Muzman on 26/6/2009 at 03:13
I would like to apologise for Ken Ham, the Kiwis will have to apologise for Ray Comfort however. They are some of Oceania's finest exports. The further they go, the better exports they become. I would prefer if they went straight to the top by being exported to outer space immediately. But you can't have everything. We sent them to where the rockets are instead.
I would also like to thank the US for being something of a holy land to our fundies, so we lose more and more of them every year (if you could just stop some of them coming back somehow that'd be great).
Have you lapsed folks heard Julia Sweeny's 'Letting Go of God'? The title sounds a bit self help, but it's actually the hilarious one woman show of her travels from Catholicism to not quite born again to New Ager and finally atheist. Damn funny, you might say.
Queue on 26/6/2009 at 03:31
Quote Posted by Dia
The priest/teacher called me Doubting Thomasina for the duration of those classes.
Nothing builds character and strong, healthy, Christian values in a child more than name-calling.
...beats diddling them, I guess.
fett on 26/6/2009 at 03:33
Burn in hell, infidel.
uncadonego on 26/6/2009 at 03:58
We had a nun that no fooling actually poked kids with her pen. Another nun would stand behind you and squeeze the sensitive muscles between your neck and shoulder as hard as she could. Maybe doesn't sound so bad, but look at an eight year old kid, then imagine yourself doing that to the kid. One time a puppy wandered just inside the doorway of our class fire exit door (which wasn't rigged to a fire alarm but was opened because it was hot) we little kids all ahhhhh'd and giggled at it like kids will. The nun told the class that "Le Diable" (french school) sent the dog to distract us from our lesson. One time a deacon visited the class and was answering a question about something or other. He stood in front of me talking to me as though I were the pope to demonstrate something or other, I can't remember. Well, I interrupted him mid-sentence, held out my hand to him and said: "kiss my ring!"
Not a good day.:tsktsk:
heywood on 26/6/2009 at 05:34
Quote Posted by uncadonego
Selective breeding isn't really an argument that's truly useful for either side. Left alone all dogs would intermingle over time and all breeds of the species would mix into one again
I don't buy that. The Canidae family was never that homogeneous before domestication, with a bunch of different types of gray wolf, red wolf, coyote, jackal, and foxes. So rather than merging together, it's more likely different dog breeds would win out in different regions because they are better adapted to the climate and food sources in those regions. And the most specialized breeds would die out. The end result would not be the same as the starting point before man domesticated dogs. And there is no arguing that selective breeding by humans didn't alter the sub-species, resulting in a more rapid development of sub-species with specialized traits.
Quote:
It shows we can manipulate things, but it doesn't show they were created, or that we can engineer them into an entirely new species.
We've already engineered transgenic crop species by direct manipulation of genes. And besides, evolution doesn't require engineering. It only requires genetic mutation and time.
I suspect that you're looking for more than just new transgenic species though. Do you mean something like creating a flagellum or new sensory organ through genetic engineering? If so, how much time do you think is reasonable to give us?
uncadonego on 26/6/2009 at 14:47
As if I don't know that we have genetically engineered plants.
There is no 100% concensus on where dogs came from.
(
http://www.seefido.com/html/the_dog_s_origins.htm)
(
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/dogs-that-changed-the-world/introduction/1273/)
Besides that no matter if all of our carefully controlled breeds of dog melded into a few sets of adapted breeds or just one mutt breed, they're still all the exact same species.
As for engineering a new sensory organ, you hold your breath, I'm not going to, let alone producing an entirely new species of animal. I don't "believe" in creationism, and if scientists had faith in evolution they should be shot for working so hard at vaccinating the weak and extending their lives to pass on their pathetically weak genes. Let the weak die. Survival of the fittest. Best way to become immune to disease is to let only the survivors of those diseases pass on their genes. Jerks are de-evolving the human race.
Ok, now I'm getting sarcastic because these threads always solve nothing and I'm done with it.
Morte on 26/6/2009 at 14:57
Quote Posted by uncadonego
I don't "believe" in creationism, and if scientists had faith in evolution they should be shot for working so hard at vaccinating the weak and extending their lives to pass on their pathetically weak genes. Let the weak die. Survival of the fittest. Best way to become immune to disease is to let only the survivors of those diseases pass on their genes. Jerks are de-evolving the human race.
Ok, now I'm getting sarcastic because these threads always solve nothing and I'm done with it.
Do you ever wonder if your sterling contributions might have anything to do with that?
d0om on 26/6/2009 at 15:09
We don't even have a good definition of what a species is so arguing about turning from one into another is a bit pointless.
At the moment a bacterium can change its species by simply picking up a plasmid from bacteria-sex, but do we really mean for a single cell to be able to change species in this manor?
Arguing about if we see evolution creating new species is therefore rather pointless imho, especially since our current definition doesn't even work for asexual reproduction.
the_grip on 26/6/2009 at 15:10
Quote Posted by uncadonego
You don't have to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Just because I don't believe the universe was created in six days doesn't mean some fundamentalist can tell me I therefore don't really believe in God, and just because I believe in God doesn't mean I can't figure out Kepler's laws of planetary motion or Faraday's principle, or have to think that Mendel's genetic experiments were the work of the devil. Don't forget that Mendel believed in genetic laws but was also an Augustinian priest. Live and let live dude. Be comfortable with what you believe and don't believe. If you believe something different twenty years from now, you're the only one that has to live with your conscience, not...who are we talking about again, the kid from Growing Pains or something...?
You know I used to say this to myself... "c'mon, give it a fair shake, there was something there worthwhile..." I know that may be the case for some people, but I personally see zero good things in it and it sucked out a huge part of my life. So the baby AND the bathwater can go down the toilet on this one, at least to me.
