Are Humans Still Evolving?
Budikka666
evolving, and answers "Yes".
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
Budikka
Mike Jones
A human is asked a question he has an investment in?
I wonder what the answer might be? ;)
--
*===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.slackware.com/
duke
wrote:
>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
you see, evolution is God's way.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Mitchell Holman
news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>
>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>lving/
>
> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>
I don't guess that is written down in your
"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
Meteorite Debris
his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> >evolving, and answers "Yes".
> >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
>
> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
> you see, evolution is God's way.
So where can I giving offerings to this great goddess Evolution? Sounds
like she been doing all the hard work and that bully sky god YHWH has
been taking all the credit.
--
Remove both YOUR_SHOES before replying
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet
Jason Gastrich prayed for me on 8 January 2009 and nothing happened.
Apatriotism Yahoo Group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apatriotism
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make
you commit atrocities." - Voltaire
Meteorite Debris
> Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> evolving, and answers "Yes".
> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
I have fun out telling racists that because most diversity in human DNA
is found in Africa where humans have existed the longest that in the
event of a near extinction event in the future like the Mt Toba eruption
or a meteorite impact that Africans are the best placed to survive. They
don't like it. They don't like it up them as Corporal Jones would say.
duke
Nope, not that I know of. The bible addresses spiritual development, not
physical development.
duke
<epicurusboth@YOUR_SHOESaapt.net.au> wrote:
>Last time that great scribe duke <duckg...@cox.net> chipped away at
>his/her stone these gems of wisdom for posterity ...
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>> >evolving, and answers "Yes".
>> >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
>>
>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
>> you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>So where can I giving offerings to this great goddess Evolution?
We recommend the local homeless shelter.
> Sounds
>like she been doing all the hard work and that bully sky god YHWH has
>been taking all the credit.
It all depends on your spiritual development, or lack thereof.
Brian E. Clark
duckg...@cox.net says...
> >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
>
> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
> you see, evolution is God's way.
Uh huh.
How odd, then, that "God's way" earns no mention whatsoever
in "God's book." How odd that no Christian priest, monk,
scholar, or pope knew anything about "God's way" until
Darwin had laid out his case in 1859.
--
-----------
Brian E. Clark
ilbe...@gmail.com
> Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>
> Budikka
The Probability of Evolution
Job 10:12
Thou hast granted me life and favour, and thy visitation hath
preserved my spirit.
Evolutionists explain that life started from non-living matter in some
sort of "primeval soup." Over the years, they have presented several
scenarios of how this might have happened. They have suggested
isolated ponds, pools of water on the sides of volcanoes, and in the
oceans. Let's consider the general mathematical principles involved in
any of these scenarios.
In science, the person who proposes a theory is supposed to present
the evidence for that theory. Yet, for the incredible claim that life
sprang into being out of non living materials, no evidence is offered.
Just how incredible are evolution's claims about the origin of life?
Given the conditions evolutionists claim existed at the origin of
life, the chance of evolving the simple, common, iso 1 cytochrome "c"
protein is one chance out of one followed by 75 zeros. But that's not
a living, reproducing thing. Given the same conditions, the chance of
getting a DNA molecule with the ability to reproduce is 100 billion,
billion to one. The chance of getting a minimal cell works out to one
chance out of a 1 followed by 4,478,296 zeros!
Rigorous examination of evolution's claims about the origin of life
shows that every evolutionary claim about how life started is just as
fanciful. As every believer has testified, God is the source of all
life, including yours and mine. It has always been so and will always
be so.
Prayer: Dear Father in heaven, I thank You for the gift of life and
eternal life. Amen.
References: Joseph Mastropaolo, "Evolution Is Biologically
Impossible," Impact #137, November 1999.
WangoTango
@cox.net says...
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
> >news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
> >
> >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
> >> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> >>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
> >>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
> >>>lving/
> >>
> >> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
> >> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
> > I don't guess that is written down in your
> >"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
> Nope, not that I know of. The bible addresses spiritual development, not
> physical development.
So, the answer is NO, and your statement is made up.
Sounds about right.
haiku jones
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> >evolving, and answers "Yes".
>
> Of course we are.
No, not "of course". It's a very good question, and
many people, including biologists, ask it.
Death is evolution's way of voting you off
the island. No early death, no natural selection.
No natural selection, no evolution. And since, at
least in the first world, we have managed to
conquer the traditional ways in which you
might die before reproducing -- childhood
diseases, starvation, animal attack, accidents,
tribal warfare -- then just about anybody who
wants to reproduce gets a good shot at it.
So "Are we still evolving" is a very good question
indeed.
Haiku Jones
Hannele
> On Oct 27, 5:12 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>> <budik...@netscape.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>> evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-e...
>>
>> Of course we are.
>
> No, not "of course". It's a very good question, and
> many people, including biologists, ask it.
>
> Death is evolution's way of voting you off
> the island. No early death, no natural selection.
> No natural selection, no evolution. And since, at
> least in the first world, we have managed to
> conquer the traditional ways in which you
> might die before reproducing -- childhood
> diseases, starvation, animal attack, accidents,
> tribal warfare -- then just about anybody who
> wants to reproduce gets a good shot at it.
>
> So "Are we still evolving" is a very good question
> indeed.
>
The answer is still: "of course we are", though.
All species evolve until they become extinct.
>> God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
>> you see, evolution is God's way.
>>
Hmm, Duke *almost* makes sense here. Is that a first?
>
--
Hannele, A.A #2211
Budikka666
> Responding to Budikka666:
>
>
>
> > Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still evolving,
> > and answers "Yes".
> >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-
> evolving/
>
> > Budikka
>
> A human is asked a question he has an investment in?
>
> I wonder what the answer might be? ;)
A scientific one, doubtlessly! Besides, Jerry Coyne isn't human -
he's super human!
Budikka
Budikka666
The challenge I offered you in this thread:
http://tinyurl.com/nubnxr
on May 11th 2009, only to see you RUN AWAY.
Unmet challenge #2
Provide *positive*, *scientific* evidence *for* a creation. Not Bible
quotes. Not quotes from creationists or atheists or evolutionists.
Not divine revelation. Not juvenile unsupported ignorant assertions.
Not chants of 'no it isn't!'. Not counter challenges when you haven't
even met ours, but *positive*, *scientific* evidence *for* a creation.
Unmet challenge #3
Provide evidence that shows how DNA is the work of a creator. Show us
this evidence and explain how it demonstrates a creator.
Unmet challenge #4
Support claims that bacteria have never arisen from anything other
than bacteria/life has never arisen from anything but life.
Unmet challenge #5
Provide evidence in support of the creationist claim that information
cannot be added to a genome.
Unmet challenge #6
Define scientifically what the "genetic boundaries" are: specifically
what the mechanism is which (according to creationist claims) prevents
one species from evolving into another species over time.
Unmet Challenge #7
Provide your scientific evidence (as opposed to your LYING,
unsupported bullshit, which has been refuted repeatedly) to support
your creationist claim that life cannot arise from organic chemistry,
when scientists have repeatedly demonstrated that the truth is quite
to the contrary
Unmet Challenge #8
Prove that there's a god out there waiting to judge me when I die.
Otherwise you and your creationist fundie ilk are nothing but pathetic
LIARS and FRAUDS.
Unmet Challenge #9
Prove that we have a soul. Demonstrate scientifically where it is and
what its purpose is.
Unmet Challenge #10
Prove that this fictional Jesus isn't fictional and that he literally
died and that he came back to life and went to Heaven.
Here's a list of the strongest advocates of creation on Usenet WHO
HAVE FLED one or more of these challenges:
Chicken Adman
Chicken Andrew
Chicken Brother Ted
Chicken Codebreaker
Chicken Curtjester1
Chicken Duke
Chicken Gabriel
Chicken I'll Be Bauck
Chicken Pastor Dave
Let's face it, NOT A SINGLE creationist on Usenet has been able to
find the guts to face these challenges. This fictional god of theirs
has deserted every one of these liars and frauds That's what a sad,
pathetic and vacuous bunch of lousy, low-life scum they are.
Case closed. End of story.
Budikka
SkyEyes
Let him get another nip or two at that bottle of communion wine he
stashes in his closet. He'll be back to his usual silliness in no
time.
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
BAAWA Knight
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net
SkyEyes
wrote:
<Snip>
> References: Joseph Mastropaolo, "Evolution Is Biologically
> Impossible," Impact #137, November 1999.
You're quoting "Impact"??? I didn't know that smarmy christer feel-
good rag was still in business. I guess you can make enough money to
stay alive by playing up to people's fantasies.
I just hope they've learned how to punctuate by now. I used to sit in
church and entertain myself by editing the pathetic broadside.
Now: if you want to present evidence, find some peer-reviewed
scientific study that supports your conclusions. *That* will get you
some traction here. "Impact," I am sorry to say, won't.
Bill
> On Oct 27, 5:12 am, duke <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > >Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> > >evolving, and answers "Yes".
> > >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-e...
>
> > Of course we are.
>
> No, not "of course". It's a very good question, and
> many people, including biologists, ask it.
>
> Death is evolution's way of voting you off
> the island. No early death, no natural selection.
> No natural selection, no evolution. And since, at
> least in the first world, we have managed to
> conquer the traditional ways in which you
> might die before reproducing -- childhood
> diseases, starvation, animal attack, accidents,
> tribal warfare -- then just about anybody who
> wants to reproduce gets a good shot at it.
>
> So "Are we still evolving" is a very good question
> indeed.
>
> Haiku Jones
There is a complication though: we humans limit the effects of
selection. We tend to breed out traits and characteristics we don't
like. It's a kind of unconscious eugenics. Historically, racial
intermixing has been frowned upon, even cultural intermixing has been
considered undesirable. Other animals do the same thing
"instinctively" but humans, as in everything else, are far more
disciplined and determined about it. It may be that we have
deliberately stopped human evolution.
Bill
Alex W
We may sidestep certain specific problems, but that does not
mean we have stopped evolution. Animals, too, manage to do
this. Domesticated species are ensured food, protection and
procreation. Other species are left by circumstance in
highly isolated habitats that protect them from predators.
In neither case have they stopped evolution but merely
entered what is possibly an evolutionary dead end: they
often become unfit to deal with changes in their environment
and die. Modern Fresian cows, for instance, would not
survive for long if left to their own devices. The dodo
went extinct. This merely proves that evolution is very
strictly equal-opportunity. With humans, this means simply
that we are reacting to momentarily favourable changes in
our environment but not that this will affect our ability or
need to change in the future.
For that matter, most of the really widespread advances such
as basic hygiene and healthcare or food resources are only
skin-deep: remove them and humans are not substantially
changed in their biology. The more dramatic examples such
as advanced medical treatments to allow severe birth defects
to survive or lethal genes to procreate really only affect a
very small proportion of humanity -- as a whole, mankind's
survival chances would not be affected by a few million
largely white folks with dodgy genes.
bobsyo...@yahoo.com
Free Lunch
<bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>One could only hope so.
>
The larger the population of a species, the greater the stabilizing
effects of that large population.
duke
If you ever read it, you'd see that.
duke
>One could only hope so.
Take my word for it.
Free Lunch
that evolution has happened and continues to happen:
- Vestigial structures.
- Homologies
- Nested hierarchies
- Vast and elaborate fossil record
- Continental drift
- Related to species distribution
- Related to nested hierarchies
- Behavioral studies
- Radiometric dating
- Radically different collection of flora and fauna
during progressive eras
- DNA and genetic data
- Related to nested hierarchies
- and recent observed events of speciationOn Sat, 31 Oct 2009 13:31:09
-0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>>>lving/
>>>
>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
>If you ever read it, you'd see that.
I've read the Bible. It is chock full of errors. Too bad you believed
the fundamentalist liars when they sold you that bill of goods.
Free Lunch
alt.atheism:
>On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:36:29 -0400, "Pepsi...@teranews.com"
><bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>One could only hope so.
>
>Take my word for it.
You have repeatedly demonstrated that your word is not good.
Mitchell Holman
news:ri0pe5lu0vugob0q1...@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman
> <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-e
>>>>vo lving/
>>>
>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
> If you ever read it, you'd see that.
Another biblethumper who knows nothing about his bible.
Sheesh.........
Tim Miller
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>> news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>> evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>> http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>>> lving/
>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>> "inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
> If you ever read it, you'd see that.
MOST atheists have read and understand it MORE thoroughly
than you, pinhead. That's WHY they're atheists.
Tim Miller
And generally wrong...
Christopher A. Lee
<noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>news:ri0pe5lu0vugob0q1...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-e
>>>>>vo lving/
>>>>
>>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>>
>>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>>>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>>
>> If you ever read it, you'd see that.
>
> Another biblethumper who knows nothing about his bible.
>
> Sheesh.........
I'm not sure of most of the OT chronology but that is a black mark
against the Bible.
The Greek philosopher Anaximander (610 to 546BCE) is the earliest
source I have found for the idea of evolution. To gauge his
importance, Pythagoras was one of his pupils.
The ancient Greeks show just how backward and ignorant the people of
the OT were.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
bobsyo...@yahoo.com
"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
news:ngjoe55jac7dqdrbs...@4ax.com...
I'm not sure I agree with that.
It seems like, the larger the population - the more likely you're going to
have splinter groups who have the notion that their ideas, ideals and laws
are different and better than what the group has.
Also - larger populations seem to prefer conservative stagnation than real
change.
"Stability" means the Dark Ages millions of times more often than it means
"Eden".
Free Lunch
<bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>
>"Free Lunch" <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote in message
>news:ngjoe55jac7dqdrbs...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 08:36:29 -0400, "Pepsi...@teranews.com"
>> <bobsyo...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.talk.creationism:
>>
>>>One could only hope so.
>>>
>> The larger the population of a species, the greater the stabilizing
>> effects of that large population.
>
>I'm not sure I agree with that.
>It seems like, the larger the population - the more likely you're going to
>have splinter groups who have the notion that their ideas, ideals and laws
>are different and better than what the group has.
>
>Also - larger populations seem to prefer conservative stagnation than real
>change.
>
>"Stability" means the Dark Ages millions of times more often than it means
>"Eden".
>
But that's how evolution works. Large populations have a harder time
changing.
Alex W
Generally speaking, larger populations almost never change.
Rather, they ARE changed. The French, American or Russian
revolutions changed political and social systems on a large
scale, but they were initiated and conducted by a small
cadre of dedicated fanatics who enforced their vision on the
whole of the populace. To be fair, though, one huge
exception to this is religious: the Protestant Reformation
had its inspirations and leading lights, but it enjoyed far
more widespread active public participation than comparable
events.
As for change and stability, I wonder whether we are
confusing cause and effect. IOW, do large societies resist
change (effect) because they have evolved control and
stabilising mechanisms (cause), or did these mechanisms come
first and conservatism is only a consequence? Are control
and stability mechanisms a characteristic of large
societies, or are they a natural outgrowth of social growth?
I'd also like to point out that large societies also offer
opportunities for smaller groups to flourish which they
would not enjoy in smaller entities. Put simply, a large
group can better afford to tolerate small splinters or
deviant movements than a small one whose survival depends
more heavily on homogeneity.
duke
>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>>lving/
>>
>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
> I don't guess that is written down in your
>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
Look outside the window.
Dan Listermann
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:e78re51ghaq83iua5...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>>>lving/
>>>
>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
> Look outside the window.
>
How about "reading between the lines?" That works too, right?
Free Lunch
alt.talk.creationism:
I'm talking about biological evolution, not cultural.
Free Lunch
alt.talk.creationism:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>>news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>>> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>>>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>>>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
>>>>lving/
>>>
>>> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>>> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
>> I don't guess that is written down in your
>>"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
>Look outside the window.
No God there, but you knew that.
Duke, why do you insist on lying to us all the time? Why do you insist
on being evidence that your religion is false?
Alex W
Sorry; I was sparking off the "ideas, ideals and laws"
comment.
On a purely biological point, I'd have my doubts as well.
Population density and close contact facilitate genetic
mixing which in turn should accelerate genetic changes (i.e.
evolution). By contrast, genetic peculiarities and even
diseases tend to be more common in smaller and/or more
isolated groups where homogeneity may foster certain
otherwise undesirable traits and prevent fresh blood from
circulating as much as it should.
bob young
duke wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666 <budi...@netscape.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> >evolving, and answers "Yes".
> >http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evolving/
>
> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to evolution. So
> you see, evolution is God's way.
Yup . . . . .including innocent children that have
Spinal deformities
epilepsy
cleft palates
Blind
Deaf
Sometime both
Downs syndrome
Severe mental deficiencies
etc. etc. etc. etc.
Some god
Some myth
Oh and we must not overlook the one in every 4000,000 human births that results in
fetuses arriving grossly deformed, so gross the parents are never allowed to see
it.
Any explanation for that Dook ?
>
bob young
duke wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
> >news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
> >
> >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
> >> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
> >>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
> >>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still-evo
> >>>lving/
> >>
> >> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
> >> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>
> > I don't guess that is written down in your
> >"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>
> Nope, not that I know of. The bible addresses spiritual development, not
> physical development.
The book addresses ancient superstition and mythology - nothing more
Mitchell Holman
>
> duke wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:13:07 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <noe...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in
>> >news:urode5tec1i320hj9...@4ax.com:
>> >
>> >> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:00:31 -0700 (PDT), Budikka666
>> >> <budi...@netscape.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Jerry Coyne asks (or more accurately, is asked) if we're still
>> >>>evolving, and answers "Yes".
>> >>>http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/10/24/are-humans-still
>> >>
>> >> Of course we are. God created the universe and turned it over to
>> >> evolution. So you see, evolution is God's way.
>>
>> > I don't guess that is written down in your
>> >"inerrant" Bible somewhere, is it?
>>
>> Nope, not that I know of. The bible addresses spiritual development,
>> not physical development.
If the bible imparts spiritual development why are so
many of its readers perfect assholes?
US evangelist Tony Alamo gets 175 years for sex crimes
Nov 12, 2009
Tony Alamo, a US preacher, has been sentenced to 175 years
in prison for taking underage girls across state lines for
sexual intercourse. The sentence effectively punishes Bernie
Hoffman, otherwise known as Tony Alamo, the founder of Tony
Alamo Christian Ministries, for the rest of his life for
molesting children he took as "brides" in his ministry.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6565830/US-
evangelist-Tony-Alamo-gets-175-years-for-sex-crimes.html