Finnegan Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 So you would never have questioned the religious explanation of life prior to evolutionary theory based merely on the idea that they were smarter than you ? I imagine if this were 1032 we'd all believe whatever regional religion was the cultural norm because that's how tribes work. However, that's a completely retarded argument and a massive irrelevance. We're not talking about preaching of unbacked beliefs we're talking about post-enlightenment science with hard proof.
whoareyaaa Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Ah, another misunderstanding, chimps aren't our ancestors. These charts are generally a bit overly simplified but the point remains - that point where we branch off to human and chimpanzee is where our common ancestor went the way of the dodo. We're not descended from them, we're their cousins in essence. Understood, so basically a chimps DNA is the closest to a humans compared to any other living thing on the planet.
Carl the Llama Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Put yourself up a pro-euro candidate now, big gap in the market for it. See how you get on. I didn't say I'm pro-euro, I'm less sure that it's a bad idea for Britain. In all the recent reports of the Pound rising against the Dollar, UK media have rather conveniently ignored the fact that the Euro's exploded massively against the pound. But like any good football fan, I'm not going to have a knee-jerk reaction over recent, short-term form.
Carl the Llama Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Understood, so basically a chimps DNA is the closest to a humans compared to any other living thing on the planet. But it's unheard of that they'd contract the same disease and in turn retain the same ERVs. Just so everyone's clear: I believe in evolution, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate with some glaring flaws in the scientific process where a case could easily be made for fitting the evidence to the theory instead of vice-versa.
Zingari Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I imagine if this were 1032 we'd all believe whatever regional religion was the cultural norm because that's how tribes work. However, that's a completely retarded argument and a massive irrelevance. We're not talking about preaching of unbacked beliefs we're talking about post-enlightenment science with hard proof. Yes , but you are accepting of these theories because you say that they are all well researched and universally accepted by many others on the same track . This is the very same argument used by religion. Do you really believe that the masses weren’t browbeaten into believing merely because lots of clever people researching old papyrus documents were telling them.“Don’t question it , don’t doubt it because we fookin know better than you†Well I still believe that no fooker sees the whole picture and never will.
Captain... Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Yes , but you are accepting of these theories because you say that they are all well researched and universally accepted by many others on the same track . This is the very same argument used by religion. Do you really believe that the masses weren’t browbeaten into believing merely because lots of clever people researching old papyrus documents were telling them.“Don’t question it , don’t doubt it because we fookin know better than you†Well I still believe that no fooker sees the whole picture and never will. The difference between science and religious dogma is that scientific process is open to scrutiny and examination whereas religion was kept behind closed doors, and questioning it was treated as blasphemy.
Finnegan Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 And I "still believe" that's because you're a superstitious retard and not any sort of sage, wise head with an open mind. I mean don't get me wrong, you're a lovely superstitious retard and an asset to this community but you ARE a superstitious retard all the same.
Guest MattP Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I didn't say I'm pro-euro, I'm less sure that it's a bad idea for Britain. In all the recent reports of the Pound rising against the Dollar, UK media have rather conveniently ignored the fact that the Euro's exploded massively against the pound. But like any good football fan, I'm not going to have a knee-jerk reaction over recent, short-term form. I don't think it's a knee jerk reaction to make sure in the current climate we can keep control of our own interest rates and value of currency. No to mention the difficulty in leaving and probably the fact we would be joining something that probably won't even exist in a few years. I think the chance of us (europe itself) determining the direction of how and where Europe goes financially is probably long gone now, we had that chance in the early 90's and didn't take it. It's going to be attempted enforced austerity from Brussels and the Germans and the people of the nations under it campaigning against it a la Italy this past week. That's for a new thread though.....
Zingari Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 And I "still believe" that's because you're a superstitious retard and not any sort of sage, wise head with an open mind. I mean don't get me wrong, you're a lovely superstitious retard and an asset to this community but you ARE a superstitious retard all the same. i accept the retard bit , but what makes you think i'm superstitious ?
Finnegan Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 i accept the retard bit , but what makes you think i'm superstitious ? 95% of your posting history.
Zingari Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 95% of your posting history. give me some examples . or are you thinking of "suspicious"
Carl the Llama Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I don't think it's a knee jerk reaction to make sure in the current climate we can keep control of our own interest rates and value of currency. No to mention the difficulty in leaving and probably the fact we would be joining something that probably won't even exist in a few years. I think the chance of us (europe itself) determining the direction of how and where Europe goes financially is probably long gone now, we had that chance in the early 90's and didn't take it. It's going to be attempted enforced austerity from Brussels and the Germans and the people of the nations under it campaigning against it a la Italy this past week. That's for a new thread though..... I think you misread my post. The bold bit would make a perfect explanation for why I'm not having a knee-jerk reaction. Europe showed just yesterday with the fish dumping bans that they can actually work together. Sometimes. Insufficiently. I'm reserving optimism for the whole socio-political experiment, but unfortunately I understand all too well the views of the eurosceptics, which could turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy if we don't get a grip soon. But yeah it's really another discussion entirely. Evolution is a lie perpetrated by the Vatican. Why do you think the Pope stepped down?
Babylon Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I always wear my lucky brown y fronts when I watch Leicester When making my tin foil hat, I always buy the foil from Lidl. It is the aliens chosen supermarket. When discussing evolution on foxestalk, I will always watch anti evolution youtube videos whilst rubbing myself furiously with my left hand. Case closed?
The Doctor Posted 27 February 2013 Author Posted 27 February 2013 Understood, so basically a chimps DNA is the closest to a humans compared to any other living thing on the planet. pretty much yes. But it's unheard of that they'd contract the same disease and in turn retain the same ERVs. Just so everyone's clear: I believe in evolution, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate with some glaring flaws in the scientific process where a case could easily be made for fitting the evidence to the theory instead of vice-versa. Because they didn't contract the same disease - their ancestor (who is also ours) did. That's why we share the same ERV's in the same loci. Otherwise the probability of them inserting in the same loci separately is, if I've done the maths right, well beyond 3.04x1070 - or 1 in 30,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (my calculator isn't good enough to go up to things like 500! - I've had to do it off 50! in 1000, which will give a lower end estimate than in reality). Oh, and that's just inserting into one member of each species. Take that to the 100% of both species and you're looking at something several billion times that.
Webbo Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Oh joy, yet another thread on evolution. We should really be able to settle the matter once and for all this time.
davieG Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Oh joy, yet another thread on evolution. We should really be able to settle the matter once and for all this time. We haven't evolved enough to do that.
Rincewind Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 The bottom line is that Humans have the brain to be curious and question. The answers they find is dependant on what they have found out or discovered. In prehistoric times when Man first walked the Earth they knew little. All they knew was that there was a lot of bad weather that buggered up their lives. They wanted answers and the only answers the wisest amongst them had is what they saw which was sometimes what was in the sky. The night sky was clear and star constellations resembled figures so the explanations were that there were Mighty Men up there that created everything. As Man attained knowledge different answers were forthcoming until the way we see it in modern times. We have the ability to experiment and do research. Our knowledge of the Earth universe and everything has increased a millionfold so we have no need to believe in the bearded man in the sky. Our understanding is increasing all the time. If we are evolving it is in the understanding sense as we learn more.
Zingari Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Oh joy, yet another thread on evolution. We should really be able to settle the matter once and for all this time. Don’t worry Webbo it’s been solved. Creationists know, Creative evolutionists know, evolutionary creativists know. And blind evolutionists know. They all know for sure , they just need to tie up a few loose ends and intertwine them into one big acceptable theory. Apart from me , I’m still a don’t know .
Rincewind Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I've just looked in the Bible and have the answer. God did it. Can't be bothered to read the thousands of scientific books that give the alternative viewpoint.
Charl91 Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I don't know why we're arguing about it anyway, it was obviously God.
Babylon Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 I don't know why we're arguing about it anyway, it was obviously God. Which one?
Zingari Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Which one? Obviously , the one that looks like Charlton Heston !
davieG Posted 27 February 2013 Posted 27 February 2013 Obviously , the one that looks like Charlton Heston ! I thought he was Moses Or was it him the broke the evolutionary cycle with his cross-breeding.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.