| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Tom McCafferty" |
| Date: |
15 Jul 2005 10:20:12 AM |
| Object: |
Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called Greater
Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
.
|
|
| User: "Tom McCafferty" |
|
| Title: Can you prove the Ice Age never happened? |
15 Jul 2005 02:03:31 PM |
|
|
--------------8B1BCCD9ABC4CD89ED83EAD2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called Greater
Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
--------------8B1BCCD9ABC4CD89ED83EAD2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called Greater
<br>Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
<br>
<p> <a href="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</a>
<a href="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</a></html>
--------------8B1BCCD9ABC4CD89ED83EAD2--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McCafferty" |
|
| Title: Re: Can you prove the Ice Age never happened? |
15 Jul 2005 02:49:10 PM |
|
|
--------------D793DA1D8644D1B685A0203D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The Bible deals with Middle East culture.
The info below deal with the geohistory of the North West.
Tom McCafferty wrote:
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called
Greater
Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
--------------D793DA1D8644D1B685A0203D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
The Bible deals with Middle East culture.
<br>The info below deal with the geohistory of the North West.
<p>Tom McCafferty wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit.
Its called Greater
<br>Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
<br>
<p> <a href="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</a>
<a href="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</a></blockquote>
</html>
--------------D793DA1D8644D1B685A0203D--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Can you prove the Ice Age never happened? |
15 Jul 2005 08:57:09 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 14:49:10 -0500, Tom McCafferty wrote:
The Bible deals with Middle East culture.
The info below deal with the geohistory of the North West.
And, of course, we're all familiar with both the Middle-Eastern race as well
as the North-Western race.
There have been several instances of successful interbreeding (well, from
reports, the party was a bang-up success).
Gray Shockley
---------------------------------------
If someone knows the answer before
knowing the question, this has nothing
to do with rationality and everything
to do with religion.
Tom McCafferty wrote:
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called
Greater
Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP
-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-we
b-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McCafferty" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 10:22:21 AM |
|
|
--------------FCDD5E7037A9E7D39F95306C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Tom McCafferty wrote:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called Greater
Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D
--------------FCDD5E7037A9E7D39F95306C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<p>Tom McCafferty wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>But can you disprove the Ice Age.
<p>I live in an area that was built of glacial deposit. Its called Greater
<br>Vancouver. Sometimes the area is called Burrard Peninsula.
<p><a href="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula+ice+age&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</a></blockquote>
<A HREF="http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D">http://ca.search.yahoo.com/search?p=burrard+peninsula&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D</A></html>
--------------FCDD5E7037A9E7D39F95306C--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 10:27:28 AM |
|
|
(Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Strickland" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 11:35:23 AM |
|
|
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is also
true, then why are there still apes? Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
If God did indeed create man in His own image, then there would be man, and
there would be apes, and any change from hunched over to standing erect
would be a function of breeding, not evolving from one species into another.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Da Clayton Code" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 07:23:59 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also
true, then why are there still apes?
Oh jeez....get a fourth grade education you dipshit and stop thinking one
liners from Answers in Genesis equals science!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 10:47:51 PM |
|
|
The Da Clayton Code wrote:
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hot mail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also
true, then why are there still apes?
Oh jeez....get a fourth grade education you dipshit and stop thinking one
liners from Answers in Genesis equals science!
Even AiG has repudiated his jewel of stupidity.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 12:44:48 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also
true, then why are there still apes? Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
If God did indeed create man in His own image, then there would be man,
and
there would be apes, and any change from hunched over to standing erect
would be a function of breeding, not evolving from one species into
another.
You're joking, right?
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 01:11:18 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:44:48 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also
true, then why are there still apes? Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
If God did indeed create man in His own image, then there would be man,
and
there would be apes, and any change from hunched over to standing erect
would be a function of breeding, not evolving from one species into
another.
You're joking, right?
I certainly hope so, but unfortunately, I doubt it. I've met quite a few people
in RL who apparently believe the "why are there still apes" question totally
refutes evolution.
And even worse, when you try to explain why there are still apes, the fundies
can't comprehend a word of it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gray Shockley" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 08:46:42 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:11:18 -0500, John Baker wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:44:48 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also
true, then why are there still apes? Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
If God did indeed create man in His own image, then there would be man,
and
there would be apes, and any change from hunched over to standing erect
would be a function of breeding, not evolving from one species into
another.
You're joking, right?
I certainly hope so, but unfortunately, I doubt it. I've met quite a few
people
in RL who apparently believe the "why are there still apes" question totally
refutes evolution.
And even worse, when you try to explain why there are still apes, the fundies
can't comprehend a word of it.
Which - in and of itself - is an argument against evolution.
Gray Shockley
--------------------------
Rove for Treason
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
18 Jul 2005 12:27:33 AM |
|
|
Gray Shockley wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:11:18 -0500, John Baker wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:44:48 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
<snip>
And even worse, when you try to explain why there are still apes, the fundies
can't comprehend a word of it.
Which - in and of itself - is an argument against evolution.
Ummm... no. Remember, evolution is not "survival of the fittest", but
"reproductive success". Do fundies have babies?
"I promise honey, I love you, and will respect you in the morning."
"OK"
And so the genes are passed on...
Gray Shockley
--------------------------
Rove for Treason
kermit
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ouroboros rex" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 12:40:41 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
If God did indeed create man in His own image, then there would be man,
and there would be apes, and any change from hunched over to standing
erect would be a function of breeding, not evolving from one species into
another.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Strickland" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 01:09:46 PM |
|
|
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow out
of apes. If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes. This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism. Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false. Since the evolution from
apes must be false, then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes should
have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of survival
of the fittest.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 02:17:48 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> writes:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzerW.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow out
of apes. If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes. This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism. Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true,
In the binary sense that you are using it? No, we do not. In fact, no
biologist uses that phrase in the one-round-elimination-tournament
sense that you imply.
Further, very few current biologists use the phrase at all, unless
they're discussing the history of the theory. It's an anachronism
of the 19th century, and is most generally still seen only in
simplistic popular science writing, newspaper editorials, and creationist rants.
The actual picture is far more complex -- and far more interesting --
than the on-off cartoon version you are quoting here.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ZenIsWhen" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 01:32:11 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:6qCdnT7wsIUvZkrfRVn-iA@ez2.net...
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow
out of apes. If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would
demand the demise of apes.
Says who? Totally ignorant religious fanatics? Certainly NOT scientists!!!!
There is NOTHING in "survival of the fittest, that demands deat to the
"unfit".
Your ignorance, obviously, knows no bounds.
This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist, man did not evolve
from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological truism.
Your ignorance of the topic, and of real scieince/evolution - shows nothing.
Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false. Since the evolution from
apes must be false, then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes
should have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of
survival of the fittest.
No. It does not "stand to reason" - unless you are a fanatical religious
zealot who doesn't have the ability to reason!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 05:28:27 PM |
|
|
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote:
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet,
You do? Only because human beings are apes. The great apes roam very
limited forests, none of which is especially hospitable to humans.
the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest,
Not at all. Until the development of antibiotics, cities were
notoriously unhealthy places to live.
and therefore man did not grow out of apes.
That does not follow.
If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes.
Not at all.
This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism.
The third possibility is that you don't understand what "survival of
the fittest" means, and that is the correct possibility.
Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is true,
No more than we have evidence for the rest of evolutionary theory.
lojbab
--
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier, Founder, The Logical Language Group
(Opinions are my own; I do not speak for the organization.)
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 04:14:18 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:09:46 -0700, "J Strickland"
<spam@nospam.net> let us all know that:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest,
Non sequitur.
Don
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Da Clayton Code" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 07:31:35 PM |
|
|
"Don Kresch" <ROT13.qxerfpu@jv.ee.pbz.com> wrote in message
news:co9gd1t05qth8i4lca26se5731dsmkfl69@4ax.com...
In alt.atheism On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:09:46 -0700, "J Strickland"
<spam@nospam.net> let us all know that:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes
is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see
apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest,
Non sequitur.
Exactly....it's the same as saying "Well if I'm decended from my great great
grandfather, then how come my cousin is still alive? If he's alive then
sexual reproduction is a myth!!" That's how retarded and ignorant
Strickland is!!!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 04:39:47 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@ipho use.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
Claim CC150:
If we are descended from apes, why are there still apes around?
Source:
Robinson, B. A, 2003. 17 indicators that evolution didn't happen (with
rebuttals).
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noway.htm#11
Response:
1.Humans and other apes are descended from a common
ancestor whose population split to become two (and more)
lineages. The question is rather like asking, "If many
Americans and Australians are descended from Europeans,
why are there still Europeans around?" Creationists
themselves recognize the invalidity of this claim (AIG n.d.).
Links:
Foley, Jim. 2002. Fossil hominids: Frequently asked questions
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/faqs.html#apes
References:
1.AIG, n.d. Arguments we think creationists should NOT use.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/faq/dont_use.asp#apes
Further Reading:
Darwin, C., 1872. The Origin of Species, London: Senate, chap. 4.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter4.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC150.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 08:52:04 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow out
of apes.
'J' you are an ape, in more ways than one!
If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes. This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism. Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false. Since the evolution from
apes must be false, then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes should
have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of survival
of the fittest.
'J', when you read, as I assume that you did, that a british/Japanese team
operating a robotic dive machine 1.5 miles below the Pacific Ocean had
discovered new life forms at this depth living next to the 'hot spouts' from
below the sea bed which provided oxygen and heat, did you say "Ah so this must
be part of the evolutionary process"
Or did you come to the conclusion that for some reason your god put them
there. And if so how come there is nothing in the bible about 'life that
liveth below in the deep deep waters'
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
17 Jul 2005 11:46:06 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow out
of apes. If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes. This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism. Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false. Since the evolution from
apes must be false, then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
Earthworms might have a different standard for fitness, if they cared
about such things. you are pretty inferior by earthworm standards.
A giraffe might look with disdain at your short neck, and stubbly
little legs.
We build cites. <shrug>
Don't feel bad; evolutionary theory is complex and subtle. But trust
me, you don't understand it.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes should
have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of survival
of the fittest.
That's not exactly true. The theory of evolution says that some
individuals of a gene pool are more likely to survive than others. If
the reasons they survive are inheritable (we now know this is genetic),
then those traits are more likely to be passed on. "Fittest" conjures
up images which do not necessarily apply - "reproductive success" is
closer to the proper soundbite.
Which is fitter - sparrows or rattlenakes?
Answer: neither. If a species survives by eating leaves of trees, and
another survives by eating termites, they are not in direct
competition. Humans and the other survivng apes have not been in
competition until recently. We are expanding into areas we didn't live
in before, and they are dying out. There *were other apes we used tobe
in direct cometition with - and they went extinct.
As the environment changes (because of weather, or a new predator, or a
competitor is expanding) then a species must adapt or die. Fitness for
the environment is all that matters. If some of the species adapt one
way, and others of the species adapt another, you may end up with two
or more different species descended from one ancestor.
Look, science isn't out to "get God". Weathermen understand quite a bit
about how rain works, and tornadoes, and snow. Does that mean God
doesn't make it rain? If there is a god, it just means we know *how he
does it.
Evolution is how he made *us, and the worms, and sparrows, and
aardvarks, and all the other critters, great and small.
Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Server 13" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 03:22:30 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they can't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest,
Exactly.
and therefore man did not grow out
of apes.
There is no therefore there. please take an elementary logic class.
If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes.
False.
This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exist,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism.
false.
Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false.
False.
Since the evolution from
apes must be false,
False.
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
died off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes except for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes should
have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of survival
of the fittest.
Why would I go kill an ape in Sumatra?
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Strickland" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 03:46:36 PM |
|
|
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hugh Gibbons" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
16 Jul 2005 11:00:49 PM |
|
|
In article <17CdnT6Ma-LpvUXfRVn-uQ@ez2.net>,
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote:
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
Yes it is. There is no difference between evolution due to natural
selection and evolution due to artificial selection except that people
determine the criteria for survival in the latter case.
And life did apparently evolve from (as you put it) pond scum, since
that is the earliest form of life that we can find evidence for.
Every other kind of life appears to be a specialized form of pond
scum right down to the molecular level and they appear in the
fossil record (those that were substantial enough and numerous
enough to leave fossils for us to find) in forms that changed over
time tending towards those forms we see around us alive today.
Except for those that simply disappeared. We presume that they
vanished due to changes in the environment or succumbed to
competition.
What we don't see in the fossil record or in the living world are
examples of species that appear in any way to be wholly novel, which
would support your hypothesis of unique creation, if they existed.
==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
18 Jul 2005 12:22:10 AM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
Yes and no. "breeding" is not the right word but it does convey the outcome.
RT
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 08:55:03 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
If this conversation took place four hundred years ago 'J' would win hands
down, but you see, back then they knew nothing.
We now know how science has trashed countless myths, so how about we come back
in another four hundred years and starer this conversation all over again!
'J' would be laughed out of the room!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC, aa#2220 thanks to Jason Gastrichs effort" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 07:46:48 PM |
|
|
J Strickland wrote:
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
You mean it's not the version of evolution you require for your lies to
make even a modicum of sense.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 04:17:11 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 13:46:36 -0700, "J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net>
wrote:
"Server 13" <c-bee1@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db9608$vv2$5@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
I.E., evolution.
That is not evolution. Or, it isn't evolution in the sense that man evolved
from apes, or life evolved from pond scum.
Then you don't know what evoluton is. You won't learn it from
creationist tracts.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Del" |
|
| Title: Re: Some claim they can disprove evolution. |
15 Jul 2005 04:28:26 PM |
|
|
Notice that Strictland ignores the substantial posts that
address his question and instead responds to the one
liners, pretending that his question goes unanswered.
J Strickland wrote:
"ouroboros rex" <c-bee1@itg.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:db8sep$sui$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
"J Strickland" <spam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:gLednZLwffUOeErfRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
"Bert Hyman" <bert@ipho use.com> wrote in message
news:Xns96946A6311B94VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
celista2burnaby@hotmail.com (Tom McCafferty) wrote in
news:42D7D451.CD91230B@hotmail.com:
But can you disprove the Ice Age.
The same way you "disprove" evolution: invoke magic.
If "survival of the fittest" is true, and that man evolved from apes is
also true, then why are there still apes?
lol This is absolutely the dumbest argument out there. Do you see apes
roaming the cities?
I see apes roaming the planet, the fact that they c an't build cities is
testament to them not being the fittest, and therefore man did not grow out
of apes. If man grew out of apes, then survival of the fittest would demand
the demise of apes. This hasn't happened, therefore two possibilities exi st,
man did not evolve from apes, or survival of the fittest is not a biological
truism. Since we have unrefutable evidence that survival of the fittest is
true, then the evolution from apes must be false. Since the evolution from
apes must be false, then man is a seperate and distinct species that has
changed over the eons as a function of breeding.
Wouldn't the "less than fittest" have
d ied off in the face of the fittest?
We don't compete directly with apes exc ept for space. We did apparently
kill off several other varieties of smarter hominids on the way up, IIRC.
True. But if we evolved from apes, then it stands to reason that apes should
have met their demise by now if there is any truth to the theory of survival
of the fittest..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
