word!
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
> >
> > I've already said I believe in evolution, just I recognize that some
> > part of it at least is taken on faith.
> >
> > I was actually racking my brain for the word hypoth
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> You just stated evolution is also origins. I read one person made this
> claim and it's a new one. You make it sound as if it's a consensus.
I hope it's not consensus. I really hope that there is always a minority
challenging any scientific principa
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 3:55 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> I've already said I believe in evolution, just I recognize that some
> part of it at least is taken on faith.
>
> I was actually racking my brain for the word hypothesis as it relates
> to the scientific method earlier. Glad you used it haha.
>
You just stated evolution is also origins. I read one person made this
claim and it's a new one. You make it sound as if it's a consensus. I think
if you toned down your attack and expanded on your thoughts it could make
an interesting discussion
.
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Cameron Childr
I've already said I believe in evolution, just I recognize that some
part of it at least is taken on faith.
I was actually racking my brain for the word hypothesis as it relates
to the scientific method earlier. Glad you used it haha.
On 1/4/14, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jan 4, 2014
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Why would you need to be a biologist to accept that all life may have
> evolved from a single cell?
>
I think that the mistake that people often make in these sorts of
discussions is attempting to explain the theory to someone who doesn't WAN
Ah, ok. Well, to start with, that isn't what I usually mean when I say
Evolution. That's why I gave you the definition I use. It can be tricky
when multiple people use a word and don't have a common definition.
As for your question here, it's a good one. I also don't have all the
answers. There i
Coelacanth would have been the correct answer
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/18/science/coelacanth-dna-may-tell-how-fish-learned-to-walk.html?_r=0
Sounds like you were on the right track but that the use of legs allowed
them to leave the water. I also forgot about crocodiles and alligators.
.
.
I've seen other planets
On Jan 4, 2014 8:56 AM, "Scott Stroz" wrote:
>
> Why would you need to be a biologist to accept that all life may have
> evolved from a single cell?
>
> I am not an astronomer, yet I do not believe earth is the only planet in
> the universe with life. Is that 'faith'? No.
I think the best answer to that question is that moist human
characteristics are specialized for living on land. Having characteristics
for living on land is not something I would expect in creatures that live
in the sea.
On Jan 4, 2014 9:21 AM, "Sam" wrote:
>
> The question was to provoke thou
Not necessarily. Maybe there were sea creatures with human-like arms, but
those creatures died off because their 'arms' offered no real as advantage
or were a detriment to the species.
On Jan 4, 2014 9:21 AM, "Sam" wrote:
>
> The question was to provoke thought not insults. Why do no sea creatu
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Why would you need to be a biologist to accept that all life may have
> evolved from a single cell?
>
>
You can believe it as do I but it is just a theory at this point. Remember
that evolution doesn't explain origins. You seem to think it d
The question was to provoke thought not insults. Why do no sea creatures
have human characteristics like hands or arms. Octopi have arms/legs and
use them for tools but it's not good enough. Whales have what appear to be
feet in their fins but walking wouldn't have mad sense based on their size.
M
Why would you need to be a biologist to accept that all life may have
evolved from a single cell?
I am not an astronomer, yet I do not believe earth is the only planet in
the universe with life. Is that 'faith'? No. When you consider that there
are billions of galaxies, each with potentially bill
That there is proof that I am the product, however long and by what ever
means, of a single cell organism that eventually walked on land to become a
primate and eventually me.
I am no biologist, molecular or otherwise.
On Jan 4, 2014 1:23 AM, "Judah McAuley" wrote:
>
> Where is the faith? What
I didn't mean that.
I mean you guys seem to have an almost dogmatic adherence to some things
that aren't certain.
I try to be skeptical in every direction.
On Jan 4, 2014 1:21 AM, "Judah McAuley" wrote:
>
> "Why don't humans live under water" isn't even a science denier question (I
> don't thi
Where is the faith? What are you believing without evidence?
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:18 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> I have to side with Sam here.
>
> There is an element of faith based on sources here.
>
> A faith to which I personally ascribe, but a faith none the less.
>
~~~
I have to side with Sam here.
There is an element of faith based on sources here.
A faith to which I personally ascribe, but a faith none the less.
On Jan 3, 2014 10:35 PM, "Sam" wrote:
>
> Wooah, I never said or implied evolution doesn't exist. Asking question
> about science is probably the
No one knows exactly how gravity works. Does that mean gravity does not
exist?
On Jan 3, 2014 4:57 PM, "Sam" wrote:
>
> It's very interesting that you too don't understand the point yet try to
> make the same insult.
>
> Do you girls all go to the bathroom together and discuss your line of
> at
It's very interesting that you too don't understand the point yet try to
make the same insult.
Do you girls all go to the bathroom together and discuss your line of
attack?
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Its very interesting that Sam simply doesn't understand the
Its very interesting that Sam simply doesn't understand the idiocy of the
argument, and of course takes it as a personal insult.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Im kinda surprised the if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there
>
I see you don't like the hard questions. Just throw insults and they go
away. That was easy.
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> Why aren't humans living underwater? Seriously?
>
> Why would an ancient species that adapted to land and split from it's
> aquatic breth
Why aren't humans living underwater? Seriously?
Why would an ancient species that adapted to land and split from it's
aquatic brethren evolve in anywhere close to the same way that the ones
that stayed aquatic? The environment is utterly different and we are
talking 100s of millions of years. Wh
If life is so diverse that a tree a bug a virus and a human all started
from the same cell why are all humans so much alike? Shouldn't we have wild
variations too?
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:12 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Sam, why do you find it hard to believe all the variations that resulted?
>
I never said monkeys stopped evolving. The question was if all these
mutation are taking place why aren't they also happingin with simple
organisms? You kind of answered that question.
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> Same argument, he just started with single cells.
Sam, why do you find it hard to believe all the variations that resulted?
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Always with the insults.
>
> If we all came from the sea why aren't humans also living under water? And
> why would some life forms choose not to evolve and why are all human
Only if you have no clue as to what we're discussing.
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox <
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Im kinda surprised the if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there
> still monkeys argument wasnt used.
>
>
~~
Same argument, he just started with single cells.
Of course, there is another counter argument to the monkey's debate.
Monkey's are still around because they are made of meat and meat is
delicious.
I suppose that could also be an Intelligent Design argument, though.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:01
Always with the insults.
If we all came from the sea why aren't humans also living under water? And
why would some life forms choose not to evolve and why are all humans so
much alike. While I believe it's possible and maybe even probable we could
have all come from the same microbial life form,
Im kinda surprised the if we evolved from monkeys, then why are there still
monkeys argument wasnt used.
On Jan 3, 2014, at 2:00 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> Yes, very odd that the success of single cell organisms would mean that
> there would continue to be single cell organisms. I mea
Could you explain what you mean, Tim?
Natural selection always applies, as far as I am aware. It isn't constant,
however, so maybe that's what you are thinking of?
Natural selection isn't just one thing, like predation, or mate choice, or
growth rate. I think a lot of people get confused because
Good answer
On Jan 3, 2014 3:01 PM, "Judah McAuley" wrote:
>
> Yes, very odd that the success of single cell organisms would mean that
> there would continue to be single cell organisms. I mean, look at the
> success of 4 legs. Surely that would mean that 6 legs are totally passe`
> and doomed t
That's some of why is theory.
We know that natural selection/survival of the fittest isn't always true
now. And that mutations occur from environmental factors and other factors
we don't understand.
On Jan 3, 2014 2:26 PM, "Scott Stroz" wrote:
>
> Not every instance of every organism would hav
Yes, very odd that the success of single cell organisms would mean that
there would continue to be single cell organisms. I mean, look at the
success of 4 legs. Surely that would mean that 6 legs are totally passe`
and doomed to extinction.
For anyone that actually wants an answer to Sam's idiocy
Interesting.
But people are mostly the same. I knew a girl with six toes but other than
that we're kind of similar. Seems like you're implying things can go any
way yet they seem to go in the same direction. I guess I'm trying to figure
out how one of my distant cousins became bacteria instead of
Not every instance of every organism would have the same mutations.
Not all mutations would dictate that those without them would perish.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> I was wondering if life on earth started from one single cell organism in
> the sea. Seems odd that we'd sti
I was wondering if life on earth started from one single cell organism in
the sea. Seems odd that we'd still have single cell forms of life with all
this evolution going on. On big happy family.
.
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:20 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Really Tim its all over the place,
>
Really Tim its all over the place,
start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_transitional_fossils
And what do you mean by missing link?
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Timothy Heald wrote:
>
> I don't disagree with anything you wrote.
>
> The questions for me are more about the middle
> > > > On 1/2/14, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/bobby-jindal-gop-must-stop-being-the-stup
;
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/bobby-jindal-gop-must-stop-being-the-stupid-party/2013/01/26/fdd7236c-67ea-11e2-83c7-38d5fac94235_video.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> >
Ok, so are you saying that your questions are about human evolution?
There is a big high level question of "Did humans evolve from a prior
species". If you accept the prior notion that species are created due to
heritable variation and differential survival due to natural selection
t
t;
> > >
> >
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/bobby-jindal-gop-must-stop-being-the-stupid-party/2013/01/26/fdd7236c-67ea-11e2-83c7-38d5fac94235_video.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:53
I don't disagree with anything you wrote.
The questions for me are more about the middle species and missing link.
On Jan 2, 2014 4:01 PM, "Judah McAuley" wrote:
>
> Which parts of evolution do you consider not proven facts? One of the big
> problems with the word "evolution" is that many peop
And if he's a nasty sort, its obvious that time wounds all heels.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:52 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> Luckily for him, time heals all wounds.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Judah McAuley
> wrote:
>
> >
> > If I recall, he had to cancel the first lecture because he broke h
Which parts of evolution do you consider not proven facts? One of the big
problems with the word "evolution" is that many people mean different
things when they use the word, so I never know what someone thinks has or
has not been proven.
I'll go for a fairly simple definition of evolution, star
www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/bobby-jindal-gop-must-stop-being-the-stupid-party/2013/01/26/fdd7236c-67ea-11e2-83c7-38d5fac94235_video.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Timothy Heald
> > > > > wrote:
> >
gt; > >> Really, they call themselves that?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons <
> > larrycly...@gmail.c
Luckily for him, time heals all wounds.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> If I recall, he had to cancel the first lecture because he broke his arm,
> thus perhaps proving the connection between gravity and time.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Larry C. Lyons >wro
If I recall, he had to cancel the first lecture because he broke his arm,
thus perhaps proving the connection between gravity and time.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> Maybe he simply didn't have the time.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:35 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> >
> >
Maybe he simply didn't have the time.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 2:35 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> If you are going to give a lecture questioning the reality of timeand
> you have to reschedule that lecture for...another time.
>
> Well, maybe there's your answer :)
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:
If you are going to give a lecture questioning the reality of timeand
you have to reschedule that lecture for...another time.
Well, maybe there's your answer :)
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> By the by, here is the lecture that I am hoping to catch. Lee Smoli
By the by, here is the lecture that I am hoping to catch. Lee Smolin, who
seems an interesting dude.
http://www.isepp.org/Pages/13-14%20Pages/Smolin.html
I saw a talk by Eric Drexler in this lecture series recently. It was a
fascinating combination of quite good and quite bad. Loved some of the
The standard view, as I understand it, is that time isn't a real thing. A
useful concept, but not a real thing. However, there are some intriguing
theories out there that say that time may, in fact, be a real thing and
that that then has some fascinating consequences. I do not understand
these th
It appears that several of the "laws" we take for granted don't seem to
hold true at the subatomic level. Even, perhaps, time itself.
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> There are many ways you explain that observation, Newton's theory on
> gravitational attraction is but
There are many ways you explain that observation, Newton's theory on
gravitational attraction is but one of them. Newton's theory had a heck of
a run, no doubt, but it was found to not hold at scale, either very large
(relativistic) or very small (quantum). Einstein helped out a lot with
relativit
>
> http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
>
> Real sad, now acceptance of the theory of evolution is now a minority
> position in the GOP. No wonder they call themselves the Party of Stupid.
>
>
~
d, Jan 1, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Timothy Heald
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Really, they call themselves that?
> > > > >>
> &
2014 at 8:53 PM, Timothy Heald
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> Really, they call themselves that?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons <
> &
> > >> Really, they call themselves that?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons <
> larrycly...@gmail.com
> > >> >wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >
y Heald
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Really, they call themselves that?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/public
w.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
> >
> > Real sad, now acceptance of the theory of evolution is now a minority
> > position in the GOP. No wonder they call themselves the Party of Stupid.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
~~
s that?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons >> >wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> > http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
>>> >
&
n 1, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Timothy Heald
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Really, they call themselves that?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons > >wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evol
Larry C. Lyons >wrote:
>
> >
> > http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
> >
> > Real sad, now acceptance of the theory of evolution is now a minority
> > position in the GOP.
Really, they call themselves that?
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
> http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
>
> Real sad, now acceptance of the theory of evolution is now a minority
> position in the GOP. No wonder they call
http://www.pewforum.org/2013/12/30/publics-views-on-human-evolution/
Real sad, now acceptance of the theory of evolution is now a minority
position in the GOP. No wonder they call themselves the Party of Stupid.
~|
Order the
https://www.bigquestionsonline.com/content/why-do-we-care-about-human-evolution-today
interesting take on evolution.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155
> of their size, and also some somewhat extravegant
> (negative) things such as a Pastor of one in Georgia who
> drives a Rolls Royce and has his own Gulfstream jet (maybe we
> are all in the wrong business?).
Well, it is often said that L. Ron Hubbard (the author) said...
"You don't get rich w
I always pick up a copy of the Economist when I fly on a plane. It's
packed with interesting text to read and can take almost an entire
cross country plane trip to get through. At any rate...
For those with an interest in science... the Dec 24 - Jan 6 Economist
has an interesting summary of the
69 matches
Mail list logo
