And a bullfighter isn't red. He just waves a red flag.Originally Posted by Rayne
@Leo: I find life gets along much easier when everybody just tells the truth, which I've gotten into the habit of doing. Now if everybody BELIEVED everybody else, that might get us into trouble if one person lied. So I understand your sentiment. Reminds me of that move, The Invention of Lying.
that movie sucked
in other words... you're a douchesadist
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
Well now your'e just full-on trolling.
no, you have no taste
I haven't seen the movie myself, but I hear that it's nothing but dry humor. Which I sometimes find it to be funny, when appropriate; but, there is such a thing of too much of one thing. So I'm sure that it was... lame.
Actually, recent movies have become lame. Nothing like the cool/creative movies of the 80's. Some early 90's. And I do have to give it to a couple movies made in the past decade. But that is a small number compared to the garbage that we have now.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
macro evolution and micro evolution arent distinguished whatsoever in any real science for starters
They're not differentiated in terms of the actual phenomenon god. Terminology on the other hand is always debatable.
evolution is evolution. if you concede "micro" evolution, and you HAVE to, there is no logical reason to then deny "macro" evolution. it is an absolutely arbitrary distinction set up in order to cater to an already assumed belief, and thus invalid.
But people acknowledge macro-evolution as being synonymous with evolution of a new species... which it is, and which was what I was going for. It's the same distinction anyone gives to decay and fossilisation. But again terminology has little to do with this. It was more about straightening out a few details on evolution than anything else.
again with the trolling, just ignore.
Leo 3DS friend Code: 0344 - 9299 - 0936
;]
>__>
"Evolution is evolution... It is an absolutely arbitrary distinction set up in order to cater to an already assumed belief, and thus invalid."
If people think it's synonymous with the evolution of a new species they are showing their gross ignorance of the subject and pretty much prove they have taken absolutely zero effort to investigate the matter thoroughly. It would be like me saying that cars have high horsepower and low horsepower depending on how fast you drive.
"I prefer a sane world where you are rewarded by providing people with something they want. Not arbitrarily rewarded in a status game that reminds me of chimpanzees." - nazgulnarsil
Here I am with my empire
I’ll bring you to your knees
Ebb and flow with my desire
Cause its all that you’ve been taught to be
It's just terminology, teenageangst, and whether it's invalid or not is purely subjective. The base for the distinction is clear, but your stupid analogy doesn't exactly put it forward coherently. I view macro-evolution as when a species evolves to a point where it's distinguishable and cannot reproduce with it's prior species. It's not that the processes involved are different from typical variation but it just has a more more lasting effect. Small change vs. big change. I see it that way. A lot of people see it that way. My biology text book sees it that way. Whether you do or not is not something I particularly care about.
But again, you don't seem to be aware that you're just arguing terminology; it's pointless. I never rejected the concept of evolution. You just don't like me applying separate terms to different occurrences of variation. They don't need to have any base in scientific terminology - none of us are scientists. I just use it for clarity. And I don't even get why you've got sand in your vagina with what I think is synonymous with macro-evolution when you don't even believe in the term itself.
But what about certain species of birds, dogs, etc, that can breed together even though they are from seperate species?I view macro-evolution as when a species evolves to a point where it's distinguishable and cannot reproduce with it's prior species.
From:
ShadowRaven
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." Albert Einstein
Cannot reproduce meaning they are not meant to. Retard scientists pull these experiments. I think I heard something about a type of chimpanzee that can breed with humans. Doesn't mean you'll go and hump the nearest ape.
Also the genomes of Ligers and other hybrids are fucked up. Can doesn't mean should. You can reproduce with your sister but you shouldn't, nor would you want to. Basic instinct prevents animals from mating with other species.
From:
ShadowRaven
Last edited by ShadowRaven; 07-05-2010 at 04:02 AM. Reason: Because I feel like it.
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." Albert Einstein
ShadowRaven knows how evolution works alright.
From:
ShadowRaven
I think Evolution and Creation can coexist. <3
Then again I'm not a Christian so lol.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
