Origin of the species, where do you stand?

[skysaintj 0]

... Squeaky !!! go play outside we'll call you when dinner is ready

If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it

[rhys 0]

Quote

>This implies you agree that they are both rodents...

Uh, no. I'm just saying that the former squirrels would speciate into a new species. Call em "bat winged flying squirrels" or whatever.

To add to the evolution theory, Bats are the only (land based) Mammals that were present in New Zealand prior to tha Maori estimated at about 1000 years ago.

There were Only Birds and insects and a few reptiles left from the jurassic period!

Bats are of the wing so woul most probably been brought from Australia in some freak storm.

Alot of the birds remain flightless because for millions of years the only preditors were birds so the undergrowth of the forest was the safest place.

The Poms fucked it Like the Little Old lady that swollewed the fly!

Interesting addition. the largest Eagle in world history Lived in New Zealand and it ate Moa that made ostrich and emus look like Midgets.

google 'Haast eagle' for a quick read if your interested?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[Squeak 17]

Quote

... Squeaky !!! go play outside we'll call you when dinner is ready

bIL bill billlll YOU GOTTA WARN THIS MUG OTHER WISE YOUR JUST PLAYING FAVOURTIES, I know you like me but you have to play fair with all of us





BTW Skysaint....no second prizes for lack or origniality

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Quote

... Squeaky !!! go play outside we'll call you when dinner is ready

bIL bill billlll YOU GOTTA WARN THIS MUG OTHER WISE YOUR JUST PLAYING FAVOURTIES, I know you like me but you have to play fair with all of us





BTW Skysaint....no second prizes for lack or origniality

Hey. I already tried to defend you. If I were a mod I'd ... oh well. Ban PJ. RATTER

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[speedy 0]

Hey pajarito,

I have been reading this thread with interest. I really would like to know your answer to these two questions as well.

1) Do you believe species were all created simultaneously, or at different times, by "The Designer"?

2) How old do you believe the Earth to be?

Thanks

Dave

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[skysaintj 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

... Squeaky !!! go play outside we'll call you when dinner is ready

bIL bill billlll YOU GOTTA WARN THIS MUG OTHER WISE YOUR JUST PLAYING FAVOURTIES, I know you like me but you have to play fair with all of us





BTW Skysaint....no second prizes for lack or origniality

Hey. I already tried to defend you. If I were a mod I'd ... oh well. Ban PJ. RATTER

AAAh ha ... Now that will be what you call evolution

If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it

[Andy9o8 0]

Uh oh! They're burning the witches!

[Andy9o8 0]

Interesting article:
(Dire warning: Requires more than a very short attention span)

"A Free-for-All on Science and Religion "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21belief.html?8dpc=&_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

[skysaintj 0]

>>http://www.nytimes.com/...n&pagewanted=all

It's amazing to see how desperately society is looking to comfort it's conscience

If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

>>http://www.nytimes.com/...n&pagewanted=all

It's amazing to see how desperately society is looking to comfort their conscience

Since your buddies pajarito and royd are desperately avoiding answering my questions, maybe you will:

Do you believe all species were "designed" simultaneously, or did "The Designer" keep coming back with new ones?

How old do you think the Earth is, and how long ago did life first appear?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Royd 0]

Quote

So, do you believe "the Designer" created all species simultaneously, xor did she wait until her failures became extinct, and then she came back with some better designs?

I believe that he put everything where it belongs, set it in motion, and left it to run its course.

I believe that the Earth is the only sphere amongst the millions or billions out there that sustains any form of life.

There are plenty of them out there that experience surface action, such as volcanic activity, and upheavals.

We know that there are atmospheres on many, if not most of these spheres.

All of the conditions are simply not there as a complete group to sustain life.

For life to pick the one planet, even within our solar system, start itself up, and put itself into one huge functioning entity that we call nature is as far fetched as an invisible entity with unknown power, forming and casting everything into a perfect movement across the heavens.

Look at the moon. How many large craters are on it?

It very possibly was placed there as a meteor trap to keep the largest ones from reaching earth on a regular basis. A space shield of sorts.

How far back does decipherable written record go, and where is it found.

Does the term," the cradle of civilization" mean anything?

Isn't the purpose of nature to flow together as one giant, smooth entity? Sort of like the original socialism.

All that we, as humans, truly need is water, food, and shelter to survive. Yet, as a whole, the human race seems to be a restless bunch that can't be content with just having enough to sustain life. It's as if there is an inner clock that is bent on self destruction, some more than others.

I do not believe that if the idea of God were removed from every single mind, that the human race would suddenly become one giant happy family.

With only the threat of manmade law or personal revenge hanging over our heads, the world would decend into chaos very rapidly.

He who dies with the most toys, wins.

[jakee 1,260]

Quote

Interesting article:
(Dire warning: Requires more than a very short attention span)

"A Free-for-All on Science and Religion "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21belief.html?8dpc=&_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

Very interesting. If they genuinely thought that conference was needed then things in America must be worse than I realised.

I think this is worth repeating though,

Quote

His response to Mr. Harris and Dr. Dawkins was scathing. “I think that you and Richard are remarkably apt mirror images of the extremists on the other side,” he said, “and that you generate more fear and hatred of science.”

Dr. Tyson put it more gently. “Persuasion isn’t always ‘Here are the facts — you’re an idiot or you are not,’ ” he said. “I worry that your methods” — he turned toward Dr. Dawkins — “how articulately barbed you can be, end up simply being ineffective, when you have much more power of influence.”

When scientists get together and talk about how to have scientific discovery elevated above religion I think it adds credence to those fucking morons who think that science is just a conspiracy to deny Jesus. In that light this kind of talk may well end up being counterproductive.

I was flicking through Dawkins' "God Delusion" in a bookstore the other day and was struck by the same thing. I think we need people like Dawkins to fight the good fight of evolution against the bronze age theological bullshit which seems to be making a comeback right now. Unfortunately when he so publicly lashes out against the whole edifice of religion I believe (even though I agree with what he says) that it makes those who should read his works on evolution far less likely to do so.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[jakee 1,260]

Quote

We know that there are atmospheres on many, if not most of these spheres.

All of the conditions are simply not there as a complete group to sustain life.

And just how the fuck do you know that? Have you looked at all the planets in even just this galaxy?

Your astronomy is as bad as your biology.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Royd 0]

Quote

And just how the fuck do you know that? Have you looked at all the planets in even just this galaxy?

Name one planet in this solar system other than the third rock, which will sustain life, and prove it.

[jakee 1,260]

Quote

Quote

And just how the fuck do you know that? Have you looked at all the planets in even just this galaxy?

Name one planet in this solar system other than the third rock, which will sustain life, and prove it.

And that means what? You said that not a single other planet in this universe has all the conditions together to sustain life. The tiny, tiny sample we have available in our solar system does not tell us everything about what is out there.

You also made a bizarre comment about life "picking" this planet over the others in our solar system that are unable to sustain it. What did that mean?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

And just how the fuck do you know that? Have you looked at all the planets in even just this galaxy?

Name one planet in this solar system other than the third rock, which will sustain life, and prove it.

In this solar system, only? Probably none.
But...
You realize, don't you (don't you?), that there are billions of solar systems within this galaxy alone, and probably millions of galaxies in existence.

The statistical probability that there is NOT life on other planets approaches nil.

[JackC 0]

Quote

Unfortunately when he [Dawkins] so publicly lashes out against the whole edifice of religion I believe (even though I agree with what he says) that it makes those who should read his works on evolution far less likely to do so.

You may be right but I think Dawkins has a point. A persons religious views have somehow managed to command an undue amount of respect, to the point that even mildly difficult questions result in resentment and even violence. This level of respect is most certainly not warranted and I think there is a good argument for not showing people respect they do not deserve. You can't reason with someones faith, it's immune to logic, evidence and every other method you might have to try to get past that god shaped brain blockage. Dawkins method of proverbially bashing people over the head with an iron bar might not work, bet then fuck all else does cos they just ain't listening anyway.

[jakee 1,260]

Quote

You may be right but I think Dawkins has a point. A persons religious views have somehow managed to command an undue amount of respect, to the point that even mildly difficult questions or ridicule result in resentment and sometimes violence. This level of respect is most certainly not warranted and I think there is a good argument for not showing people respect they do not deserve.

Oh agreed there absolutely. I live with a mix of people from atheist to evangelical and I absolutely hate the idea that if one of them is talking about Jesus to me it would somehow be rude of me to say what I think Screw that.

There is a difference though with Dawkins' crusade. I don't think very much of what he says is wrong, its just that he is a man with a rare gift for explaining something very important (evolution) and I wouldn't like to see people turned away from that thinking "Oh its that horrible god hater, I won't read anything of his again!"

But hey, you're probably right - most wouldn't read it anyway

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Remster 24]

Quote

Look at the moon. How many large craters are on it?

A lot.

Now, How many of those are impact craters?

Between that statement and the complete fossil skeleton statements you made, you should really research your data before claiming it was fact .

Edit: I didnt understand your post properly initially about the moom. never mind my response. But the skeletton thing still stands.

Remster

[billvon 2,435]

> All of the conditions are simply not there as a complete group to sustain life.

We've visited two bodies other than earth so far (at least with any level of investigation.) There are billions to go. That conclusion might be a little premature.

>is as far fetched as an invisible entity with unknown power, forming
>and casting everything into a perfect movement across the heavens.

It's far from perfect! Galaxies collide, black holes form from collapsing stars, meteors run into planets . . .

> Look at the moon. How many large craters are on it? It very possibly
>was placed there as a meteor trap to keep the largest ones from reaching
>earth on a regular basis. A space shield of sorts.

The earth has been hit by a lot more meteors than the moon! Heck, barringer crater in arizona was formed only about 25,000 years ago. But when a meteor hits the moon, it creates a crater that stays there forever (or at least until another meteor obliterates it.) On earth, it is eroded away by our weather (which the moon doesn't have.)

> Does the term," the cradle of civilization" mean anything?

It means Iraq nowadays, which is ironic.

>I do not believe that if the idea of God were removed from every
>single mind, that the human race would suddenly become one giant
>happy family.

I agree with you there. They'd find something else to kill each other over after a few years.

>With only the threat of manmade law or personal revenge hanging over
>our heads, the world would decend into chaos very rapidly.

If that were true, then atheists would all be criminals. That's not the case. Indeed, in some areas (the Middle East) it's the religious people causing all the trouble.

[Squeak 17]

Quote

Quote

Look at the moon. How many large craters are on it?

A lot.

Now, How many of those are impact craters?

Between that statement and the complete fossil skeleton statements you made, you should really research your data before claiming it was fact .

Hey come on I said that like 2 pages ago and got slapped by Bill but i think it was the part where i said he show stop interfering with grown up cnversations that got Bills attention, I probably shold not have said that.

You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky)
My Life ROCKS!
How's yours doing?

[Andy9o8 0]

By the way, the "cat giving birth to dogs" story has been debunked by blood tests:

http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/blood-tests-debunk-cat-dog-birth-claim/20061117154009990003?ncid=NWS00010000000001

[kallend 1,651]

Quote

Quote

So, do you believe "the Designer" created all species simultaneously, xor did she wait until her failures became extinct, and then she came back with some better designs?

I believe that he put everything where it belongs, set it in motion, and left it to run its course.

I believe that the Earth is the only sphere amongst the millions or billions out there that sustains any form of life.

There are plenty of them out there that experience surface action, such as volcanic activity, and upheavals.

.

So where did "The Designer" decide to put humans (other than "where they belong") to wait out the Jurassic, Triassic, and Cretacious periods where we don't find any human or primate fossils but we find plenty of now extinct lifeforms? Were they waiting in a volcano for an upheaval?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

I believe that he put everything where it belongs, set it in motion, and left it to run its course.

How do you know that He didn't set it in motion by means of The Big Bang, and that leaving it to run its course means that the development of the universe, and the evolution of life forms, didn't happen the way modern science believes it did?

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

how did Einstein discover that Newton's Laws were "a fraud"?

As previously noted, Newton's "laws" were not discovered to be fraudulent. They were discovered to be incomplete.

But, since you asked:

The Maxwell equations were not invariant when transformed between different inertial frames of reference via Galilean transformations. The Michelson - Morley experiment showed that the speed of light was consistent for an observer regardless of the observer's inertial frame of reference.

Einstein's theory of special relativity was derived from two postulates:

1. The laws of physics are the same in all reference frames.

2. The speed of light in a vacuum is equal to the value of c, independent of the motion of the source.

A master of logic was Al.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!