James Powell wrote:

"Jd" <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in message
news:q91k635n8cpgq5s6naojnr0gec96bkc4bc@4ax.com...

James Powell wrote:

"Jd" <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in message
news:st3v53pckd48rpnuggtcjt5kssoilet61f@4ax.com...

<snip>

Don't you have anything better to do than post utter and ridiculous crap?
I've read science fiction stories with more credible science than you
appear
capable of.

James Powell

If you had a decent OLR you could filter out my messages. Cheapscape.

Jd

Trying to sound like you are intelligent again? You are still failing.

James Powell

I order you to not filter out my messages or to put them in a killfile but instead, to read each and
everyone of them and to reply to them even if you don't want too.

Jd

James Powell wrote:

"Jd" <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in message
news:q91k635n8cpgq5s6naojnr0gec96bkc4bc@4ax.com...

James Powell wrote:

"Jd" <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in message
news:st3v53pckd48rpnuggtcjt5kssoilet61f@4ax.com...

<snip>

Don't you have anything better to do than post utter and ridiculous crap?
I've read science fiction stories with more credible science than you
appear
capable of.

If you had a decent OLR you could filter out my messages. Cheapscape.

Trying to sound like you are intelligent again? You are still failing.

I order you to not filter out my messages or to put them in a killfile but instead, to read each and
everyone of them and to reply to them even if you don't want too.

In alt.atheism On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:17:03 GMT, Jd
<ZionsFire@att.net> let us all know that:

Human evolution has never been proven. It's called the ToE for that reason.

Just like it's called the Quantum THEORY of Gravity.

Reject evidence? You're kidding? Or have you been asleep on the web while
I posted that evidence of
humans and worms having a common ancestor, and rats and humans yada yada
yada.

You're just miffed at how when I show this evidence, it makes you guys
look like loonies. Alien
abductions, ToE, global warming...... my my such fertile ground for any
accomplished writer.

Believe it or not they actually just released findings from the landing I
mentioned at the onset of
this thread.... but it was just from 4 hours of data. You can read the
whole thing on the JPL
website if you want, but basically they've concluded that their original
assumption was exactly
correct (surprise, surprise) that Titan is an earth-like planet\moon.....

Now let's deal with this underhanded name calling bad habit you have.
Over and over again I've
posted interesting scientific findings yet you ignorantly continue making
yourself look bad by
calling me names. Why do you do that? Are you stupid? Have you not yet
discovered that it does you
no good atall?

Dave Oldridge wrote:

Jd <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in
news:un4463hvib2203j0fm4gkf1rub1sir0944@4ax.com:

Dave Oldridge wrote:

Jd <ZionsFire@att.net> wrote in
news:st3v53pckd48rpnuggtcjt5kssoilet61f@4ax.com:

The ToE depends upon the notion of hybrids and mutants. Even
Darwin himself expressed dismay over the lack of evidence wrt
intermediate species. That's a biggie. It means that if there is
no evidence of intermediate species then the whole theory of
evolution itself is in question. Hence "hybrids" temporarily
relieves the frustration of evolutionists in that they can say
that hybrid races didn't hang around long enough to leave good
fossil proof, but did live long enough to produce the next
"species" in the evolutionary chain so to speak.

Yawn....these are old lies. You need some new ones. These don't
work any more.

Fact: Evolution does require mutations. Mutations are OBSERVED, in
virtually all viable, reproducing individuals of every species we've
tested. It does NOT depend much on hybrids, though obviously a
mutation found in only one parent will not be paired with a copy of
itself in offspring.

Human evolution has never been proven. It's called the ToE for that
reason.

"As discussed earlier in this paper, Darwin considered the general
absence of forms intermediate between species to be a difficulty
with his theory of speciation. I pointed out that his defense of
the theory lay mainly in explaining why the data did not exist
rather than convincing the reader that intermediate forms ever did
exist. The mechanism of speciation by selection against the
hybrids provides a more direct answer as to why intermediate forms
generally do not exist between species."

http://www.iorg.com/speciation.html#Modern%20Theory%20Natural%20Sel
ec ti on

Actually, Speciation is inevitable if sub-populations become
genetically isolated. The reason for the isolation is pretty much
irrelevant. This is simply the mathematical certainty that random
variations in isolated populations will eventually force the
populations to diverge. Observations indicate that the divergence
will eventually result in an inability to interbreed.

Basically, you need a mutation and a sexual encounter by the
mutant with his/her parent for this special theory of
hybridization to occur....

Huh? If you're talking about interspecies hybrids, the genomes have
to be fairly close for it to work at all. The really radical ones
are allopolyploid hybrids such as triticale, which, in general, get
classed as new genera. That's because they depend on a kind of
polyploid mutation in both parents' germ cells to result in a hybrid
at all.

This only works readily, though, in self-pollinating plants, so you
would be correct in saying that a certain amount of inbreeding
follows.

"The term hybridogenesis was coined by R. J. Schultz and indicates
a reproductional mode which is found in a few animal groups (e.g.
the topminnow Poeciliopsis, a small fish in desert streams in
Mexico and Soutwestern USA; water frogs; Bacillus, stick insects
in Italy). This mode marks hybrids between two parental species
(A,B) who are able to reproduce by backcrossing which one of the
parent. These hybrid normally contain two chromosome sets (AB, one
from each parent species) in their body cells, but in the gonads
(ovar or testicles) the chromosome set of one parent is lost, so
that only one set remains (A or B), with A in their gonads,
hybrids can backcross with B and vice versa."

http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/PBhtmls/hybridogenesis.htm
l

But species "evolving" from hybrids has been attributed to
birds.....

"In birds, where hybrids probably are more likely to be noticed
than most other orders, a number of inter-specific hybrids have
been recorded (see Sibley, 1961; Gray, 1957; Cockrum, 1952). From
this evidence it appears that hybrids among populations, even so
distant as to be considered good species, are not mere anomalies,
but part of a larger pattern of population dynamics."

http://www.iorg.com/speciation.html#Modern%20Theory%20Natural%20Sel
ec ti on

Not only birds, but a human/reptilian connection has been reported
and evidenced throughout many cultures, and according to one
source gives rise to the human "common ancestor" known by many as
"homo-erectus".....

And then we're off into never-never land.....

Why don't you take some real science courses instead of reading
fairy tales?

Why don't you forget all that razz ma' tazz and concentrate for 3
weeks on the first verse of the Holy Bible....

Genesis 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the
earth."

Not in dispute. What IS indispute is HOW.
And, for bibliolatrous literalist heretics, WHEN.

... and for one good reason. After you wear yourself out wondering
about whether or not a stupid "theory" is worth basing your entire
inner moral code or or not, you then have to come to grips with the
question "where did those rocks in my backyard come from?".

You've been seduced into the heretical notion that scientific findings
can dictate morality. Maybe that's because you have no real moral
compass.

Don't get me wrong here. I'm not suggesting that things will not get
worse wrt theories of hoplesss men. I wouldn't even doubt of some
idjuts already have a "theory" concerning quartz being the common
ancestor of humans.

Not bloody likely. We're too carbon-based for that.

Why do you reject evidence for the common ancestry of chimps and
humans that is of the same quality as you would likely cling to if it
exonerated you on a false criminal charge? Is hypocrisy mandatory in
your cult?

Reject evidence? You're kidding? Or have you been asleep on the web
while I posted that evidence of humans and worms having a common
ancestor, and rats and humans yada yada yada.

You're just miffed at how when I show this evidence, it makes you guys
look like loonies. Alien abductions, ToE, global warming...... my my
such fertile ground for any accomplished writer.

Believe it or not they actually just released findings from the
landing I mentioned at the onset of this thread.... but it was just
from 4 hours of data. You can read the whole thing on the JPL website
if you want, but basically they've concluded that their original
assumption was exactly correct (surprise, surprise) that Titan is an
earth-like planet\moon.....

"By driving their computer models of Titan to match the data returned
from the probe, planetary scientists can now visualise Titan as a
working world. "Even though we have only four hours of data, it is so
rich that after two years of work we have yet to retrieve all the
information it contains," says François Raulin, Huygens
Interdisciplinary Scientist, at the Laboratoire de Physique et Chimie
de l'Environnement, Paris. The new details add greatly to the picture
of Saturn's largest moon. "Titan is a world very similar to the Earth
in many respects," says Jean-Pierre Lebreton, ESA Huygens Project
Scientist.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070601110714.htm

Now let's deal with this underhanded name calling bad habit you have.
Over and over again I've posted interesting scientific findings yet
you ignorantly continue making yourself look bad by calling me names.
Why do you do that? Are you stupid? Have you not yet discovered that
it does you no good atall?