61
   

Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 10:16 pm
@spendius,
spendi, Since you continue to show your ignorance about evolution, what this tells us is that human development was a slow and long process. We branched out from the primates (monkeys) to what we are today.

The following is taken from the Smithsonian website:
Quote:

Evolutionary Tree Information:

Fossils and DNA confirm humans are one of more than 200 species belonging to primates. Within that larger group, humans are nested within the great ape family. Although we did not evolve from any of the apes living today, we share characteristics with chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans (the great apes), as well as other apes. We most likely evolved from Homo heidelbergensis, the common ancestor we share with Neanderthals, who are our closest extinct relatives.
cicerone imposter
 
  3  
Reply Mon 16 Aug, 2010 10:22 pm
@cicerone imposter,
spend, It was not Adam and Eve that started the Homo Sapiens. The bible is a comic book written by humans who had no understanding of anthropology, genealogy, or paleontology.

Here's the explanation of human evolution from Wiki:
Quote:
Human evolution
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the general evolution of humans. For a timeline see Timeline of human evolution.

Human evolution, or anthropogenesis, is the origin and evolution of Homo sapiens as a distinct species from other hominids, great apes and placental mammals. The study of human evolution encompasses many scientific disciplines, including physical anthropology, primatology, archaeology, linguistics and genetics.[1]

The term "human" in the context of human evolution refers to the genus Homo, but studies of human evolution usually include other hominids, such as the Australopithecines, from which the genus Homo had diverged by about 2.3 to 2.4 million years ago in Africa.[2][3] Scientists have estimated that humans branched off from their common ancestor with chimpanzees about 5–7 million years ago. Several species and subspecies of Homo evolved and are now extinct. These include Homo erectus, which inhabited Asia, and Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, which inhabited Europe. Archaic Homo sapiens evolved between 400,000 and 250,000 years ago.


0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 11:35 am
ci, wrote this on another thread--

Quote:
Most in the animal kingdom practice homosexuality. That tells me, it's normal animal behavior.


Will our other anti-IDers confirm or deny that that is a position of anti-ID. It is a central position. Is anything moreso.

wande?? farmrman?? Anybody else??
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 11:36 am
@spendius,
spendi, I posted this earlier, but I'll post it again from the National Geographic:
Quote:
But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.


Try to refute that statement if you can.
MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 11:56 am
plus chimps and bonobos.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I don't need to refute it. My eyes tell me its bullshit. I grew up on farms. Evolution theory says its bullshit. And the usage "not unknown" is an admission of bullshit. As is the usage " are discovering".

I am talking about orgasm. The NG has to keep in with its left wing followers. It's pop science run as a business. It doesn't want to alienate any readers.

Which same-sex birds? Which sheep.

Anyway, lets see what your pals have to say.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:02 pm
@MontereyJack,
Give us the evidence Jack.
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:03 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

spendi, I posted this earlier, but I'll post it again from the National Geographic:
Quote:
But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.


Try to refute that statement if you can.

I have read on homosexual acts of animals as far back as the 1950s. Some animals also attempt cross species sex.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:04 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

I don't need to refute it. My eyes tell me its bullshit. I grew up on farms. Evolution theory says its bullshit. And the usage "not unknown" is an admission of bullshit. As is the usage " are discovering".

I am talking about orgasm. The NG has to keep in with its left wing followers. It's pop science run as a business. It doesn't want to alienate any readers.

Which same-sex birds? Which sheep.

Anyway, lets see what your pals have to say.


Ah, the 'I've never seen it' theory of science.

You've retreated to the last redoubt of the total fool, Spendi. ******* Idiotic.

Cycloptichorn
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:04 pm
@spendius,
I don't recall Darwin ever mentioning it. I've read Origins twice and also dip into it from time to time. I may have missed it but I doubt it.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:06 pm
@spendius,
spendi, Your skill at comprehending the English language is at grade level or worse. You challenge issues without providing any evidence; just your bull shite.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:07 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I've obviously got you rattled Cyclo. You're showing signs of "resistance" if you know what that is. Which I doubt.

Resistance analysis is a standard procedure in psychiatry, psychology and bar conversations.
MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:08 pm
Wikipedia on bonobos
Quote:
The reason Bonobos are perceived to be a matriarchal species is that females tend to collectively dominate males and commonly engages in casual sexual activity, as well as significant homosexual contact.[10][11]
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:09 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

I've obviously got you rattled Cyclo. You're showing signs of "resistance" if you know what that is. Which I doubt.

Resistance analysis is a standard procedure in psychiatry, psychology and bar conversations.


Standard procedure in modern psychiatry? How would you know? You disdain all modern psychiatry, because it tells you the opposite of what you claim is true.

Cycloptichorn
rosborne979
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:11 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
I have read on homosexual acts of animals as far back as the 1950s. Some animals also attempt cross species sex.

Those perverts.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:11 pm
@edgarblythe,
Look Ed--you having read of that is neither here nor there. I've read that Americans are infants with grown bodies. I didn't take it to be true because I have read it.

Quote:
Some animals also attempt cross species sex.


Yeah--humans. And they are "some animals". What others. What is "sex" Ed?
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:11 pm
Coper at al, International Journal of Primatology:
Quote:
Homosexual behavior is defined as genital contact, genital manipulation or both between same-sex individuals. Available data indicate that this behavior is phylogenetically widespread among the anthropoid primates, but totally absent among prosimians. The majority of the 33 species that demonstrate homosexual behavior do so rarefy, but for a substantial number (N =12) it appears to be a more common pattern under free-ranging conditions. I summarize data on homosexual behavior as it relates to form, living condition, age, sex, social organization, and ecological context, and discuss hormonal, demographic, and sociosexual theories for primate homosexual behavior. Among adult primates, the behavior is not the product of abnormal excesses or deficiencies in androgens. Prenatal excesses of androgens may have some effect on the expression of female homosexual behavior, but these effects might vary over the life span, and data are equivocal at present. Demographic processes that result in skewed sex ratios can favor the expression of homosexual behavior in a population, which causes intraspecific variation. I examine several sociosexual explanations, including (a) proceptivity enhancement, (b) receptivity reduction, (c) dominance assertion, (d) practice for heterosexual copulation, (e) tension regulation, (f) reconciliation, and (g) alliance formation. An evolutionary scenario highlights the transformations this behavior underwent during the evolution of the anthropoid primates. I suggest exaptation as a theoretical framework for interpreting homosexual behavior and conclude that future consideration of sexual selection among primates should address homosexual components of this process.
spendius
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:17 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Ah, the 'I've never seen it' theory of science.


Sure--what else is there. I've never seen aliens or flying saucers. I've never seen action at a distance. Your baby argument could be used to defend both of those. And underground cities on Uranus.

I've seen thousands of animals, maybe hundreds of thousands, in the wild and domesticated. I gave two other reasons as well.

MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:19 pm
Ever had your leg humped by a male dog, Spendius? You know they find you atractive.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Tue 17 Aug, 2010 12:21 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

Quote:
Ah, the 'I've never seen it' theory of science.


Sure--what else is there. I've never seen aliens or flying saucers. I've never seen action at a distance. Your baby argument could be used to defend both of those. And underground cities on Uranus.


No, it couldn't. You have no understanding of what you are speaking of at all. Trying to equate observed science with Black Swan arguments is a logical fallacy - which you probably aren't even smart enough to understand.

Quote:
I've seen thousands of animals, maybe hundreds of thousands, in the wild and domesticated. I gave two other reasons as well.


You haven't seen hundreds of thousands of animals, wild or domestic. I guarantee. I see that wild exaggeration is one of your fortes as well as scientific ignorance.

You are the pre-eminent anti-intellectual, Spendi - foolish and cocksure, with no regard to how lowly you are seen in the eyes of nearly everyone here. The only ones who like your posts are those who are convinced that you're taking a piss at everyone else constantly - even they don't believe that someone could be so seriously stupid.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.16 seconds on 11/23/2024 at 08:41:54