Wow, I go to work then come home and sleep and look at all the zany I missed out on!
Originally posted by Keymaster1
I'll tell you a secret! if your female, look down to your you-know-what.
There is something there that PROVES BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT WE WERE CREATED!
It's called a HYMEN, it's sole function is as a chastity detector!
It is debatable whether it it fool-proof, but it's reliability is astronomical!
Also, there is NO OTHER ANIMAL ON THIS PLANET WITH ONE!
Think about it.
If anyone can PROVE ME WRONG, I WILL RELENT AND WILL GIVE EVOLUTION A CHANCE, until then, CASE CLOSED!
And please tell everyone this, and maybe we can end this stupid debate.
Who is telling you this goofy stuff? Elephants have hymens
So do horses
. Guinea pigs, too
And we can't leave out alpacas and llamas
I'm also seeing that female hyenas posses a hymen as well, and that sounds very counter-productive. By the way, if you want a reason do doubt an
intelligent creator? Look at hyena reproduction. Female spotted hyenas are an amazingly
horrible "design." I can go into more detail if you
like, I've studied these animals for years.
Originally posted by On the Edge
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
You do know then that certain humans have a nasty little agenda regarding the whole "global warming" scenario,right?
I'm sure you would never consider the possibility that Satan has an agenda behind the theories of evolution?
Yes, I know that "Conservatives" and other assorted and sundry ignorant bastards have quite the agenda to pretend it doesn't exist, since adressing
the problem would potentially cut into CEO profits. And we can't let their constituents have anything less than a 1056% return every can we?
Well, no, because while I have proof that conservatives (unfortunately) exist, and have seen enough of their arguments firsthand to assure me of their
agenda, I have yet to see any evidence for any sort of deity, sub-deity, demigod, spirit, or assorted imp, much less a particular Hebraic goon.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by resonance
Very simply put in Layman's terms, it's both an "Appeal to Ridicule" and an "Ad hominem" attack. Neither of which is a VALID argument
When people do not want to address the actual points made, yet then proceed to attack the person making the statements or attack their results
by ridiculing them then they think they have won the argument.
In reality it renders their counterargument void in it's entirety, however it is a very powerful attack because 99% of "Joe Public" doesn't
understand the rules of logical debate and accepts fallacies of logic on face value.
If you have not been noticing, sir, several of us have pointed out the reasons ID is not "science" - the major reason is that it doesn't follow the
scientific method. If it at least tried
, that would be something.
You want to talk about logical fallacies? ID is, currently, 100% argument from incredulity. "I don't understand how it works, so it must be magic."
Originally posted by Outlawstar
My question is this, why doesint evolution seem to apply to humans?
Where did Cro-Magnon man come from 35,000 years ago?
It is clear that they are not as conventionally was believed related, that is, Neanderthal ws not Cro-magnon's ancestor, they were completely
different skeletally and physically, and why does it seem that Neanderthals became more primitive before abruptly dissapearing, why have we evolved
way beyond the needs to survive
Oh, but it DOES apply to humans! Compared to modern humans, Cro-Magnons were blocky, flat-headed, prognathous goons with too many teeth. If we go back
to Africa and look at anatomically modern humans (as contrasted to behaviorally modern humans) we find even more primitive features, even brow ridges.
They're still homo sapiens, they're just a spectacularly non-pretty homo sapiens.
Why have we changed so much? Technology. Fire allows us to cook our food, meaning it's softer and needs less chewing - thus why our jaws are shorter
and weaker than those of our H. sapiens forebearers - which is why wisdom teeth are such a problem for us. Projectile weapons, sturdy clothing, and
the ability to build shelter meant that we developed a more gracile form - we didn't need to put so much of our energy towards grrowing muscle and
bone mass, shed our hair, lost a lot of fat, etc.
No, H. neanderthalis was not H. sapiens' forbearer. They do however share a common ancestor. Currently this ancestor is thought to be H.
And do you want to know why neanderthals became "more primitive" looking? Inbreeding. The Aurignacian H. sapiens culture had pushed neanderthals to
the extremes of their range - the very southern reaches of Iberia and the Italian peninsular, and there they sat, basically breeding among their own
small families for a few thousand years before H. Sapiens was pushed southward by the last Glacial Maximum, and either killed or outcompeted the
And also, I really do think that natural selection is itself the greatest evidence of an intelligence,I mean it would be just as easy to call
it intelligent selection would it not, no, Im not convinced.
I see the theory of evolution as very good, but not definite, hmm, is there a third variable were not looking at, perhaps something to explain modern
mans explosion onto the scene and his unusual evolutionary traits?
Unfortunately just because you do not understand something doesn't mean it's flawed. Humans didn't "Explode" onto the scene. Like any other
animal, we have a definite family tree, lots of species (now all extinct save for ourselves and, if you like the woo-woo, perhaps yetis and
sasquatch). There is clear development between those species and within our own. We don't really have many "unusual" evolutionary traits. In fact
we're pretty much what you'd expect from a bipedal chimpanzee, two million years after leaving those cousins in the woods.