We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Ben Stein interviewed on BNN (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7~8~9~10~11..14~15~16 [Next]
Chessmann
View Profile
Inner circle
4145 Posts

Profile of Chessmann
Jonathan, I think you give sentamentality a much bigger role than it actually plays (well, in things other than debates, anyway Smile )
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-26 22:54, Tom Bartlett wrote:
If every thing evolved from the first one cell organism why there are not skeletal remains of each transition or even something close just in one species? There are more huge gapes evolution than there opinions about what is the truth.


You know, fossils are not easy to form. They are even more difficult to find. Based on that, we have quite an extensive fossil record that all points to evolution.
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
I have never seen this evidence presented only rumors and many that were supposed to support man has descended from apes, have been debunked like the human skull mated with the jaw of an orangutan. Because of the circumstances, it had to have been perpetrated with the intent to falsely prove the origin of the species. How much of the other alleged evidence was manufactured to support the theory? Science may not be so infallible but obviously scientists are.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 00:24, Tom Bartlett wrote:
I have never seen this evidence presented only rumors and many that were supposed to support man has descended from apes, have been debunked like the human skull mated with the jaw of an orangutan. Because of the circumstances, it had to have been perpetrated with the intent to falsely prove the origin of the species. How much of the other alleged evidence was manufactured to support the theory? Science may not be so infallible but obviously scientists are.


Wait... what? I've never even heard of these human/orangutan hybrid skulls, plus that paragraph is quite fallacy-laden.
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-26 19:57, Chessmann wrote:

Certain aspects that have been once held as fact by ID's have been - apparently - refuted. That does not mean that ID has been disproven. Using this thinking, each time a position in evolution has been disproven (there have been many such times), evolutionists should have given up! Not a good way of being scientific!


You don't seem to have an understanding of the scientific method. In an experiment, if the results do not match the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is revised and retested to account for that. However, even with this, nothing has ever "disproven" evolution as a whole, hence the theory still holds strong as the cornerstone of modern biology and one of the most important scientific theories ever.
Thetruthteller
View Profile
New user
93 Posts

Profile of Thetruthteller
Watch this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO7IT81h200

It explains quite well why Creationism should not be taught in science class

This one explains how ideas become scientific theories

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcavPAFiG14

So far Creationism has yet to meet the criteria of being recognised as a science
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
Jut Google it, it is easy to find. The scientific method, only works when, the evidence is not tainted and all the evidence including that which does not support what the scientists want to prove.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
I really don't care if Creationism is taught in science classes or not. I do think we should not be teaching that humans evolved from apes; there is no conclusive evidence to support it.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
Thetruthteller
View Profile
New user
93 Posts

Profile of Thetruthteller
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 01:10, Tom Bartlett wrote:
I really don't care if Creationism is taught in science classes or not. I do think we should not be teaching that humans evolved from apes; there is no conclusive evidence to support it.


If your science teacher is teaching that humans evolved from apes then they need to go back to school and educate themselves on the basic tenants of evolutionary theory.

Evolution does not maintain that humans evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them.

The evidence of this is rather conclusive due to the discovery of matching retro viruses in our DNA

So yes the evidence is conclusive that apes and humans share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them
abc
View Profile
Inner circle
South African in Taiwan
1081 Posts

Profile of abc
Could you please define "rather conclusive"
I understand conclusive and I understand rather but "rather conclusive" is a very smart way of saying it isn't conclusive.
Conclusive would mean that there is no oher feasible explanation of why something happened. I will believe that when we have cured HIV/Aids. Until then I think we need to be rather careful when we use words like "conclusive".
Chessmann
View Profile
Inner circle
4145 Posts

Profile of Chessmann
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 00:48, magicman226 wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-09-26 19:57, Chessmann wrote:

Certain aspects that have been once held as fact by ID's have been - apparently - refuted. That does not mean that ID has been disproven. Using this thinking, each time a position in evolution has been disproven (there have been many such times), evolutionists should have given up! Not a good way of being scientific!


You don't seem to have an understanding of the scientific method. In an experiment, if the results do not match the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is revised and retested to account for that. However, even with this, nothing has ever "disproven" evolution as a whole, hence the theory still holds strong as the cornerstone of modern biology and one of the most important scientific theories ever.


I'm afraid that you did not understand the point of my paragraph, as your own did not address it.
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 13:05, Chessmann wrote:

I'm afraid that you did not understand the point of my paragraph, as your own did not address it.


Well, when has evolution ever been disproven?
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 02:21, Thetruthteller wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 01:10, Tom Bartlett wrote:
I really don't care if Creationism is taught in science classes or not. I do think we should not be teaching that humans evolved from apes; there is no conclusive evidence to support it.


If your science teacher is teaching that humans evolved from apes then they need to go back to school and educate themselves on the basic tenants of evolutionary theory.

Evolution does not maintain that humans evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them.

The evidence of this is rather conclusive due to the discovery of matching retro viruses in our DNA

So yes the evidence is conclusive that apes and humans share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them


So no, the evidence is not conclusive that apes and humans share a common ancestor.

It is conclusive that apes and humans share some common DNA, but so do most mammals. After all, DNA is the building blocks of all things great and small.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20662 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 00:41, magicman226 wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 00:24, Tom Bartlett wrote:
I have never seen this evidence presented only rumors and many that were supposed to support man has descended from apes, have been debunked like the human skull mated with the jaw of an orangutan. Because of the circumstances, it had to have been perpetrated with the intent to falsely prove the origin of the species. How much of the other alleged evidence was manufactured to support the theory? Science may not be so infallible but obviously scientists are.


Wait... what? I've never even heard of these human/orangutan hybrid skulls, plus that paragraph is quite fallacy-laden.


Then you did not read my post on Piltdown man. Read it and research it before you come to a conclusion.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-28 02:01, Tom Bartlett wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 02:21, Thetruthteller wrote:
Quote:
On 2008-09-27 01:10, Tom Bartlett wrote:
I really don't care if Creationism is taught in science classes or not. I do think we should not be teaching that humans evolved from apes; there is no conclusive evidence to support it.


If your science teacher is teaching that humans evolved from apes then they need to go back to school and educate themselves on the basic tenants of evolutionary theory.

Evolution does not maintain that humans evolved from apes. We share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them.

The evidence of this is rather conclusive due to the discovery of matching retro viruses in our DNA

So yes the evidence is conclusive that apes and humans share a common ancestor but we did not evolve from them


So no, the evidence is not conclusive that apes and humans share a common ancestor.

It is conclusive that apes and humans share some common DNA, but so do most mammals. After all, DNA is the building blocks of all things great and small.


Yea, they share DNA because they are related...
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-28 13:28, Dannydoyle wrote:

Then you did not read my post on Piltdown man. Read it and research it before you come to a conclusion.


I looked it up. It was an archaeological hoax. However, that doesn't disprove evolution at all. It's not like our entire knowledge of human evolution relies on that single piece of evidence.
Chessmann
View Profile
Inner circle
4145 Posts

Profile of Chessmann
Magicman, you have just hit upon what I was saying earlier, regarding BOTH sides. Disproving 1 piece/portion of a position does not necessarily demolish it as a whole.
My ex-cat was named "Muffin". "Vomit" would be a better name for her. AKA "The Evil Ball of Fur".
magicman226
View Profile
Loyal user
San Antonio, Texas
234 Posts

Profile of magicman226
Quote:
On 2008-09-28 14:34, Chessmann wrote:
Magicman, you have just hit upon what I was saying earlier, regarding BOTH sides. Disproving 1 piece/portion of a position does not necessarily demolish it as a whole.


ID does not have any scientific grounding at all to demolish. Have they even done any experimentation?
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20662 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Hey kid, they can not show parrental relationship.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27166 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
If you wanted to see evidence for some sort of willful manipulation of matter as regards life - seek something living which is not carbon based and using RNA/DNA as it's basis of replication. Failing that - what's to rationalize but a lack of imagination or worse - the obvious implications of the fossil record which strongly suggests a great deal of entire races of creatures which came to be were destroyed.

The bird is cruel! ( look up that story )
...to all the coins I've dropped here
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Ben Stein interviewed on BNN (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..7~8~9~10~11..14~15~16 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.14 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL