rockpile Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Homo sapiens are the better species that survived, as opposed to Neadrethals who had larger bodies but smaller brains. And I believe there has been a recent discovery that there may also have been another type of prehistoric man that didn't survive. 284954[/snapback] Were the australopithecus gay homonids? (not that there is anything wrong with that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Bunch of frigging hillbillies.. http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/...e.ap/index.html 284831[/snapback] And you're moving back to a place with high taxes and no toilet paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 4,217,441 Is that the number of posts you have logged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 Actually no. Evolutionary changes are specific adaptations to local environment. There are grasses that grow in the north that do not grow in the south, does that make them an overall superior species? No, they just adapted to their environment. Race in humans is also an example of adaptation. If you lived in hotter climates, you evolved a darker complexion. If you lived in a colder climate, you have a fairer complexion. How does that make a race superior? 285014[/snapback] It does not. It is an adapation to local conditions, as you say. But along that line, the plant species compete in their own savage fashion to propagate at the demise of competing species. As do members of the animal Kingdom. Plant life and non-human life is relentless and persistent in this. The evolution-only model is not suspended for humans. The eliminatation of human competitors by those with favorable variations should have continued apace - and after the conquering, and when the moved into the regions of those that they eradicated, they would have adapted. One might, with some validity, ascribed this to ancient man's lack of mobility. But within their own range, they did not, for example, kill off the folks that happened to have big noses or buggy ears - that such folks are shunned is beyond discussion, these days as before. But not exterminated, in the main. My contention is that there was something else afoot. If not, we are the extremely fortunate benificiaries an exquisite set of coincidences - a temperate distance from an energy source that doesn't fry carbonaceous compounds, a well -placed moon that serves to keep the planet from axial extremes, an abundance of vulcanism that produces an atmosphere that remains regenerative, an so forth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 didn't they throw virgins in to the fire god at one time ?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 didn't they throw virgins in to the fire god at one time ?????? 285084[/snapback] The Vikings (who terrorized and murdered a lot of Europe for many a year), had a good way of dealing with the infirmed elderly. They gave them a bang-up party, with the best of food, and then told them how much they loved them and then pitched them off a 500 foot cliff into the fijords. Everybody was happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 23, 2005 Share Posted March 23, 2005 You miss the point Joe. What about variations between homo sapiens, like variations in other species? Why is the existence of variation in us rejected, yet accepted in other species? If evolution was all there is, should not superior humans exist in the same fashion that superior crops and animals do? 284965[/snapback] I think your argument assumes that humans are the pinnacle of evolution, which would be inconsistent with the very definition of evolution. Lifeforms are always improving and evolving. I also believe that any state, country, group or person who tries to keep evolution from being taught should just go ahead and secede from modern society. Why is it always religion trying to keep science down? Its been that way for centuries, why stop now, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Was that on bingo night? 285025[/snapback] You know, I've lived just outside of Atlanta for about seven years now. I have NEVER seen one church/firewall sign read "Bingo on Tues." To whomever said it... unless you've lived in the South for an extended period of time, you have no idea. We're still fighting the "evolution in schools" battle down here. Some bible-thumping nutjob tries to bounce it every three years or so. And... like you all know... How do you keep a Southern Baptist/Mormon from drinking too much on a fishing trip? Bring two! -Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 I think your argument assumes that humans are the pinnacle of evolution, which would be inconsistent with the very definition of evolution. Lifeforms are always improving and evolving.I also believe that any state, country, group or person who tries to keep evolution from being taught should just go ahead and secede from modern society. Why is it always religion trying to keep science down? Its been that way for centuries, why stop now, eh? 285137[/snapback] I'd argue that some humans are much more advanced than others... it's simply not politically correct to recognize that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 How do you keep a Southern Baptist/Mormon from drinking too much on a fishing trip? Bring two! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted March 24, 2005 Author Share Posted March 24, 2005 And you're moving back to a place with high taxes and no toilet paper. 285045[/snapback] yeah, high taxes and no TP is a small price to pay to be surrounded by people who don't believe in evolution... I would happily pay more taxes to never have to drive down the street and see some moron with a confederate flag for his back window... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 yeah, high taxes and no TP is a small price to pay to be surrounded by people who don't believe in evolution... I would happily pay more taxes to never have to drive down the street and see some moron with a confederate flag for his back window... 285222[/snapback] You know, I used to really share that belief. I'll admit, when I see Jim Bob Jerk-Off in his jacked-up Ford with the flags 'a waving, I get a bit hot headed. Not because of what some say that flag stands for, but because I was jumping to the conclusion that Jim Bob took issue with me personally because I'm one of them damn yankees moving into his southland. Bottom line? Screw Jim Bob. If anyone has a problem with me or my home town, screw 'em. It's because of the influx of "damn yankees" that the government of Georgia can afford to make his truck payment for him. Now.... the yankee jokes get REALLY EFFING OLD after a few years. "Ya'll aren't from here, eh?" I've started to answer "yeah, born and raised." Confuses them... much like "numbers." -Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 . "Ya'll aren't from here, eh?" I've started to answer "yeah, born and raised." Confuses them... much like "numbers." -Jeff 285228[/snapback] I'd get the same thing when I lived in NC. "Yer not from 'round these here parts, are ya, boy?" "Nope," I'd finally answer. "My family came here to find some slaves to bring back to Italy, and I'm just carrying on the family business." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 I'm getting quite sick of the South, too. It isn't the people or the religion... it's just "weird." BUT.. I'm not ready to go back to Buff... the economy still blows. I need to find a happy medium. Anyone feel like hiring me out of ATL for a crazy high salary, and foot relo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Now.... the yankee jokes get REALLY EFFING OLD after a few years. "Ya'll aren't from here, eh?" I've started to answer "yeah, born and raised." Confuses them... much like "numbers." -Jeff 285228[/snapback] That's awesome! Funny as all ell. Mind If I quote you on that??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 That's awesome! Funny as all ell. Mind If I quote you on that??? 285241[/snapback] LOL... I'm on a roll tonight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Some of the religious right don't believe in evolution becuase they can't wrap their atrophied brains around the concept. Any idea more than 3 sentences long is information overload. There was a screaming idiot on a local talk show today who was a creationist. He was saying how he does not believe he came from rocks. The host puzzled by his comment asked him to elaborate. The caller went to explain that in the religion of "darwinsim" as he calls it, people evolved from rocks!! I think what he was missing was that comets and such deposited organic molocules on the forming earth that eventually formed the building blocks of life. But in his feeble brain, that became "evolved from rocks." By the way, these kinds of people are the core of Bush's support. They find comfort in not thinking. Just tell them what to believe they and they'll believe it. They think they are honoring God. All they are doing is selling God short. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 It does not. It is an adapation to local conditions, as you say. But along that line, the plant species compete in their own savage fashion to propagate at the demise of competing species. As do members of the animal Kingdom. Plant life and non-human life is relentless and persistent in this. The evolution-only model is not suspended for humans. The eliminatation of human competitors by those with favorable variations should have continued apace - and after the conquering, and when the moved into the regions of those that they eradicated, they would have adapted. One might, with some validity, ascribed this to ancient man's lack of mobility. But within their own range, they did not, for example, kill off the folks that happened to have big noses or buggy ears - that such folks are shunned is beyond discussion, these days as before. But not exterminated, in the main. My contention is that there was something else afoot. If not, we are the extremely fortunate benificiaries an exquisite set of coincidences - a temperate distance from an energy source that doesn't fry carbonaceous compounds, a well -placed moon that serves to keep the planet from axial extremes, an abundance of vulcanism that produces an atmosphere that remains regenerative, an so forth. 285059[/snapback] The one thing that people forget is that science is never absolute. The entire scientific method revolves around the constant testing of ideas, even if it means discarding them when proof shows it necessary. But the point is: you never stop seeking the truth!! The creationists/intelligent designers pounce on that and say "AHA! you see, science does not know for sure!" Yes, but if you can't prove A, that doesn't make B true either. They argue that since science is not proven, then the religious explanation of creation is the only other possibilty, which is utter hogwash. Of course, I piss them off by asking "which religion's creation story is the true one?" Christian? Hindu? American Indian? Austrailian Aboriginal? At that point they storm out of the room in a huff. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjeff215 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Some of the religious right don't believe in evolution becuase they can't wrap their atrophied brains around the concept. Any idea more than 3 sentences long is information overload. There was a screaming idiot on a local talk show today who was a creationist. He was saying how he does not believe he came from rocks. The host puzzled by his comment asked him to elaborate. The caller went to explain that in the religion of "darwinsim" as he calls it, people evolved from rocks!! I think what he was missing was that comets and such deposited organic molocules on the forming earth that eventually formed the building blocks of life. But in his feeble brain, that became "evolved from rocks." By the way, these kinds of people are the core of Bush's support. They find comfort in not thinking. Just tell them what to believe they and they'll believe it. They think they are honoring God. All they are doing is selling God short. PTR 285311[/snapback] What's funny is that is the same argument the far right uses as well. In favor of socialized medicine and retirement benefits because they don't have the mind power to think for themselves. In this case, both sides are *right* I'd argue. Listening to Right Wing Talk on the way home from work today. I have to turn Sean H. when he starts talking about that woman down in Florida. The same goes for "The Savage Nation." They were going off on some tangent about how the good Christians ought to barge into that place and walk Terry out. The right-to-life crowd. Of course, the argument was "if the liberals had their way they would put her to death via lethal injection." Politics as usual. Disagree simply because of party affiliation. Rant Off. -Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puhonix Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 This is right along the lines of what you were talking about, I didnt really think Florida would get wrapped up in this, but then again, we are Florida, the laughing stock of the nation. TALLAHASSEE — Republicans on the House Choice and Innovation Committee voted along party lines Tuesday to pass a bill that aims to stamp out “leftist totalitarianism” by “dictator professors” in the classrooms of Florida’s universities. Baxley said a university education should be more than “one biased view by the professor, who as a dictator controls the classroom,” as part of “a misuse of their platform to indoctrinate the next generation with their own views.” The bill sets a statewide standard that students cannot be punished for professing beliefs with which their professors disagree. Professors would also be advised to teach alternative “serious academic theories” that may disagree with their personal views. link I just dont see creationism as a "serious academic theory." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts