|
2 registered members (AndrewAMD, Nymphodora),
485
guests, and 3
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Science vs Wack Jobs
[Re: Irish_Farmer]
#69251
01/22/07 13:59
01/22/07 13:59
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
What exactly would you expect to find, in this case? Non-conformity of the ocean floor? Like what we surely find?
A non-conformity as in no subsurface landbridge part that seems to be untouched. There should have been traces of massive erosion there. You would definately find evidence.
The non-conformity you probably are referring to is the higher part of the seabottom compared to both more left and right of that bottom, as if it's a land bridge underwater, right?
Well, imagine the force of those walls of the sea, according to the bible two massive walls and very high. If those come crashing down, that would be very visible on that land part's bottom which lays higher than the surrounding underwater surface. The erosion effect would be like a dam breaking, but instead of a crack becomming a hole, with these sea walls it would be water everywhere comming down and the force would be even stronger.
Quote:
It doesn't have to be extremely windy all the way between the walls of water.
It has to be according to the physics on our earth, apart from that doesn't the bible mention it was wind making the sea walls rise? Thus, you'd need winds that would literally blow people to death for such sea walls to rise. Off course your god can do anything, but according to laws of physics humans would simply die in such an event.
Quote:
There is a lack of physical evidence for other historical events that we accept as true. So, who knows?
Lack of evidence or lack of investigation and research? Sometimes it doesn't take much at all to prove something happened. Still I do agree, there are many events for which physical evidence (probably) lacks. Still, if something isn't presumable then why take it for granted anyway without evidence? If there's no evidence any speculation is quite pointless, unless there's evidence in favor of the opposite.
Quote:
There wouldn't be that big of a difference in speed, and why even send chariots if you're just going to ditch them anyway?
The difference in speed would be huge. Imagine a chariot drive through loose sand with wooden wheels, those would be awefully slow compared to a man on horseback with no extra payload of dragging a chariot through sand. (I know, a beach is probably a bit harder making it easier to ride on).
A little question by the way about what the bible says; they didn't ditch the chariots on purpose did they?
By now I know religion doesn't seem to work by means of logic ór evidence for that matter, honestly something that greatly disturbs me. I'm not saying the things we don't know should always make sense, but I ám saying the things we do know in this respect máke sense just fine. So why ignore the parts we do know in favor of believing in parts we don't know?
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Science vs Wack Jobs
[Re: inFusion]
#69253
01/23/07 04:07
01/23/07 04:07
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771
Bay City, MI
lostclimate
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771
Bay City, MI
|
yes, and i know its not a falsifiable claim to say this, but if you dont know yet, how can you say a higher being with its own system does not exist, also, i just read a little in the beginning of this thread, matt claimed that you cant be considered a true scientist and not believe in darwinist theories, not true, a true scientist would say that if darwin was right, we should be looking for the half monkey, half man, or that there should be a cross between a crocodile and an alligator somewere with a fourth tooth that doesnt extend all the way up, were is the evolutionary gradient?
|
|
|
Re: Science vs Wack Jobs
[Re: lostclimate]
#69254
01/23/07 15:52
01/23/07 15:52
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
If you are looking at the present, you are looking at a lot of branches of evolution (the ends of branches to be more precisely, eventhough they still grow). It's more difficult to see the gradient, especially cross-species. However you can see it in fossils all the time. There are plenty examples of fossils with rudimentary bone structures or other features that they have in common with other species, sometimes even of a different order. We already know a lot about humans to in this respect, hence the claim of apes being our ancestors. Always remember though that at the time of transition (which was infact a gradient itself!) between ape and man, there weren't a lot of us just yet. Finding very old human remains is rare and slows the overall research in this down. That's why once DNA was discovered people looked into DNA differences too. When you have a tree it's very difficult if not impossible to judge his age when all you have is the end of a branche. Evolution is a bit like that, but then we're not after the age, but moreso looking for the stems/roots of a species and it's family ties. This is infact possible. The idea of a 'missing link' only indicates that perhaps the chain should be one link longer instead. It's a bit like wanting to find pure green next to pure yellow, if you wish to find that good luck, because in a (normal color) gradient that's impossible. Quote:
We don't know yet, so we won't make things up like Religion does
If we don't know yet, what they claim could be true if their source is accurate, so they're not necessarily making things up. Eventhough in generally I would definately agree with your comment, because I don't believe the bible can be accurate after such a long time,
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Science vs Wack Jobs
[Re: PHeMoX]
#69255
01/29/07 19:15
01/29/07 19:15
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,011
South Africa
capanno
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,011
South Africa
|
Recently Ive done research about evolution and biology. Its evident that most fascist evolutionists like matt, have no idea what neo darwinism requires, and what the theory teaches. They idolize richard dawkins, who, Im sorry, is a total loon. He's so driven by emotion he cant even asses his evidence critically.
I encourage every neo darwinian to spend time to research what they believe in. Then they will realize why top evolutionists confess that there is no evidence for the modern theory of evolution, or that it doesnt explains what we see today at all. I know this is hard to get your head around, but If you know what the theory teaches youll hopefully realize.
I recommend Dr Lee M Spetner's book, Not by chance. He shows on a molecular-biology level how ridiculous neo darwinism is. And before it gets accused of bias, he is an atheist.
have a nice day!
c
|
|
|
Re: Science vs Wack Jobs
[Re: jcl]
#69257
01/29/07 21:55
01/29/07 21:55
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
Matt_Aufderheide
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,131
|
Quote:
not true, a true scientist would say that if darwin was right, we should be looking for the half monkey, half man, or that there should be a cross between a crocodile and an alligator somewere with a fourth tooth that doesnt extend all the way up, were is the evolutionary gradient?
It constantly amazes me, although i suppose it shouldnt, that poeple who argue about evolution often have absolutely no understanding of it at all.
These poeple have no substantial arguements.
|
|
|
Pepsi vs Coke
[Re: capanno]
#69258
01/29/07 22:20
01/29/07 22:20
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010
analysis paralysis
NITRO777
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010
analysis paralysis
|
Quote:
Recently Ive done research about evolution and biology.
Perhaps you should summarize a few points from your recent reading, I am also interested in what you learned from Spetner's book, as I have not read it yet, I have definitely heard of it.
|
|
|
Re: Pepsi vs Coke
[Re: NITRO777]
#69259
01/29/07 23:10
01/29/07 23:10
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771
Bay City, MI
lostclimate
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,771
Bay City, MI
|
Quote:
It constantly amazes me, although i suppose it shouldnt, that poeple who argue about evolution often have absolutely no understanding of it at all.
These poeple have no substantial arguements.
I will admit i am not the type to study something such as this, but my basic understand of it is that (dependent on which way you follow) either slow adaptations happened over long period of time (through mutation of a genes) or at various times through out the time line there was a large mutations happened, even these large ones should show a lot more of a detailed gradient than there currently is.
|
|
|
Re: Pepsi vs Coke
[Re: lostclimate]
#69260
01/30/07 02:38
01/30/07 02:38
|
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538
WA, Australia
JibbSmart
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,538
WA, Australia
|
Coke  Quote:
Quote:
not true, a true scientist would say that if darwin was right, we should be looking for the half monkey, half man, or that there should be a cross between a crocodile and an alligator somewere with a fourth tooth that doesnt extend all the way up, were is the evolutionary gradient?
It constantly amazes me, although i suppose it shouldnt, that poeple who argue about evolution often have absolutely no understanding of it at all.
These poeple have no substantial arguements.
i usually avoid these sorts of threads because they don't get anywhere. however i was having a lil peek at the latest page and this quote ^^ amused me 
if lostclimate's ignorance is so amazing, matt, maybe u should explain in what way he's wrong? let's see a substantial argument
such a belittling accusation should surely be backed by some hard evidence, coming from an intelligent evolutionist such as yourself
julz
Formerly known as JulzMighty. I made KarBOOM!
|
|
|
|
