If EVOLUTION is REAL, then WHERE is the PROOF?
Offline 1) Where are all the missing links in the fossil records between EVERY single species that has ever existed and is currently living today? Shouldn't there be hundreds of thousands of every little step of transition between species if evolution actually existed including ape to man? Why can we find plenty of fossils of the SAME species over and over again and yet we can't find the hundreds of thousands to millions of transitional forms there have to be to prove evolution? WHERE ARE THE FOSSILS OF THE TRANSITIONAL FORMS? (The theory of evolution creating NEW species is different than 2 different dogs mating together to create a new breed of dog. Creating a new species is like breeding 2 dogs together to create an elephant) If evolution is happening now, what NEW species are developing TODAY? (New species meaning a completely different animal, not a mutation of one from another - obviously combining 2 different types of the same species will create something that looks like a combination of the 2, but it's STILL the SAME SPECIES)
2) If things that were not living became things that were living, why is that NOT still happening today? Shouldn't we be constantly seeing that happen now if it happened before? Why can't scientists make living organisms out of objects that aren't living? Why did LIFE begin if there was evolution? Why not just have nothing but nonliving material everywhere combing together to make more nonliving material? If we know the physical makeup of certain animals, why can't humans create life from the non-living as well?
3) If the big bang THEORY was actually real, then what created the big bang? Was there NOTHING before the big bang? No universe, no planets, no stars, no life? No time? No space? Absolutely nothing? How long was there NOTHING for? Was it nothing for millions of years, and then all of a sudden something just appeared out of NOTHING? Can you even call it nothing because that could be something in itself? What caused something to appear out of NOTHING and WHY? What was the point? And how?
4) How did it come to be that you are controlling the body that you have currently? How can someone not believe in the existence of a soul? What happened when you were born? What will happen when you DIE?
The majority of the people who I have met that don't believe in an intelligent Creator tend to be unintelligent themselves and nearly all of them haven't taken the time to think DEEPLY about the subject of life, how it began, and the fact that they will also die someday. Most of them have come to their conclusions based on popularity or what "feels" right without even looking deep into the subject which is their own life. Most of them are also too busy trying to make ends meet to even think about their own life and their EXISTENCE. Most of them come to a conclusion based on lack of information and without thinking deeply about it just like most people do about politics as well. Some people feel strongly about being Republican or Democrat and barely even know what the difference is, unfortunately many people may feel strongly about creation or the existence of EVERYTHING out of nothing as well without knowing both sides of the story as well.
Why is it that most "atheists" all of a sudden believe in a "god" or God when they are in a near-death situation or when a close family member of theirs is close to dying or when they are in a situation that they believe that cannot control? Why not ask the universe to save you if you are about to die?
- Login to post comments
your post is proof of evolution, it shows probably clearer than anything that man did indeed have a common ancestor with chimpanzees
Every fossil found is a transitional fossil, between its ancestors and its descendants.
It requires fairly special conditions for a dead animal to be fossilized so that it will be preserved in some form for an extremely long time. And then most of these will be embedded deep in the Earth's crust by sedimentary deposits and movements of the crust, so we are unlikely to ever find them.
So the fossil record contains an extremely tiny sample of all the animals that ever lived. And they are all different from each other to some extent.
We can usually fit every new fossil plausibly into our current picture of the 'tree of 'life', and it may even allow us to further refine the relations between the life-forms we currently place on that tree.
For something to be more obviously a 'transitional' fossil, we would need to have found a fossil of one of its ancestors and one of its descendants which were sufficiently similar to it to be identifiably on the same lineage, but different enough to show the process of evolution. That requires a certain amount of good luck, but there have been a few good examples, such as 'Tiktaalik'.
Putting this all together, this answers the first question.
For a new emergence of life to happen once some form of life was already well-established and developed would be difficult, since the precursors to life would most likely represent food to existing life.
Even if it did manage to emerge, it would require detailed genetic analysis to identify it as being from an independent origin, and actually scientist are trying to do precisely this, to see if there have indeed been successful independent origins.
We would not otherwise see it happen all the time, because it is something that takes such a long time to produce anything that we would see as an actual life form.
If the Big bang required a cause, then why would not that 'cause' require a cause, and so on back to minus infinity. There does not have to be a 'point', a 'purpose', to anything.
Science suggests that the initial cause need only be something almost infinitesimally small, a random twitch in reality, no need whatsoever for an 'intelligent being' which would require far more justification in itself. Proposing a 'God' only introduces a massive unnecessary complication in the process, rather than an ultimate explanation of anything.
The last question is just silly.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
It's kind of like me saying my shirt is white today because I bleached it last night, and I didn't spill soy sauce on it yesterday.
It may be true that I didn't spill soy sauce on my shirt, but that has nothing to do with it being white after I bleached it- that would be the case either way, even had I soaked my shirt in soy sauce all day, after the bleaching.
Of course, I am nit-picking, and perhaps a qualification is in order, but I'm concerned with confusing creationists (as you said).
Creationists are already very confused, I believe we should try to clarify our responses with the most relevant answers-- and in cases like these, there are certain things that can be considered the predominant reason, with others (while they may technically be true) being irrelevant/not "the reason".
Yes, but just think how many poor underaged Humanzees would have to be sexually abused before that happened. I don't think that'd be fair to them.
Rest assured creationists would manage to concoct some cockamamie way of getting around it.
I just feel like I have to chime in with my own two cents. Gtplaya818, you show that you understand nothing about evolutionary theory, yet you speak like you are the one "in the know". So, like so many have done before, I will try my best to correct your mistaken assumptions. And, if you are unwilling to come back for fear of your faith being diminished or some such nonsense, I will write this for anyone still on the fence as to our origins.
Fossilization of the remains of dead plants and animals is EXTREMELY rare, so we only find a few remains of the many creatures which have inhabited this planet. Asking for fossilized remains for every species ever to live is like asking for video of every moment of a persons life to prove they exist! With what we have found, we are able to put the evidence together into a coherent form, and new fossil finds just add to the picture.
No it isn't. That's a common misconception when you get an "education" on evolution from Ken Ham and "Dr." Kent Hovind. Given enough generations, a breeding population can, and most likely will, give rise to new species. All you need is time, genetic exchange, and environmental pressures.
Evolution doesn't create completely different animals overnight, it takes time and lots of it. Small mutations add up over time, and given enough time, new species will emerge. Evolution IS happening today, and we (and every other individual on the planet) are transitional forms. When we die, given the right circumstances for fossilization, we will then become a transitional fossil. You seem unable to grasp the timescales involved for evolutionary change to occur. Given enough time and separation between breeding groups, that one species will diverge into two or more species.
It might be, it might not (on planet earth) but it's probably due to the timescales involved and where we are looking.
This proves you got your information from people like "Dr." (forever in quotes) Kent Hovind. That question doesn't make sense. You seem to be mistaking abiogenisis (the origins of life from non-organic matter) and evolution (the diversity of life due to breeding populations) as one and the same. They are not.
It could have, but it's not, so I don't see why it has any bearing on a thread about evolution.
You are confusing evolution and cosmology. I don't know what caused the big bang, but I doubt it was nothing and I also doubt it was some invisible sky fairy.
I control my body because I was born. If my mother and father had not copulated at the moment they did, and if the exact sperm hadn't fertilized the exact egg, I wouldn't exist anywhere. I don't believe in a soul because there is absolutely no evidence for one. Our bodies are kept going by electricity, when we die, it stops, and that's it. No soul, no magic, no invisible sky fairies. Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble, but reality isn't so bad. When I die, what I know as my consciousness will cease, and I will have no more thoughts or emotions afterward.
It reminds me of a great quote by Mark Twain: "I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it."
All the evidence I have seen points me to think that being dead is just like it was for me before I was born: nothing.
Evidence please? Because from your posts, it is you who is without intelligence, not us speaking from the position of evidence, logic and reason. You have no evidence to base your assertions on so you just claim some kind of unquestionable "knowledge". From my experience, those who can't live life without their imaginary friend beyond childhood are the mentally stunted, unintelligent ones.
You have shown through all your posts that it is you who have come to your conclusions with a lack of information, and each time you write a sentence, you cement upon the internet that impression I, and many others, have of you. You need to read more then just one copy of the Holy Babble, or the ravings of anti-scientific crackpots like "Dr." Kent Hovind or Ray Comfort to be "well read".
Only religious creationists are claiming atheists and scientists say that everything came from nothing.
That is a lie perpetrated by religious leaders to give religion the appearance of legitimacy. It has none.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hope.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_Hope_story
I hope that some of that can come to some use.
"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!
For horses and donkeys, it's already been proven that they can reproduce and in a sense almost like a mutation of one another.
If it's actually true that humans can mate with chimps and have an offspring, I'm sure some idiots out there have already tried doing it and have failed. HOWEVER, I'll be willing to bet ANY one on this board that it's impossible, and I'm willing to bet a $1000 American cash. A great way to win this and claim it as your own prize would be to go ahead and get your own chimp and try it for yourself as many times as you want till an offspring comes out. You bring the REAL offspring, I give you the cash. However, if you take me up on this offer and Lose after (needs to be a set time period) then I win the wager.
So, you're saying that the only way you will listen to reason and abandon your completely unfounded and idiotic claims is that WE must break the laws of pretty much everywhere to disprove you? No, it's YOU who needs to provide the evidence as it's you making the insane claims about the nature of the universe. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence ( Luminon, if you read this, yes they do, no matter what you say), and claiming that an invisible hand is guiding natural processes is very much an extraordinary claim. If you understood anything about science ( no not religion, science, as we are talking about actual knowledge about the universe we find ourselves in and not superstitious fairy tales), you would understand that from a genetic standpoint, we are almost identical (98.7%) to chimps and interbreeding is not a completely unfounded idea.
So if you feel it's necessary to make claims about the universe and evolutionary theory which have no basis in reality, just expect that other people (everyone else who isn't insane or mentally deficient) will demand evidence.
You may ask for people to go easy on you and your ideas, and many other people here out of politeness have, but I will not. As long as you make stupid statements, I will find myself unable and unwilling to call a spade by any other name. All the sane people here have already provided you with an abundance of evidence disproving your claims, so if you continue to cling to them like a child to their safety "blankey", you are obviously either not reading any of the actual scientific evidence provided, or you are mentally incompetent. It's your choice which it is.
Either enter reality with the rest of us, or cling to your mental delusions, it's your choice. Just remember that when you make idiotic claims, people will treat you as such.
I think you should watch this video. If you do, you will see why we view science the way we do. It's our baloney detection kit, and you sir, are full of it.
"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!
Conscious intent isn't needed for cause and effect to happen but that doesn't prove that there isn't a conscious intent either. Computers can run programs on their own for days/months/years without someone needing to even touch the program again. That doesn't prove that the program wasn't created for a reason in the first place. You can also plant a seed in the middle of some fertile soil in Kansas and never do anything with it again ON PURPOSE. That seed could become a huge tree and you don't necessarily have to be there to make sure the process happens. So just because that tree grew on it's own doesn't mean that you weren't there to plant that seed in the first place.
Most things that HUMANS create are also created ON PURPOSE, not randomly without intent. The same goes for ANYTHING else that has intelligence. You start with the thought, then move into action towards the goal. Look at anything and everything you own. Just because you bought your shoes in the store, doesn't mean it just randomly appeared on the shelf. Someone came up with the THOUGHT for the design first, and then created it on purpose.
I definitely agree that you were "conscious" after you were born, and you were able to observe the things happening to and around your body after that point, that's obvious. And yeah, obviously the human that came out of your mother's womb is going to be some sort of gene combination of your mom and dad. But that human didn't have to be you. You didn't have to be the one conscious in the body that came out of the womb. It could have been someone else with your exact same personality, looks, gene combination, etc but it would be that person that would be conscious of what was happening in that body instead of you. And who knows what would have happened to your consciousness, or if you would have ever even had one. And if not, then you would have never even known that this conversation was even happening and in a sense, there would basically be nothing in your reality. There wouldn't even be anything, it would just be nothing and you wouldn't even know that there was nothing.
One thing is for sure. You are conscious today, and you know that you are you. You are also, from what we know, not able to be conscious of the thoughts and actions of 2 or more people at the same time as well.
Well the clock is ticking, maybe anywhere from ~20-40+ years for each of us left on this earth. And regardless of what you think about death, the time we have here ALIVE is SHORT.
So if they would have had sex a day or 2 afterwards (instead of the day they had it) or even if the sperm hit the egg a minute afterwards, would you still be you?
Great way to DODGE a request. Such strong faith you have there that it's possible to interbreed eh? So many words, so little thoughts in how to put a solution into action. Do I sense a little anger coming from my monkey friend? LOL Maybe try some anger management classes before your next reply. lol Let's see if you continue with your current strategy of dodge and attack instead of coming up with ways to proof your strong faith in interbreeding with your cousins. lol
MY POINT EXACTLY - tell ALL of your friends and family in a serious manner that you KNOW for a fact that you can interbreed humans and chimps and believe that you can make a human-chimp breed and I want to see them tell you how intelligent of an idea that sounds like without making YOU look insane LOL Hey, you could lead us to the next big discovery! LOL
You are equating things known to be designed by humans (shoes) to things which can be shown to be of natural causes. The only reason we can tell that humans designed them is because we are humans and have been raised in a tool making culture. Here is a great article refuting your "appearance of design" argument.
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI100.html
Complexity alone is not evidence for design, and the more complex something gets the less likely it was designed, as everything we create is as simple as possible while still remaining functional. A great talk about this is from Prof. P.Z. Myers called "Design vs. Chance". In it he compares designed objects with the much more complex arrangements created by natural laws and random chance. It demolishes the "complexity is an inherent signifier of design" argument, and elegantly at that. A must watch video, IF you wish to actually understand this subject instead of just bleating along with "Dr." Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and the rest of the Creanderthal loony bin.
Adding intent to the universe's beginning is adding another step of incalculable complexity to the equation, which is completely unnecessary and almost certainly wrong. Ever heard of Occam's Razor? Well, you should:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
So, continue posting your unscientific claims if you wish for those claims to be continually refuted. Or, you can read the scientific research on the subject and enter reality with the rest of us. Your choice.
"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!
I'm not dodging anything. We have simply stated that due to our genetic proximity with chimps, it's not necessarily impossible for a hybrid between our species to exist. That in no way means I wish to copulate with a chimp. The means of accomplishing the creation of a human/chimp hybrid, sans copulation, has been stated many times previously on this thread, so I didn't think you needed it repeated again. Apparently I was giving your reading comprehension too much credit. You seem to be the only one dodging anything, since every request made of you to provide even one shred of evidence for your claims have been met with silence. Great way to dodge our repeated requests for evidence gtplaya818!
Nope, no faith at all, just evidence. I have no faith in anything. The only things I believe are things I have evidence for, and my level of belief is directly proportional to the amount of evidence I have for it. You are the one with faith, since you persist in believing things which you have no evidence for.
The solution to putting the hybrid hypothesis into action has been repeated so many times on this thread I didn't think it was necessary to repeat it again. Three words: in vitro fertilization. Again, I seem to be giving too much credit to your level of reading comprehension. The only other possibility I can see besides a problem with your reading is that when you stated you wanted to have a conversation with us you were lying. Hmmm... Doesn't your Holy Babble say some things about that?
Yes you do, as your religious buddies have been raping, pillaging, murdering and keeping people ignorant and in chains (both mental and physical) for thousands of years. If your religion didn't have the blood of millions on it's hands, I probably wouldn't be so hostile, but it does so I am.
And don't call me "my monkey friend". I am not your friend and we are not monkeys, we are primates just like our cousins, the other great apes. Does it look like we have prehensile tails or opposable thumbs on our feet like monkeys? No it doesn't... sadly.
This reminds me of a great quote from a member of this site:
The only one laughable is yourself buddy, since any person well versed in science will never speak of absolutes, only degrees of certainty proportional to evidence presented. None of us, to my knowledge, and I've read all the posts on this thread, have ever stated that it is a FACT, we have only stated that it wasn't necessarily impossible due to how close we are genetically. We only speak of evidence, and the evidence points to it's possibility. As none of my friends and family are religious kooks like yourself, they will demand the evidence I have to support my claims and I will provide it. Thus, I will not look insane, as I have scientific evidence to lead me to the conclusion (genetic proximity). You on the other hand, have been making claims which you have absolutely no evidence for, yet you somehow continue to demand evidence from us. Doesn't your Holy Babble have some things to say about hypocrisy? Hmmmm...
So, in closing, you have only succeeded in "LOL"ing yourself by demanding from us what you yourself are unable to provide in exchange: evidence. Come back when you have at least a basic understanding of the subjects involved, or you will continue to look like an idiot without even noticing it. And at least read the references given to you which, from how you continue to post here, I can tell you have not.
"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!
I agree, but recall that this is what I was responding to.
"Anybody care to explain how everything came to be in the VERY BEGINNING of time and space if it wasn't created on purpose? How did anything appear or start if it wasn't created? How did the very first thing even exist and where did it come from?"
I answered your questions. I don't know how the universe began, but conscious intent is unnecessary.
A complex, intelligent being would also raise a lot of questions. Among those would be fact that intelligence has only been observed as a product of complex biological structures. It would also be unable to account for its own existence.
Right. It doesn't have to be 'me,' in the philosophical sense. It just happened to be me. It could have been someone else.
I'm young, so I probably have more than that. But, yeah, it's a short amount of time.
I wouldn't exactly be me. If it was the same sperm entering the egg a few minutes later, I would probably be extremely similar to how I am now. If it was few days later, I would still be very similar, but probably not as much. If it was a different sperm, I would end up with different genes, so I would undoubtedly be pretty different.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
1) I would not have sex with a chimpanzee for $1000.
2) Sex doesn't always produce offspring. For various reasons, it can be unsuccessful. If no reproduction occurs, how would you know if it's because of one of these reasons or because humans and chimpanzees can't interbreed?
3) I don't think anyone here is 100% certain that it would be successful. Why would anyone have sex with a chimp just to lose $1000? The James Randi Foundation offers 1 millions dollars to anyone that can show paranormal/supernatural abilities. You are structuring this in the form of a challenge, so it would make more sense if the participant did not have to pay if they lost.
4) How do we know you would pay the money?
Edit:
5) Doesn't this violate any laws?
6) Why not just do artificial insemination?
Edit: Do you have any more questions about evolution? You ignored a lot of my responses.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
I can only keep reading RSS for so long at a time. Threads like this make me want to unplug my computer from the Internet and pretend people aren't this stupid for a while.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Do what I do - don't talk to Paisley. Saves a lot of wear and tear on my sanity. Nice of Nigel to give us a diagnosis, but I would hesitate to ask him how he would diagnose me - though my psychologist friend says I'm not too awful fucked up.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
The fact that humans and chimpanzees may well not able to interbreed at all, despite having very similar genetic sequences, is actually evidence of evolution in action.
New 'species', which are different groups which don't or can't interbreed, and have some degree of apparent collective physical difference, arise when a group within a larger fully inter-breeding group cease to interbreed with the larger group for any reason.
It might be that they are physically separated by distance, difficult terrain, as when they migrate into another valley, or to another island.
Or they may have acquired some non-harmful mutation which makes inter-breeding no longer very viable.
With humans and other primates there is at least one obvious difference in their genetic material which could well make it less likely for successful cross-fertilization. We have 23 chromosome pairs, the other primates have 24. This appears to be due to two chromosomes that are separate in primates becoming joined end-to-end, which can happen as the result of a copying glitch. We still have very similar sequences overall.
If this reduced or blocked the production of successful breeding back when there was no other significant difference between the group that were our ancestors and the group that were the ancestors of other modern primates, such as the great apes and chimpanzees, then that is all that is needed to allow those groups to start drifting apart.
Once they became sufficiently different, or migrated to new environments, then natural selection could kick in and favour evolution in a consistent direction to survive better in the new environment, and become 'obviously' a distinct species.
Meanwhile, their original group would also continue to adapt to changing conditions, such as major climatic change (that was several ice-ages ago, after all), and also change from our common ancestor. Recent finds strongly suggest that the apes have changed further from our common ancestor than we have.
So our inability to interbreed is actually evolution in action, not in any way a 'disproof'. We have two independent ways to demonstrate our close relationship to chimps, the long-established anatomical and skeletal comparisons, and now the even more accurate comparison of DNA sequences. It only requires a single non-obvious mutation to block successful inter-breeding, so that is a very crude indication of any common ancestry.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
I am in agreement with kv.
Also, during the heyday of the Soviet Union ( given it's former Marxist / Leninist political and cultural agendas ) I would not consider it improbable to say that during that era there were at least millions of atheists in foxholes ( ....they were also in tanks, bombers, jet fighters, artillery units, etc. )
My mom decided to get her tubes tied.
Sorry, but that's the only one I can answer.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Then this song is for you!
The song is about a guy who found a stupid girlfriend and religion and they filled his head with BULLSHIT!
FILLER
What happened to you?
You're not the same
Something in your head
Made a violent change
It's in your head
FILLER
You call it religion
You're full of shit
Was she really worth it?
She cost you your life
You'll never leave her side
She's gonna be your wife
You call it romance
You're full of shit
Your brain is clay
What's going on?
You picked up a bible
And now you're gone
You call it religion
You're full of shit
FILLER
THEY FILLED YOUR HEAD!!!
"This may shock you, but not everything in the bible is true." The only true statement ever to be uttered by Jean Chauvinism, sociopathic emotional terrorist.
"A Boss in Heaven is the best excuse for a boss on earth, therefore If God did exist, he would have to be abolished." Mikhail Bakunin
"The means in which you take,
dictate the ends in which you find yourself."
"Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government! Supreme leadership derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony!"
No Gods, No Masters!
...then this song is for you!!
I don't wanna hear it, hear all your bullshit.
If EVOLUTION is REAL, then WHERE is the PROOF?
The fact that humans have to eat and excrete, sexual habits, and genetic variety are all proof enough for me that we are indeed a part of the animal kingdom. Sickle cell anemia, hemochromatosis, and lactose-tolerance are all proof enough of continued adaptation for better or worse.
A daughter of hope and fear, religion explains to Ignorance the nature of the unknowable. -Ambrose Bierce
Hello. You automatically owe me a thousand bucks then. You can donate it to this web site in my name.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/409311?dopt=Citation
=
Evolution is true!
explain this!
evolution at work
you cannot deny
possibly the strongest proof yet
a little known fact, the manetee evolved from the chicken finger!
and lastly the ultimate shocker is that the lama evolved from Samuel L Jackson
its plain as day... maybe im believing for very bad reasons
P.S. how could i forget yoda evolved from the cat
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Thanks for the link; I would have been surprised if it really hadn't been done, but I didn't have time to search thoroughly.
Gtplaya818, does your word mean anything to you? I'm really curious to see if it does, or if you're a liar like most people. I'll actually be really impressed if you follow through with your promise.
I'm always amazed when people follow through with anything- pretty sad that humans are so unreliable that it surprises me when somebody is honest.
To all: Shall we place bets as to whether he'll actually live up to his talk and cough up the 1k, or renege on his word?
I wouldn't expect honesty of a theist, so I'm betting no, and I'll put $10 toward the site (if he does donate) in anybody's name who will take me up on the bet... (if he doesn't, you donate $10 in my name).
Err... on second thought, lets go for a maximum 20 people taking me up on this. I don't really want to be in for more than $200 in the astronomically small chance that he does actually have the decency to keep his word. >_< I'm not a money bags like gtplaya818.
I rather doubt that he is going to pay up. My read on his bet was that he felt he was in the same safe zone as if he had offered to pay up for anyone who showed him a four cornered circle.
Remember that in the theist world view, a species is pretty much the same as “each after it's own kind”. Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth. The general point to Linnaeus taxonomy is to classify different organisms by apparent similarity. Writing in the years before Darwin, it might not have been so obvious but the system has been at least partially successful in capturing how different species are related.
In the modern world of course, this has been largely replaced by cladistics which also takes genetic relationships into account. Humans are part of the hominid clade and it is possible that if the experiment were allowed to continue, offspring (probably sterile) would result. Be it a mule, a ligon or a zorse, out of species breeding is fairly well documented.
In fact, there are a number of cases of out of species breeding that has resulted in fertile offspring. The more expensive breeds of cats are among those examples. Bengal cats are part Asian snow leopard. Savanna cat is part Serval. There are of course lots of other examples but being a cat person, I tend to go with those.
=
I'm only going to answer this point because everybody else has answered everything else. I'm going to answer this with a short dialog.
Paul and Ken live in the same neighborhood. One day Ken is walking along and finds Paul putting together what looks like an extensive and time-consuming jigsaw puzzle.
Ken: Hi Paul, I see you're putting together the unicorn puzzle.
Paul: Unicorn puzzle?
Ken: Yes, the unicorn puzzle, several hundred years ago my great-great-grandfather put together that puzzle and wrote down what he found for all of us to read.
Paul: Are you sure we're talking about the same puzzle? I'm not seeing a unicorn. When my friend Chuck started this puzzle last week he figured it was a bear, so a bunch of us have been taking turns putting it together to confirm what he said. So far, it's pretty clear its a bear.
Ken: But you haven't gotten it all put together yet! How can you know what it is before you have it all put together?
Paul: You don't have to completely finish a puzzle to know what it is. Look over here. This is a bear's claw, and over here is some fur. Here is the tail over on this end. I can tell by what I've put together so far that this is most likely going to end up a bear.
Ken: But you don't know! It's only a THEORY that the puzzle depicts a bear! A THEORY! There are huge GAPS in the puzzle! If there are gaps, you can't say ANYTHING about it!
Paul: But you're saying its a unicorn and based on the pieces here that's an even less likely scenario than you think the bear is!
Ken: Are you saying my great-great-grandad LIED to us?
Paul: No, maybe he was mistaken, or was putting together a different puzzle. But nothing can deny that the facts point far more firmly into the possibility that it's a bear than it being a unicorn.
Ken: Whatever, you're just blinded. You're just afraid of what the puzzle being a unicorn MEANS, and you don't want to be held accountable for your actions! Take it easy Paul, hopefully one day you'll just admit the plain truth that that puzzle is of a unicorn.