@spendius,
Stop it, your making me laugh!
The simple is impossible and the impossible is simple. That is the core of modern thinkers.
@spendius,
Quote: I'm a fan of non-linear, infinitely directional, exponential, surdistic, indefinite integral calculus.
The difference tween you and I is that I can actually do something with it.
@NoOne phil,
Quote: I am from a distant planet
Ill bet the cumulative IQ of "the distant planet" rose several tens of points when you left.
@farmerman,
Quote:The difference tween you and I is that I can actually do something with it.
Good. I like people who can do things. It comes in handy quite often and the downside is easily managed.
@NoOne phil,
NoOne phil wrote:
I just feel that non-relevent arguments, pro or con for any idea, just abound way too often in discoure.
What argument was being made? I wasn't aware the quote made any argument.
NoOne phil wrote:
What does it matter how a thing came to be, if that thing can not even do its own job, for example, man, us, who cannot even think.
What?
NoOne phil wrote:
Where does one find a toaster that spends more time wondering who constructed it more than if the damn thing makes toast or not?
So a toaster has a specific purpose... okay. I'll buy that. Never mind that I can find additional uses for it. For your... uh... analogy... to work you must then be able to describe what human's purpose is in a similar way.
Good luck.
NoOne phil wrote:
Dont you think it is rather odd how people can do so little, understand so little, but they sure and the hell can tell you all about cosmology?
I suppose then if you don't know the technical specifics of how a computer works, you're incapable of telling anyone that you can type a word document on one.
NoOne phil wrote:
Don't you find that to be the actual Cosmic Joke?
More like a local punchline.
A
R
T
@failures art,
"
I can find additional uses for it."
T he whole "subjective" "objective" thingy is a little fuzzy in your mind?
"What argument was being made?
I wasn't aware the quote made any argument."
This is all you had to write--and exactly what I said.
@NoOne phil,
Your post isn't legible.
What about the concept of the natural universe being worth greater awe than human mythology is so threatening to you?
A
R
T
@NoOne phil,
Your posts would be more understandable if you used the quote function rather than quotation marks.
Mutations 2
Rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost all observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless; many are lethal (b).
b. “The process of mutation is the only known source of the raw materials of genetic variability, and hence of evolution....the mutants which arise are, with rare exceptions, deleterious to their carriers, at least in the environments which the species normally encounters.” Theodosius Dobzhansky, “On Methods of Evolutionary Biology and Anthropology,” American Scientist, December 1957, p. 385.
“In molecular biology, various kinds of mutations introduce the equivalent of noise pollution of the original instructive message. Communication theory goes to extraordinary lengths to prevent noise pollution of signals of all kinds. Given this longstanding struggle against noise contamination of meaningful algorithmic messages, it seems curious that the central paradigm of biology today attributes genomic messages themselves solely to noise.” David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors, “Three Subsets of Sequence Complexity and Their Relevance to Biopolymeric Information,” Theoretical Biology & Medical Modelling, Vol. 2, 11 August 2005, p. 10.
“Accordingly, mutations are more than just sudden changes in heredity; they also affect viability, and, to the best of our knowledge, invariably affect it adversely.” C. P. Martin, “A Non-Geneticist Looks at Evolution,” American Scientist, January 1953, p. 102.
“Mutation does produce hereditary changes, but the mass of evidence shows that all, or almost all, known mutations are unmistakably pathological and the few remaining ones are highly suspect.” Ibid. p. 103.
“[Although mutations have produced some desirable breeds of animals and plants,] all mutations seem to be in the nature of injuries that, to some extent, impair the fertility and viability of the affected organisms. I doubt if among the many thousands of known mutant types one can be found which is superior to the wild type in its normal environment, only very few can be named which are superior to the wild type in a strange environment.” Ibid. p. 100.
“If we say that it is only by chance that they [mutations] are useful, we are still speaking too leniently. In general, they are useless, detrimental, or lethal.” W. R. Thompson, “Introduction to The Origin of Species,” Everyman Library No. 811 (New York: E. P. Dutton & Sons, 1956; reprint, Sussex, England: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1967), p. 10.
[continue]
[From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown
Edit [Moderator]: Link removed]
@Pahu,
Hey idiot child, why don't you post your bullshit in the threads about evolution, and not here. I suspect you're afraid of the response you'd get.
@Pahu,
Mutation is not about "beneficial" to any organism. It's about survival. Many mutations are bad for health and life.
@Pahu,
Nobody this is aimed at even reads this ****, pahu. Go to some other thread instead of being a jerk.
@Pahu,
Don't worry Pahu. These guys are so thick that they haven't worked out yet, after all this time, that what they say doesn't even go in one ear so it can't go out of the other.
If it was to cause an effect, however slight, it would prove the magic of words. So they can't want it to have any effect because they don't believe in magic.
@spendius,
spendi, Read your post, and look in the mirror; it's a perfect reflection of your opinion. You're not only "thick," but the fact is you'll "never get it."
@Pahu,
Pahu wrote: “Accordingly, mutations are more than just sudden changes in heredity; they also affect viability, and, to the best of our knowledge, invariably affect it adversely.” C. P. Martin, “A Non-Geneticist Looks at Evolution,” American Scientist, January 1953, p. 102.
"A Non-Geneticist" from 1953... why didn't he just write a book called, "here's my stupid uninformed opinion". Sheesh.
It is an educational experience to dwell and meditate upon the last three posts above. Their meaning might escape you if you let them fly by.
@spendius,
We all know it has escaped you, and it flew over the coocoo's nest.
@cicerone imposter,
Keep it up ci. It's a good thing that the intellectual capacities of atheists are displayed so that those thinking of becoming atheists can see what they might aspire to become.
@spendius,
Atheist only means we don't believe in any god. Any other issue you may wish to apply to atheists are nonsensical and foolish attempts at pseudo intellectual pursuit.
You would be better entertained at your local pub with that kind of foolishness.
