| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Freedom Fries" |
| Date: |
18 Jul 2005 12:07:51 AM |
| Object: |
Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
No word on when the religious jesus freaks in america will go to China to
kill the elephants to the destroy the evidence that contradicts their
pathetic illusions.
Tuskless elephants evolving in China due to poaching Sun Jul 17, 3:59 AM ET
BEIJING, July 17 (AFP) - A recent study has predicted that more male Asian
elephants in China will be born without tusks because poaching of tusked
elephants is reducing the gene pool, the China Daily reported Sunday.
The study, conducted in the Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture in
southwest China's Yunnan province, where two-thirds of China's Asian
elephants live, found that the tuskless phenomenon is spreading, the report
said.
The tusk-free gene, which is found in between two and five percent of male
Asian elephants, has increased to between five percent and 10 percent in
elephants in China, according to Zhang Li, an associate professor of zoology
at Beijing Normal University.
"This decrease in the number of elephants born with tusks shows the poaching
pressure for ivory on the animal," said Zhang, whose research team has been
studying elephants since 1999 at a reserve in Xishuangbanna.
Only male elephants have tusks, which are said to be a symbol of masculinity
and a weapon to fight for territory. However, due to poaching for ivory, the
elephants' pride has become a death sentence, the report said.
"The larger tusks the male elephant has, the more likely it will be shot by
poachers," said Zhang. "Therefore, the ones without tusks survive,
preserving the tuskless gene in the species."
A similar decline in elephants with tusks has been seen in Uganda, which
experienced heavy poaching in the 1970s and '80s, the report said.
However, Zhang's findings of the spread of the tuskless gene due to poaching
must be tested, according to some academics.
"This is, of course, a possibility, but till now there is no clear genetic
proof that it can occur," Vivek Menon, executive director of the Wildlife
Trust of India, was quoted as saying.
Rampant poaching of male elephants for tusks has also caused the
female-to-male ratio to rise from the ideal 2:1 to 4:1 in China and 100:1 in
India, the report said.
There are between 45,000 and 50,000 Asian elephants in 13 countries,
including China and India. China only has about 250, according to the
report.
China is among 160 nations which signed an international treaty administered
since 1989 banning the trade in ivory and products of other endangered
animals.
Nonetheless, four Asian elephants were found shot dead in China last year.
In addition to poaching, human activity that causes a loss of habitat also
threatens the animals.
.
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
18 Jul 2005 09:39:35 PM |
|
|
"Freedom Fries" <RedumblicansShouldBe@gaschambers.com> wrote:
No word on when the religious jesus freaks in america will go to China to
kill the elephants to the destroy the evidence that contradicts their
pathetic illusions.
Tuskless elephants evolving in China due to poaching Sun Jul 17, 3:59 AM ET
Yep, that should get the fundies howling. }:-}
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
18 Jul 2005 12:32:38 AM |
|
|
Freedom Fries wrote:
No word on when the religious jesus freaks in america will go to China to
kill the elephants to the destroy the evidence that contradicts their
pathetic illusions.
I wouldn't stereotype Christians like you are doing. The only reason
that some Christians reject evolution concepts is because of the
informal belief among some atheist/evolutionists that there is no God
and all life happened by random chance. However, as Genesis 1 doesn't
detail how God created life, who's to say that God didn't employ some
evolution concepts when he created life on earth? But I will also note
that the more recent scientific concern of irreducible complexity
throws a monkey wrench into evolution concepts anyway.
John 3:16
Revelation 3:20
Tuskless elephants evolving in China due to poaching Sun Jul 17, 3:59 AM ET
BEIJING, July 17 (AFP) - A recent study has predicted that more male Asian
elephants in China will be born without tusks because poaching of tusked
elephants is reducing the gene pool, the China Daily reported Sunday.
The study, conducted in the Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture in
southwest China's Yunnan province, where two-thirds of China's Asian
elephants live, found that the tuskless phenomenon is spreading, the report
said.
The tusk-free gene, which is found in between two and five percent of male
Asian elephants, has increased to between five percent and 10 percent in
elephants in China, according to Zhang Li, an associate professor of zoology
at Beijing Normal University.
"This decrease in the number of elephants born with tusks shows the poaching
pressure for ivory on the animal," said Zhang, whose research team has been
studying elephants since 1999 at a reserve in Xishuangbanna.
Only male elephants have tusks, which are said to be a symbol of masculinity
and a weapon to fight for territory. However, due to poaching for ivory, the
elephants' pride has become a death sentence, the report said.
"The larger tusks the male elephant has, the more likely it will be shot by
poachers," said Zhang. "Therefore, the ones without tusks survive,
preserving the tuskless gene in the species."
A similar decline in elephants with tusks has been seen in Uganda, which
experienced heavy poaching in the 1970s and '80s, the report said.
However, Zhang's findings of the spread of the tuskless gene due to poaching
must be tested, according to some academics.
"This is, of course, a possibility, but till now there is no clear genetic
proof that it can occur," Vivek Menon, executive director of the Wildlife
Trust of India, was quoted as saying.
Rampant poaching of male elephants for tusks has also caused the
female-to-male ratio to rise from the ideal 2:1 to 4:1 in China and 100:1 in
India, the report said.
There are between 45,000 and 50,000 Asian elephants in 13 countries,
including China and India. China only has about 250, according to the
report.
China is among 160 nations which signed an international treaty administered
since 1989 banning the trade in ivory and products of other endangered
animals.
Nonetheless, four Asian elephants were found shot dead in China last year.
In addition to poaching, human activity that causes a loss of habitat also
threatens the animals.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Niels van der Linden" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
18 Jul 2005 05:43:14 AM |
|
|
No word on when the religious jesus freaks in america will go to China to
kill the elephants to the destroy the evidence that contradicts their
pathetic illusions.
I wouldn't stereotype Christians like you are doing. The only reason
that some Christians reject evolution concepts is because of the
informal belief among some atheist/evolutionists that there is no God
and all life happened by random chance. However, as Genesis 1 doesn't
detail how God created life, who's to say that God didn't employ some
evolution concepts when he created life on earth?
What or who is a god?
But I will also note
that the more recent scientific concern of irreducible complexity
throws a monkey wrench into evolution concepts anyway.
It's not scientific.
John 3:16
Revelation 3:20
O, please. You could 'justify' anything using the Bible.
--
Niels
Alt.Atheist #2237
"The thing that saved me was Upanishads; Hinduism. Where you have
practically the same mythology [as Roman Catholicism], but it has been
intellectually interpreted. Say, already in the 9th century BC the Hindus
realized that all the deities are projections of psychological powers and
they are within you not out there [points away]."
-Joseph Campbell in The Hero's Journey
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
24 Jul 2005 09:20:26 PM |
|
|
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
Freedom Fries wrote:
No word on when the religious jesus freaks in america will go to China to
kill the elephants to the destroy the evidence that contradicts their
pathetic illusions.
I wouldn't stereotype Christians like you are doing.
He's not. He's speaking of the fundies.
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest. They react just as a
toddler does concerning Santa Claus.
[]
of the informal belief among some atheist/evolutionists that there is no God
and all life happened by random chance.
Ah, yes, the fountain of ignorance and dishonesty continues to produce
more excrement.
Fact: There is no Santa Claus and Flying Reindeer.
Fact: There is no Heaven, Hell, or eternal or infernal life.
Fact: There is no God.
Fact: Religion is a nomenclature upgrade of superstition.
Fact: There is no reason or logic involved with the superstition.
However, as Genesis 1 doesn't
detail how God created life, who's to say that God didn't employ some
evolution concepts when he created life on earth?
ROFLMAO @ you! Objective supporting evidence the universe was
manufactured much less your imaginary daemon deity able to find its
metaphorical arse using both hands are?
Superstitious cretins like yourself really 'frost my shorts.' Peddle
your invincible ignorance in the Jesus circle jerk groups-others
aren't interested.
But I will also note
that the more recent scientific concern of irreducible complexity
throws a monkey wrench into evolution concepts anyway.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
'Irreducible complexity' is nothing more than *****. There's
nothing more than carny blarny in the term which catches the
terminally uneducated-like yourself.
John 3:16
Revelation 3:20
Poor poor cretin. I certainly hope you don't reproduce. The world
doesn't need more bronze-age stupidity.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
25 Jul 2005 11:44:57 PM |
|
|
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
26 Jul 2005 02:27:23 PM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 01:14:05 AM |
|
|
"VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most Christians accept the _fact_ of evolution and understand
that there are a number of closely related _theories_ which
attempt to describe the directly observed fact.
Only the truly willfully ignorant clods think evolution doesn't
happen some how.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 03:25:28 PM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11eea3n48ujrkd3@corp.supernews.com...
"VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most Christians accept the _fact_ of evolution and understand
that there are a number of closely related _theories_ which
attempt to describe the directly observed fact.
Only the truly willfully ignorant clods think evolution doesn't
happen some how.
Only the members of the "Church of Evolution" make dumb statements like
that.
They are ALWAYS uneducated in science OR Geology OR biology.
ONLY the completely uneducated stretch the word evolution to their own
liking to fit their religion.
Your god is evolution. You worship and defend it fiercely.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 09:15:02 AM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11eea3n48ujrkd3@corp.supernews.com...
"VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most Christians accept the _fact_ of evolution and understand
that there are a number of closely related _theories_ which
attempt to describe the directly observed fact.
Only the truly willfully ignorant clods think evolution doesn't
happen some how.
"The more you know, the more you know you don't know"
You reference to "facts" indicates your total lack of education.
Yes, most so called Christians haven't a clue about evolution OR the Bible.
Note, for the VERY retarded and slow, such as yourself, I have NEVER stated
that evolution in some form or another does not / did not exist, nor that it
doesn't exist as many think it may. What I DO know is what people who
depend on knowledge in this field say.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
28 Jul 2005 01:23:12 AM |
|
|
"VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11eea3n48ujrkd3@corp.supernews.com...
"VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most Christians accept the _fact_ of evolution and understand
that there are a number of closely related _theories_ which
attempt to describe the directly observed fact.
Only the truly willfully ignorant clods think evolution doesn't
happen some how.
"The more you know, the more you know you don't know"
You reference to "facts" indicates your total lack of education.
And another Christian cultist who knows nothing about science
clocks in with yet another occult notion.
---
http://www.ElmerFudd.US/ http://www.notserver.com/
http://sf.irk.ru/www/ot3/otiii-gif.html
http://www.rightard.org/ http://www.thedarkwind.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 07:47:34 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:27:23 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e68dec$0$25391$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
"Evolution is a Fact and a Theory"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
Not biological evolution.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
Sorry you feel that way.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
And sometimes sand and dust turn to rock.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
Evolution means (inherited biological) change, you can no more devolve
than you can dewalk.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
Please demonstrate this.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
Wow, did you come up with that insult yourself?
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
What in here is science (or any other kind) fiction?
"Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"Observed Instances of Speciation"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"The Origin of Whales and the Power of Independent Evidence"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
--
Matt Silberstein
Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.
Cliff on Cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 09:18:01 AM |
|
|
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:sc0fe19329ulicigqhgrvorcgiq2mpfu70@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:27:23 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e68dec$0$25391$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
"Evolution is a Fact and a Theory"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
Not biological evolution.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
Sorry you feel that way.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
And sometimes sand and dust turn to rock.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
Evolution means (inherited biological) change, you can no more devolve
than you can dewalk.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
Please demonstrate this.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
Wow, did you come up with that insult yourself?
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
What in here is science (or any other kind) fiction?
You cannot debate.
You are too ignorant of algorithm or fact.
You barely know English except to twist words to justify theory.
As I stated before, "Get an education".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 10:14:01 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 07:18:01 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e79792$0$28902$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:sc0fe19329ulicigqhgrvorcgiq2mpfu70@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:27:23 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e68dec$0$25391$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
"Evolution is a Fact and a Theory"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
Not biological evolution.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
Sorry you feel that way.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
And sometimes sand and dust turn to rock.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
Evolution means (inherited biological) change, you can no more devolve
than you can dewalk.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
Please demonstrate this.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
Wow, did you come up with that insult yourself?
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
What in here is science (or any other kind) fiction?
You cannot debate.
Who's going to stop me? Oh, you mean I lack the ability, not the
authority. How about you try to point out the errors rather than
making personal attacks?
You are too ignorant of algorithm or fact.
What relevant "algorithm" am I ignorant of?
You barely know English except to twist words to justify theory.
How about you try to point out the errors rather than making personal
attacks?
As I stated before, "Get an education".
Any particular one?
--
Matt Silberstein
Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.
Cliff on Cheers
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 11:52:48 AM |
|
|
VO wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:sc0fe19329ulicigqhgrvorcgiq2mpfu70@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 12:27:23 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e68dec$0$25391$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
"Evolution is a Fact and a Theory"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
Not biological evolution.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
Sorry you feel that way.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
And sometimes sand and dust turn to rock.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
Evolution means (inherited biological) change, you can no more devolve
than you can dewalk.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
Please demonstrate this.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
Wow, did you come up with that insult yourself?
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
What in here is science (or any other kind) fiction?
You cannot debate.
You are too ignorant of algorithm or fact.
You barely know English except to twist words to justify theory.
As I stated before, "Get an education".
I submit that it is you who needs an education. You are woefully
ignorant of the most basic scientific principles.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
26 Jul 2005 02:39:43 PM |
|
|
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last 1500
years.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
26 Jul 2005 03:59:33 PM |
|
|
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows how.
If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence. There
isn't.
There are tuskless elephants and brain dead humans.
Everything "evolves".
A tin can turns to rust.
A human is water and crud and "evolves" to such after time.
A rock evolves to sand or dust.
Yes, man IS evolving. Man is evolving (devolving) to an ape.
The cognitive capability of man is demonstrably less in just the last
1500 years.
You seem to be ahead of the curve.
What YOU think is evolution is just science fiction so far.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 07:50:15 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:59:33 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e6a42f$0$5925$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows how.
In science first you identify the facts, then you explore the how.
That you consider this dumb may well say more about your understanding
of science than anything else. Orbits, for example, were recognized as
facts before we understood how it happened.
If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence. There
isn't.
What do you mean by "a" sequence? There are lots and lots of
sequences.
"Fossil Horse FAQs"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"The Natural History of Marsupials"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"Transitional Vertebrate Fossils"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
There are tuskless elephants and brain dead humans.
To take your tact, which are you?
[snip]
--
Matt Silberstein
Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.
Cliff on Cheers
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 09:09:02 AM |
|
|
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:hj0fe1h3hujg2ij72ak36giks9slp0c33t@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:59:33 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e6a42f$0$5925$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows how.
In science first you identify the facts, then you explore the how.
That you consider this dumb may well say more about your understanding
of science than anything else. Orbits, for example, were recognized as
facts before we understood how it happened.
Another proof of your self elitist ignorance.
Prediction pridiction prediction and observable, factual history.
Actually, I can't imagine that you know why they orbit.
If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence. There
isn't.
What do you mean by "a" sequence? There are lots and lots of
sequences.
NONE
"Fossil Horse FAQs"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
A primary Mormon driven "fact" to justify "The Book of Mormon"
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
"The Natural History of Marsupials"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"Transitional Vertebrate Fossils"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
AND? Interest articles Interesting "theories".
I have worked many years with many successful geologists and nuclear
physisists (who make money from other than books and theories). I am merely
repeating what every one of them believes. AKA "The more you know, the more
you know you don't know".
The main thing is that there are way too many unanswered questions to
actually believe what most consider to be "evolution" and geologic history.
"The neophytes and book writers get their sexual excitment over it" is what
one geoloogist stated in an opening statement of a meeting, pre-empting any
questions regarding historical or evolutionary reasons for where oil is to
be found.
There are tuskless elephants and brain dead humans.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 10:12:31 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 07:09:02 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e79578$0$11302$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:hj0fe1h3hujg2ij72ak36giks9slp0c33t@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 13:59:33 -0700, in alt.atheism , "VO"
<here@overthere.net> in
<42e6a42f$0$5925$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows how.
In science first you identify the facts, then you explore the how.
That you consider this dumb may well say more about your understanding
of science than anything else. Orbits, for example, were recognized as
facts before we understood how it happened.
Another proof of your self elitist ignorance.
Rather than trying for a personal attack why don't you point out an
error if you see one?
Prediction pridiction prediction and observable, factual history.
Huh?
Actually, I can't imagine that you know why they orbit.
They feel like it?
If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence. There
isn't.
What do you mean by "a" sequence? There are lots and lots of
sequences.
NONE
"Fossil Horse FAQs"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
A primary Mormon driven "fact" to justify "The Book of Mormon"
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Huh?
"The Natural History of Marsupials"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
"Transitional Vertebrate Fossils"
http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-evolution.html
AND? Interest articles Interesting "theories".
And interesting evidence.
I have worked many years with many successful geologists and nuclear
physisists (who make money from other than books and theories). I am merely
repeating what every one of them believes.
Of course you are.
AKA "The more you know, the more
you know you don't know".
The main thing is that there are way too many unanswered questions to
actually believe what most consider to be "evolution" and geologic history.
That is a cool sentence. It appears to say something, but is actually
empty. What does "too many unanswered questions" mean? Do you mean we
could answer more if we wanted to? Or that we have more than we like?
Or what?
"The neophytes and book writers get their sexual excitment over it" is what
one geoloogist stated in an opening statement of a meeting, pre-empting any
questions regarding historical or evolutionary reasons for where oil is to
be found.
Yeah, sure.
There are tuskless elephants and brain dead humans.
And unmarked snips.
--
Matt Silberstein
Well ya see, Norm, it's like this. A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we know, kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers.
Cliff on Cheers
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 11:50:49 AM |
|
|
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks. Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows how.
If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence. There
isn't.
It is a fact that you have no idea what you are talking about.
There are tuskless elephants and brain dead humans.
You obviously fall into the latter category.
You are probably incapable of learning, but ....
www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
by Laurence Moran
Copyright © 1993-2002
[Last Update: January 22, 1993]
W hen non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse
two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the
question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older
ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change
over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of
the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the
existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated
today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is
overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less
certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories
of the mechanism of evolution. Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as
anyone else:
In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect
fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to
theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist
argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages
about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and
scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what
confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this
argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I
devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a
scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in
the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community
to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and
theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing
certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas
that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists
debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation
replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves
in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like
ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some
other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no
such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic
and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve
certainty only because they are not about the empirical world.
Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists
often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they
themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I
suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility
does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact
and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always
acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms
(theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually
emphasized the difference between his two great and separate
accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a
theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution.
- Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981
Gould is stating the prevailing view of the scientific community. In
other words, the experts on evolution consider it to be a fact. This is
not an idea that originated with Gould as the following quotations indicate:
Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond
reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution.
Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the
earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or
are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain
bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about
certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to
evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are
constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.
- Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in
the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973)
reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, J. Peter Zetterberg ed., ORYX
Press, Phoenix AZ 1983
Also:
It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially
those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state
clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue
within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative
importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the
earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a
fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period
and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old.
It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all
represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million
years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer
living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are
none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living
forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms
that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from
nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural
world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the
earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun.
The controversies about evolution lie in the realm of the relative
importance of various forces in molding evolution.
- R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for Truth"
Bioscience 31, 559 (1981) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, op cit.
This concept is also explained in introductory biology books that are
used in colleges and universities (and in some of the better high
schools). For example, in some of the best such textbooks we find:
Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact.
The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the
various models that attempt to explain how life evolves... it is
important to understand that the current questions about how life
evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution.
- Neil A. Campbell, Biology 2nd ed., 1990, Benjamin/Cummings, p. 434
Also:
Since Darwin's time, massive additional evidence has accumulated
supporting the fact of evolution--that all living organisms present on
earth today have arisen from earlier forms in the course of earth's long
history. Indeed, all of modern biology is an affirmation of this
relatedness of the many species of living things and of their gradual
divergence from one another over the course of time. Since the
publication of The Origin of Species, the important question,
scientifically speaking, about evolution has not been whether it has
taken place. That is no longer an issue among the vast majority of
modern biologists. Today, the central and still fascinating questions
for biologists concern the mechanisms by which evolution occurs.
- Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology 5th ed. 1989, Worth
Publishers, p. 972
One of the best introductory books on evolution (as opposed to
introductory biology) is that by Douglas J. Futuyma, and he makes the
following comment:
A few words need to be said about the "theory of evolution," which
most people take to mean the proposition that organisms have evolved
from common ancestors. In everyday speech, "theory" often means a
hypothesis or even a mere speculation. But in science, "theory" means "a
statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes
of something known or observed." as the Oxford English Dictionary
defines it. The theory of evolution is a body of interconnected
statements about natural selection and the other processes that are
thought to cause evolution, just as the atomic theory of chemistry and
the Newtonian theory of mechanics are bodies of statements that describe
causes of chemical and physical phenomena. In contrast, the statement
that organisms have descended with modifications from common
ancestors--the historical reality of evolution--is not a theory. It is a
fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun. Like
the heliocentric solar system, evolution began as a hypothesis, and
achieved "facthood" as the evidence in its favor became so strong that
no knowledgeable and unbiased person could deny its reality. No
biologist today would think of submitting a paper entitled "New evidence
for evolution;" it simply has not been an issue for a century.
- Douglas J. Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology, 2nd ed., 1986, Sinauer
Associates, p. 15
There are readers of these newsgroups who reject evolution for religious
reasons. In general these readers oppose both the fact of evolution and
theories of mechanisms, although some anti-evolutionists have come to
realize that there is a difference between the two concepts. That is why
we see some leading anti-evolutionists admitting to the fact of
"microevolution"--they know that evolution can be demonstrated. These
readers will not be convinced of the "facthood" of (macro)evolution by
any logical argument and it is a waste of time to make the attempt. The
best that we can hope for is that they understand the argument that they
oppose. Even this simple hope is rarely fulfilled.
There are some readers who are not anti-evolutionist but still claim
that evolution is "only" a theory which can't be proven. This group
needs to distinguish between the fact that evolution occurs and the
theory of the mechanism of evolution.
We also need to distinguish between facts that are easy to demonstrate
and those that are more circumstantial. Examples of evolution that are
readily apparent include the fact that modern populations are evolving
and the fact that two closely related species share a common ancestor.
The evidence that Homo sapiens and chimpanzees share a recent common
ancestor falls into this category. There is so much evidence in support
of this aspect of primate evolution that it qualifies as a fact by any
common definition of the word "fact."
In other cases the available evidence is less strong. For example, the
relationships of some of the major phyla are still being worked out.
Also, the statement that all organisms have descended from a single
common ancestor is strongly supported by the available evidence, and
there is no opposing evidence. However, it is not yet appropriate to
call this a "fact" since there are reasonable alternatives.
Finally, there is an epistemological argument against evolution as fact.
Some readers of these newsgroups point out that nothing in science can
ever be "proven" and this includes evolution. According to this
argument, the probability that evolution is the correct explanation of
life as we know it may approach 99.9999...9% but it will never be 100%.
Thus evolution cannot be a fact. This kind of argument might be
appropriate in a philosophy class (it is essentially correct) but it
won't do in the real world. A "fact," as Stephen J. Gould pointed out
(see above), means something that is so highly probable that it would be
silly not to accept it. This point has also been made by others who
contest the nit-picking epistemologists.
The honest scientist, like the philosopher, will tell you that
nothing whatever can be or has been proved with fully 100% certainty,
not even that you or I exist, nor anyone except himself, since he might
be dreaming the whole thing. Thus there is no sharp line between
speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a
difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the
idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its
probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered
by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of
the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact. For the
evidence in favor of it is as voluminous, diverse, and convincing as in
the case of any other well established fact of science concerning the
existence of things that cannot be directly seen, such as atoms,
neutrons, or solar gravitation ....
So enormous, ramifying, and consistent has the evidence for
evolution become that if anyone could now disprove it, I should have my
conception of the orderliness of the universe so shaken as to lead me to
doubt even my own existence. If you like, then, I will grant you that in
an absolute sense evolution is not a fact, or rather, that it is no more
a fact than that you are hearing or reading these words.
- H. J. Muller, "One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough"
School Science and Mathematics 59, 304-305. (1959) reprinted in
Evolution versus Creationism op cit.
In any meaningful sense evolution is a fact, but there are various
theories concerning the mechanism of evolution.
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
27 Jul 2005 03:21:00 PM |
|
|
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:JXOFe.17342$26.120@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks.
Not in science.
Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
As I have stated, I have made much money working with geologists and nuclear
physicists for about 30 years.
I consulted to them on how to measure and find answers.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows
how. If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence.
There isn't.
Writing books and articles OR being in a University environment does not
give anyone useable credentials.
Evolution theory is your god.
You worship and defend it.
As I have stated, I do NOT discount the concept.
Another piece of my science belief and working with others on research is
the "String Theory".
Now go play games with your "Church of the Evolutionists".
Don't forget to attend regular meetings and NEVER read heretical literature
that might give you doubts about your God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
28 Jul 2005 02:28:18 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:21:00 -0700, "VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:JXOFe.17342$26.120@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks.
Not in science.
Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
As I have stated, I have made much money working with geologists and nuclear
physicists for about 30 years.
I consulted to them on how to measure and find answers.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows
how. If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence.
There isn't.
Writing books and articles OR being in a University environment does not
give anyone useable credentials.
Evolution theory is your god.
You worship and defend it.
As I have stated, I do NOT discount the concept.
Another piece of my science belief and working with others on research is
the "String Theory".
Now go play games with your "Church of the Evolutionists".
Don't forget to attend regular meetings and NEVER read heretical literature
that might give you doubts about your God.
What does Jesus say about lying? If you're a scientific consultant, I'm the King
of Norway.
.
|
|
|
| User: "VO" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
28 Jul 2005 10:08:06 AM |
|
|
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote in message
news:962he1d2d10c3a8vukots1c08u1cd5l1ca@4ax.com...
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:21:00 -0700, "VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:JXOFe.17342$26.120@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks.
Not in science.
Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
As I have stated, I have made much money working with geologists and
nuclear
physicists for about 30 years.
I consulted to them on how to measure and find answers.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows
how. If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded
sequence.
There isn't.
Writing books and articles OR being in a University environment does not
give anyone useable credentials.
Evolution theory is your god.
You worship and defend it.
As I have stated, I do NOT discount the concept.
Another piece of my science belief and working with others on research is
the "String Theory".
Now go play games with your "Church of the Evolutionists".
Don't forget to attend regular meetings and NEVER read heretical
literature
that might give you doubts about your God.
What does Jesus say about lying? If you're a scientific consultant, I'm
the King
of Norway.
That's your problem.
So you can't respond.
Figures
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
31 Jul 2005 11:10:17 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 07:28:18 GMT, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:21:00 -0700, "VO" <here@overthere.net> wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:JXOFe.17342$26.120@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:3kwFe.17335$26.4276@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11ebggl94cbno84@corp.supernews.com...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 17 Jul 2005 22:32:38 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
The only reason that some Christians reject evolution concepts is
because
they're terminally ignorant and dishonest.
Most Christians accept the fact of evolution. It's only the
truly moronic, inbred, superstitious clods who think it some
how says something about their gods.
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks.
Not in science.
Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
As I have stated, I have made much money working with geologists and nuclear
physicists for about 30 years.
I consulted to them on how to measure and find answers.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows
how. If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence.
There isn't.
Writing books and articles OR being in a University environment does not
give anyone useable credentials.
Evolution theory is your god.
You worship and defend it.
As I have stated, I do NOT discount the concept.
Another piece of my science belief and working with others on research is
the "String Theory".
Now go play games with your "Church of the Evolutionists".
Don't forget to attend regular meetings and NEVER read heretical literature
that might give you doubts about your God.
What does Jesus say about lying? If you're a scientific consultant, I'm the King
of Norway.
Be careful, it wants to be your queen.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lamont Cranston" |
|
| Title: Re: Evolution in Action in China, Tuskless Elephants |
28 Jul 2005 09:37:53 AM |
|
|
VO wrote:
"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont@TheShadow.com> wrote in message
news:JXOFe.17342$26.120@chiapp18.algx.net...
VO wrote:
Most scientists, Christian or otherwise, recognize "evolution" as an
interesting "theory".
Most scientists recognize evolution as a fact. There are a number of
theories as to how evolution occurs.
WRONG
Get an education.
I have one, thanks.
Not in science.
Yes, in science.
Maybe you might want to consider your own advice.
As I have stated, I have made much money working with geologists and nuclear
physicists for about 30 years.
I consulted to them on how to measure and find answers.
As I have stated, since you don't know what you are talking about, there
is no way that you can be advising anyone about anything.
The dumbest thing one can say is that it is fact and YET no one knows
how. If it were a "Scientific" fact, there would be a recorded sequence.
There isn't.
The above statement reveals you as a total phoney.
Writing books and articles OR being in a University environment does not
give anyone useable credentials.
Nobody said it does.
Evolution theory is your god.
You worship and defend it.
You have no idea what I worship or defend.
As I have stated, I do NOT discount the concept.
Nobody cares what you discount.
Another piece of my science belief and working with others on research is
the "String Theory".
Since, it's "String Theory" and not "the String Theory," I know that you
are full of *****.
Now go play games with your "Church of the Evolutionists".
The more that you say, the more ignorant you appear.
Don't forget to attend regular meetings and NEVER read heretical literature
that might give you doubts about your God.
Read and weep. I don't expect anybody as stubbornly ignorant as you to
learn.
www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
by Laurence Moran
Copyright © 1993-2002
[Last Update: January 22, 1993]
W hen non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse
two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the
question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older
ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change
over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of
the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the
existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated
today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is
overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less
certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories
of the mechanism of evolution. Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as
anyone else:
In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect
fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to
theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist
argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages
about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and
scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what
confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this
argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I
devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a
scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in
the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community
to be as infallible as it once was."
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and
theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing
certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas
that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists
debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation
replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves
in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like
ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some
other yet to be discovered.
Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no
such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic
and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve
certainty only because they are not about the empirical world.
Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists
often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they
themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I
suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility
does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact
and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always
acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms
(theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually
emphasized the difference between his two great and separate
accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a
theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution.
- Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981
Gould is stating the prevailing view of the scientific community. In
other words, the experts on evolution consider it to be a fact. This is
not an idea that originated with Gould as the following quotations indicate:
Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond
reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution.
Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the
earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or
are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain
bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about
certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to
evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are
constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.
- Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in
the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973)
reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, J. Peter Zetterberg ed., ORYX
Press, Phoenix AZ 1983
Also:
It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially
those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state
clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue
within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative
importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the
earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a
fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period
and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old.
It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all
represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million
years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer
living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are
none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living
fo | | | | | | | | | |
