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

http://unfollowingjesus.com/files/2011/07/doonsbury1.jpg

0 Replies

@hingehead,

Quote:

I wonder if that's because ova are all created at the same time whereas sperm are produced over time on an 'as needs' basis.

You're missing the point hinge. The idea is to reassure everybody who is, or has, engaged with pre-marital rumpy-pumpy, adultery, divorce, pornography, abortion and homosexuality, that they are, or were, doing nothing wrong and needn't be ashamed. Basically on behalf of certain vested interests.

Jack's very corny cartoon, which he has besmirched at least one other thread with, is in the same game.

I was wondering from the figures fm gave whether DNA sampling is compulsory in Iceland.

Did you see the Pope on TV news saying Mass in Lebanon?

It's a very good point you make. The sample in the study, though large, is all from the same historical snapshot and it is one known to have been exposed to the hole in the ozone layer, long dark winters and possibly a sea food diet. The conclusion from it being applied to evolution, as a process over unimaginable periods of time, is obviously ridiculous.

The question is whether an explosion of pre-marital rumpy-pumpy, adultery, divorce, pornography, abortion and homosexuality, is a destructive cultural mutation or an advantageous one irrespective of how convenient such things are to an individual or certain institutions such as media, the legal and medical professions and manufacturing industry.

0 Replies

The tragedy in all this epic waste of time from spendi is, I think he really knows the truth of evolution, but figures humanity can't handle the truth.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

You give him too much credit. He's a contrarian. If you said the sky is blue, he'd argue that it's purple.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

That's about it ed. It is rather obvious.

Your side needs to argue that humanity can handle it.

I use "humanity" because you did. Actually humanity can easily handle it. It did for a few million years and from what little I know of those times it must have been extremely trying. Humanity can handle anything physically survivable.

I mean our culture. You need to argue that our culture can handle it. I don't think it can and remain the culture we know and love. Hence, along with millions of others, I think evolution, valid up to a point as it is, is a subversive theory. I'll even allow that our culture might need subverting but I haven't seen any arguments on here to that effect or speculations on what might be the resulting improvements.

For example--Rider Haggard puts these words into Cleopatra's mouth--

Quote:

Well, and what is marriage? It is the union of the heart, that bond beautiful as gossamer and than gossamer more light, which binds soul to soul, as they float through the dreamy night of passion, a bond to be, perchance, melted in the dews of dawn? Or is it the iron link of enforced, unchanging union whereby if sinks the one the other must be dragged beneath the sea of circumstance, there, like a punished slave, to perish of unavoidable corruption? * Marriage! I to marry! I to forget freedom and court the worst slavery of our sex, which, by the selfish will of man, the stronger, still binds us to a bed grown hateful, and enforces a service that love mayhap no longer hallows!"

*Referring to the Roman custom of chaining a living felon to the body of one already dead.

On a matter of principle there is your choice. Mae West or Laura Bush.

Huxley, in Brave New World, chooses Cleopatra's reasoning. He makes a bit of a mess of it though by idealising the woman. Which is a bit far fetched really.

0 Replies

People will be people, no matter which side they believe. A man is a saint. If he accepts evolution, his actions will not vary significantly, re human relations. You are setting a tempest in a beer mug.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

You give him too much credit. He's a contrarian. If you said the sky is blue, he'd argue that it's purple.

How on earth am I a contrarian when I support the Christian dispensation. What an inordinately silly, and arrogant, assertion that is.

Anybody who doesn't agree with Setanta is a contrarian. Phew!! That's dictator ****.

And the sky isn't blue. It just looks blue.

Quote:

Your eyes see blue when you look at light which has a wavelength between 450-495 nanometres (A nanometre is one-billionth of a metre). The blues with a higher wavelength gradually look more violet, while those with a lower wavelength gradually appear more green. Pure blue, in the middle, has a wavelength of 470 nanometres.

"Blue" is merely shorthand from a scientific point of view. The same word is used for blue and green in some languages and other languages differentiate shades of blue.

Science is a closed book to Setanta.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

A man is a saint. If he accepts evolution, his actions will not vary significantly, re human relations. You are setting a tempest in a beer mug.

Swinging wildly won't help ed. I am not talking about any "he". I'm talking about Culture and specifically our Culture.

Do you think suburbia would exist if those matters relating to sexual relations which the Church inhibits, as does the State to a certain extent, were as common and acceptable as sliced bread? Do you?

Media operates in cities and in highly centralised areas of them.

The whole point of beer and pubs is to get a tempest going.

Have you heard Tempest yet? I have.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

You are setting a tempest in a beer mug.

I wouldn't mind doing that as good as was done in the Dayton and Dover gigs.

0 Replies

@hingehead,

hingehead wrote:

I wonder if that's because ova are all created at the same time whereas sperm are produced over time on an 'as needs' basis.

That's almost certainly what's happening. But it's interesting that as a man (and probably many animals) get older, their sperm carry more mutations.

Animals that survive to older ages are typically living in stable, productive, viable environments. So in a general sense, at least for mammals, the less challenging your environment the greater chance of mutations creeping into your population due to elderly males.

2 Replies

@rosborne979,

Quote:

the less challenging your environment the greater chance of mutations creeping into your population due to elderly males.

It might be the less challenging environment rather than the age of males.

And an environment might only seem less challenging if the biological system is not taken into account. ros is mixing his metaphors. Modern life may well be more challenging to the biological system than we realise.

fm's report has the look of superficiality dressed up in the clothes of science and it is significant that the question "what counts as a mutation?" has been ignored.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Hingehead observation is porobably the truth. NM Singh, in a study done a few years ago at U Wis, found that age related "Apoptosis" (programmed cell death) actually DECREASES with age. Therefore, DNA being produced by older males DOES have a greater chance of acquiring mutations that the male can pass along .

2 Replies

@farmerman,

But how does that happen fm? Is it the environment and not being simply older? An older man has been exposed to the environment for longer than a young man.

1 Reply

@spendius,

HA !!

1 Reply

@farmerman,

That's about the size of it.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I agree. I wonder how much of an affect this has on evolution.

Anything which increases the chance of mutation will have an effect on evolution. And in this case it's interesting because a selected group of individuals within the population is the source of more of the variation.

1 Reply

The mutations only matter if they create new genetic material which is viable, which gets triggered or "turned on," and which enhances reproductive opportunities in the offspring.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Looks like the human "mutation clock"(which had been sortya set at 20000 years for every "fixed-in-the -genome" mutation may be a little too long.
I dont see why these populational 'ST" repeat alleles that everyone uses as forensic determinants for racial and geographic indices dont count as mutations providing "new' information.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

The mutations only matter if they create new genetic material which is viable, which gets triggered or "turned on," and which enhances reproductive opportunities in the offspring.

Ultimately yes, but they could accumulate in the gene pool and become selective way down the line. Basically this is just another mechanism of variation within a gene pool. Anything which increases variation within the gene pool will probably affect evolution of the population at some point (I would think).

2 Replies

@rosborne979,

Basically this is just another mechanism whereby ros, fm and Setanta attempt to persuade the dumber segment of A2K that they know what they are talking about and, as a consequence of that wondrous manifestation, that the Christian dispensation should be dumped in the dustbin along with all its works and especially those relating to wanking, shagging spayed females, divorce, abortion and homosexuality.

Bearing in mind that they dare not read the essay by Thorstein Veblen I linked, and that the author was a proper evolutionist, it is painfully obvious, and very much so, that they haven't the faintest idea about "life" and its processes and are relying on words and expressions, which might well sound definitive and scientific to the untrained ear, but are actually inexplicable and deployed here for the sole purposes of chumps with a putative hard on to feel better about themselves.

1 Reply

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know