Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Farmer quote:


More evidence of inverted thinking. Or maybe I was wrong about that.

well you are certainly free to think what you will. I think I ill have another joint.

Don't fear the reefer.

last timeI hard "Reefer" was when my Dad said it.

Laddy uses genetics in only one focus point. Think about it, weve seen evidence from galaxies almost 4 BILLION light years away where we see the spectra of the entire classes of pyrimidines and purines , and COOH; (Fatty acis, sters, Cooh Polymrs etc)yet we dont see anything of advanced organic biochem struturs , lik RNA, DNA , riboosomal points unti the :grt oxygenation event)
Leaddy has the pony leding the horse, and he totally misses the environments of change (Because they dint support his worldview)
Hes a rookie at genetics and paleosciences, evolutioen etc. Hes onlly interested in one time point, to hell with the rest.

That's why I quit following leadfoot's posts. Ridiculous.

Here's one for you.

Do you think need can push evolution.

Instead of happening over millennium through random mutation.
That the mutation could be influenced by necessity (don't ask me how) and so evolution could be happening at a quicker rate than thought.

I'm assuming somebody has suggested and probably disproved this before but I could find nothing on the web.

You are making an assumption though.

That the stars are really as other people say they are.

Suppose I am God, and I create a terrarium in order that souls evolve and reincarnate through a cycle of birth, aging, death, afterlife, and rebirth until they are able to develop to the point where they escape this world and become ascendant beings. A spiritual evolution plan to match the physical evolution plan. Unfortunately, if they know I am watching them, my plan will not proceed, because they will become distracted instead with worshiping me (yup, all those who worship God are unevolved by this rationale). And so I create a blue screen.

I swap out stock images for a sunny day...

For a Starry Night...

And so on.

The rain, wind, and snow are simply special effects.

Btw, the average human can only see a few miles even on a sunny day. Even on Everest, the furthest we can see is about 336 km. This is not due to "curvature" (which does not exist, because the curvature supposedly happens at about five km or 3.1 miles, but even from 5 meters up, real distance is 8 km according to this calculator, and I've been on mountains and seen distant mountains, as it would be on a flat nonmoving illusory Earth) but that our horizon creates a natural screen against further vision.

I am nearsighted. I find it completely absurd that I can barely see leaves on a tree (a giant Sequoia for that matter) from a couple hundred feet

yet somehow we can see these from light years away.


The only solution to this obvious visual discrepancy is that we are looking at a parallax. A blue screen.

Supposedly, these stars are years displaced from our sight, and some have actually burned out by the time we see them. That's a load of crap. We've looked at these same stars since the beginnings of human history. We would have noticed a difference by now, if they were long since dead.

2.5 million light years is supposedly how far away we can see. But my eyes cannot see fine detail on a tree less than one mile away. Only that it is green, has leaves and branches, but I certainly cannot see the veins of leaves on such trees from more than maybe 50 ft away. How then can I see 2.5 million light years (about 23 quintillion miles)?
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20150727-what-are-the-limits-of-human-vision

you may continue your self-abuse I wont dime you.


See, theres yer problem. You failed math from K-12

I have this major limitation. I try to speak about things of which I have a working knowledge. Apparently you dont have that limitation

With me it's more like...

...but when I tell it to other people it's like they only hear part of the explanation.

You are under the impression that human history is only since about 6000 BC. Been listening to those crappy Muslims again and their skewed history, right?

Actually humans are about 6 million years old.
https://nineplanets.org/questions/how-long-have-humans-been-on-earth/
So at least some old tales should talk about stars that are no longer around with a 2.5 million light year diff, and us being around 2 million light years. To my knowledge in all this time, we have zero records including cave art that show any stars going nova.

Let's do simpler math. Here's one that alot of leftists fail at. I have two cars. One is a gas car has good gas mileage, going 60 miles to the gallon, with 12 total gallons (fillup time: roughly 15-30 minutes). The other is an electric car that goes 200 miles before fillup (wowee! That's about a four hour round trip) after which it will take anywhere from 8 to 20+ hours to recharge. Which is more practical? Yes, yes, I know. "I can recharge at overnight at home." But you're not near home. You've gone to another town, and risk getting stuck at a gas station for the night.
You see, when you accuse me of not getting simple math, I point out that most of your ilk chooses three hours of driving with 13ish hours of charging, over nearly eight hours of driving with 15 minutes of filling, because they see smoke and think the former is more eco-friendly. Is it though? How much energy gets used for hours of plugging?

Obviously, from your above statement YOU are the one who dosnt listen . Show me where I said anything like that?
Tell me, what was the human LUCA and its estemated date of occurence

It is called inference. Or is it insight? Regardless.

The ability of an intelligent person to trace information backward to its source.

For example, if you said something like, "There are no heroes. Nobody ever comes to rescue anyone." But heroes came to rescue my brother, sister, and entire family so that isn't true. Using my (I guess it is insight, inference is something detectives do), I ask, "They never came to save you, did they? You were left all alone." You'd likewise tell me that you never said that, and where did I get such an opinion. The ability of insight is a subset of empathy ( or was it sympathy), the ability to feel for others and put yourself in their perspective.

It's not 100% accurate, but you are able to connect the dots of a conversation, you can come to so pretty interesting observations. You didn't say it. You didn't have to. It seems about 80% likely you meant it. There's still that pesty 20% though.

So how did I get that from your crappy insults? Well it's because you are obviously debating my previous point and not just talking trash to me. See? Totally accurate.

I was asking your opinion for the name of the Last Common Ancstor of our species. You emed to be lacking the scholarship so Im using a mild bit of peripatetic analysis as you wander all over the place. Cn you perhaps expand your bases for your opinion??

Ill be back this PM nd will look in

the fact i you sound a lot like Ledfoot who is famous for :making up" and assigning some silly personal unrstandings of what you think others have said. I actually think you make up stuff and announce that I (or anyone else) had said an you know your just engaging in preaching "alternate facts and unerstandings" (we call that BS and lying in a more argot sense unique to you alone)

Other words
'If ya aint got nothin to add just STFU"

"Don' Fear The Reefer"?

Just when I think, 'this guy's, perhaps, worthy of a response'.

Your ego types provacative bollux.

Nevertheless
Have a splendid Sojourn.

Damn those Sodomites (Atlanteans)

I you?

Well, you said I first, so you really mean that you do.

I do not care about being worthy of a response.

But responding to my posts with "Well, you suck" is about as weak as it gets.

See, arguments are meant to be like this:
Person 1: I believe that X is the case. (Reason, Reason, Reason)
Person 2: No, Y is the case (Reasons)
Person 1: Objection (Find Contradiction)

Watch how they do it on debate.org

You just went all
Me: I believe Z is the case (Reasons)
You: Your mom.

On me.