Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

@farmerman,

Bloody hell fm. You're not serious surely. Separate universes, pizzas, not an egg unless, presumably, it's not an omlette, the outer reaches sending us info, seemingly shifted, in the shape of a "singularity", like a jam butty maybe, if only to avoid mixing metaphors, apparent shear planes, possible occurences, quite nicely, quite valuable, contaminants of our planet, seemed to follow, try to fit, (that's fundamental Lamarkianism), 7 pulses of life, several decent working hypotheses, the Christian one working the best of course, obviously.

I can understand why some Americans think that their educational system is pooped if you are allowed to have any influence on it.

Someone asked you to define gobshite the other day. If they ask you again refer them to that post.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Had you been snorting kinnikinic in purified form.

1 Reply

@spendius,

what parts are you unable to understand spendi? and dont call me Shirley

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The point.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
It stands to reason that evolution has always been with us. We just didn't always know it. You are confusing theory with history.

You're confusing communication with typing words Ed. We know that what has always been with us has always been with us. Calling what has always been with us "evolution" is a circularity. If what has always been with us is labelled "evolution" then obviously evolution has always been with us. Your statement says nothing.

Read the post I responded to and my words make sense.
And calling what Darwin said was "evolution" is only 150 years old. What has always been with us is what the point of the argument is all about. Some don't think that what has always been with us is defined by how you are using the word "evolution". Or by how Darwin used it. Or by how Darwin's followers use it.
That's only your personal assertion. Not worth a holler down an empty tunnel.
Hitler is reported by authoritative sources to have included mental defectives and those whose ways of life he considered unfit, such as gypsies, in his cull. In which case cheesey is correct. Evolution theory has no argument with Hitler's methods, and those of his followers, relating to culling, sterilisation and eugenic experiments. Or none that I can see.
Evolution theory has no argument with Michaelangelo painting ceilings and Farmer Brown growing corn, either.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

Read the post I responded to and my words make sense.

I'm well aware Ed that people making circular arguments using interchangeable terms are not aware that they are doing it. Even editorials in posh newspapers sometimes engage in the tactic. It can be hard to spot but it wasn't in the example you provided.

Quote:

That's only your personal assertion. Not worth a holler down an empty tunnel.

It wasn't even my assertion. In your home state most of the population, I gather, don't accept evolution as being what has always been with us. They are the "some" I referred to. What I said didn't include me.

Quote:

Evolution theory has no argument with Michaelangelo painting ceilings and Farmer Brown growing corn, either.

It has no explanation for them. Both are forms of art. Artifice.

BTW--Emily Bishop just said on the No 1 soap in the UK, Coronation Street, that "some people think that society would collapse in 24 hours if people told the plain unvarnished truth." She paused and then said, "I wouldn't give it that long myself."

1 Reply

@spendius,

My words were straightforward truth. The only circular thing is your rhetoric.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

I showed your statements earlier to be circular Ed. Show me that mine are. These assertions are not arguments.

Quote:

My words were straightforward truth. The only circular thing is your rhetoric.

Both those sentences are circular. One stoppers too.

And btw--not all A2kers are "empty tunnels".

0 Replies

not all A2kers are "empty tunnels

I give you three guess which ones are.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

You admitted to being Ed. Are you not aware of that?

0 Replies

Endless word games. Give us a break.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Okay . Count to ten.

0 Replies

Spendius -- You are a tiresome little git. As my 86 year old father would say, what skin off your nose is . . . evolution?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

A Membreane "brane" is the outer surface of a separate univers

That is one hypothesis .....it is not widely accepted as there are other versions. That is only one type of brane that has been suggested. Branes are more integrated into string theory.

Quote:

knowing about the very evidence that immediately begins leaving its footprint a few tenths of a second after the Big Bang, needs only a definition of what the neighborhood looked like a few seconds before.

Incorrect. We are not talking about an explosion where the constituents were there before. We are talking about NOTHING was there before. How do we extrapolate nothing ?

Quote:

Im not so quick to diosmiss all the evidence we have to date.

You are confusing theory and facts. We have only mathematical modelling evidence of what the universe was like AFTER the big bang.

Quote:

Our Universe, (Like the bazillions of galaxies) is shaped like a pizza, not an egg (indicating a series of limited directional forces (Or a surface of contact between two branes)

Are you saying the universe is dead flat and does not have the distortion due to gravity that was expected ? If that is what pizzas and eggs mean I agree.

Quote:

Our universe is sending us scads of radio data that is directional and seemingly shifted toward the blue at outer reaches.

Radio data is omni-directional by its very nature. When you say blue shift do you mean as in gravity shifted red ?

Quote:

weve created maps of the shape of a "singularity"

We've created maps of temperature differences. There is no shape to a singularity (infinite mass).

Quote:

Spectra from the various elements occur in a series of apparent shear planes indicating the possible occurence of sevral pulses of inflation, where each one forms heaviewr elements

Heavier elements are formed in the death of first generation stars. To what shear planes are you referring ?

3 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

We have only mathematical modelling evidence of what the universe was like AFTER the big bang.

incorrect. All the following measurements are evidence, measurable with equipment. Math modelling need not apply.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Ionus wrote:

Quote:
Incorrect. We are not talking about an explosion where the constituents were there before. We are talking about NOTHING was there before. How do we extrapolate nothing ?

yes, Where did the very thing start How did the two elements [hydrogen & helium] that made up the original BB come from? I know this is the next steps for scientists to decipher. no one knows this answer yet.

0 Replies

I thought this thread was about Evolution... not cosmology...

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

All the following measurements are evidence, measurable with equipment. Math modelling need not apply.

What following measurements ? Are you aware of why the CERN was built ? It was because we had no measurements, no real data below the size of an quark.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Quote:

Spendius -- You are a tiresome little git. As my 86 year old father would say, what skin off your nose is . . . evolution?

I'm a six footer mate.

I like being tiresome.

And the whole point of my input is that evolution is no skin off anybody's nose. The threads about it are nothing to do with evolution. They are to do with undermining the Christian religion or trying to pose as scientific or being tiresome or trying to bring back the matriarchy or giving a leg up to Commies and the Taliban.

I'll bet money that all the "evolutionists" ('scuse me while I have an ahemming session) are connected up personally to the well known sexual peccadillos which the Christian religion deplores. Pre-marital sex, abortion, adultery, divorce, birth control and homosexuality.

I consider all of those are de-stabilising to society and that the Christian religion deplores them for that very reason and for no other reason. Nothing to do with dogma. The dogma derives from the study of de-stabilising factors. And a de-stabilising influences are skin off my nose.

It's no skin off my nose that the earth is round or that it goes around the sun or that the sun is only one of an infinite number of suns or that it all got started with a bang.

Try your witty one liners on those who don't know how utterly silly they are.

1 Reply

I'll bet money that all the "evolutionists" ('scuse me while I have a ahemming session) are connected up personally to the well known sexual peccadillos which the Christian religion deplores. Pre-marital sex, abortion, adultery, divorce, birth control and homosexuality.

The Christian religion might deplore, but Christians are as guilty of those at I would guess the same ratio. What a load of bullshit to use in justification of pushing willful ignorance.

1 Reply

Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know