[quote]ninearms wrote:
tedro wrote:
Yet you are allowed to declare evolution as fact? How’s that work, and where is the evidence? Again I’m not talking about microevolution, we’re talking macro. Go ahead, search a bit. While the theory makes very good sense, the evidence is surprisingly thin.
Your turn…
[/quote]
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
[/quote]
Bullshit. You do it all the time. Especially in Mathematics.
[quote]Rocky101 wrote:
ninearms wrote:
If there’s one thing that baffles me about American politics it’s how being average is seen as some kind of badge of honour. That and the fact that someone who thinks the Earth is less than 6000 years old is taken remotely seriously.
Bingo, we don’t need anymore religious nuts in the White House. I don’t want America to turn into the Christian version of Iran.
[/quote]
The problem with this statement other than being extreamly closed minded is that you must replace your world view. In the US christianity is well known, and the underlying principles of right and wrong are known. Not all christians believe the world is 6000 years old but by very defination they are followers of the teachings of Christ.
Any reasonable person would agree that living the example of set by Jesus is a good way to live. This is why we like Christian leaders because we have an idea of what they think is right and wrong (not that they actually do it).
People would likley not vote for an athiest for example because their world view is not set ie no right and wrong, good or evil. That and i have never met an athiest that did not condecend on people of faith.
Nobody doubts where McCain and Palin stand on the issues. Most are confused about what Obama and Biden stand for.
Rudy and Palin set the stage. McCain closes the deal tonight.
I really hope Obama’s team and the MSM (I know it’s redundant) keep up the attacks. The backlash is already happening and it will only help McCain in November.
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
Bullshit. You do it all the time. Especially in Mathematics.
[/quote]
We aint’ talking about lines and curves son. We talking about highly non liner and random process, if you believe in evo.
I am an engineer i do lots of math and build real things. I don’t push a pencil around on a piece of paper. If you actually work and start taking you data 4+ orders of magnitude people die.
Example: This bottle holds 10 PSI i am certain it will work or 100000 PSI
or how about this the wires in you house run 110 Volts ac right? They should eaisly be able to take the 500,000 volts right off the high voltage lines shouldn’t they? This is only 3 orders of magnitude.
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
Bullshit. You do it all the time. Especially in Mathematics.
[/quote]
Gravity anyone?
Onion just ran a brilliant article. Theory of Intelligent Falling is about as valid as the Theory of Intelligent Design.
Technically evolution (the idea that life evolves) is a fact, it’s how this occurs that is a theory. However, regardless of whether it is a theory or a fact it is still science, being discovered and tested via the scientific method. Creationism and ID are not science.
[quote]jakshafter wrote:
The problem with this statement other than being extreamly closed minded is that you must replace your world view. In the US christianity is well known, and the underlying principles of right and wrong are known. Not all christians believe the world is 6000 years old but by very defination they are followers of the teachings of Christ.
Any reasonable person would agree that living the example of set by Jesus is a good way to live. This is why we like Christian leaders because we have an idea of what they think is right and wrong (not that they actually do it).
People would likley not vote for an athiest for example because their world view is not set ie no right and wrong, good or evil. That and i have never met an athiest that did not condecend on people of faith.[/quote]
People of faith are fine. People who think there faith has actual hard evidence, and therefore it should be taught in a scientific setting, deserve to be mocked until they cry.
I would argue that the example set by Jesus is not a good way to live. He sat back and let himself die instead of fighting for the right of him and his people to worship the way they wanted. The founding fathers ignored Jesus’s “turn the other cheek” example, and so have Christians every time they took up arms.
As for Atheists not having a set right and wrong, that point has been absolutely destroyed so many times, I feel no need to do it again. We’ve had plenty of atheist Presidents in the past, and the moral structure of America didn’t fall apart. There is no reason to believe it would now.
To be a bit more on topic… everyone says the speech is so good. I can’t seem to find it on youtube… anyone have a link to a vid or text version even?
[quote]ninearms wrote:
tedro wrote:
Yet you are allowed to declare evolution as fact? How’s that work, and where is the evidence? Again I’m not talking about microevolution, we’re talking macro. Go ahead, search a bit. While the theory makes very good sense, the evidence is surprisingly thin.
Your turn…
[/quote]
My turn for what? I have never attempted to deny evolution, I simply remain skeptical about its conclusions.
The link you posted is a good one. I have been through it before. The author even takes time to post a criticism, and in turn replies to the criticim. This is what is needed on this subject, a healthy debate. He also takes the time to define a scientific theory, which is something that is frequently misrepresented both ways.
Interestingly enough, there is still not an explanation for the gaps in fossil records, nor is there an explanation for the formation of the first nucleic acids, or there nucleotides, or there sugar and phosphate groups, or the elements composing those compounds. You see, creationsts don’t all believe that there was just a sudden poof and humans appeared, many of the beliefs can actually fall in line with those of evolution. The problem is that most evolutionists begin with the presupposition that God does not exist.
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
Bullshit. You do it all the time. Especially in Mathematics.
Gravity anyone?
Onion just ran a brilliant article. Theory of Intelligent Falling is about as valid as the Theory of Intelligent Design.
Evolution is a theory. And so is gravity.[/quote]
so what you are saying is
A = B
therefore
B = C
hmmmm… i guess if thats reasonable to you. I got an idea! Why don’t you build your life around that concept.
You should perhaps do a bit more research. I am a graduate student who specializes in bioinformatics.
There is not a single scientist who differentiates between Micro and Macro evolution. They are both the same thing. Ask any professor or doctor in the field.
I have taken more than a mere introductory course in biology. I was explaining that this is when this issue is first introduced and examined.
You think the professors who teach introductory courses lie in some way? Tell me you went to college.
You’re an idiot. I have yet to find a single Biology professor who is atheist. In fact, the only professor I have worked with that was atheist was a Chemistry professor.
And yes there is an explanation of how the building blocks of life appeared. Again, if you had actually gotten an education in the matter, they are first introduced in the following courses.
Organismal Biology and Phylogenies
Molecular Genetics
BSCI 106 and 207
LOL sorry for the thread jack guys i was just jerking your chain.
I though Palin did a fantastic job in the speach. I think with this she has become the new media darling. She is also for the most part untouchable from most attacks because she is a real deal middle class mother of 5 that worked hard and through her own merit got to where she is.
The speach Itself was very Karl Rove feeling. By this i mean instead of attacking Obama’s weak points she attacked his strong points and made light of them, and marginalized his stance to make him look foolish for his beliefs.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
jakshafter wrote:
The problem with this statement other than being extreamly closed minded is that you must replace your world view. In the US christianity is well known, and the underlying principles of right and wrong are known. Not all christians believe the world is 6000 years old but by very defination they are followers of the teachings of Christ.
Any reasonable person would agree that living the example of set by Jesus is a good way to live. This is why we like Christian leaders because we have an idea of what they think is right and wrong (not that they actually do it).
People would likley not vote for an athiest for example because their world view is not set ie no right and wrong, good or evil. That and i have never met an athiest that did not condecend on people of faith.
People of faith are fine. People who think there faith has actual hard evidence, and therefore it should be taught in a scientific setting, deserve to be mocked until they cry.
I would argue that the example set by Jesus is not a good way to live. He sat back and let himself die instead of fighting for the right of him and his people to worship the way they wanted. The founding fathers ignored Jesus’s “turn the other cheek” example, and so have Christians every time they took up arms.
As for Atheists not having a set right and wrong, that point has been absolutely destroyed so many times, I feel no need to do it again. We’ve had plenty of atheist Presidents in the past, and the moral structure of America didn’t fall apart. There is no reason to believe it would now.
To be a bit more on topic… everyone says the speech is so good. I can’t seem to find it on youtube… anyone have a link to a vid or text version even?[/quote]
Only in evolutionary biology can you extrapolate orders of magnitude out of your data set. This is the data weakness that doesn’t get pointed out in this debate. Observing a few hundred years worth of data and extrapolating back 1 million years is the equivilent of observing a single inch and telling me the next mile of the road. It is a silly endevor. To do this in any other science field would get you laughed at.
Bullshit. You do it all the time. Especially in Mathematics.
Gravity anyone?
Onion just ran a brilliant article. Theory of Intelligent Falling is about as valid as the Theory of Intelligent Design.
Evolution is a theory. And so is gravity.[/quote]
Gravity is actually a really good example. For a very long time, Newton’s theories were widely accepted. Newtonian physics are still frequently used to explain gravity, and his calculations are also used, though they are not entirely correct.
Today, we rely on Einstein’s general relativity theory to explain gravity. It’s another theory that appears very sound, and is highly regarded. Even so, it is far from the end all theory. There is undoubtedly more that needs to be added to it, and with discoveries of dark matter it may need revised entirely.
The difference is that the opponents of GR are not disregarded, and even its supporters acknowledge that it will need to be revised. This does not happen in the evolution debate, hence the problems with it being regarded as “fact” amongst the “consensus”.
Quite trying to misrepresent her. Post the whole statement, not a liberal news article.
“Pray for our military. Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right for this country - that our leaders, our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God,” the Alaska governor said in her address posted on the website of the Wasilla Assembly of God.
She is saying to pray that what we our doing, going into Iraq, is the will of God. In other words, pray that we are doing God’s will. She doesn’t say she knows God’s will, simply to pray that we are upholding it.
That might have been her intent. I don’t know and neither do you.
What’s certain is that politicians who speak of wars of aggression as “a task that is from God” should be looked at suspiciously.[/quote]
That’s how your folks justify all the murders and atrocities they do. We look at them suspiciously and it pisses you off.
I think she did a great job. I also think it went a long way to capture the audience with real issues we face in a dangerous world…one that the Dems deny exist.
She opened up a can of whoop-ass for sure.
To not address her family issues was perfect. This did not phase her…keep the attacks coming because that is all they have. Don’t even talk about her experience. That arguement is dead for the Democrats, yet alive for Republicans because yes, OBAMAs actual contributions for reform or “change” are minimal compared to the VP in the GOP side.
The Republican ticket is strong. They effectively distanced themselves from the current administration, which negates the “Another 4 of the last 8 years” rhetoric.
The Democratic ticket is weak, however it is strong in that people voting for OBAMA are voting against Republicans and that’s it. They do not care who is on the ticket, they just know they want Republicans out. They want to believe “Change” is coming, but don’t even know how.