Stupid Design - Dr. Tyson makes some good points...

originally posted by: DAVID64
I've always thought the human body was poorly "designed". Take pain for example : Yes, it's needed to alert you to damage being done, but we should be able to shut it off. It can and will cripple you to the point that you can't survive. Damaging one part of the body should not effect the rest to that point. Useless organs are next. Why do we need an appendix? Or tonsils? We are absurdly easy to kill and lack any sort of natural self defense. No claws or suitable teeth to fight with, just a big ol' brain that tells us to pick up a rock or stick to beat'em over the head with. But, I guess it works.

The appendix acts as a reservoir for the good bacteria that helps digest food. Tonsils are used to train up the immune system to identify bacteria and viruses. Beyond the age of three they aren't needed (at least according to current medical opinion). Humans have few predators now - the biggest dangers in the past were large cats, bears and wolves. Living in fortified dwellings and in large numbers was the safest option. Having bows and arrows and shotguns were the best defence.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Prove what? Collisions of galaxies??

Look here:

csep10.phys.utk.edu...

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Do you have any reason to assume it wouldn't be the same? Personally, I assume that it is technically different in that it is less dense (you know not as many particles floating around out there) and would behave more closely to a true vacuum. Do you have any reason to assume otherwise?

a reply to: SuperFrog

i see the whole "creationism in class" debate as a gray issue. we learn about egyptian mythology, hindu mythology, norse and greek and roman and aztec and some others i cant recall right now. but seriously, thats a lot of gods that we make a point of including in our world history classes and whatnot. gods whose stories and misadventures we are required to read and answer questions about in school. because those are gods that dont stand a significant risk of hijacking our politics, i suppose. gods that people arent willing to die or kill for anymore. but still, thats something of a double standard.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Bare in mind that we teach them in such a way that everyone understands that they are myths and aren't true. Could you imagine the backlash if Christianity or Islam was taught that way?

a reply to: stormcell

Yep and the appendix is also important for blood cells.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not necessarily.

Just a nice little what if...

As you said previously we should take into account the knowns...


But as far as up to now, between galaxies is an unknown, so speculation will always be valid imo.


I don't mind being wrong about it, just find it interesting to wonder.

originally posted by: SuperFrog
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Prove what? Collisions of galaxies??

Look here:

csep10.phys.utk.edu...

No prove that between galaxies that Space is exactly the same as within galaxies. Nice link though.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Fair enough. As long as you realize what you are doing and that the speculation may come with some scientific conditions being false in order for it to be true.

a reply to: the2ofusr1
Point to me might be that birth = good and death = bad . Seeing we will die ,how could birth be considered good ? If death is part of the natural law of life then ,how could imposing a time frame on that existence one way or the other be considered bad or good ,other then from a personal preference ?

a reply to: SuperFrog

It has bothered me, since some 15 years ago I read we were going, in the future to crash with Andromeda. It also bothers me that we have so much dna junk and worse than that far more disease prone dna than the animals. I might be half a hop up from a chicken but the chicken has less disease weak genes than I do.

At school some of the natural catastrophes were brought up as being punishment from God because people were pagan then. Catholic thinking Oh Dear.

But with the expectations the religiosity dream up to tell us we can trust in God about from all the desert religions, is sheer stupidity when people have to actually think about the above.

Dr Tyson isn't original in these flaws, its God's roll that we have been suckered into believing in our formative years before we had enough experience to question this dogma, that's the real problem and the so-called morals taken from these pious poppies that stop a lot of people thinking we need to do as much as we can to limit these flaws within ourselves and remove ourselves from those we have to escape in order to survive. If you take it its God's will basically you're stuffed.

a reply to: Shiloh7

it almost seems as though we would rather be used and abused by the universe at large than just be ignored and eventually forgotten. like people who would rather be in a damaging relationship than face life on their own. people like that...i dont know. i dont understand that. having the power to stand up for yourself and deliberately ignoring it because suffering somehow gives you a perverted sense of belonging, like a ritual. thats just sick.

a reply to: Shiloh7

Luckily, when galaxies collide, the distances between bodies within the galaxies are so large that you are statistically unlikely to actually run into anything. You should really worry about the gravity of another body getting too close and throwing you into an erratic orbit.

a reply to: the2ofusr1


Tyson's battle with labels , "Isams" as he calls them is his own ability or desire to not engage in the philosophical determination of his own position . imo Both Atheist and Agnostics may want to come to his request to find another word to describe him because he is at a loss for a better word .Tyson would wish that the public avoid 1% of what he has said and focus more on the other 99% .Gee , ya give him a pass because nobody wants to be held to what they may or have said . Using his figures for responsibility I could kill a 100 people out of the many billions and claim "don't judge me for that " ,...besides the English language is evolving and what may have been considered killing one day may not be in the future .

For a guy to make claims that he is going to be unwilling to , Talk about, to debate about , religious discussion , he finds himself right in the middle of the discussion in which he has no escape . I am thinking that OP is not one of his mentors and probably wishes ,you had never made this thread .

Tyson's desire to not engage is so very evident in that he want's it to just go away .He has no real logical defense for doing so because ,it's his underlings that want the victory over the subject matter .Craig is very generous to Tyson in that he also would be happy if ID were taught in the different classes . Thanks OP for the thread and the opportunity for me to post a few words and the vids I provided . There will always be the other side of opinions on such matters ...peace

Wouldn't humans ability to reason also be flawed. A failur in one area corrupts the whole, wheather created or evolved.

a reply to: SuperFrog

Ummm. ..Tyson is the new Michio Kaku...nothing more...



YouSir

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
No prove that between galaxies that Space is exactly the same as within galaxies. Nice link though.

Just give it some time, 6-7 billion of years and we (Our galaxy, but that time Sun and our little solar system will not look anything close to what it looks right now) will experience it first hand... There are some cool youtube videos regarding galaxy collisions.

Glad you liked link...

Here is some interesting stuff:

www.stellarium.org...

www.cyberciti.biz...

If is of interest to you, you can use Celestia to see how 2 or more bodies will react to each other due to gravity and trajectory and analyze it. Just now imagine this on grand scale on super computer.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: the2ofusr1
Tyson's battle with labels , "Isams" as he calls them is his own ability or desire to not engage in the philosophical determination of his own position . imo Both Atheist and Agnostics may want to come to his request to find another word to describe him because he is at a loss for a better word .Tyson would wish that the public avoid 1% of what he has said and focus more on the other 99% .Gee , ya give him a pass because nobody wants to be held to what they may or have said . Using his figures for responsibility I could kill a 100 people out of the many billions and claim "don't judge me for that " ,...besides the English language is evolving and what may have been considered killing one day may not be in the future .

Firstly, did you by any chance note that you are still replying to yourself. It is interesting, as it looks you are arguing your comments. I already replied to one of your posts with Dr. Creig's video, where he is misleading argument and denying that creationist are trying to put pseudo science into science books.

As for language, sure, it is involving, so to describe some killings we got new words like genocide and massacre, as pure killing failed to describe horrors those 2 words describe.

Your statements about Dr. Tyson are just without any evidence, pure ad-hominem.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
For a guy to make claims that he is going to be unwilling to , Talk about, to debate about , religious discussion , he finds himself right in the middle of the discussion in which he has no escape . I am thinking that OP is not one of his mentors and probably wishes ,you had never made this thread.

At this point you really don't make a sense to me. On contrary, I live this thread and points it rises.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
Tyson's desire to not engage is so very evident in that he want's it to just go away .He has no real logical defense for doing so because ,it's his underlings that want the victory over the subject matter .Craig is very generous to Tyson in that he also would be happy if ID were taught in the different classes . Thanks OP for the thread and the opportunity for me to post a few words and the vids I provided . There will always be the other side of opinions on such matters ...peace

Peace to you and thank you for your posts and message, but please note, that is not what thread supposed to be. It's discussion, here we can talk into details if you don't agree with particular part of given OP or any following posts.

a reply to: SuperFrog

Sorry for the late reply to your reply to me . I have no idea who Wendy is and how what Craig is responding to has much to do with Tyson . Tyson seems to be sitting somewhere off in the distance to the fence of Agnosticism as he can while trying to engage in theistic discussion . In my mind he is either (atheistic / agnostic ] and needs to put his feet on the ground he has chosen to stand on or just simply back out .

He does make reference to this desire in the 2 vid's I posted and makes it clear that he is not either groups spokesman despite the desire of either to use him as such .

a reply to: swanne

Only someone going through puberty would take the time to ask lol

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: SuperFrog

Sorry for the late reply to your reply to me . I have no idea who Wendy is and how what Craig is responding to has much to do with Tyson . Tyson seems to be sitting somewhere off in the distance to the fence of Agnosticism as he can while trying to engage in theistic discussion . In my mind he is either (atheistic / agnostic ] and needs to put his feet on the ground he has chosen to stand on or just simply back out .

He does make reference to this desire in the 2 vid's I posted and makes it clear that he is not either groups spokesman despite the desire of either to use him as such .

Here is Wendy Wright, who is trying to include creationism and ID in schoolbooks



Tyson is actually against Dawkins and late Hitchens' approach toward religion and atheism, as in his opinion it would be more practical to focus first on educated top scientist. (you could see this in religion part of OP video toward end of video) To some extent I would agree that is fruitless to argue with creationist like Mrs. Wright, but because people such as her and organizations that propagate similar ideas are hard working on destabilizing science and bring us to where Islam was thousands years ago, to discredit science and knowledge and replace it with belief... there is time where I find myself more aligned with Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris. If we don't argue this today, tomorrow my grand kids might learn that Earth was created for this little hairless ape's cousin...