[meliora] Babble

[wolveraptor]

What can't these morons understand about the words "gradual" and "simultaneous"? Maybe it's the multiple syllable thing?

[Stuart Mackey]

So many replies for one bit of unreason?

[Wyrm]

.... Remember, if there is even one creature that could not have evolved, then there must be a Creator."

You know, I just love the "magic bullet" mentality of these creationist morons. "If only we can find the one teensy-tiny little chink in the armor of the eeeevil-lution dragon and drive the purifying holy crossbow bolt of the LAWRD into its unholy guts, and cheer as it dies a horrible death." Meh.

[Darth Wong]

So many replies for one bit of unreason?

Well let's face it, the only point of this thread now is just a bit of idle chit-chat about the causes of people like this. It's not as if this person is capable of a real debate anyway; one look at her copy-paste methodology makes that obvious.

[Stuart Mackey]

So many replies for one bit of unreason?

Well let's face it, the only point of this thread now is just a bit of idle chit-chat about the causes of people like this. It's not as if this person is capable of a real debate anyway; one look at her copy-paste methodology makes that obvious.

Indeed, and on that note, I think a beer is in order, as I find out if "unreason" is an actual word.

EDIT: Unreason is an actual word. That deserves another beer.

[Keevan_Colton]

Indeed, and on that note, I think a beer is in order, as I find out if "unreason" is an actual word.

EDIT: Unreason is an actual word. That deserves another beer.

I'll drink to that too...and another to your ability to edit in here now

[Plekhanov]

.... Remember, if there is even one creature that could not have evolved, then there must be a Creator."

You know, I just love the "magic bullet" mentality of these creationist morons. "If only we can find the one teensy-tiny little chink in the armor of the eeeevil-lution dragon and drive the purifying holy crossbow bolt of the LAWRD into its unholy guts, and cheer as it dies a horrible death." Meh.

This seems like a projection of their own subconscious fears onto us, in that they seem to think just because their own world view is build upon a teetering pile of bullshit that can only be maintained by a studious denial of reality they assume that those who disagree with them are on similarly intellectually weak ground and likely to crumble under the merest challenge.

[Stuart Mackey]

Indeed, and on that note, I think a beer is in order, as I find out if "unreason" is an actual word.

EDIT: Unreason is an actual word. That deserves another beer.

I'll drink to that too...and another to your ability to edit in here now

Why thank you, have another one me!

[Darth Servo]

Sir Frederick Hoyle (British astronomer) said, "If one counts the number of trial assemblies of amino acids that are needed to give rise to the enzymes [required for life], the probability of their discovery by random shuffling turns out to be less than 1 in 1x10^40,000."

And that calculation ASSUMES that only one sequence works for a given function. That assumption has been proven false so many times its ridiculous that creationists keep bringing it up.

Former Yale professor of biophysics, Dr. Harold Horowitz, said the chance of the smallest, simplest life form evolving randomly is one chance in 10^340,000,000.

Since evolution is NOT totally random, his statement is irrelevant.

Let me give you a quote from a book by a guy named Mark Cahill. Let's assume macroevolution happened, and let's look at the giraffe as an example

"One thing I learned is that the giraffe needs a powerful heart to pump blood up its long neck to the brain.
If we want to believe in evolution, let's imagine the very first giraffe manages to evolve the two-foot-long heart it needs to get blood up a neck that long. It's heart is now so powerful that, as the giraffe bends its head down, the increased blood pressure is more than enough to burst the blood vessels in its brain.

So this first giraffe must be intelligent enough to realize that an improvement is needed and then set out to somehow grow an incredibly complex organic structure to fix the problem.

<snip remaining bullshit>

Gee, is this the BEST you could do? You honestly think the giraffe's evolutionary ancestory STARTED with that long neck?

HELL NO.

The giraffe's evolutionary ancestory started with an AVERAGE length neck like other animals. Then to get the higher leaves, ones with slightly longer necks were able to get more than ones with shorter necks. And along with the slightly longer neck evolved a slightly stronger heart. All the other mechanisms involved like the blood shunt also started evolving long before the problem became a lethal one. Initially the longer neck and stronger heart produced only small changes in blood pressure, not large fatal ones.

Is this really to complicated for you creationists to comprehend? Or are you delibrately trying to NOT see the simple solutions for the alleged problems you think are in evolution.

.... Remember, if there is even one creature that could not have evolved, then there must be a Creator."

What a pitty then that the creationists have yet again FAILED to produce one.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Classic misrepresentation of evolution. Giraffes didn't spring into existence overnight with long necks. Giraffe precursors were likely short-necked animals. Generations of selective pressure induced a shift towards longer-necked animals capable of exploiting a previously untapped food resource. Animals whose circulatory systems could cope with their body layouts would be more likely to survive to reproductive age than animals that couldn't. End result, the highly-adapted animal we see today.

Wouldn't another example of your point be the formation of bipedal organisms from aquatic finned creatures? I think I read an article in Scientific America that did a brief synopsis of the formation of bipeds via transgressing the aquatic barrier. Over time, fins developed into legs while organisms were still in the water due to selective advantages of being able to hold oneself up out of the water to get air (among other things).

It's not like it poofed into existence right away. There were many transitory species like Eusthemopteron, Acanthostega and Icthyostega. I on't really understand it all, and I think I have a harder time comprehending more distinct changes without some sort of geographic barrier or separation from the group, but changes due to pressures on specific genes doesn't seem far-fetched. etc.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

Classic misrepresentation of evolution. Giraffes didn't spring into existence overnight with long necks. Giraffe precursors were likely short-necked animals. Generations of selective pressure induced a shift towards longer-necked animals capable of exploiting a previously untapped food resource. Animals whose circulatory systems could cope with their body layouts would be more likely to survive to reproductive age than animals that couldn't. End result, the highly-adapted animal we see today.

Wouldn't another example of your point be the formation of bipedal organisms from aquatic finned creatures? I think I read an article in Scientific America that did a brief synopsis of the formation of bipeds via transgressing the aquatic barrier. Over time, fins developed into legs while organisms were still in the water due to selective advantages of being able to hold oneself up out of the water to get air (among other things).

It's not like it poofed into existence right away. There were many transitory species like Eusthemopteron, Acanthostega and Icthyostega. I on't really understand it all, and I think I have a harder time comprehending more distinct changes without some sort of geographic barrier or separation from the group, but changes due to pressures on specific genes doesn't seem far-fetched. etc.

Well, yes, but the cookie-cutter example presented by the, most likely, late and unlamented YEC concerned giraffes, so giraffes were what I opted to talk about. Examples like the one you just provided would've been very useful had she really intended to stick around and hold a discussion on the subject. But, her assertion that we, as evolutionists have no evidence, and that Jesus fulfilled hundreds of prophecies indicates that she just intended a drive-by preaching.

[Dalton]

Since this meliora person has so far failed to provide any responses to rebuttals whatsoever I fail to see the point in letting this account fester and rot as a potential cracker target. So, meliora, you're going back into the reject bin.