Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Choose your favourite one and lets go....I warn you, I have 30 years of experience in the field, so make your first shot your best.
So warned, Cephus.
Simple. Read Richard Lenski's research where he, with the newfangled aid of DNA genome mapping (which provides absolute proof of what's going on, and was likely not even dreamed of when you were in school, so it's a bit of a curse to your arguments I know...) showed, irrefutably, that a bacterial genome changed by simple chance mutation resulted in a new bacterial genome that was able to utilize a substrate material, a food if you will, that the parent bacterium could not utilize. That inability was one of the key determiners of the original bacterium species definition, BTW.
You can't argue that point, sorry. And so, if you change that digestive and food utilization ability, you thus have a new species. QED.
Like a western plains antelope now able to eat meat. And then, given that change, it sure enough does go out and begins to eat meat, using a new previously unused niche. Voila!
Of course you can mis-interpret or mis-state these findings any way you want. The Creation Institute and AnswersInGenesis have all desperately now tried, unsuccessfully BTW, and of course with lies and deceits, to rebuke this one, since it represents a real threat to their hegemony and thoughtless principles of blindered faith.
BTW I also like those recently discovered lizard tail and carnivorous dentition gene segments in Gallusdomesticus. Simply turned off by repressor genes, but available for use if the need or ecological pressures arise. T-Rex in miniature! Say it isn't so!
You know; "Them egg-laying critterswhat uzed-tah be little din'saurs; gawhlly Andy, ain't they cute?"
I'm always truly amazed that Christians deny this sort of good and well-presented evidence, and yet, in support of their grossly implausible ideas, truly hole-filled and impossible evidence, unsupported in reality, logic or common sense, they plunge on denying the undeniable. and making absolute fools of themselves. As in: A 6500 year old Earth. I mean, honestly, Cephus! Honestly! Look around you, man.
If the church and theists had 1/1000th of the validity, credibility, reproducibility, cross-disciplinary support or logic for their various ancient tribal ideas that Evolution does, they'd be dancing in the streets. They'd have something, but alas, they do not. Not one iota. Thye have, essentially, NOTHING. Except faith, which doesn't cut it.
We see this all the time whenever someone of low to non-existent faked-up scientific credentials finds, say, a vaguely possible biblio-archeological find, or underwater city (thus "PROVING "Noah's Ark, snort...) or cloth of Jesus origins, it's an immediately assumed truth, an absolute, but when we ask for simple justification or some other tests to confirm it, we get blasted by those who claim we're too skeptical, and why can't we just accept their speculations and dreams?
Well, yep; science is skeptical. That's why, when we do agree on something, you can usually take it to the bank.
Anyhow, tell me where Lenski went so horribly wrong. Oh, and watch out for them chickens sneakin' up behind you.....
Perhaps Troop is a fast typist. There really isn't much actual typing there to be honest. I mean, SWMBO could type that lot in about 10 minutes. It would take me all day.
Around 90 words a minute if I'm just entering paperwork into a computer...
About 70 words a minute if I'm just writing any old thing... Of course, that doesn't include pauses/breaks to stop and think about what I'm going to say next.
You're right. There really wasn't as much typing as the post would have you believe. I had also started to respond and had written the lengthy introduction before I decided to go to bed the night before. So, when I woke up, it was merely a matter of quoting the papers, etc... I did find a few places around the 'net that had highlighted and quoted some of the most important parts of the papers. That helped in so much as digging through all of them again in order to find the exact pieces I wanted to point out. Of course, the parts not highlighted are often all the supporting evidences of the conclusions printed in bold.
The entire thing was actually very quick to do in Microsoft Word. All the quotations, my input, etc... were all relatively easy. The hardest part was actually going back and making sure I had the proper tags for bold print, italicized print, quotes, etc... so it would look right on the forum.
What was the total time? Maybe two hours broken up into several choppy bits?? Three at the most?
After all... It was a hundred degrees yesterday with 70% humidity. All my household chores were done for the weekend and I was bored. It was as good a time as any to flay open the lies of Creationism.
Anyway, Rafius, I'll talk to you later, buddy. I've got a lot going on today (GldnRule probably doubts that) and it looks like I'll be working quite a bit for the next few weeks. So make sure you keep things honest and snarky enough for me in my absence.
What is not to believe in when we utilize our knowledge of evolution in all kinds of ways...Below is a sample of what I mean...
GENETICALLY ALTERED SALMON GET CLOSER TO THE TABLE: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is seriously considering whether to approve the first genetically engineered animal that people would eat -- salmon that can grow at twice the normal rate. The salmon was developed by a company called AquaBounty Technologies and would be raised in fish farms. It is an Atlantic salmon that contains a growth hormone gene from a chinook salmon as well as a genetic on-switch from the ocean pout, a distant relative of the salmon. Normally, salmon do not make the growth hormone in cold weather. But the pout’s on-switch keeps production of the hormone going year round. The result is salmon that can grow to market size in 16 to 18 months instead of three years, though the company says the modified salmon will not end up any bigger than a conventional fish. “You don’t get salmon the size of the Hindenburg,” said Ronald L. Stotish, the Chief Executive of AquaBounty. “You can get to those target weights in a shorter time
I probably couldn't...it's not my field of expertise. Not that it matters...my intuition and perception tells me in my gut that the general concept of evolution that the scientific community has put out, is meritorious and valid...and I give it credence. But that's not my issue with the pooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooost .
How much time must that have taken him? I've never seen anything like it on here. Who could be THAT obsessed to make that kind of investment?
Don't tell me you weren't a little taken aback yourself at the sheer enormity of it Raf. I mean, WTF?!! Even if one had that kind of spare time...why would you invest it to debate A STRANGER...and to what end? Maybe you can see some potential self-actualization in it that I don't. Com'on, cop to it Man...it's strange, and you know it.
If a Believer had put up something like that, you would have gone down into your Snark Cellar and broke out the "Finest Vintage Snark" you were "saving for a special occasion".
A post like that takes 10-20 minutes.. I take about 5 times longer reading new posts..
"10 to 20 minutes"? How did know I could count on one of you guys to come out of the woodwork with some ludicrous rebuttal? Demonstrative of your lack of any case against what I said...and indicative of your bias and prejudice. So what's new?
The poster himself--"What was the total time? Maybe two hours broken up into several choppy bits?? Three at the most?"
At least A FULL QUARTER of what is considered a normal work day...probably more...to argue with a stranger...to further your concept of "NOTHING". HaHaHa! Now THAT'S what I call a "rich and full" life. LMAO!
The "Steadfast Fundies" and "Twilight Zone Theists" have NOTHING on you guys (The UltraOCD Atheists). But, hey...at least you're all good for some really great laughs.
Hey Rafius...you got a bottle of Snarkafleur Blanc de Blanc '69, I could buy off of you? I need it for this one!
You consider my efforts valuable, Gldnrule . . . you should not snark the sincere efforts to educate that are represented in Troop's posts. He is misguided about God . . . but he is sincere in his desire to know and impart knowledge. No OCD involved.
What a typical mindset from those who love remaining ignorant. The only thing you see when you look at the aforementioned post is "An Atheist with OCD who has no life." Sadly, it's the same kind of remarks you post that remind me of those who say "Why read a book? It's a waste of time; especially if I can watch the movie!" Often enough those statements come from those who simply can't do the things they are criticizing.
If I spent two or three hours rebuilding a car in my garage you probably wouldn't bat an eyelash. If I spent two or three hours getting drunk you wouldn't say a thing. If I spent two or three hours praying you'd probably criticize those criticizing me. If I spent two or three hours watching a movie you'd have probably wanted to join me depending on the movie.
But, I take two or three hours and make a post that not only helps me as well as others to understand things I enjoy reading about and all of a sudden I become "Ultra OCD." I take two or three hours to actually do something more stimulating for human understanding than most hobbies do and I "need serious help." I take two or three hours to disembowel the arguments of a person who willingly and knowingly is trying to distort the knowledge of other human beings and I need serious help.
So, which is it, GldnRule? Are you upset that you don't have the capacity to do the same thing and must therefore denigrate me? Do you have anything positive to add to the conversation other than claiming I need severe help? Is it just narcissistic rage driving your comments or is it actual amusement of what you deem to be a human freakshow?
I am a human being, GldnRule. I'm not a freakshow and I don't have OCD. You can ask my psychiatrist.
Ya know...I like this post. A lot. It helped me.
I'm not "ignorant" at all...I have my field(s) of expertise...you have yours...others have theirs. In the Army, serving in the MI Corp during the Cold War...before the advent of computers...I could "break" encoded messages we intercepted with the best ever...I'm a great business and finance man...I'm an "ace" promoter. I'm also interested in learning about the things I don't know...not that I "couldn't" do those things...I just don't, simply because I didn't.
If you spent time in your garage rebuilding something useful...I'd say that was a good thing.
If you spent time getting drunk...I'd say you were wasting your time and compromising yourself.
If you spent three hrs praying...I'd say you could have wrapped up those prayers in much less time.
I would join you watching a movie, depending on the movie.
Aaaaaaand...based on your third paragraph...I humbly apologize to you. I was wrong to say what I did. You have set me straight on the matter...and I am sorry.
The self amusement I found insulting (with no real justification and no excuse) you was indicative of my own character flaw...and an area in which I need improvement.
Thank you GCST, for helping me be a better person. I was becoming that which I have condemned. You have my apology and my respect. I put this here instead of a DM because I wanted my acknowledgment of your merit, and of my error (and apology for it), to be "public".
I took the time to read the whole post you put up...the least I could do to try to redeem myself. It was great...I learned a lot. Thank you. You are obviously a brilliant man.
You consider my efforts valuable, Gldnrule . . . you should not snark the sincere efforts to educate that are represented in Troop's posts. He is misguided about God . . . but he is sincere in his desire to know and impart knowledge. No OCD involved.
As you will see...I had found myself aware of that. And was writing a post acknowledging that, as you were writing your post.
I'm not "ignorant" at all...I have my field(s) of expertise...you have yours...others have theirs. In the Army, serving in the MI Corp during the Cold War...before the advent of computers...I could "break" encoded messages we intercepted with the best ever...I'm a great business and finance man...I'm an "ace" promoter. I'm also interested in learning about the things I don't know...not that I "couldn't" do those things...I just don't, simply because I didn't.
If you spent time in your garage rebuilding something useful...I'd say that was a good thing.
If you spent time getting drunk...I'd say you were wasting your time and compromising yourself.
If you spent three hrs praying...I'd say you could have wrapped up those prayers in much less time.
I would join you watching a movie, depending on the movie.
Aaaaaaand...based on your third paragraph...I humbly apologize to you. I was wrong to say what I did. You have set me straight on the matter...and I am sorry.
The self amusement I found insulting (with no real justification and no excuse) you was indicative of my own character flaw...and an area in which I need improvement.
Thank you GCST, for helping me be a better person. I was becoming that which I have condemned. You have my apology and my respect. I put this here instead of a DM because I wanted my acknowledgment of your merit, and of my error (and apology for it), to be "public".
I took the time to read the whole post you put up...the least I could do to try to redeem myself. It was great...I learned a lot. Thank you. You are obviously a brilliant man.
Hi GldnRule,
Thank you but your apology was far too humbling. I am by no means a brilliant person. The people who do the actual scientific investigation, the analyzing, hypothesizing, research, and who submit their works to a rather fierce scientific community to be horrendously scrutinized are the real brilliant ones - and the brave ones.
Sadly, it is my feeling that we live in a day and age where all of this readily available information or the understanding thereof is seen as "elitist," weird, or a sign that someone has serious mental problems. The fortitude with which to capture knowledge in this day and age, with so much of it abundantly available, seems lost to a general public unconcerned with how much we know or how far we can actually take ourselves if we simply put forth the effort. My frustration was largely borne from that perceived mentality.
Anyway, for what it's worth, I harbor no ill will or resentment to you. It's in the past. If I said I'd never done such a thing I'd be lying so I can also understand how these things happen. I do appreciate your candid and formal apology as it shows true character and I humbly but graciously accept it and hope we can move forward in a positive manner from here.
Last edited by GCSTroop; 07-11-2010 at 09:55 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you believe in evolution?
