US views on evolution

Post Reply New Topic

Beneficil, I hope you mean 'worries' and not 'fantasies'?

Can't tell the difference.

something you fantasize about is usually something you are wishing would happen.

Whenever the subject of creationism vs. evolution resurfaces, I'm always reminded of this clip from the movie Gettysburg:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFc3DDTPXXo[/youtube]

I actually remember that scene quite well.
Though I hadn't realized just how phoney Tom Berenger's beard looked.

Sometimes I feel the American people in general deserve hell from above for all our crimes.

I was just reading this article here about our constant deliberate indifference when it comes to prison rape:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rodney-sm ... _hp_ref=tw

I also saw this comment:



I do notice that the vulnerable victim is often the one placed in solitary while the predators get to go back to the general population and live it up, while waiting for new vulnerable victims to arrive; the cycle will then repeat itself. The victims all get to stare at a wall for 23 hours a day for months on end.

But of course they all deserve it, say many sick-minded Americans.

I don't think the country as it is is worth much fighting for.

I just read that Huffington Post link, and that's truly horrific and heartrending.

We share a common ancestor, with chimps, from five million years ago. We share a common ancestor with Neanderthal, from 600,000 years ago, and Africans share the first, but not the second. While we do share a common ancestor with Africa, it was over 600,000 years ago.

Chimps have had just as much time as we have to evolve. An equal start, an equal amount of time, and they are fur covered poop slingers. evolution exists, results vary, Chimps have the status of Bush Meat.

There were forks in the road, various blends of DNA, and all roads do not lead to the same place. There is no catching up, no do overs, no shortcuts, and chimps will continue on their path.

As Jared Diamond points out in The Third Chimpanzee, Bonomos split from chimps, we from them, and we still have a lot of common behaviors. We define ourselves by how we differ from Bonomos. It is a short list.

They may pick up a rock or stick, we made sharp points, and always carried something. We left Africa, Bonomos stayed behind. Everyone out of Africa is different, and those who went north, became part neanderthal, something not found in East Asia, India, Africa.

Evolution is Genetic and Cultural.

What I had hoped to discover on this thread was what the other side thought about Evolution.

Nothing yet, just name calling. Nothing that will change my view based on a lifetime of study, of Genetics, Geology, Anthropology, and History.

Just a Bonomophobe, Nazi, with the sharpened stick of knowledge.

Our two points of disagreement seem to be over mud evolving into DNA, and the gods breeding with some humans.

Science has agreed that life did not start here. Panspermia, that life came from somewhere else, and that DNA is too complex to have ever started anywhere by accident.

While the later gods, those of the Greeks and Romans, do seem made up, and useless, the Elder Gods were written of by the Sumarians and the Egyptians as very wise, and teachers of mankind, at least some of them. All of the old stories say they had children with the daughters of man, and created man in their own image.

There are two waves of contact, first when humans were formed, 125,000 years ago, at the start of a long ice age, and again 15,500 years ago at the end of the last ice age. Some were human forms, some were talking fish, who returned to the sea each night. Marduk had a companion who was a talking serpent with legs.

The Jewish Book is a very good record, that perserved stories only recently found and translated from the Sumarian. They alone kept the story, when it had been lost to all. Nothing in the Sumarian disagrees.

The gods were good to us, set us on a better path, and they will return.

Billions and Billions of worlds, just in the Milky Way,

Do not look down at the dirt beneath your feet, look up, at the stars.

I'm unclear about what you mean by "While we do share a common ancestor with Africa, it was over 600,000 years ago."
I ask, because we (I presume you mean Caucasians) can intermarry with Africans, and produce viable offspring. Therefore we are absolutely the very same species, and any differences between the races is merely skin deep.

We bred with the neanderthal, after almost 600,000 years apart. We cannot breed with Bonomos, after five million years. Divergence takes time, to become a seperate species, but after a half million years, neanderthal were different. More than skin deep different.

My point is, we will continue developing down different paths. At some point we could become seperate species.

New breeds are being produced. African Americans are the only sub species who are growing larger brains.

If they got it from breeding with whites, it would have been a one time event. If it is from surviving, plus a richer culture, it is a cultural event. The food is better, but whites are not growing larger brains.

Evolution has not stopped, but it is slow.

For now, we are all Bonomos, except for the Bonomos.

And he got the order wrong too: white people are descended from Africans.

There are no "subspecies" of Homo sapiens. There aren't even 'races,' biologically; we're just not different enough from each other.

At the risk of sounding condescending, you do know that whites and blacks are the same species of humans, don't you?

I would not think Republicans changed so fast, I might be the increase of those identifying as Independent has caused the appearance that more Republicans have the creationist view when it would be more accurate to say the remaining Republicans.

The reason this is so important is it has to do with the peddlers of religion's authority. If religious authority is considered questionable you can also question other religious guilt and fear manipulations. This is not good for the religion business.

At one time the official church view was the earth was the center of the universe. The science of celestial mechanics showed this was not true. Today it really matters little if you have an accurate understanding of celestial mechanics unless your building a GPS system or launching a probe to Mars. Today it is a non issue with religion.

Evolution as a scientific principle is far more important.
If you working for an oil company as a geologist you must have an accurate model of how the earth evolved to find the oil. Creationist don't have a chance.

Evolution as a principle is highly useful to virtually all fields of science.
Historically religion has tried to squash good science as they feared (accurately so!) it would undermine their authority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_Libr ... ohibitorum

Religion will never go away it will evolve and adapt as it always has or go extinct.

Last edited by DoodleDoo on 03 Jan 2014, 1:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

How many Republicans have left the fold since the Conservative dull wits hijacked the party?

The Independent voters are the only hope for the country.

ruveyn

You must have missed when I pointed out that several of your more outlandish claims were outright wrong...

You cannot extrapolate to a human by looking at the "junk DNA" of a prokaryote. Carsonella rudii has 160,000 base pairs of DNA (including coding and non-coding DNA). Homo sapiens has 3 billion base pairs. 2% of that is coding- still much more than the entirety of C. rudii's genome.
Humans are not descended from pigs. The genetic evidence is that our closest relatives are chimpanzees and bonobos, then gorillas, then orangutans. After a bit of a leap, we reach gibbons; a further leap brings us to Old World monkeys, then New World monkeys, then lemurs, then other primates. Next are Tree shrews and Colugos. After them, rabbits and rodents. We then have Laurasiatheria, to which pigs belong... along with cetaceans, cats and dogs, horses, bats, pangolins, giraffes, seals, bears, hippopotamuses, and hedgehogs.
Darwin did not change his views based on the threat of execution at the hands of Queen Victoria.
Catastrophism is not correct (whilst big events do impact the world, gradual change generally has a bigger impact- the extinction events were of course massive, but they didn't form the oceans or mountains).
Modern scientists tend not to cite Darwin, rather the findings that have corroborated his theories.



That is not true. There is some speculation that life might have come to Earth on a meteorite. However, the current dominant scientific view is that abiogenesis occurred on Earth.

It is also not true that DNA is too complex to have "started anywhere by accident". Currently, our best understanding (supported by some laboratory work) is that nucleic acids formed essentially by accident (though really we can point to complex chemistry that I won't go into here), and from there they formed RNA. Moving from single-stranded RNA to double stranded DNA isn't a huge jump.

I'm less convinced by the speculation as to how functioning ribosomes formed, but I have confidence we'll find it soon- our knowledge in this area is exploding at an incredible rate that I'm not sure I've got my head around yet.

You can believe that if you like, but it is no more sensible than believing in Santa or Dumbledore. There are lots of stories about those two people, and only minimal contradiction.