saddle shaped. So Men in Black got it wrong.
How am I wrong and what does that have to do with anything I said? You're just calling shit the "four fundamental forces" like that somehow answers anything. There was a period in psychology when they started calling everything an instinct and pretended that doing so was answering questions. "Why is loosewhore such a fat slut?" "Teenage fat slut-instinct." Nothing is really answered. Ooo, its "fundamental" forces... because now that they're called "fundamental" it means everything is wrapped up in a nice little package. It doesn't work that way. Word games don't answer questions. It's no better than calling everything "god" and saying "problem solved".
Literature is for fags.
Wanko shocked me more than the beheading videos did. Never thought that a guy who has a post full of fucked-up quotes would know shit about physics. Maybe literature but not physics.
My hat's off to you, wanko.
Literature is a fuck of a lot more interesting than crap you are spouting.
don't get me wrong, i enjoy a good book every now and then, i'm waiting for some hubert selby jr to come soon via mail, but i'm much more fascinated by science.
wow, i spout off a bout ID and hank has a feild day, when it comes to wanko and his theorys, all he has to say is. "Math is boring" WTF? Good job wank, hanks apparently got nothing to say.
Orangie, the hadron collider is AWESOME! I would love for a mini black hole to form and swallow the earth. Of course the chances of that happening are pretty slim. But hey! If life can magically form out of protiens, so can black holes from the Hardon collider!
Yor mouth wants to collide with my hardon.
that would really blow if the whole world was sucked into your dick
I don't know mathematics or physics. What the fuck am I supposed to say? I don't spout off when I don't know the subject. I do, however, know ID is bollocks. No math is required.
If we don't have all the answers, it's magic. Right, you stupid cunt, that is exactly the mentality that suits ID. You dumbass. Pull your head out of your ass.
But hank, that's exactly what YOU belive in. Magic. You said, "We dont have all the answers." What else can it mean then? If you dont have all the answers, how can you honestly build a sound argument from that? If a Christian said well, "we dont have all the answers," would you give any lieniancy? Hardly.
way to go, billy, you fucking gaywart, i was trying to have a first decent conversation and you fucked it up with your shit about how everybody's wrong and you are right.
You, my friend,are a complete moron.
I am not saying im right. I am trying to have an opposing view point. Seems to me, your "decent conversation." is only for people who share your point of view.
Wanko-What the hell are you talking about? The Dirac Equation does not describe a "mirror universe" only the postulate existence of anti-matter positrons. Dirac only built upon the Schroeninger Equation using Heisenberg's Matrix Mechanics to explain wave mechanics and, ultimately, string theory. Why does this make you so angry?
For fucks sake, what is wrong with your fucking brain?
Science does and always has admitted it doesn't have all the answers and any theories that it does have are open to change pending the arrival of further evidence. That is honesty. The answers it does have are based on data.
Religion has no answers and claims it has all of them.
For people who say that religion has all the answers, they are as wrong as the people like you, who claim otherwise.
Sorry, *as wrong as the people who claim science, even though it does not hold all the answers, still hold all the answers. Cant you see you are putting as much faith in a belief as those arguing the opposite side?
You are not only "trying to have an opposing viewpoint". You are trying to debate it and convert others. If creationists just kept their opinion to themselves, it wouldn't be a problem, but they try to get the nonsense taught in America's public schools. Can you imagine? America is, rightly, a fucking laugingstock due to the excessive religiousity polluting and retarding it's growth like lead paint chips in a baby's mouth.
Oh, now we get to the real crux of the problem. It's not that I am arguing for a theory, it's that I'm trying to convert people. Wow, why dont you have a burning at the stake while you are at it. You are no better. I point out problems and holes. And you have a salem witch trial.
If she floats then she is not a witch like we had thought.
A down payment on another one at Salems Lot.
billy, science never made something a fact. it never gave any sure answer. that is how science works. nothing is sure. people thought that there wasnt something smaller than an atom, till they got the equipment and knowledge of other fields of science to find out that there was more. so we now still dont have the needed knowledge to find out how physics work when there is not time - and there was nothing that could be called time before the big bang. and even if we find out. we still would question it. sciencist are open for every plausibel explanation.
but ID says it is how it is. doesnt it seem a bit ignorant?
Nothing about me rejecting your ridiculous theory resembles a salem witch trial.
if you would only point out problems you wouldnt tell us that ID has answers to them. that is converting.
Just read Genesis 1 and it is all explained to you.
"America is, rightly, a fucking laughingstock"
I agree wholeheartedly!
ug. it's my day off and i dont want to be wasting my time with this. I want to be wasting my time playing COD5 or Dead space. You ever play that irish? It's fucking awesome.
thank you for leaving, billy.
K-Billy, science is not faith-based, much as the creationists like to claim it does. Believing in science is not the same as believing in divine creation. Much like believing in DNA is not the same as believing in Zeus.
Yet orangie, people still come here seeking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Hmmm. I guess you should let them in on the joke. Actually, nevermind that. Who honestly gives a fuck what other people think?
K-Billy says: I want to be wasting my time playing COD5 or Dead space.
how do you expect anyone to take you seriously?
Thats right, Hank. Don't teach anything that might open one's mind or offer alternate theories in modes of thought. Then the Left-wing, liberal control freaks might lose their stranglehold on what THEY think people should think. God forbid should a leftist allow freedom of thought. A left winger thinks anyone who doesn't think like they do are "Hate-Mongers." You say America is a laughingstock because of its "Religiosity". But no one says that about the "Peace-loving" sand-niggers of the asshole of the earth, the Middle East. And, I'm sorry, but an ex-patriate is too biased to be able to fairly comment on America's public schools.Too bad you socialist, pinko-commies cornered the market on hate.
Would believing that the tooth fairy created all life be a viable theory for you? Why not? It's possible. It could be anything.
IFD, Intelligent Fairy Design, that's plausible, right K-Billy? Because if science can't explain EVERYTHING then ANYTHING could be the source of life.
You are a fucking dimwit.
I haven't played either of those yet.
Haha, nice one FatPat. That was really funny, although I'm sure you didn't intend it to be so.
religion is a stupid waste of time. regardless of its nature.
I never said Dirac described an antimatter universe or anything, other than the positron, only that the equation hinted at the idea and it eventually became a common theme in science fiction. I'm so angry because you're so gay.
Tooth fairy is for fags.
Arch-atheist Richard Dawkins now thinks a serious case can be made for a sort-of God?
A serious case could be made for a deistic God.
This was surely remarkable. Here was the arch-apostle of atheism, whose whole case is based on the assertion that believing in a creator of the universe is no different from believing in fairies at the bottom of the garden, saying that a serious case can be made for the idea that the universe was brought into being by some kind of purposeful force. A creator. True, he was not saying he was now a deist; on the contrary, he still didn't believe in such a purposeful founding intelligence, and he was certainly still saying that belief in the personal God of the Bible was just like believing in fairies. Nevertheless, to acknowledge that ‘a serious case could be made for a deistic god’ is to undermine his previous categorical assertion that
...all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all ‘design’ anywhere in the universe is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection...Design cannot precede evolution and therefore cannot underlie the universe.
Well, I can't comment on why Dawkins may have said. You are most likely quoting him out of context.
The question that has come to me now is Why do people need so badly for there to be a purposeful founding intelligence behind the origin of life? It's not objective reasoning in the slightest as far I can tell, but a very subjective desire for the idea, a need, a very strong yearning.
Well, okay then, Wanko.
"For Oranjeboom, If he has a sence of humor anymoar"
God damn you!
MOAR!!!
just to further inflame oranje's temple vein.
How can god damn me sinse he doesn't exit? Wanna try that one MOAR time.
That thread is pretty long, so I'll put it here.
FYI, NATAS. I think believe that people are perfectly welcome to opinions that differ from my own. I just find it annoying when they act as though they are right, which is impossible.
Thats right, bitch. I think believe!
Well now you know how some people see you as annoying, Because that is exactly how you are. You always take your opinion as the right one and everyone else is just a fucking idiot.
Nice to see you today, Im glad you enjoyed the clip. =)
My opinion is the right one, & what makes you think I would care about people finding me annoying?
The people who I have time for on here find you annoying.
Good day.
The thing is you really are a fucking idiot.
Was that an interpost? Maaaaayybbee.
Two birds with one stone there, Hank.
Your opinion is the right one to you of course, but trying to force it on everyone else is not just annoying but pathetic as well. You cant even take a joke.
Thanks for proving my point on both counts.
Creationists say that a lot too. "Don't try and force your opinions about evolution on me."
But, who is fighting to get their bullshit in the schools? Smells like hypocrisy.
Fuck it, Hank. Get it taught in all schools. Have Christian Science instead of biology/phys/chem. (Just don't teach the kids what an oxymoron is.) I'm getting sick of fighting with religionists, para/pseudo-scientists etc. Let them win.
The number of religion-focussed schools opening in the UK is (per capita) matching the US and no-one's listening to skeptics (did I just swear?).
The idiots will be back in the dark ages within two generations and they fucking deserve it. Using prayer and acupuncture to cure their ills. Fuck, when I'm gone, I'd be looking down laughing at them if it was at all possible...
Fuck it, Hank. Get it taught in all schools. Have Christian Science instead of biology/phys/chem. (Just don't teach the kids what an oxymoron is.) I'm getting sick of fighting with religionists, para/pseudo-scientists etc. Let them win.
The number of religion-focussed schools opening in the UK is (per capita) matching the US and no-one's listening to skeptics (did I just swear?).
The idiots will be back in the dark ages within two generations and they fucking deserve it. Using prayer and acupuncture to cure their ills. Fuck, when I'm gone, I'd be looking down laughing at them if it was at all possible...
Looking down from where, exactly?
I sense a conflict of ideas here.
Looking down from where, exactly?
I sense a conflict of ideas here.
I sense an inability of the reader to read a sentence completely.
Iteration doesn't make your point any more valid. To comment on a sentence that was obviously incomprehensible to you is one thing...
Oh, shit. Now I see what happened. Who's the donkey?
(I didn't post twice, though. Honeslty, I didn't)
i only read the fist dozen or so posts because i can only take so much of this bullshit, but i agree with Hank. evolution doesn't try explaining how life STARTED; it explains... oh let me think... the origin of species. not the origin of life itself. species.
No, no no! Evolution doesn't try to do anything. It doesn't even concern itself with life. Why, oh, why people think evolution is life-based is beyond me. Evolution is just something we happen to have noticed but not nearly begun to understand. Planets evolve, solar systems evolve. They're not at all concerned with life. Evolution, in its simplest terms is the passage of time. In a more ethereal sense, its anti-entropy.
That's a pretty broad definition. Darwin's theory seeks to explain differentian of living organisms through random genetic mutation, natural selection, and time.
yeah. and you are supposed to start keeping track of "differentian of living organisms through random genetic mutation, natural selection, and time"
not when life started, --because science cant figure out HOW it started-- but sometime after.
Like, probably after the first few magic cells started to do all that darwin stuff.
Hasn't yet does not equal can't.
And even if science couldn't explain it, why would you want to explain it away by saying some god figure did it instead of just admitting we don't know and being honest about it? To make yourself feel better? You are weak, man.
"Hasnt yet does not equal cant" It seems to me you are giving the same amount of faith in a system as the creationists.
It seems to me you are stupid as fuck. How many times do I have to say it?
Science looks for and finds answers. Creationism/ID/religion does not. It's an easy choice.
Science looks to find answers. Once the ID or creationism argument is introduced, then that is not a possibility of science? Seems pretty ignorant to me.
What? That theory is more than a thousand years old. It was shot the fuck down a loooooong time ago.
See the link about The Teleological Argument.
id like to see this guy tied up and mouth fucked by a tranny
that would make a good mucho video lol.
It seriously disturbs me that people actually believe this garbage. "i have no grasp of science and don't understand what your saying so you must be wrong because you dont include god in your theory" right...
Do some research..theres a whole other thread devoted to that same argument.This argument will carry on longer than the politcal types
I want to punctuate this moron in the face.
Darwin would kick his ass.
People using the incomplete fossil record to explain away gradual evolution should go back to school and study Geology. The chances of any plant or animal actually becoming a recognisable fossil are extremely remote. The chances of finding them are even more remote. Even if you took the Earth's crust apart, piece by piece, you would not get a complete fossil record of life.
time and space had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy.The singularity didn't appear in space; rather, space began inside of the singularity. Prior to the singularity, nothing existed, not space, time, matter, or energy - nothing. So where and in what did the singularity appear if not in space? We don't know. We don't know where it came from, why it's here, or even where it is. All we really know is that we are inside of it and at one time it didn't exist and neither did we.
Can't we all just get along. =)
Shut the fuck up. You are a boring cunt.
A bit to much for your little mind to grasp. It's ok monkey boy maybe someday your brain will evolve enough to where you can look at things and form your own opinions as to how it happend istead of believing what someone else to you, That being religion or your darwin theory. Aw hell you probably wont understand that either, so have Oranjre explain it to you.
Further proof that you have no idea how evolution works.
That was one of my New Year's resolutions actually.
"This year I resolve to evolve my brain a bit and start to try to form my own opinions."
Fossils were planted by God to test people's faith. They're made to look like they're more than 6500yrs old. Ooh. A dichotomy.
the brainwashing of america in full effect...
Just one word did that a couple of hundred years ago. I believe it was the word 'freedom'.
oh, and all the other systems of control work oh so much better.
Logically we should have flying cars by now. The fact that we dont proves a man in the sky made the universe. Fact.
The fossil does prove evolution but even if there were no fosssils comparing and studying DNA also proves evolution. Creationism id for losers.
Do pieces of shit like this also not reallise that we have no definitive evidence whatsoever of the existence of the invisible sky wizard that they so fervently try to convince everybody exists? For some reason this is enough to disprove evolution in their eyes, so why not anything else?
Yep, their arguments are strictly negative, focusing on perceived flaws in evolutionary theory. Their only positive assertion is that "God made everything."
It is beyond me how anyone could take that shit seriously.
it's amazing isn't it
No, there are too many idiots in the world for anything to be amazing anymore. It's just par.
There are people who try to take the argument in that direction hank, making it all about god. But there are scientists out there who are of different faiths and religions who still think Intelligent Design has some good points.
Bringing up scientists is just another attempt to associate the non-science of ID with real science in order to gain some much needed credibility.
From Wiki,
"Intelligent design is the assertion that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." It is a modern form of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God that avoids specifying the nature or identity of the designer. The idea was developed by a group of American creationists who reformulated their argument in the creation-evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings that prohibit the teaching of creationism as science. Intelligent design's leading proponents, all of whom are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank, believe the designer to be the God of Christianity."
Here's the link for the teleological argument from which intelligent design comes. If anyone wants to educate themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument
It's certainly nothing new. It basically says there are some things so complex that they couldn't possibly have arisen naturally and must have been created by some supernatural being. I think it's piss weak. It's like saying, "Wow, the eye is a really incredible thing. It's so amazing. We can't possibly begin to understand how this thing came to be. It must have been made by God. You see? Where there is a knowledge gap, they insert God to fill the gap.
God invented the Universe , that why its so stupendously huge...it's to stop us traveling to other solar systems
Anybody read that Teleological Argument link?
I pretty much said that ID is creationism without attributing it directly to a god, yesterday.
I'm so fucking smart!!
I did.
Thank you.
And with that, I'm off to bed.
Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray the lord my soul to keep
And if I die before I wake
Please God, kill all the creationists
The only thing right about Creation are the Teenage Fanclub and Oasis back catalogues.
Wiki is for fags.
And yet Wiki knows so much
Wiki is pure shit. Tell me where Shania Twain lives.
have you tried Googling that ?
Ahh nevermind, they fixed the entry like a month ago.
Did they fix the entry that said you weren't a cocksucking dickhole?
Fucked if I know, you're the guy who spends 2/3 of his life on there.
Yeah, that and the 3/4 of my life I spend here means I'm bad at math, but I can spell Fuck You Wanko!
Spelling is for fags.
You ar the fag expert.
shut the fuck up
And just who the fuck are you supposed to be talking to, you dirty stinking pile of noob puke?
You'd be far better off shutting the fuck up yourself. Cuntbag.
Laying it on a bit thick there, aren't you Fugs? :p
Ya think?
Sorry, crank. Welcome to the world that is Mucho.
Now just keep that fetid dick-trough of a mouth shut, and we'll get along just fine.
That better, Manny?
A little. Not quite harsh enough second time around though, you have to come to some kind of perfect balancing between the two.
Fuck you crank.
See fugs, that there is what I like to call "pwning a noob".
I made that up myself.
That's why it was stupid.
hmmmm.
for the first time i've decided to say something on here. On the video: self explanatory, only made me laugh.
- to HankChinaski: i thought you were very ignorant even though your jokes are somewhat funny on a special occasion. But just because you've shown interest in the Gould, it demands respect from me. Well done! Knowledge is the ultimate power.
Somewhat funny on a special occasion?
like christmas and my birthday
Shutup shitcrack. It would have been better if you hadn't said anything on here and just slit your wrists and cried alone.
Hank's jokes are never funny.
Your funny bone is stuck up another man's ass.
You're not a man.
I guess I should consider myself lucky.
well you cant be funny ALL the time....
Idiot, liar. Smithsonian has an entire wall with fossils detailing the recent evolution of the horse leg, for one. And what is "fully formed"? Everything is still evolving, changing!
Yes.
I bet you're more interested in the evolution of the horse cock.
I bet your more intersted in the taste.
"Al dente, my Black Beauty!"
I see stupidity still lives strong in the hearts of MuchoSucko!
welcome home, tool...
fuckin zeitgeist background
What is sad is science does not have an answer to how life began. ID does. But it's being thrown out as a kook fringe idea because people are worried that it involves too much religion. Scientists from different religions argue that it does not have to be a "god" it can be anything. Evolution is sound, right up to the point of it's beggining. Everything falls apart right there. Why cant BOTH theories be taught in schools? Why only one? Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Huh?
ID doesn't have an answer. And, it's designer does have to be a god, a conscious metaphysical being, a creator. If it's not that, then what is it? The Big Bang?
It can't be taught in the schools, because there isn't anything to teach. Oh, it could be anything that started life on this planet? How about Peter Rabbit? Let's teach that Peter Rabbit created life on this planet. No, wait, let's teach in our schools that Al Bundy created life. At least Al Bundy has some basis is in reality.
Al Bundy is for fags.
That "for fags" line is only funny when Dik says it.
Being funny is for fags.
Wow. You are really funny. Keep it up, knobhead.