Support NeoGAF

Count Dookkake · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
How cute, I love it when idiots try to diss religion in post where Religion has nothing to do with what is said. I love progressives and Atheist, all about the free exchange of thoughts, as long as it doesn't impact on their little God hate. Seriously, can there be a bigger class of douche bags on the Planet?

:lol

In all honesty, it was a genuine question. Nary a pun nor a wink.

Anyway, I'm sure you can see that religion has popped up a few times in this thread. Scientific advances that lessen the gaps for god tend to cause a bit of subject overlap. No need to get so defensive.

As for the bolded... hmm, how about holy men who rape kids? I think that might fit the bill. Don't want to go off-topic, but you asked.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
And what does that have to do with all the hostility that Atheist and many libs have towards religion, nothing at all. Those Chistains who are not fundies are not hostile towards religion are they, no, they hate the screw jobs.

Your hypocritical generalizations, that's what.

methos75 · May 15, 2009

How am I being hypocritical, I hate both sides of the house. I think atheist who diss religion in public are huge douche bags and waste of flesh and I think the screw job chistain nutjobs trying to run everyone's lives are the same.

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

quadriplegicjon said:
and the time it took us was much faster than the time it took in actuality..

so are you saying this is proof that man > god ?

Are YOU saying that god directed the process? that's you saying it, not me.

"Simple" studies of population genetics are based on the premise that evolution is true.

And? it's like saying Algebra is based on the premise of Mathematics (DUH), but Mathematics is not a waste of time. Evolution (macro) and its branches are a waste of time.

methos75 said:
I wouldn't call them bubbleheads, but I do remember reading a book by Stephen Gould were he stated that 80% of all Scientific inventions and knowledge we have we just sorta of bumbled into.

I read in another book that 90% of statistics are bull.

Ela Hadrun said:
Really? Your Jesus avatar isn't in support of a belief in the divinity of Jesus? ok then

I believe in him, but it's poking fun at my tag. It's getting the expected reaction.

KHarvey16 · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
I think atheist who diss religion in public

Yeah, how dare they criticize an idea! Bunch of assholes if you ask me.

Bulla564 said:
Evolution (macro) and its branches are a waste of time.

:lol

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
How am I being hypocritical, I hate both sides of the house. I think atheist who diss religion in public are huge douche bags and waste of flesh and I think the screw job chistain nutjobs trying to run everyone's lives are the same.

You know, you're right. I didn't consider self-loathing to be an option.

Particle Physicist · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Are YOU saying that god directed the process? that's you saying it, not me.

:lol oh come on... you may not have specifically said it, but you were clearly suggesting that.

methos75 said:
How cute, I love it when idiots try to diss religion in post where Religion has nothing to do with what is said. I love progressives and Atheist, all about the free exchange of thoughts, as long as it doesn't impact on their little God hate. Seriously, can there be a bigger class of douche bags on the Planet?

huh? while Bulla564 may not have explicitly said it, he was clearly alluding to intelligent design... i.e. a religious construct.

Bulla564 said:
And? it's like saying Algebra is based on the premise of Mathematics (DUH), but Mathematics is not a waste of time. Evolution (macro) and its branches are a waste of time.

so furthering our understanding of the world around us is a waste of time? :lol

Zaptruder · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
How am I being hypocritical, I hate both sides of the house. I think atheist who diss religion in public are huge douche bags and waste of flesh and I think the screw job chistain nutjobs trying to run everyone's lives are the same.

Trans: "RAGE! OH GOD I FEEL SO UNCOMFORTABLE TALKING ABOUT THIS SHIT I JUST GOTTA HATE!! SHUT UP SHUUT UUP! SHUT UUUUUUPPP!!!" *shakes fist*

devilhawk · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Evolution (macro) and its branches are a waste of time.

There is little difference between macro and micro evolution other than scale. If research ceased in macro evolution, micro evolution research would be hampered. The reduction of macro evolution to micro evolution is itself an important aspect.

methos75 · May 15, 2009

Zaptruder said:
Trans: "RAGE! OH GOD I FEEL SO UNCOMFORTABLE TALKING ABOUT THIS SHIT I JUST GOTTA HATE!! SHUT UP SHUUT UUP! SHUT UUUUUUPPP!!!" *shakes fist*

how would it make me uncomfortable, I believe in evolution, I just also happen to believe in God. Sadly for all the idiots who think other wise, the two are not mutually exclusive to each other. I also believe that man can recreate the works of God, creating life does not disprove God. God created us in his image, its only natural we should try to emulate he who we mirror.

Shins · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
how would it make me uncomfortable, I believe in evolution, I just also happen to believe in God. Sadly for all the idiots who think other wise, the two are not mutually exclusive to each other. I also believe that man can recreate the works of God, creating life does not disprove God. God created us in his image, its only natural we should try to emulate he who we mirror.

If only you could emulate His grace.

methos75 · May 15, 2009

God was not all grace, the bible is prove of that and the Flood, Man's removal from the Garden, Luicfer's banishment, etc. Those who say God is a a peaceful, forgiving, graceful God know little of the bible.

ZAK · May 15, 2009

I don't think I've ever seen such a high concentration of failing to recognize trolls on GAF.

Or... I hope that's what's happening.

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

devilhawk said:
There is little difference between macro and micro evolution other than scale. If research ceased in macro evolution, micro evolution research would be hampered. The reduction of macro evolution to micro evolution is itself an important aspect.

Well that's a big load of bull. The RELEVANT (edit) study of molecular biology and genetics DOES NOT rely on some hypothesis that mokeys and men share an ape-like ancestor. Studying genomes ang variance within species DOES NOT rely on the absurd story of dinosaurs evolving into birds.

Macroevolutionary fables are not even fun bed times stories. They are a waste of time and money, but oh well... naturalists need a hobby.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Well that's a big load of bull. The RELEVANT (edit) study of molecular biology and genetics DOES NOT rely on some hypothesis that mokeys and men share an ape-like ancestor. Studying genomes ang variance within species DOES NOT rely on the absurd story of dinosaurs evolving into birds.

Macroevolutionary fables are not even fun bed times stories. They are a waste of time and money, but oh well... naturalists need a hobby.

Says the man who flunked biology.

Count Dookkake · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Well that's a big load of bull.

Kinda off-topic, but has your Jesus avatar always cradled that dinosaur? I could have sworn it was a sheep earlier today.

Beer Monkey · May 15, 2009

methos75 said:
Look if you do not believe, cool, keep it to your fucking self. If you do believe, cool, keep it too your fucking self.

Okay...

methos75 said:
how would it make me uncomfortable, I believe in evolution, I just also happen to believe in God. Sadly for all the idiots who think other wise

Wait...

DanteFox · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
Says the man who flunked biology.

mmmmmmm... ad hominems.... delicious....

:d

Nocebo · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Well that's a big load of bull. The RELEVANT (edit) study of molecular biology and genetics DOES NOT rely on some hypothesis that mokeys and men share an ape-like ancestor. Studying genomes ang variance within species DOES NOT rely on the absurd story of dinosaurs evolving into birds.

Macroevolutionary fables are not even fun bed times stories. They are a waste of time and money, but oh well... naturalists need a hobby.

So macroevolutionary fables are not fun because they require too much thinking? I agree they would make terrible bed time stories. That's why we have the bible and such which tells the same things only dumbed way down to make it easier to swallow. Which makes sense because way back then we didn't have the accumulated knowledge we have now. It would have taken too long to explain everything in detail.

Buttchin · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Well that's a big load of bull. The RELEVANT (edit) study of molecular biology and genetics DOES NOT rely on some hypothesis that mokeys and men share an ape-like ancestor. Studying genomes ang variance within species DOES NOT rely on the absurd story of dinosaurs evolving into birds.

Macroevolutionary fables are not even fun bed times stories. They are a waste of time and money, but oh well... naturalists need a hobby.

ummmm riiiiiiiight,

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" ~Theodosius Dobzhansky ("theistic evolutionist")

and yes there is a lot of truth in that statement get yourself a molecular biology textbook and you'll see that pretty quickly

Kipz · May 15, 2009

From Rapture Ready:lol :lol :lol :

Yeah, I dont buy this for a second. Couldnt they have just read Genesis? Saved a lot of time!!

I think it takes more faith to believe in evolution.

I found how life began many years ago. All I had to do is pick up a Bible and read the first few chapters of Genesis and there it was in black and white.

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Count Dookkake said:
Kinda off-topic, but has your Jesus avatar always cradled that dinosaur? I could have sworn it was a sheep earlier today.

I think the sheep was the original, but creationists (or making fun of creationists?) it was made with the dinosaur.

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" ~Theodosius Dobzhansky ("theistic evolutionist")

Yay! it's quotes time already? and NO, the study of biological system to benefit humanity has little to do with how they supposedly diverged from a common ancestor.

It's a hobby.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

DanteFox said:
mmmmmmm... ad hominems.... delicious....

:d

Well, I mean it more in the sense that what he's saying convinces me of his lack of understanding, not that his prior failings disqualify his present arguments from being considered.

Buttchin · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Yay! it's quotes time already? and NO, the study of biological system to benefit humanity has little to do with how they supposedly diverged from a common ancestor.

It's a hobby.

no the quote wasn't my argument... But some quotes hold an asston of truth to them... this happens to be one..

it was a lead in to my argument of get a molecular textbook and find out how all the enzymes involved evolved from a common ancestors and it's readily apparent to anyone with any formal education in biology. It wouldn't be feasible to go through every single piece of the overwhelming amount of evidence but if you want to (which im guessing you aren't) there are nice free reputable sources readily available.

separating the central dogma of molecular biology and evolution is basically impossible and in order to understand one you have to have intimate knowledge about the other.

Oh and you want a real world example of evolution impacting humans looking up the heterozygous advantage in relationship to sickle cell anemia.

Nocebo · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Yay! it's quotes time already? and NO, the study of biological system to benefit humanity has little to do with how they supposedly diverged from a common ancestor.

It's a hobby.

Why is it a waste of time if progress is made all the time? Why is it a waste of time when it should eventually rule out that we could possibly have come from a common ancestor? Isn't that what you believe in? Shouldn't you be supportive of this then?

DeathbyVolcano · May 15, 2009

*sigh*

I always avoid coming to these threads and I think I'm going to keep it that way. Science, go to your corner. Religion, you too.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

A good example of how the fundamental theory of biology touches on something like anthropology, since you're so keen on bringing up human ancestry: The reason why various groups of people on this earth have different skin color.

This is more than just a curiosity, it has had real social ramifications.

"God's Beard!" · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
It's a hobby.

edit: you know what? I've decided against it.

Buttchin · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
The reason why various groups of people on this earth have different skin color.

they have a pretty good idea of why the different skin colors (which wasnt what you were askin).

I'm posting more to say that your example of evolutionary principles relating to various aspects of the real world is much better than my "heterozygous advantage in reference to sickle cell anemia"..

that is all

Ionas · May 15, 2009

The THEORY of evolution* is obviously central/fundamental/whatever you want to call it to the study of genetics and cellular biology; to borrow from literary critics, evolution is the loose string in the fabric that, when pulled, brings the whole piece together.

But still, maybe they have a point: I don't know that man's ancestry and relation to other primates is all that pressing of an issue.

*joking, joking

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Buttchin said:
no the quote wasn't my argument... But some quotes hold an asston of truth to them... this happens to be one..

it was a lead in to my argument of get a molecular textbook and find out how all the enzymes involved evolved from a common ancestors and it's readily apparent to anyone with any formal education in biology. It wouldn't be feasible to go through every single piece of the overwhelming amount of evidence but if you want to (which im guessing you aren't) there are nice free reputable sources readily available.

Oh and you want a real world example of evolution impacting humans looking up the heterozygous advantage in relationship to sickle cell anemia.

LOL another needless assumption is to say that enzymes evolved from a common ancestor. One doesn't even need to assume that to study their function, structure, etc.

Moreover, genetic variance (a.k.a CHANGE), while always observed to a limited degree in experiments, is qualified as evolution (a.k.a CHANGE), it is useless to extrapolate this into common ancestry between all living organisms.

Hitokage said:
A good example of how the fundamental theory of biology touches on something like anthropology, since you're so keen on bringing up human ancestry: The reason why various groups of people on this earth have different skin color.

This is more than just a curiosity, it has had real social ramifications.

That's genetics and the relation between genotypes and phenotypes. It has NOTHING to do with supposed theories of ape-like ancestors (no matter how much the Nazis wanted to believe).

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Buttchin said:
they have a pretty good idea of why the different skin colors (which wasnt what you were askin).

If he's going to argue Cain and Noah's Ark, he's welcome to do so.

Moreover, genetic variance (a.k.a CHANGE), while always observed to a limited degree in experiments, is qualified as evolution (a.k.a CHANGE), it is useless to extrapolate this into common ancestry between all living organisms.

Because MAGICAL BARRIERS prevent changes from accumulating in groups so they don't get too far away from organisms they ceased to interbreed with eons ago!

Just because you can say 2 + 2 = 4 doesn't mean you can say what 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 is!

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
Because of MAGICAL BARRIERS that prevent changes from accumulating in groups so they don't get too far away from organisms they ceased to interbreed with eons ago!

I wouldn't say magical. They are empirical observations in all experiments.

Oh sorry... forgot the naturalist Deity of TIME and CHANCE.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
I wouldn't say magical. They are empirical observations in all experiments.

All experiments creationists ever care to cite anyway, too bad they omit the last century of research. Some quick and easy examples: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
All experiments creationists ever care to cite anyway, too bad they omit the last century of research. Some quick and easy examples: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Ah yes, the delicate subject of what defines a species. Two fruit flies, two mice, two dogs that can't interbreed anymore to produce a viable offspring, are considered to be different species.

Are these REALLY the best examples of boundless genetic evolution to explain the current diversity in life?

ouch...

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Ah yes, the delicate subject of what defines a species. Two fruit flies, two mice, two dogs that can't interbreed anymore to produce a viable offspring, are considered to be different species.

Are these REALLY the best examples of boundless genetic evolution to explain the current diversity in life?

ouch...

Like I said, you must have failed biology. You don't even know what you're arguing against.

Buttchin · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
Like I said, you must have failed biology. You don't even know what you're arguing against.

thats why i gave up arguing with him... i wrote a large speil defining the difference between the theory of evolution versus the fact of evolution so that he would've basically had to completely ignorant to callgenetics and molecular biology different from evolution but i then came to the conclusion it wasnt worth it cause he would simply quote what a said and saya single sentence amounting to ':lol U ARE STUPID'

i figured it wasnt worth the trouble

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
Like I said, you must have failed biology. You don't even know what you're arguing against.

To answer what seems to be your last line of defense, no, I never failed none of my biology courses.

Perhaps you can explain how your groundbreaking experiments, the two species of mice, for example, can be extrapolated into diversity in life arriving through accumulated genetic changes.

devilhawk · May 15, 2009

Buttchin said:
thats why i gave up arguing with him... i wrote a large speil defining the difference between the theory of evolution versus the fact of evolution so that he would've basically had to completely ignorant to callgenetics and molecular biology different from evolution but i then came to the conclusion it wasnt worth it cause he would simply quote what a said and saya single sentence amounting to ':lol U ARE STUPID'

i figured it wasnt worth the trouble

I wrote a nice spiel about conservation of epigenetics and genetics and about homologies, all in reference to important beneficial genomic and proteomic research. I thought the same thing you did.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Perhaps you can explain how your groundbreaking experiments, the two species of mice, for example, can be extrapolated into diversity in life arriving through accumulated genetic changes.

I can't think of a way to respond to this post without being outright insulting.

...oh, how about...

"Do it multiple times."

devilhawk · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
I can't think of a way to respond to this post without being outright insulting.

...oh, how about...

"Do it multiple times."

Repetition is part of the scientific method, he can't do that.

Bulla564 said:
I never failed none of my biology courses.

Seems about right.

Nocebo · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
I wouldn't say magical. They are empirical observations in all experiments.

Oh sorry... forgot the naturalist Deity of TIME and CHANCE.

Yes, women were created from some guy's rib! Everyone knows that. That's certainly more plausible than evolving from other creatures.
Actually which creation fable do you subscribe to anyway? You're being suspiciously vague about what you believe in most of the time.

Buttchin said:
thats why i gave up arguing with him... i wrote a large speil defining the difference between the theory of evolution versus the fact of evolution so that he would've basically had to completely ignorant to callgenetics and molecular biology different from evolution but i then came to the conclusion it wasnt worth it cause he would simply quote what a said and saya single sentence amounting to ':lol U ARE STUPID'

i figured it wasnt worth the trouble

Hey there are other people reading this thread too. I for one would be interested in reading that!

Particle Physicist · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Perhaps you can explain how your groundbreaking experiments, the two species of mice, for example, can be extrapolated into diversity in life arriving through accumulated genetic changes.

take a fucken bio class and/or read about other experiments..

the whole basis of your argument is that you don't understand the explanations people are giving you.

Game-Biz · May 15, 2009

Wait, is this fucking science thread about to turn into a fucking evolution vs. creationism thread?

Fuck this shit, I'm out.

Skittleguy · May 15, 2009

I'm lost. What are you people arguing about?

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

Hitokage said:
I can't think of a way to respond to this post without being outright insulting.

...oh, how about...

"Do it multiple times."

Do what multiple times? speciate mice over and over again?

Yes, women were created from some guy's rib! Everyone knows that. That's certainly more plausible than evolving from other creatures.
Actually which creation fable do you subscribe to anyway? You're being suspiciously vague about what you believe in most of the time.

I don't believe in the genesis, if that's what you are implying. It's nothing more than a Jewish folk tale with a moral message. I don't subscribe to the fable of evolution either.

devilhawk · May 15, 2009

Skittleguy said:
I'm lost. What are you people arguing about?

Essentially, the science in the OP furthered the thinking of the RNA world hypothesis. Furthering the RNA world hypothesis is itself a backing of evolution. Now a creationist is telling us why it was a waste of time all the while conceding evolution exists but only on certain scales.

Bulla564 · May 15, 2009

quadriplegicjon said:
take a fucken bio class and/or read about other experiments..

the whole basis of your argument is that you don't understand the explanations people are giving you.

Sorry kiddo, the point is THERE ARE NO OTHER EXPERIMENTS that support their claims. Their best examples are rubbish.

I'm lost. What are you people arguing about?

How the experiment like in the OP and macroevolution are USELESS to human progress.

Hitokage · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
I don't believe in the genesis, if that's what you are implying. It's nothing more than a Jewish folk tale with a moral message. I don't subscribe to the fable of evolution either.

Well aren't you hip and edgy.

Nocebo · May 15, 2009

Bulla564 said:
Do what multiple times? speciate mice over and over again?

I don't believe in the genesis, if that's what you are implying. It's nothing more than a Jewish folk tale with a moral message. I don't subscribe to the fable of evolution either.

What exactly do you believe then? Do you believe in something you made up by cherry picking things you like here and there? I'm going to guess the answer here is yes. You subscribe for example "Intelligent Design", correct?, which selects a handfull of ideas from evolution science.

Support NeoGAF

Let there be Life! Scientists create RNA from base elements.

Member

Setec Astronomer

Banned

Banned

Member

Setec Astronomer

between a quark and a baryon

Banned

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

massive bear, tiny salmon

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Member

Member

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Member

Banned

Member

Setec Astronomer

Member

Member

between a quark and a baryon

Member

Ring a Bell for me

Banned

Member

Banned

Setec Astronomer

Member

Similar threads