Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I'm sure all the resident Religious Republicans will disagree with the Researchers.
3-8-2006 Human quadrupeds discovered in Turkey
The discovery of a Turkish family that walks on all fours could aid research into the evolution of humans.
Researchers believe the five brothers and sisters, who can walk naturally only on all fours, may provide new information on how humans evolved from four-legged hominids to walk upright.
Nicholas Humphrey, evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, told The Times the discovery opened "an extraordinary window on our past".
The BBC said the documentary would contribute to fierce scientific debate and raised profound questions about what it is to be human.
Humphrey, who has contributed to the documentary, believes the style of walking may be a throwback to a form of behaviour abandoned by humans more than three million years ago.
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Interesting, I wonder if this documentary will become available on the net after broadcast.Originally posted by: dmcowen674
I'm sure all the resident Religious Republicans will disagree with the Researchers.
3-8-2006 Human quadrupeds discovered in Turkey
The discovery of a Turkish family that walks on all fours could aid research into the evolution of humans.
Researchers believe the five brothers and sisters, who can walk naturally only on all fours, may provide new information on how humans evolved from four-legged hominids to walk upright.
Nicholas Humphrey, evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics, told The Times the discovery opened "an extraordinary window on our past".
The BBC said the documentary would contribute to fierce scientific debate and raised profound questions about what it is to be human.
Humphrey, who has contributed to the documentary, believes the style of walking may be a throwback to a form of behaviour abandoned by humans more than three million years ago.
All these pesky scientists, slowly and inexorably accumulating evidence that human beings have been slowly changing over the eons. What's an Intelligent Designer to do when all His perfectly crafted handiwork is modified by random forces and - amazingly - is made even more perfect?Providing the strongest evidence yet that humans are still evolving, researchers have detected some 700 regions of the human genome where genes appear to have been reshaped by natural selection, a principal force of evolution, within the last 5,000 to 15,000 years.
The genes that show this evolutionary change include some responsible for the senses of taste and smell, digestion, bone structure, skin color and brain function.
.
.
.
The finding adds substantially to the evidence that human evolution did not grind to a halt in the distant past, as is tacitly assumed by many social scientists. Even evolutionary psychologists, who interpret human behavior in terms of what the brain evolved to do, hold that the work of natural selection in shaping the human mind was completed in the pre-agricultural past, more than 10,000 years ago.
"There is ample evidence that selection has been a major driving point in our evolution during the last 10,000 years, and there is no reason to suppose that it has stopped," said Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the University of Chicago who headed the study.
.
.
.
Dr. Pritchard also detected selection at work in brain genes, including a group known as microcephaly genes because, when disrupted, they cause people to be born with unusually small brains.
Dr. Bruce Lahn, also of the University of Chicago, theorizes that successive changes in the microcephaly genes may have enabled the brain to enlarge in primate evolution, a process that may have continued in the recent human past.
Last September, Dr. Lahn reported that one microcephaly gene had recently changed in Europeans and another in Europeans and Asians. He predicted that other brain genes would be found to have changed in other populations.
Dr. Pritchard's test did not detect a signal of selection in Dr. Lahn's two genes, but that may just reflect limitations of the test, he and Dr. Lahn said. Dr. Pritchard found one microcephaly gene that had been selected for in Africans and another in Europeans and East Asians. Another brain gene, SNTG1, was under heavy selection in all three populations.
Originally posted by: shira
Last September, Dr. Lahn reported that one microcephaly gene had recently changed in Europeans and another in Europeans and Asians. He predicted that other brain genes would be found to have changed in other populations.
Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Evolution IS only theroy. What is religion, wild guesses? I don't know of a single person who has met God in person. I always fail to see why both camps can't find a middle ground. Can't evolution and creationism both be right?
Originally posted by: themusgrat
This is the dumbest OP I have ever seen. In fact, I won't read all of it. Anyone who thinks that one "think tank" is behind ID is very misinformed. ID, the principle, has been around before the THEORY of evolution was even made up. As for what I believe, because of scientific research, I agree that evolution is possible, to a point. We will evolve, but never become chickens, nor chickens us. But because of the overwhelming lack of hard evidence, I know that I did not evolve from a monkey, or lizard, or big bang. My theory on the big bang is that: there was an explosion of stuff that no one knows the origin of, that resulted in seemingly infinite and very ordered solar systems, of which 1 in a trillionbajillion decided to have llife, and therefore, a fish appeared from no life, violating several universal laws, the fish decided that swimming was boring, shed its fins and grew arms and legs, went to the north pole, decided to grow a natural parka of hair, then moved back to the equator, decided that parkas are kind of hot, was told by a chiropractor that he should straighten his back, and called himself human.
So if evolution was true, why didn't life adapt itself to any of the other planets? Is it because it can't adapt to anything else?
Originally posted by: lyssword
I will not comment on evolution or ID+creationism, but the pure usage of put-downs by "evolution" camp seem to be not in a spirit of debate but simple dirty fighting. Please, comments like "dumbshit, idiot, retard, monkey, laughable, stupid, pure BS, bullshit, etc.." ( I don't have the time to find all of the words used) doesn't help get your point of view across to the "other camp". TY
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: lyssword
I will not comment on evolution or ID+creationism, but the pure usage of put-downs by "evolution" camp seem to be not in a spirit of debate but simple dirty fighting. Please, comments like "dumbshit, idiot, retard, monkey, laughable, stupid, pure BS, bullshit, etc.." ( I don't have the time to find all of the words used) doesn't help get your point of view across to the "other camp". TY
I agree, it's very frustrating trying to get people to stop repeating the lies they've swallowed.
Everytime one of these threads becomes active, someone claims that 'evolution can't be right' and starts asking for 'transitional fossils' and all sorts of crap like that, thinking they have really shown science where they can stick it.
Then when one of us patiently explains that they are very, very wrong, and backs that up with both fossil and biological evidence, the person either responds with 'yeah but I don't believe that' or just runs away.
So when someone gets frustrated by an ID proponent, especially one who they know was around 'last time' this discussion was had, I find it fairly easy to empathize.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: lyssword
I will not comment on evolution or ID+creationism, but the pure usage of put-downs by "evolution" camp seem to be not in a spirit of debate but simple dirty fighting. Please, comments like "dumbshit, idiot, retard, monkey, laughable, stupid, pure BS, bullshit, etc.." ( I don't have the time to find all of the words used) doesn't help get your point of view across to the "other camp". TY
I agree, it's very frustrating trying to get people to stop repeating the lies they've swallowed.
Everytime one of these threads becomes active, someone claims that 'evolution can't be right' and starts asking for 'transitional fossils' and all sorts of crap like that, thinking they have really shown science where they can stick it.
Then when one of us patiently explains that they are very, very wrong, and backs that up with both fossil and biological evidence, the person either responds with 'yeah but I don't believe that' or just runs away.
So when someone gets frustrated by an ID proponent, especially one who they know was around 'last time' this discussion was had, I find it fairly easy to empathize.
Well there is a problem here, I think:
We know that only people who have been introduced to religious indoctrination previously and at a younger age then the awakening of the processes of reasoning and scientific logic in early adulthood posses an inner motivation to struggle against the notions of Darwin. From the fact that they mostly come from a subculture, and a sub-religious culture at that, tells us that they are bigots.
A bigot is simply a person who has a prior irrational religious belief that pops up out of the unconscious to tell him or her what is right or wrong autonomously, as in robot fashion. Evolution is wrong because the Bible says so and it is the word of God.
So no matter what argument you bring in evolution's favor, that argument must be wrong because the entire ego structure of the bigot, his whole false notion of his worthiness as a Christian and beloved of God, rests on the assumption of that truth.
So when you ask a fundamentalist Christian to have an unbiased look at evolution you are asking him to die, to experience the feelings of worthlessness his religious faith is there to mask. Worse still, the false feelings of worth that he does feel, while totally false at their root, are emotionally correspondent in many ways to how people should feel.
Self respect is a natural condition of man, an inalienable truth as it were. And respect leads to all sorts of natural virtues. So you can get a situation where you may be correctly arguing the truth of evolution with a person whose Being Morality is greater than your own and the self-evidence of that in his or her eyes will weight heavily against you.
Calling him or her a dumb ass, for example, can be one of those things. His religion usually includes the command to love you and to treat you as he or she would like to be treated. You may have the superior argument but he or she the superior manners. Where could such dumbassed, I mean poor manners come from:
The transformation of youth into adulthood is in part about the acquisition of self respect. But again because all people everywhere are infected with self hate as a condition of the fact of learning language that abstracts and creates concepts that don't exist, ie, the notion that you are worthless, and then applies them to children, everybody has created a false self. For the religious person it is his religious illusions and for others it is other things.
The young man or woman who grows to understand that the religious bs he was fed as a child is crap becomes very proud of his new capacity for logical thinking. Look at me, I am BS free. Well, not really because you are still stuck with your miserable pinhead ego. For the logical thinking type science can become his religion. Science is the power of light that cast aside superstition and illusions. Of course it never gets around to self examination, one of the duties of the religious.
So the secular type has built his self respect on the powers of the mind to scientifically discover truth. This is his ego substitute for real self respect. It has the profound power to convince because it is logical. Voilà, I am now a somebody because I am a scientist. This is his religion because it functions exactly the same.
OK, so along comes this nut case Christian who will not bow down to you God, Mr. Logic and you immediately feel the threat. If my God logic is false too then my life is also worthless. Well, yes, because it is the real truth of what you really do feel. You have erected your self respect on the external as other religious types do.
And it is this seeing yourself, this denial, in the Christian that is in you that causes you to be pissed off. You and he are the same and he is the ass you feel you are.
That is why we hate people who are different. We are different than we should be and we hate who we are. All who refuse to feel their own pain wish it on others.
Yes, the talk is coming from the evolution camp... the crazy actions however...Originally posted by: lyssword
nice to see how you turned that around to saying creationists call evolutionist dumbasses, which is completely the other way around. 99% of sh1ttalk coming from evolution camp.
... since his masturbatory tirades in the nuclear power thread are no better.Originally posted by: Moonbeamd
A bigot is simply a person who has a prior irrational religious belief that pops up out of the unconscious to tell him or her what is right or wrong autonomously, as in robot fashion. Evolution is wrong because the Bible says so and it is the word of God.
So no matter what argument you bring in evolution's favor, that argument must be wrong because the entire ego structure of the bigot, his whole false notion of his worthiness as a Christian and beloved of God, rests on the assumption of that truth.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
We know that only people who have been introduced to religious indoctrination previously and at a younger age then the awakening of the processes of reasoning and scientific logic in early adulthood posses an inner motivation to struggle against the notions of Darwin. From the fact that they mostly come from a subculture, and a sub-religious culture at that, tells us that they are bigots.
A bigot is simply a person who has a prior irrational religious belief that pops up out of the unconscious to tell him or her what is right or wrong autonomously, as in robot fashion. Evolution is wrong because the Bible says so and it is the word of God.
Originally posted by: dahunan
http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/060221_unertanfrm.htm
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The Religious Republicans especially on here will have a fit with this study:
4-4-2006 Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says
Rare conditions could have conspired to create hard-to-see ice on the Sea of Galilee that a person could have walked on back when Jesus is said to have walked on water, a scientist said today.
The study, which examines a combination of favorable water and environmental conditions, proposes that Jesus could have walked on an isolated patch of floating ice on what is now known as Lake Kinneret in northern Israel.
Looking at temperature records of the Mediterranean Sea surface and using analytical ice and statistical models, scientists considered a small section of the cold freshwater surface of the lake. The area studied, about 10,000 square feet, was near salty springs that empty into it.
The results suggest temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit (-4 degrees Celsius) during one of the two cold periods 2,500 ?1,500 years ago for up to two days, the same decades during which Jesus lived.
Such floating ice in the unfrozen waters of the lake would be hard to spot, especially if rain had smoothed its surface.
"We simply explain that unique freezing processes probably happened in that region only a handful of times during the last 12,000 years," said Doron Nof, a Florida State University Professor of Oceanography. "We leave to others the question of whether or not our research explains the biblical account."
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The Religious Republicans especially on here will have a fit with this study:
4-4-2006 Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says
Rare conditions could have conspired to create hard-to-see ice on the Sea of Galilee that a person could have walked on back when Jesus is said to have walked on water, a scientist said today.
The study, which examines a combination of favorable water and environmental conditions, proposes that Jesus could have walked on an isolated patch of floating ice on what is now known as Lake Kinneret in northern Israel.
Looking at temperature records of the Mediterranean Sea surface and using analytical ice and statistical models, scientists considered a small section of the cold freshwater surface of the lake. The area studied, about 10,000 square feet, was near salty springs that empty into it.
The results suggest temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit (-4 degrees Celsius) during one of the two cold periods 2,500 ?1,500 years ago for up to two days, the same decades during which Jesus lived.
Such floating ice in the unfrozen waters of the lake would be hard to spot, especially if rain had smoothed its surface.
"We simply explain that unique freezing processes probably happened in that region only a handful of times during the last 12,000 years," said Doron Nof, a Florida State University Professor of Oceanography. "We leave to others the question of whether or not our research explains the biblical account."
:roll: X 11ty billion
What about the Religious Democrats? How will this effect them?
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: bamacre
What about the Religious Democrats? How will this effect them?
It won't because they still believe in Science.
Sorta gives more meaning behind:Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The Religious Republicans especially on here will have a fit with this study:
4-4-2006 Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says
Rare conditions could have conspired to create hard-to-see ice on the Sea of Galilee that a person could have walked on back when Jesus is said to have walked on water, a scientist said today.
The study, which examines a combination of favorable water and environmental conditions, proposes that Jesus could have walked on an isolated patch of floating ice on what is now known as Lake Kinneret in northern Israel.
Looking at temperature records of the Mediterranean Sea surface and using analytical ice and statistical models, scientists considered a small section of the cold freshwater surface of the lake. The area studied, about 10,000 square feet, was near salty springs that empty into it.
The results suggest temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit (-4 degrees Celsius) during one of the two cold periods 2,500 ?1,500 years ago for up to two days, the same decades during which Jesus lived.
Such floating ice in the unfrozen waters of the lake would be hard to spot, especially if rain had smoothed its surface.
"We simply explain that unique freezing processes probably happened in that region only a handful of times during the last 12,000 years," said Doron Nof, a Florida State University Professor of Oceanography. "We leave to others the question of whether or not our research explains the biblical account."
Wow... who pays for these "studies"? Or more properly, who spins them? What a joke!Originally posted by: dmcowen674
The Religious Republicans especially on here will have a fit with this study:
4-4-2006 Jesus Could Have Walked on Ice, Scientist Says
Rare conditions could have conspired to create hard-to-see ice on the Sea of Galilee that a person could have walked on back when Jesus is said to have walked on water, a scientist said today.
The study, which examines a combination of favorable water and environmental conditions, proposes that Jesus could have walked on an isolated patch of floating ice on what is now known as Lake Kinneret in northern Israel.
Looking at temperature records of the Mediterranean Sea surface and using analytical ice and statistical models, scientists considered a small section of the cold freshwater surface of the lake. The area studied, about 10,000 square feet, was near salty springs that empty into it.
The results suggest temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit (-4 degrees Celsius) during one of the two cold periods 2,500 ?1,500 years ago for up to two days, the same decades during which Jesus lived.
Such floating ice in the unfrozen waters of the lake would be hard to spot, especially if rain had smoothed its surface.
"We simply explain that unique freezing processes probably happened in that region only a handful of times during the last 12,000 years," said Doron Nof, a Florida State University Professor of Oceanography. "We leave to others the question of whether or not our research explains the biblical account."
:laugh:Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: bamacre
What about the Religious Democrats? How will this effect them?
It won't because they still believe in Science.