Evolution question of the day (America, quote, faith, Biblical)

[SeekerSA]

Originally Posted by Campbell34

I believe the figurines of El Toro Mountain are recycled here, because it shows us the kind of junk science being embraced here. You say you can debunk any new material. Yet, what kind of science can debunk material without a scientific study, or a review of that material?

And Piyush Jindal, the word material goes right over his head again. TY for again displaying your ignorance in the basis of the Eegleesh language.

Material from dictionary.com

1. The substance or substances out of which a thing is or can be made.
2. Something, such as an idea or information, that is to be refined and made or incorporated into a finished effort: material for a comedy.(in your case material to discuss - on second thoughts comedy is appropriate)

Or IOW get some new "evidence" we can debunk. So far it has been a breeze to debunk your old recycled 1990something herr doktor Hovind talking points

IT IS THE SCIENCE OF THE CLOSED MINDS.

Of course your not intrested in the figurines of El Toro Mountain anymore. When you have no SCIENTIFIC REVIEW to back up your statements, why would you try to defend your position? So I guess you just ignore the evidence and move on.

Give me a break - it now claims we have not presented evidense - that is all you have talked about this entire thread, it is you that cannot see reason.

Without any doubt, you are a TRUE BELIEVER IN EVOLUTION.

Ad Homenium - par for the course for a student of her doktor Hovind.

Yup yup, I do believe in evolution and I have offered five disciplines to support it which you cannot or have not even attempted to rebut.

Because only a true believer in the Theory of Evolution, could ignore the other obvious evidence this way.

Bogus evidence you mean?

Just wave your magic wand and proclaim. "My science God tells me it's all false, let us now move on." LOL

Pretty mature using LoL's in a scientific debate. Look the jester laughs at himself. BTW it is your sides POV that has the magic wand not our side.

Wait, Wait, what about the scientific review?

What about it? You have two offers to review the figurines, you go get em and Rifleman will get them tested 'K?

"Did you not hear me, the God of science has proclaimed the evidence to be false, we need no review. We are nolonger interested."

You are the only one defending a deity here - science has no god - strange you should capitalize it though.

WOW, I think I just heard the door slam. Well, so much for the scientific review.

Only on the el figurinos until you comply to aforementioned requests.

[Violett]

Originally Posted by kdbrich

At what point did we become human and it was wrong to kill each other?

When did human beings evolve a soul?

Evolutionarily speaking, it's always been wrong. Nearly all animals in nature (and all mammals, I believe) do NOT kill each other for sport or food.

Living in large communities has made humans a little wacky (it's still unnatural for us and we're still getting acclimated to it), and it's made it easier for the insane (serial killers, etc.) to hide. Society has set up rules in order to enforce us to act the way we would if we were living back in nature, like we did when we were closer to being animals than being human.

[SeekerSA]

Originally Posted by Shibumi

Hmmm I smell a certain rankness in the air here.

With nowhere to hide, one attacks the system, even though it justly asks some reasonable questions.

I particularly like the one about why dating methods, which are regularly denounced and rejected by Creationists, are now, in this one case, both excused for bad application and simultaneously believed without question.

I suppose when the evidence for your side of the argument is real scarce, you defend anything, even bunko.

Like I said, this argument was over a long time ago. But it is educational for some.

We do try don't we?

Yes the way now is merely allowing some to embarrass themselves and demonstrate their poor education. If anything, this proves that creation "science" is bad and should not be taught in lieu of real science.

Creationism is merely another postulation of religious studies and has no place in the classroom except as religious studies.

[kb09]

Originally Posted by Violett

Evolutionarily speaking, it's always been wrong. Nearly all animals in nature (and all mammals, I believe) do NOT kill each other for sport or food.

I can think of a few animals that kill for food.

Originally Posted by Violett

Living in large communities has made humans a little wacky (it's still unnatural for us and we're still getting acclimated to it), and it's made it easier for the insane (serial killers, etc.) to hide. Society has set up rules in order to enforce us to act the way we would if we were living back in nature, like we did when we were closer to being animals than being human.

Dude.

If we lived according to nature, then there would be no blind people, no fat people, no deaf people, no sick people and three fourths of the total population would be gone. Society does not force us to act as we would in nature; if anything, it does the exact opposite (although I wouldn't mind a return to spears and leafs ).

[rifleman]

"Sport" killing would be one way to categorize the behavior of typical predators like coyotes, dingos, wolves, wolverines, cheetahs, etc. when they are presented with an un-needed abundance of food. Being hard-wired to "take" whenever a game species staggers into view, they do so, but may well leave their overkills untouched. To assign some humanistic or moralistic (or worse; Christian) overtones to this is simply incorrect, arrogant and anthropomorphic.

Such overkilling does provide necessary practice for the leaner times, and co-incidentally also provides easy free extra food for the scavenger species. All according to the nicely evolved ecological model.

We humans no doubt have such hard-wired behavior built into our relict DNA sequences, ready to be re-awakened if required (and it may soon be, what with anticipated national truckers' strikes, etc. en route... catch that rabbit for our dinner would you honey?).

We've just applied our thin veneer of pseudo-civilization and haughty conceit to our more primal behaviors, and called it "ethics" for now. It also stops inefficient and messy blood baths in our more urban street scenes. Well, with the possible exception of WA, DC...

In times of peace and plenty, it's easy to claim some sort of behavioral moral superiority over the so-called lesser animals [barf....], but when push comes to shove (Or stab. Or smash. Or shoot...) we're all just weak versions of apes, but with a truly evil mentality potential!

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by Shibumi

Hmmm I smell a certain rankness in the air here.

With nowhere to hide, one attacks the system, even though it justly asks some reasonable questions.

I particularly like the one about why dating methods, which are regularly denounced and rejected by Creationists, are now, in this one case, both excused for bad application and simultaneously believed without question.

I suppose when the evidence for your side of the argument is real scarce, you defend anything, even bunko.

Like I said, this argument was over a long time ago. But it is educational for some.

(NO), one does not attack the system because it justly asks some reasonable questions. One attacks the system, because they (IGNORE)
the questions, and ignore the (EVIDENCE). And then PROCLAIM the evidence false without ever doing a scientific review.

And you are right, in the closed mind of a believer in Evolution, this arguement was over long ago. This arguement was over at the time of the El Toro Mountain discovery. You see, science can spend millions of dollars on the study ancient artifacts. Yet, if they find artifacts that would put into question their theory of evolution. Well, here is a perfect example of how they ignore those finds.

And this is not an isolated case. I can give you another perfect example of people that were in a position to reveal a truth that would of debunk the theory of evolution, yet they decided to ignore the evidence, rather than reveal it. And there are people on this very post who would say. "OH, science would never do that." Just remember the figuriens of El Toro Mountain, and you will know, that there are some in science WHO WILL, AND HAVE DONE THAT.

[sanspeur]

Originally Posted by Campbell34

(NO), one does not attack the system because it justly asks some reasonable questions. One attacks the system, because they (IGNORE)
the questions, and ignore the (EVIDENCE). And then PROCLAIM the evidence false without ever doing a scientific review.

And you are right, in the closed mind of a believer in Evolution, this arguement was over long ago. This arguement was over at the time of the El Toro Mountain discovery. You see, science can spend millions of dollars on the study ancient artifacts. Yet, if they find artifacts that would put into question their theory of evolution. Well, here is a perfect example of how they ignore those finds.

And this is not an isolated case. I can give you another perfect example of people that were in a position to reveal a truth that would of debunk the theory of evolution, yet they decided to ignore the evidence, rather than reveal it. And there are people on this very post who would say. "OH, science would never do that." Just remember the figuriens of El Toro Mountain, and you will know, that there are some in science WHO WILL, AND HAVE DONE THAT.

Yes I agree, you certainly have done that.

[tgnostic]

(NO), one does not attack the system because it justly asks some reasonable questions. One attacks the system, because they (IGNORE)
the questions, and ignore the (EVIDENCE). And then PROCLAIM the evidence false without ever doing a scientific review.

I say attack the system because it ignores Wise peoples' concepts when they lack the reputation for trustworthiness at (like ignored the east for so long on the entrepeneurship way of sociological changes) profit (not justified profit, but just profit).

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by SeekerSA

And Piyush Jindal, the word material goes right over his head again. TY for again displaying your ignorance in the basis of the Eegleesh language.

Material from dictionary.com

1. The substance or substances out of which a thing is or can be made.
2. Something, such as an idea or information, that is to be refined and made or incorporated into a finished effort: material for a comedy.(in your case material to discuss - on second thoughts comedy is appropriate)

Or IOW get some new "evidence" we can debunk. So far it has been a breeze to debunk your old recycled 1990something herr doktor Hovind talking points
Give me a break - it now claims we have not presented evidense - that is all you have talked about this entire thread, it is you that cannot see reason.
Ad Homenium - par for the course for a student of her doktor Hovind.

Yup yup, I do believe in evolution and I have offered five disciplines to support it which you cannot or have not even attempted to rebut.
Bogus evidence you mean?
Pretty mature using LoL's in a scientific debate. Look the jester laughs at himself. BTW it is your sides POV that has the magic wand not our side.
What about it? You have two offers to review the figurines, you go get em and Rifleman will get them tested 'K?
You are the only one defending a deity here - science has no god - strange you should capitalize it though.
Only on the el figurinos until you comply to aforementioned requests.

Science is your GOD, and in this case a false one at that. Because you use sicence to defend your position on the figurines of El Toro Mountain. Yet you do this, without any scientific review.




I have give names, and dates of those who actually tested the figurines.

NOW, can you give me the names of your people, who have actually tested the figurines from your side? Can you give us the dates they were tested by them?

I'M ASKING A SIMPLE QUESTION, CAN YOU GIVE US A SIMPLE ANSWER?

WHEN, AND WHO DID THE SCIENTIFIC REVIEW FOR THE FIGURINES OF EL TORO MOUNTAIN?

(CAN YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION?)

[Campbell34]

Originally Posted by tgnostic

I say attack the system because it ignores Wise peoples' concepts when they lack the reputation for trustworthiness at (like ignored the east for so long on the entrepeneurship way of sociological changes) profit (not justified profit, but just profit).

I don't know about the east, but there are a lot of things our science has ignored. And they continue to do this with evidence that puts into question their pet theories.