uncadonego on 25/6/2009 at 16:47
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. Bananas not carefully taken care of would revert back in short order. Apples and pears not grafted onto quince trunks would drop their seeds and produce wild tall trees with smaller fruit, etc. It's not a argument winner for either side. It can't be used as an argument for creation and it doesn't prove macroevolution either. 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.
And now I've probably ticked off both groups....
the_grip on 25/6/2009 at 16:53
As somebody who took 30 years to throw off the shackles of fundies and religion, I am always dumbfounded and how shitty stupid I was. I never jived with this kind of bullshit but I really *tried* to believe other shit that was just as mind-numbingly fucking retard.
Funny thing is I'm not a dumb guy... but somehow your head gets shoved sideways up your ass with all this horseshit religion and fundies and you start trying to make the insanely stupid into reality. Whaaaaat the fuck...
Anyways, sorry, just venting here on myself. How the hell was I that stupid.
doctorfrog on 25/6/2009 at 17:03
That's not just inedible, it's actually a little frightening.
uncadonego on 25/6/2009 at 17:21
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...?
Morte on 25/6/2009 at 17:41
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. Bananas not carefully taken care of would revert back in short order. Apples and pears not grafted onto quince trunks would drop their seeds and produce wild tall trees with smaller fruit, etc. It's not a argument winner for either side. It can't be used as an argument for creation and it doesn't prove macroevolution either. 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.
And now I've probably ticked off both groups....
It works a hell of a lot more for one than the other. It demonstrates how characteristics are inherited and can cause significant changes in an organism. The only difference to regular evolution is that the selection process is manipulated by people.
Also, there's no such thing as macro-evolution. It's a false distinction created by creationists in order to avoid having to explain away the entire mountain of evidence for evolution while still dismissing speciation.
uncadonego on 25/6/2009 at 17:56
Quote Posted by Morte
Also, there's no such thing as macro-evolution. It's a false distinction created by creationists in order to avoid having to explain away the entire mountain of evidence for evolution while still dismissing speciation.
(
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/VIADefinition.shtml) Does that make the science dept. at Berkeley a bunch of creationists?
Morte on 25/6/2009 at 18:33
No, they're simply engaging the audience on terms defined by popular discourse, which is in large part shaped by creationists.
Although granted, "created by" might not be correct. I'm not entirely sure where the term originated. I do know that evolution deniers love to sieze on it and go: "A-hah! Small changes in species might occur, but macro-evolution is a compeltely different thing!" Which is of course utter nonsense. It's all the same process, there just comes a point where enough changes have accumulated that we're no longer dealing with the same species.
uncadonego on 25/6/2009 at 18:48
Quote Posted by Morte
No, they're simply engaging the audience on terms defined by popular discourse, which is in large part shaped by creationists.
Although granted, "created by" might not be correct. I'm not entirely sure where the term originated.
No...the term macroevolution was first used in 1927 by a Russian entomologist named Iurii Filipchenko. He supported evolution, not creationism, I'm pretty sure. I think his great great great grandson ends up on the Enterprise.
fett on 25/6/2009 at 19:07
Quote Posted by the_grip
As somebody who took 30 years to throw off the shackles of fundies and religion, I am always dumbfounded and how shitty stupid I was. I never jived with this kind of bullshit but I really *tried* to believe other shit that was just as mind-numbingly fucking retard.
Funny thing is I'm not a dumb guy... but somehow your head gets shoved sideways up your ass with all this horseshit religion and fundies and you start trying to make the insanely stupid into reality. Whaaaaat the fuck...
Anyways, sorry, just venting here on myself. How the hell was I that stupid.
Right there with you. I was always a skeptic and tried to look really hard at some of this stuff. Eventually it paid off I guess.
Dia on 25/6/2009 at 21:09
Quote Posted by fett
I was always a skeptic
Ditto. I got in a lot of trouble during Saturday morning Catechism classes when I was just a wee lass because I was having trouble with stuff like The Creation, the Immaculate Conception, etc. The priest/teacher called me Doubting Thomasina for the duration of those classes. Never liked him anyway.
I decided long ago that Fundies are sort of nasty pests inflicted on humanity, just like mosquitoes. How can they even be taken seriously? Rly?
