Topic: Evolution yes/no

[Manna]

Dominance:
  rule; control; authority; ascendancy.
  Animal Behavior. high status in a social group, usually acquired as the result of aggression, that involves the tendency to take priority in    access to limited resources, as food, mates, or space.

After living in Sydney, the cesspit of human waste that it is (great place to visit, tell your friends!) I would like to put forth a another
contender as the dominant species of earth.

Cockroaches - this is not that stupid argument about surviving nuclear warfare. Dominance implies control over lesser species. It requires the dominant species to exert their will on the other species to push it out of their territory or food source. With cockroaches we are capable of neither of these things. For many people, the appearance of a cockroach is enough to push the human out of a food source or space of living. You can kill one cockroach but the species will still thrive wherever we are. We have no control over their habitation of our environment and yet they aren't dependant on our species for their survival, we just help them flourish.

There you have it, insects, and vermin inherit the earth.

[Flisch]

Cockroaches - this is not that stupid argument about surviving nuclear warfare. Dominance implies control over lesser species. It requires the dominant species to exert their will on the other species to push it out of their territory or food source. With cockroaches we are capable of neither of these things. For many people, the appearance of a cockroach is enough to push the human out of a food source or space of living. You can kill one cockroach but the species will still thrive wherever we are. We have no control over their habitation of our environment and yet they aren't dependant on our species for their survival, we just help them flourish.

That's not true. The cockroaches you're referring to actually come from the tropics and can only survive inside buildings in the colder zones. Though they existed before man and now live in almost every country, the majority of them would go extinct if human dies out. Only the specimen in the warmer regions would survive. In colder regions, they are like parasites living off the human, by living inside its buildings, eating its food and using its transport vehicles for spreading across the globe. And as any parasite, it dies together with its host.

I think you're confusing quantity with dominance.

[emmet]

Was talking to a theist today who said if I was right we stopped existing after death, which he didn't like.

How, may I ask (rhetorically) is this such a bad thing? It's not like that means we're just floating around in complete nothing for eternity (THAT would suck) we just stop everything. We're not able to think about how much it sucks to not exist.

Life is everything, so why waste it believeing in God?

[Brandonazz]

Humanity does not like the concept of nonexistence because we do not know anything about it.

We fear the unknown.

[Yokto]

Life after death is a question science can not answer. Science need a observer to verify something. If there is not observer the there can be no science.

[Quantum Burrito]

Life after death is a question science can not answer. Science need a observer to verify something. If there is not observer the there can be no science.

So, why assume anything than the null hypothesis? That is, that there is no life after death.

[stuck]

Why not think?

[Yokto]

Life after death is a question science can not answer. Science need a observer to verify something. If there is not observer the there can be no science.

So, why assume anything than the null hypothesis? That is, that there is no life after death.

Well is that not what one is doing in a way if one assumes there is no other state then that as a observer? Name one time where you been in a state of nothingness and describe it.

[MetallicDragon]

Well is that not what one is doing in a way if one assumes there is no other state then that as a observer? Name one time where you been in a state of nothingness and describe it.

I took a nap a few hours ago. I don't remember anything during that time, as if I didn't even exist.

[Yokto]

Well you remember the time before the nap and the time after but not the time during the nap right?

[DarkAngel]

The whole "Evolution VS Creationism" debate is a scam.

It doesn't exist.
There is no debate.
People who think that there is a debate are actually debating something else called abiogenesis  (but for some reason they are referring to it as 'evolution').
It makes as much sense as asking "Do you believe in apples or do you believe in oranges?" - that is to say, the two ideas are not mutually exclusive.


Evolution has nothing at all to do with the origins of life.

In fact - there is no scientific consensus about how life originated! We really don't know - therefore we don't have a theory that can be debated against creationism. Therefore there is no debate!

All that evolution says is, that when a child is born it is made up of bits from both it's mother and its father, and possibly some random mutations too. That's it, the whole theory is right there in that one single fact - children are made of, but are different to, their parents.
(So if you "don't believe in evolution", then you are in effect saying that you believe you are a genetic clone of one of your parents, which is obviously false. So what you really should be saying is that you don't believe in the "scientific study of abiogenesis" - which, just for the record, is NOT called and should not be confused with 'evolution')

Creationism on the other hand, just says that god made everything. Which is fine, because there is no agreed scientific explanation for this god theory to compete against!

Even if god made the entire world yesterday -- BAM! the whole universe just popped into existence! -- evolution is still a fact, and it still doesn't contradict with the hypothetical-fact that the universe just popped into existence yesterday.
Even if we were just spontaneously created yesterday, children are still going to be made up of, but different to, their parents, therefore, in this hypothetical situation, both creationism and evolution are fact at the same time.


So please, if you want to debate the merits of creationism (apples), please don't compare it to evolution (oranges), compare it to abiogenesis (apples).

[Draugr]

i have this argument with my evangelical southern baptist friend all the time. by this point we both have decided that we will never convert each other. Anyway, I am an atheist, but I do not fully reject the idea of a superior being I just do not have faith in it. I am evolutionist to the core.

[DarkAngel]

That's not true. The cockroaches you're referring to actually come from the tropics and can only survive inside buildings in the colder zones. Though they existed before man and now live in almost every country, the majority of them would go extinct if human dies out. Only the specimen in the warmer regions would survive. In colder regions, they are like parasites living off the human, by living inside its buildings, eating its food and using its transport vehicles for spreading across the globe. And as any parasite, it dies together with its host.

The humans you're referring to actually come from the tropics and can only survive inside buildings in the colder zones. The majority of humans would become extinct if oxygen-producing-plants died out. Only the specimens with artificial oxygen supplies would survive. In all regions, they are like parasites, living off the plants, by making shelter out of them, eating them as food, and using them to power human transport vehicles for spreading across the globe. And as any parasite, it dies together with its host.

[Draugr]

In fact - there is no scientific consensus about how life originated![/b] We really don't know - therefore we don't have a theory that can be debated against creationism. Therefore there is no debate!

All that evolution says is, that when a child is born it is made up of bits from both it's mother and its father, and possibly some random mutations too. That's it, the whole theory is right there in that one single fact - children are made of, but are different to, their parents.
(So if you "don't believe in evolution", then you are in effect saying that you believe you are a genetic clone of one of your parents, which is obviously false. So what you really should be saying is that you don't believe in the "scientific study of abiogenesis" - which, just for the record, is NOT called and should not be confused with 'evolution')

Evolution is not simply the idea of genes being passed on and sometimes those genes are mutations. Evolution is the idea that if one these mutations gives the organism an advantage, its chances of surviving and reproducing increases, therefore as this creature reproduces it pass the mutation along to its offspring which then have an advantage, which then go on the produce more offspring containing the mutations, until a population of the mutated creatures has become stable and is now a new species. As more and more positive mutations occur the species becomes more and more separate.
On the subject of that there is no debate against the Creation theory, well there is no debate for it either. Using faith for evidence is the equivalent of saying that you imaginary friend told you so it must be correct.

[Draugr]

The humans you're referring to actually come from the tropics and can only survive inside buildings in the colder zones. The majority of humans would become extinct if oxygen-producing-plants died out. Only the specimens with artificial oxygen supplies would survive. In all regions, they are like parasites, living off the plants, by making shelter out of them, eating them as food, and using them to power human transport vehicles for spreading across the globe. And as any parasite, it dies together with its host.

I'm sorry , but that is possibly the most idiotic thing I have ever read in my life. You attempt at condescending upon the human race has... FAILED. That statement is equal to saying that if cows eat only grass and the grass dies, then the cow dies. I mean what a waste of a post.