It sickens me how many people in this country don't believe in evolution. I heard a statistic that it's around half, but I doubt it's that many. Science is about rational thought and testable ideas and experiments. Rejecting the scientific theory of the origin of the human race is like not believing in friction, saying something like that it's god's will that things don't move infinitley. Even though most fundamental scientific principles are proved indirectly at first (like the spherical nature of the earth), when we are able to directly observe it, we are right because it has been tested indirectly so much. Religious extremists dismiss evidence like fossils as "tricks by god to test our faith" or something like that. I bet if someone took a born again christian or another religious extremist in a time machine back 65 million years ago, observed dinosaurs, and returned, they would still reject their direct observations as "hethanistic trickery" or something like that. Courts have ruled in some places that scientific arguments in favor of creationism can be taught in public schools, what will they have to show? This intelligent design theory they yammer about is nothing more than pseudoscience, and a lazy underestimation of the power and magnitude biodiversity, natural selection, and time can accomplish.
I only have seen the begining 20ish post ...so anyhow ...I'm going to finish reading... and then... will continue ... but until then ........ Animals ( humans ect ) evolve...but to say that we Evolved. from The great ape family...is still silly...have any of you studied them?...over the past
??????? years?...And if you have ...are they getting more like Human beings?...
also ...why are they still here?
You shouldn't HAVE to 'reconcile' the ideas; people's even bothering to attempt to do that is nothing more than an unfortunate byproduct of our insistence upon viewing Darwinism in simpler terms than it was intended, and of our inability to discard religion proper. Both are discredits to human nature.
meh, we have no proof, or facts for any science, only what whats his face said, "I think therefore I am" i think thats the only fact in the universe. that there is something somewhere which is me. whether created or evolved or neither, whether this is all a 'dream'. so no one knows if even any of this is real so its pointless to discuss. but everyones entitled to try to do whatever they want(express opinions). mine is, creationism. cos its so much happier. ^___^
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-31 20:25
meh, we have no proof, or facts for any science, only what whats his face said, "I think therefore I am" i think thats the only true fact. that there is something somewhere which is me. whether created or evolved or neither, whether this is all a 'dream'. so no one knows if even any of this is real so its pointless to discuss. but everyones entitled to try to do whatever they want(express opinions). mine is, creationism. cos its so much happier. ^___^
Name:
Anonymous2005-07-31 20:59
The people who are so against evolution giving the excuse that its merely a theory are just using it as a WEAK excuse.
Their main motivation is becasue they are just arrogant and want to think that they are special and think that being evolved from monkeys is demeaning to them. If evolution had shown that humans evolved from raptors or wolves maybe they would change their tune.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-01 4:30
Dude, if we evolved from raptors that would be badass.
Ironically, these are the same people who claim humanity was formed out of clay. Cuz, you know, that's so much more meaningful.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-01 20:10
I believe in evolution, but i hate people who use evolution to disprove god, because those people are retards, just because god didnt make everyting the way it is now, doesnt mean that it didnt create existance.
>>176
technically youre right
ive heard a lot of idiots try though
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-02 2:46
>>33
I assume you believe in the bible so i will answer your question in a simple sentence.
Could it be because people were so stupid back then, then writing the bible they didnt know about science, dinosaurs, or even a thought that something was made before them?
Name:
DrLang2005-08-04 16:39
Are we talking about the same rational thinking biology community that insists that magnatism has no effects on the human body despite the many experiments that have shown numerous fascinating reactions to potential differences and electromagnetic radiation before all funding for this research was cut around 1980 due to political pressure? Yeah sure, I trust the biology community in everything they say about evolution.
He's right. That's why you need my neodymium rings and foot bracelets. They are the only magnets powerful enough to make you live forever.
Name:
DrLang2005-08-07 1:02
>>180
And this is the exact reaction I expect, because you're too lazy to look at the experimental results yourself. It IS widely accepted that bones are Piezoelectric. For some reason though, the biology community is unable to extrapolate beyond that.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-08 16:09
there is an entire invisible dimension of magnetic fields
the chinese call it chi, and accupuncture is how they manipulate it
the planet has magnetic fields and so does every biological mass
though what this has to do with creationsim and/or god is beyond me
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-09 0:26
insists that magnatism has no effects on the human body
Where'd you get that from?
And associating magnetism with the piezoelectric effect is pretty tenuous... just how many webers are we talking here?
Name:
DrLang2005-08-09 13:53
>>183
It has nothing to do with creationism specificly. However, given that the biology community generally scoffs at the idea that there are electric currents in the human body despite evidence of just that effect, I don't think I can take anything the biology community says without a degree of scepticism. They community at large has not proven to me that they are great pioneers in science. By the way, accupuncture is still not widely accepted by the biology community as anything more than placebo.
>>184
There's an old school of thought called vitalism back before the potentials in neurons were really understood, that beleived that neurons were conductors. Since this has been proven not to be the case, and idea of currents existing naturally in the human body has been met with a large wave of resistance and political pressure. I didn't specify before, but I'm not talking about things like large electromagnetic radiation causing the body to heat up or cells to mutate. I'm talking about much smaller magnitudes, and a much larger topic that I don't feel like writing a summary about.
Anyways, I'm not putting out any more argument than this, because this topic has been beat to death.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-09 22:23
idea of currents existing naturally in the human body has been met with a large wave of resistance and political pressure.
Please, tell that to the neurology and biological psychology folks. This resistance will be news to them! I guess saltatory conduction and action potentials are their imagination.
Your brain runs on electricity. Your motor neurons depend on current. Your beating heart wouldn't work without it. And what about all those energy pathways?
Name:
DrLang2005-08-10 0:45
"Your brain runs on electricity. Your motor neurons depend on current. Your beating heart wouldn't work without it."
Those are all action potentials which are more a result of ion gradients than electrons traveling down a conductor. They are a result of ion gates along an axon opening and closing triggered by a threshold potential. Thats all biochemistry more than bioelectricity.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-10 8:30
lol shark electrosensitivity, similarity of "ion gates" to actual logic gates in electronics...
Name:
DrLang2005-08-10 8:43
ion gates and logic gates? Now that I can laugh about.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-11 3:57
Those are all action potentials which are more a result of ion gradients than electrons traveling down a conductor.
The same argument could be used on a battery. All that potential is due to a chemical reaction. So is that not current?
The entire system depends on current, since without current the sodium gates wouldn't even open.
Name:
DrLang2005-08-11 9:43
>>190
You can argue that. But that is not the popular belief. Now you begin to see my dilema, since that does seem like a reasonable hypothesis.
How does any of this tangential argument about preestablished properties of biological energy fields raise any reasonable doubt whatsoever about the voracity of the scientific community with regards to the current theory of evolution?
Your series of posts taken as a whole seem like an obfuscation tactic. I'll preempt where I see this going with this statement: A theory about a Creator-God that snapped his fingers 5000 years ago to create Adam and Eve will never warrant response from the scientific community.
Let's hear your ulterior point already.
Name:
DrLang2005-08-15 12:30
>>192
I am not taking this anywhere near the theory of a creator god. Reguardless of what your belief is, The current theory of evolution requires a certain amount of faith. Quite a bit of faith from the evidence I've seen presented. I will not hold faith in a theory when the very community coming up with it denys that it requires faith to believe in. The theory of evolution is an important one, I won't deny that. But based upon my own observation, the proponents of the current theory of evolution need to get their heads out of their ass. That is all.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-15 18:26
"The current theory of evolution requires a certain amount of faith."
That claim is older than time itself, and it's still wrong.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-15 18:37
I imagine the reason the biology community doesn't accept that magnetic fields effect humans (or whatever it is) is because they unable to find results in an experiment to their satisfaction. I think the biology community probably says they don't know, rather than it doesn't happen.
Having said all that however, I haven't looked at any of the experiments you talk of and could therefore be talking out of my arse. Care to post some URL's to these experiments?
Name:
DrLang2005-08-15 19:58
>>195
I'll list a few references for you. Can't really do better than that.
Marino AA, Cullen JM, Reichmanis M, Becker RO. "Fracutre healing in rats exposed to extremely low-frequency electric fields." Clin Orthop 1979 Nov-Dec;(145):239-44
Becker RO, Murray DG. "A method for producing cellular dedifferentiation by means of very small electrical currents." Trans N Y Acad Sci 1967 Mar;29(5):606-15
Friedman H, Becker RO, Bachman CH. "Effect of magnetic fields on reaction time performance." Nature 1967 Mar 4;213(79):949-50
If you look into Rober O. Becker, you'll find lots of information on the field, both suport and criticism.
Name:
Anonymous2005-08-16 19:13
I'm too friggin lazy to read 200 posts...so here is my contribution if it has not been posted yet: