Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Sugars can rot your teeth and increase your waistline -- I supposed this could be their retribution.

The answers are coming from science slowly but surely as the facts begin to back up the hypothesis. It won't change many techno-phobes (which covers those afraid of the complexity of electronic gadgets and those with a fear of science). Of course, I still have my love/hate relationship with my laptop -- it gets cantankerous and seems to malevolently screw itself up (like HAL in "2001"). I recently had to reformat the drive, add two new memory modules and replaced the plug-and-play DVD-RW drive.

There's a continuity there someplace between the origin of life forms and sugars rotting our teeth and midriffs. LOL

Yes, let's blame it on the microbe.

You have to have water before you can have clouds.

The water arrived the same way all the other materials arrived, from an accumulation of asteroid debris. The early solar system probably looked like a giant version of Saturn, except with the Sun at it's center. Various bands of the debris disk collapsed into the largest objects within certain orbits, eventually forming the planets. And those planets reflect the relative proportion of the various objects within a particular area of the solar disk. This is why we have hard/rocky worlds near to the Sun and lighter materials farther out (the debris disk was stratified into components reflecting the relative balance of orbital mechanics versus cosmic radiation). This is also another reason why Pluto is not a "planet" in the normal sense of the word, because it probably didn't form by the same processes that formed all the others (as evidenced from it's hard/rocky nature so far from the Sun).

Which explains nothing about the water on earth.

Independent scientists, funded by the government, have found that organic food does you no more good than the cheap capitalist shite and that you have been wasting your money buying it and tarnishing your reputation in the eyes of those you told you were buying it.

There's also a rumour that some more scientists are poised to produce evidence that organic food is harmful. Worse than shite.

So was organic food a science or a religion?

It was a counterrevolutionary movement that placed itself in opposition to conventional agriculture. Like many things of a philosophical nature, its foundations owe more to English literature or the Olympic movement, than either science or religion. (cf Walter E C James, or Robert Rodale).

Both were Olympic finalists and ENglish literature majors and authors. When an author writes something, despite his ignorance of a subject , he or she becomes commited to their own brands of "truth".

Look at the ARts and Crafts movement , or, for that fact, the Fundamentalist Movement in opposition to "modsernism", that one is where a myopic worldview and a huckstering of Biblical Inerrancy, gave rise to a movement for clowns.

That certainly applies to you effemm.

I look at organic food scientifically. There is plenty of evidence in traditional best practice for the thesis that the condition of an animal or plant up to the point of harvesting or slaughter has an effect on the substance of the nutrition.

If one were to slaughter a footballer just at the moment when he scores the winning goal in the last minute of a Champion's League final his flesh would contain an overload of a number of chemicals which would not be in his meat if he was slaughtered when he was creosoting his garden fence. If he was eaten raw there and then the diner would get a dose of those chemicals larger than if his flesh was hung in a freezer for a week and marinaded in a sauce of some sort which you are more qualified than I am to specify.

The grouse are shot in fearful, startled flight and rushed, at great expense, to the tables of financiers in London who operate more ruthlessly when dosed up with fresh fear hormones. The time lapse from kill to digestion is inversely proportional to the dose.

The meat from bull-ring kill commands a high price.

Cattle driven distances in the middle ages were "rested" before slaughter. They are today.

Veal calves are slaughtered in pairs to keep them as calm as possible.

I've heard of plants which when attacked by ants send messages to their fellows which causes the latter to secrete a substance which ants won't touch.

Fruit is supposed to be best when ready to give itself up to be eaten.

And there is Sir J.C. Bose to consider.

How would you define "conventional agriculture" effemm? It is just that sort of loose language use which shocks me so much when I see it on a science thread. Isn't it agriculture designed to produce food at a price which leaves consumers plenty of money to buy other items. The % of incomes spent on food has been going down for a long time. Could industrialisation have taken place without it doing. Are all these big time city slickers merely a natural function of agricultural science. And are not agricultural regions those where the density of your "clowns" is highest and where the density of brilliant scientific geniuses, like your self, writing ignorant unscientific posts such as your's, is lowest.

Otganic food is science. Tried and tested by generations of men according to evolutionary principles which you show evidence of having no proper understanding of?

Is an "energy" drink really an "aggression" drink?

A large number of scientific procedures in agriculture were given a religious sanction because the masses wouldn't have understood the science. The cow in India is made "sacred" to prevent it being exterminated in a famine. It's non meat functions as a draught animal, converter of grass to milk and fuel being seen as a priority. Nobody ate pork when there was an R in the month and some religions don't eat it at all. Had they a scientific reason or were they "clowns" too.

Basically effemm, your tone and manner disqualify you from taking part in a scientific discussion and it is about time you realised it and took steps to do better. You continuously talk as if your audience is stupid.

I wouldn't have eaten a steak off your rump carved shortly after you completed your recent control and equipment fetishist spiel on guns.

The difference tween u and me spendi, I recognize my ignorance while you seem to be oblivious of yours.
Ive been a farmer for about 30 years, whatr your creds? besides enjoying a malt beverage?

Most all of what you just posted is pure bunk and shows how really small your mind is.
"Organic" farming has a point of origin in the 1930's. (There really wasnt any counter revolution until pesticides were invented).
Conventional farming has given us row crops, monoculture, contour plowing, rotation of crops, legume power, applied genetics and only since the 1920's (artificial) ag chemicals.
An English writer coined the word "organic gardening" in the 1930's and Rodale took it to heights in the 1950's.

Science was only late in catching up . I assume you read "pop" lit about the subject because you certainly dont seem to understand the concepts of which you speak. Your attempts at literary "upsmanship" are poor attempts at transferrence-compensation for your own wasted life.

Being criticized by you for things about which you have no idea is irony in extremus.
Like N Korea threatening nuclear armegeddon

Surely I'm not that bad?

Read Fernand Braudel.

He's not oblivious, he just doesn't care. He's not here to make sense, he's here to yank chains, and he's good at it.

Yes that too, but hes often waaay wrong in his information. Being a data kind of guy, I cant let that slip by unmolested. Its sad cause I just peeked into one of his "Multi layered" posts to see what he was all bent out of shape about.

ros, I probably yank spendi's chain as much as he pulls ours, but I don't let his bother me. He's so off base with his propositions, it hardly can be declared dangerous like some others on a2k. He loves to quote the old classic authors which can't be all bad even if misused.

Where was I waaay wrong in my info? I'm into data. And not just that bit which flatters me. I flew a kite on corn production but the data fanatics ignored that. You're anti gaming I read and everybody who doesn't bet knows nothing significant about data.

If I thought you could figure out my multi-layered posts I would multiply the layers.

. So, you admit that communication doesnt play any role in your posts. Ive said that many times and its nice to have you reinforce my hunches.

. Apparently you dont benefit from your association. If I were to search for your errors in logic and information Id be focusing on you more than you warrant. As it is, your just a few scribbles on a screen and since nothing consequential or communication centered is forthcoming soon, I can just snicker , while you say your offices and vespers.

And it's a typical load of bullshit as well. No data to support the assertion.

Which exposes " Being a data kind of guy" for what it is. Effusive mirror talk. And leaves me completely unmolested which exposes "I can't let that slip by unmolested" for what it is.

You have never laid a glove on me effemm and most of the time you have ducked out of even trying. And you're not alone.

Not at all. If my posts don't communicate with you it doesn't mean they don't communicate with anybody. So once again you are gushing at the mirror.

I'm exploring what the senator called the "controversial issues". As you don't recognise there are any it is obvious you won't, or daren't, take part in the debate about them. And the reason the senator left it at that is because they are too controversial to be blurted out for public consumption.

You can say, no doubt will, that the senator was talking out of his arse, look in the mirror and flash yourself a self-satisfied complacent smirk of superiority and remain forever in the dark. As well you might as a "data kind of guy".

It was wande who quoted the senator and I am the only one who has ever referred to his remark. But then I'm talking out of my arse too I would imagine. You lot put him on ignore. Your scientific curiosity doesn't run to wondering what he meant.

What a load of fanny.

I posted this on the "vagrant gypsy life" thread but it has some relevance here as well. I had been giving effemm's ocean going exploits a bit of grief.

T
K
O