65
   

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

 
 
Lightwizard
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 11:02 am
@Lightwizard,
I didn't mean to leave out the planets in the Solar System as also being the points of light. The whole phenomena of light at the time was unexplainable. There was also no concept of how far away the planets and stars actually were including our sun and moon and that's a reason to imagine something without any help from a heavenly voice.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 03:28 pm
@Lightwizard,
Quote:
Then Constantine summoned a panel of experts (a committee of those who represented themselves as authorities on the subject) to play editor of all these writings, tossing most of them away in favor of those who, put together, made a book about as coherent as something written by a group of inmates in an asylum.


But that is a mere set of assertions. Saying that it was written by a group of inmates in an asylum does not mean it actually was written by inmates in an asylum. It was actually written by the best minds of the time and was revised constantly by other best minds of their time.

When one rejects the claims of religion because they limit scientific and artistic perceptions it is necessary to also reject other institutions which do the same. The family and the state for example. To single out religion suggests a certain wilfulness and subjectivity. The principle is lost.

All that is left is special pleading. Probably for the relief from the sexual discipline of religious teachings.

And it is not just religion which condems homosexuality in males, abortion and birth control. Evolution itself condems them by them being non-existent in the whole of it's range. Polygyny is an evolutionary principle. So is inequality.

Surely then, a society which condones male homosexuality, abortion and birth control and insists upon monogamy and holds equality as a supreme virtue doesn't want proof of evolution. Evolutionary principles undermine it at every turn.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 03:44 pm
@Lightwizard,
incident v reflected light. Its natures earliest time clock. When the speed of light was cleverly determined back in the 1600's, everyone got the idea that "the farther away, the longer the light is travelling". Seems like no big deal today. It was, however, in 1680.
Lightwizard
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 04:02 pm
@farmerman,
In analyzing light today in the industry, it's focused and reflected light, virtually the same thing but with diffusion and dispersal in mind as far as task and ambient and accent lighting. It doesn't seem like a big deal today with plasma, electro-luminescence, laser and all the other scientific and engineering uses of light. I'm excited to see if the repair and upgrading of Hubble is successful and what science may find and confirm as far as the edge of the Universe, planets around stars, and other possibilities.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 04:08 pm
@Lightwizard,
I understand that mars will be closest to earth next August for eye-visual. That'll be a blast, since the next time that'll occur is in about 120 years or so (I've heard third hand).
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 04:49 pm
There's some serious trolling going on now. The last three posts having nothing to do with the thread. They are merely in the service of showing what expertise is at the fingertips of the diddiheads who posted them for our information as if we didn't already already know it all and plenty more besides.

They have even avoided the subject of evolution probably for the simple reason that they don't know anything significant about the matter.

Don't tell that lot there's any proof of evolution. It's just a buzz word they use to give their aggressive tendencies a work out.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  2  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 05:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I should dust off my reflecting telescope but since I bought the Hubble DVD I haven't really used it -- time for E Bay.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Mon 11 May, 2009 05:05 pm
@Lightwizard,
Mr Hubble, and his lady wife, were intimate friends with Aldous Huxley you know and old Aldous said a lot of not very nice things about science.
aperson
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 May, 2009 04:40 am
@spendius,
*SNIFF*

Do I smell a fallacious argument from authority??

Wow, this philosophy course is actually coming in handy.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Tue 12 May, 2009 05:29 am
@aperson,
Well- what a going-places student is supposed to do is check out what Aldous Huxley said about science and ponder its validity and relevance.

That stuff about improved means to unimproved ends.

One sure way to A ++ is to bamboozle your professors which doesn't look to be all that difficult a task. Competitions about who slurps up what's on the spoon best are for dimwits.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 May, 2009 06:00 am
Huxley had a dislike for Hubble ever since the day EDwin called Huxley over to his telescope and said .
"Hey Aldous, look throught the telescope and tell me what you see"
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Tue 12 May, 2009 01:35 pm
@farmerman,
Hubble was so engrossed in the cold heavens that he never noticed that his Mrs had the hots for Aldous but lacked the nerve.

In England we all have a dislike for making jokes about people's afflictions. We don't do the disabled. Not even Bernard Manning.

Otherwise I wouldn't be on these threads now would I? Average are fair game.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 May, 2009 06:53 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
In England we all have a dislike for making jokes about people's afflictions
YOU fuckin hypocrite. Early in our dealing with you, you made a lot of fun over my own crippled arm and it was totally doen to get a laugh. So dont give me that **** about "what a dislike you have for making fun of peoples afflictions".in my case though, you tried and failed cause I know and even laugh at my own shortcomings at spelling etc. I respect people who dont vaunt their humor to the "PC" realms and expect respect. You are an ethanol saturated Douche bag.


Im actually enjoying your Losing it" tonight. Do you feel alright? This is two major gaffs I caught you in without any effort.
aperson
 
  2  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 04:28 am
@spendius,
Yes spendi, I am young and already more succesful than you will ever be.

*SNIFF*

Oooo, I smell the strong tang of jealously, and some extremely bitter overtones. That's a potent scent.

Maybe if you took my course then you wouldn't have said what you just said.

Quote:
Well- what a going-places student is supposed to do is check out what Aldous Huxley said about science and ponder its validity and relevance.


Completely wrong.

Quote:
One sure way to A ++ is to bamboozle your professors which doesn't look to be all that difficult a task. Competitions about who slurps up what's on the spoon best are for dimwits.


So instead of accepting that I am capable of validly getting an A+ at the age of 16, you assumed that I MUST have bullshitted my way to it? That really is quite sad. Not to mention it is also completely wrong. The assignment was about logical analysis of arguments. While some leeway was given for interpretation of complex arguments, there was very very little opportunity for bamboozling. Sorry mate, it's legit.



To you other guys:

I wonder how desperate an adult must be in order to cut down, tall poppy style, a developing teenager?
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 04:55 am
@aperson,
When you take on individuals like spendi, you are drawn into a spiral of non sequiturs and irrelevancies. He is a student of "Never make any sense when nonsense will do nicely"

You hold your own well so you dont need any pats on the back except to let you know that we demand good work from all our colleagues. Spendi is just trying to be a contrary old soul who, much lost for attention, plays the game of opposites on the boards. Just check any post and subsequent adjacent posts by spendi, he always takes an opposite POV even when he has no idea what hes talking about (which is usually m ost of the time)
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 05:58 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
YOU fuckin hypocrite. Early in our dealing with you, you made a lot of fun over my own crippled arm and it was totally doen to get a laugh.


I deny that absolutely. I may have made fun of your typos but never after I became aware of the cause. I have never made fun of your crippled arm.

So there are no gaffes in this respect and thus your detection system is finding things that don't exist in reality.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 06:08 am
@aperson,
You do seem to be given to assertions ap.

I only bother with those when they relate to impersonal matters.
Lightwizard
 
  2  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 10:58 am
@farmerman,
It's referred to as the Devil's Advocate and he's trying to prove he's not a poser but the real thing. Maybe we need an exorcist to log in before Spendi's head starts spinning around -- he's already vomiting green slime all over the place.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 12:37 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
Huxley had a dislike for Hubble ever since the day EDwin called Huxley over to his telescope and said .
"Hey Aldous, look throught the telescope and tell me what you see"


Mr D.K. Dunaway, a professor at the University of New Mexico among other things, wrote-

Quote:
........ what forced the Hubbles and the Huxleys apart was neither personal nor intellectual but political. Grace and particularly Edwin vehemently opposed any delay in supporting the war. Of course, even Edwin could be cynical on the subject, as in one lecture to local dowagers (sic) : " the younger men will go to war like a shot because they won't want to miss the show: the older men will go to get away from their wives." (This was not well received," Grace noted icily.)

There were no heated arguments, no ruptures. The Huxleys still enjoyed Edwin's fishing stories and the telescopes on Mount Wilson, but war had opened a fissure. The Hubbles worked on William Allen White's Aid the Allies drive; on July 3, over tea, Grace and Anita Loos talked about the approaching rally, but "Aldous is silent when war is discussed.


Quote:
The Huxleys and the Hubbles continued to drift apart. The previous October, when Edwin had addressed the Aid to Britain rally, Anita and Grace had sat together; the Huxleys were noticeably absent.


Mr Hubble made many radio speeches in support of Aid to Britain and the US coming into the war.

Huxley was a pacifist and a founder member of the Peace Pledge Union.

Professor Dunaway, in a detailed biography of Huxley in Hollywood, made no mention of the matter farmerman brought up. Whether the professor thought it tactless to say such a thing about a famous American scientist or farmerman made it up I don't know. Or got it from a peer-reviewed source maybe.

Professor Dunaway paints a picture of Mr Hubble and his wife presenting a honorary English couple image and dressing in the posh manner of our upper middle-class. I would think, on the balance of evidence, that farmerman made it up or is relying on others who did.

In which case it would be real "green slime" and not just asserted to be. And all over the memory of a famous American.

He also made up that I had had fun over his crippled arm. Which is a double dose of green slime on the one page. Of course it doesn't count as green slime if the vomiter is an anti-IDer. That's how subjective anti-IDers are. Their capacity for objectivity and critical thinking is zero despite how much they talk about such things as if talking about them is the same thing as doing them.

All that actually shows is that they have no answers to the points I raise and just lash out with venemous assertions presumably on the assumption that A2Kers will think them true, as they do themselves, merely on the evidence of their having asserted them. Which is a gross insult to the intelligence of members here and it amazes me that no-one seems to have the guts to challenge them on the matter.

I am really at a loss as to how they conduct a relationship with anyone who is not a toady. They would be thrown out of every pub in England for such silly behaviour.

PS. Mr Hubble was struck by lightning shortly after delivering a lecture in England in honour of Darwin.
spendius
 
  0  
Reply Wed 13 May, 2009 12:56 pm
Quote:
Surely then, a society which condones male homosexuality, abortion and birth control and insists upon monogamy and holds equality as a supreme virtue doesn't want proof of evolution. Evolutionary principles undermine it at every turn.


That is the sort of thing they cannot answer except by blurting out ridiculous and poisonous assertions like one of those organisms with venom sacs. When at bay.

And there are many other things they won't answer. They want an in-house debate and are thus undermining the very purpose of A2K.

Here is another unanswered debating point about the composition of The Holy Bible a copy of which was used at both swearing in ceremonies of the President of the USA.

Quote:
But that is a mere set of assertions. Saying that it was written by a group of inmates in an asylum does not mean it actually was written by inmates in an asylum. It was actually written by the best minds of the time and was revised constantly by other best minds of their time.


Imagine such a thing as the sacred oath for the highest office in the world having been written by inmates of an asylum. How unpopular is that?

These anti-IDers have frightened opposition away, except my goodself, and now that they outnumber me 5 to 1 they think they are running with a NOP 80 odd% approval rating.

Well- they are scientists.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 01:50:39