LoginRegister
Nintendo Wii / Wii U Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Page 26 of 26 FirstFirst ... 16 24 25 26
Results 251 to 258 of 258
  1. #251
    Owner of Last Level Games coolsmile's Avatar
    Member #
    13970
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    US...
    Posts
    62
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    [quote]You see, that's the point. I never claimed to be objective, however, I do provide a counterpoint to your theories.[/qoute]
    And I provide counterpoints to those counterpoints ^_^
    Also, note that to challenge something, you need to have a objective grasp of what it is you're refuting.
    I don't think I do, since you don't seem to have a specific objective grasp either
    I on the other hand, have consistently pulled out evidence from various sources (if you refute that, go back and count up the amount of non-wikipedia sources I've used).
    Why would I prove myself wrong...
    You are the one who has to convince me
    Most people like you? If you were to defend your "faith" against someone, would you be pushing down on someone else? No. There's a difference between attack and defense.
    Yet attack and defense are realitive to the person giving it and the person receiving it...
    Also, if it wasn't really clear, he didn't push evolution on people because he was deceased by around 1800 years before evolutionary theory was created.
    It's only clear because they haven't seen the other side...
    Interesting website with a lot of points: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
    Beware though. It paints a bleak picture for Creationalists - but one that is well informed and well versed in referencing.
    Hitler based his ideas not on Darwinism but on a "divine right" philosophy
    That's not even an evolutionist claim and it's not even right. It's social darwinism. And my teachers (athiests) told me this.
    Um, that isn't a creationist view. They mis-state it. Evolution can't define the difference from right and wrong.

    I would like to argue more on that site but my battery is running low
    I'm sorry but that website makes so many false claims...

    ^ A project I'm currently working on with another ^
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Owner of Last Level Games (llgames.net)
    I am coolsmile on the Game Maker Community (forums.gamemaker.nl)

  2. Ads


  3. #252
    A li'l bit different Squall7's Avatar
    Member #
    89
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cornwall, UK
    Posts
    1,743
    Friends
    4
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    8420-0141-9022-6948
    Quote Originally Posted by coolsmile
    And I provide counterpoints to those counterpoints ^_^
    You provide judgement. Such things as
    Quote Originally Posted by Coolsmile
    First, the dumb people are the ones who beleive what they are told and don't introduce some argument.
    I don't think I do, since you don't seem to have a specific objective grasp either
    That's really down to how you interpret me. However, I have provided backing from a wide variety of sources.

    Why would I prove myself wrong...
    You are the one who has to convince me
    Since when is it my objective to "convince" you of anything. You're the person making the claim that evolution (or parts thereof) are incorrect. You're the one who has to convince us.

    Yet attack and defense are realitive to the person giving it and the person receiving it...
    As stated above, you're the one claiming evolution (or parts thereof) are incorrect. If I had started by saying how inaccurate and false the bible is, then I would be the one attacking. However, this is not currently the case in this discussion.

    It's only clear because they haven't seen the other side...
    "Other side"? You mean evolution? I wonder how evolution would have effected the contents of the bible had it been discovered 1800 years earlier...


    That's not even an evolutionist claim and it's not even right. It's social darwinism. And my teachers (athiests) told me this.
    It would be, if not for the "the eternal will that dominates this universe" bit in the quote. That points more towards a reference to a Divine creator, rather than a social Darwinist. Aethiest teachers can get things wrong, just as much as anyone else. No human is infallible. However, it doesn't mean they cannot speak the truth.

    Um, that isn't a creationist view. They mis-state it. Evolution can't define the difference from right and wrong.
    The website provides many opposing theories. One Catholic may have a different interpretation and therefore a different objection than another Catholic. Doesn't mean that one is not a Catholic. Creationists are only united in the debate against evolution, not united in exactly what they constitute a problem for evolution.

    I would like to argue more on that site but my battery is running low
    I'm sorry but that website makes so many false claims...
    Or rather, one's you haven't heard before. Read in each one, they provide sources for each claim.

    It's 3.03 in the morning, so I'll call it a night.


    Mail me if you want to add me on either the Wii or the 360.


  4. #253
    Banned Hochiminh's Avatar
    Member #
    3068
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    151
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    2880-7187-6708-3449
    A very interesting article about generalists vs. specialists, and the basis of why evolution exists in both types:

    http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v8.../6883290a.html

    Even more interesting is how to determine the speed of evolution, and that it is increasing more and more every day:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/inde...-evolution.xml

    I also read an article of something I never knew, that humans are exempt from natural selection because only a third of embryos will grow up and actually reproduce. Other living things will reproduce well more than half the embryos they reproduce:

    http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...Evolution.html

    Okay, now some almighty being had to have created the universe (read middle of article):

    http://www.missionislam.com/discover/who_created.htm

    I especially agree with gravity being the reason that the universe is unified; if there was to much or to little, Earth and solar systems wouldn't exist, so someone had to be perfect to create such a universe, which discounts that the universe created itself...

    Anyway, I believe in both creation (of the universe) and evolution (of species, both micro and macro). Anyway, why debate this when we may NEVER know the truth.

  5. #254
    A li'l bit different Squall7's Avatar
    Member #
    89
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cornwall, UK
    Posts
    1,743
    Friends
    4
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    8420-0141-9022-6948
    Quote Originally Posted by Hochiminh
    A very interesting article about generalists vs. specialists, and the basis of why evolution exists in both types:

    http://www.nature.com/hdy/journal/v8.../6883290a.html

    Even more interesting is how to determine the speed of evolution, and that it is increasing more and more every day:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/inde...-evolution.xml

    I also read an article of something I never knew, that humans are exempt from natural selection because only a third of embryos will grow up and actually reproduce. Other living things will reproduce well more than half the embryos they reproduce:

    http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ult...Evolution.html

    Okay, now some almighty being had to have created the universe (read middle of article):

    http://www.missionislam.com/discover/who_created.htm
    I take it you are Muslim then? It's quite refreshing to actively hear a muslim perspective on this issue. Also, I think perhaps the fall in the ability to reproduce may be a natural trigger due to a fairly high population density. Once we have a steady population (with enough food/supplies to actually go around), then we may see more natural selection in our species. In the end, I think it's our consumer society which is doing a lot of damage to both the environment and thus ourselves.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070227...nimalssexfrogs

    I especially agree with gravity being the reason that the universe is unified; if there was to much or to little, Earth and solar systems wouldn't exist, so someone had to be perfect to create such a universe, which discounts that the universe created itself...
    If another Earth and solar system happened due to a difference in gravity, then they too could be wondering, why did it happen the way it did? Complexity does not discount nature (in the broadest sense). If we are here, we're here because this planet can support life. Chances are, there's other planets that can support life as well, and there's likely life (in some form) there too. It's possible they're sentient and intelligent enough to be asking "Isn't it strange that, if we weren't in this exact spot, we couldn't have existed. Surely it isn't just coincidence"...

    Anyway, I believe in both creation (of the universe) and evolution (of species, both micro and macro). Anyway, why debate this when we may NEVER know the truth.
    Agreed on the last part. I believe in a form of the big bang - maybe not as simple as the concept we have today. But very much agreed on the last part (repeated for emphasis).


    Mail me if you want to add me on either the Wii or the 360.


  6. #255
    Banned Hochiminh's Avatar
    Member #
    3068
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    151
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    2880-7187-6708-3449
    Quote Originally Posted by Squall7
    I take it you are Muslim then? It's quite refreshing to actively hear a muslim perspective on this issue. Also, I think perhaps the fall in the ability to reproduce may be a natural trigger due to a fairly high population density. Once we have a steady population (with enough food/supplies to actually go around), then we may see more natural selection in our species. In the end, I think it's our consumer society which is doing a lot of damage to both the environment and thus ourselves.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070227...nimalssexfrogs
    Thanks for the reply, Squall. I guess you can say its a Muslim belief, but I am in no way a Muslim. I'm really not religious-I don't go to church. I guess you can say it's the "Ho Chi" religion. j/k

    So you are saying that we would have to be an even bigger population (we already have almost 10 billion people in the world.) for natural selection to occur? You bring up an interesting point on our society being damaged by us, so do you think pollution, causing mutations in species, have much to do with the natural selection of species?

  7. #256
    A li'l bit different Squall7's Avatar
    Member #
    89
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cornwall, UK
    Posts
    1,743
    Friends
    4
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    8420-0141-9022-6948
    Quote Originally Posted by Hochiminh
    So you are saying that we would have to be an even bigger population (we already have almost 10 billion people in the world.) for natural selection to occur?
    Nah, I was saying that because of the size, it may be natural that we as a populace may start seeing (and arguably have been seeing) a decrease in fertility. Perhaps nature's way of controlling population sizes, perhaps a bit of unrecognised problems with our industrialised and commercialised society, may be a bit of both... Indeed, we're starting to see more and more, people marry and reproduce not out of the best match to themselves, but other manufactured reasons. The quelling of polyogamy for example - arguably structured contrary to man's nature (of spreading the seed), in favour of the nuclear family, which is ideal in producing the workforce needed to maintain our capitalist society (slight Marxist/Neo marxist thought, but arguably true). Not saying that polyogamy is the way to go, but it IS against human nature and produced in favour of the system in which we live.

    - The key to the left side represents the number of children produced by a couple. So to maintain the population, each couple would have to have 2 children. Anything under that constitutes as a population decrease.
    Of course, this is ignoring many other factors, such as the deal with China.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-replacement_fertility

    You bring up an interesting point on our society being damaged by us, so do you think pollution, causing mutations in species, have much to do with the natural selection of species?
    Yeah, we've seen evidence that marine life is affected by chemicals that we produce:
    The substance, nonylphenol - a breakdown product of spermicides, cosmetics and detergents - is discharged through the sewerage system and is widespread in the aquatic environment.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3071549.stm
    Kinda scary to think that we're having such a massive effect on marine life - which is enivitably part of the food web in which we are a part of.

    Likewise, the more man becomes knowledgable, the less natural selection plays a part. This site explains that the human species can live without men!
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4227604
    Men's ability to produce sperm makes them an invaluable resource for the human species. But what if you could produce sperm without men? As NPR's Joe Palca reports in part two of his series The End of Men, that may soon be possible.
    However, to have natural selection, one generally has to live in a natural environment (or as close to "natural" as one can get). But mutations are caused by numerous factors, both natural and artificial.

    But tackling your question head on: pollution is manufactured by way of man. Any mutations caused from that are therefore fault of man as well. Technically, to have "natural selection", one has to live within "nature". However, the term nature is very unstable when it comes to influence, as man is both part of nature, but also manipulator of it at the same time.

    Hope you find this insightful and useful.


    Mail me if you want to add me on either the Wii or the 360.


  8. #257
    Banned Hochiminh's Avatar
    Member #
    3068
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    151
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    2880-7187-6708-3449
    - The key to the left side represents the number of children produced by a couple. So to maintain the population, each couple would have to have 2 children. Anything under that constitutes as a population decrease.
    I honestly think that the population will keep increasing, so I'm not really getting this "population decrease" stuff.

    The quelling of polyogamy for example - arguably structured contrary to man's nature (of spreading the seed), in favour of the nuclear family, which is ideal in producing the workforce needed to maintain our capitalist society (slight Marxist/Neo marxist thought, but arguably true). Not saying that polyogamy is the way to go, but it IS against human nature and produced in favour of the system in which we live.
    I can see how spreading the seed in more than one female can diversify, and maybe change natural selection. Good emphasis.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3071549.stm
    Kinda scary to think that we're having such a massive effect on marine life - which is enivitably part of the food web in which we are a part of.
    I think that as long as food is cooked to the right temperature, then these altering factors should be lessened. (I'm a shift manager at a hot dog restaurant, yeah) The same can be said for cold meat served cold below 40 degrees Farhenheit. As a general rule of thumb, bacteria that cause foodborne illnesses thrive between 40-140 degrees Farhenheit. Plus, food left out for more than four hours needs to be recooked back to its internal cooking temp. Well, that's my food prep schpeel today! But this only relates to humans and food. Other species, like fish eating other fish, is a totally different can of worms. Technically speaking, if all marine life dies due to illness, then other species whose prime source of food is marine life will die via starvation, and then those species who eats those species will die, and so on, which in turn will limit our (human) food choices until all other species die, and we run out of food. That would not be a good extinction scenario for the human race-starvation...reminds me of the dinosaurs...

    Likewise, the more man becomes knowledgable, the less natural selection plays a part. This site explains that the human species can live without men!
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4227604
    Lol...reminds me of Demolition Man, where maybe in the future, sex may be prohibited, in order to reduce STD's and AID's. In my opinion, I would definitely not be against that.

    But tackling your question head on: pollution is manufactured by way of man. Any mutations caused from that are therefore fault of man as well. Technically, to have "natural selection", one has to live within "nature". However, the term nature is very unstable when it comes to influence, as man is both part of nature, but also manipulator of it at the same time.
    Not entirely true-true being the fact that pollution is caused primarily by humans, but you still would have to factor in natural causes of pollution such as volcanic eruptions, spilled oil, littering by a species, and even sound, even though it's a small part. And yes, the ozone does vaporize most of the pollutants from the air, but obviously it was doing much better before us. I still believe that there will be some kind of geothermal shift, maybe even in the catastrophe of a major earthquake, in which is predicted to wipe out the some shorelines of major coastal areas and cities in 2017, including Oceanside near San Diego. I even think that Hurricane Katrina was man's fault, with our pollution affecting global weather. But this is just my theory.

    Hope you find this insightful and useful.
    They were all helpful, fascinating reads that had info that I never thought to consider or even know. Hope to hear from you soon.

  9. #258
    Owner of Last Level Games coolsmile's Avatar
    Member #
    13970
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    US...
    Posts
    62
    Friends
    0
    Wii Friend Code: $post[field5]
    I'd have to disagree there. I learnt about evolution in school, and I understand know it isn't meant to explain the beginings of life.
    Yeah, because that's you, but not everyone is as intellegent and most are gullible

    Right now I'm too tired to reply

    ^ A project I'm currently working on with another ^
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    Owner of Last Level Games (llgames.net)
    I am coolsmile on the Game Maker Community (forums.gamemaker.nl)

Ads

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Similar Threads

  1. Pro Evolution Soccer 2009
    By AutumnWind in forum Nintendo Wii Gaming
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-07-2009, 07:55 AM
  2. Pro Evolution Soccer 2008 For Wii
    By Wii-Bhoy in forum Nintendo Wii Gaming
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 11:15 AM
  3. Pro Evolution Soccer 7
    By lilsam in forum Nintendo Wii Gaming
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-10-2007, 03:32 PM
  4. Fifa or pro evolution
    By monkey in forum Nintendo Wii Gaming
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-14-2007, 11:24 AM

Search tags for this page

drives us to worship dna

,

how was dna created

Click on a term to search for related topics.