Inteligent Design

[Minimalist]

I don't give a shit what you believe as long as you don't try to shove it down my throat.

But the same tenet doesn't seem to apply in reverse, from what I see.

When you visit a message board dedicated to science and start spouting fairy tales you had better expect resistance. I will promise not to go into one of your precious churches.

Frankly, I can think of far better ways to waste time, anyway.

[Guest]

where do i start today?

When you visit a message board dedicated to science and start spouting fairy tales you had better expect resistance

first off, i am not sputing fairy tales as i can back up what i say with true science not theoretical. secondly, i don't call science a waste of time, so try and keep some decorum.

Havn't you realised yet
It's a brick wall

Don't take this personally, but that post was mostly gibberish

it would be nice if you applied your comments to yourselves first before responding. you don't say anything that can't be applied back at you. idid not write gibberish but i see you found a way to avoid answering the questions posed. typical.

It's a process not a creature

i believe i said that in my post. now if you lookat how you describe evolution andits process, you will see that it is evolutionists who attach the personifcation not me. i am trying to point out that all that you ascribe to the theory only has purpose and reason IF it is a person which you have admitted that evolution is not. thus there is no reason for the variety in the world plus the other things i pointed out since evolution and its process can not cognitively conceive of such things.

It's not suppose to think

right and that is exactly what evolutionary adherents are trying to do to school children.

It takes generations to make noticeable progress.

there have been 10,000 years of generations without one change. millions of years are just an excuse because you can't prove it true even through science.

let me finish with a couple quotes:

Dr. Tours, who developed the nano-car, said his experience in chemistry and nanotechnology had showed him how hard it was to manuever atoms and molecules. He found it hard to believe, he said, that nature was able to produce the machinery of cells through random processes. The explanations offered by evolution, he said, are incomplete.

Dr. Salthe, an atheist, said evolutionary biologists were unfairly suppressing any competing ideas. (he is not a supporter of i.d./creation)

both quotes taken from the article"Few Biologists but many evangelicals sign anti-evolution petition" 2/21/06

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

[quote="Minimalist]
When you visit a message board dedicated to science and start spouting fairy tales you had better expect resistance. I will promise not to go into one of your precious churches.
Frankly, I can think of far better ways to waste time, anyway.[/quote]

My churches? I'm a field archaeologist, not a cleric. And I don't remember 'spouting fairy tales' at any time since joining this board, which was very recently.
This is just a way of noising up the new faces, right?

[Rokcet Scientist]

Today, western people are 20 centimeters (= 8 inches) taller – on average! – than only 100 years ago.
Check the records!
It proves
1) that evolution happens, and
2) that it happens in spurts.

And if you still don't believe it, go stand next to your own gramps and grannie and see the difference...!

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

I would imagine people are taller now due to better nutrition, fewer life-threatening diseases, better sanitation, housing, working and environmental conditions. And don't forget how much Western nations have spent on creating welfare states over the last six decades; better medical care has to play a vital part.
It's arguable whether any of this is down to natural selection, or just natural progress. If it was the former, we would have seen a 'Black Death' style demographic catastrophe first, surely?

[Guest]

Today, western people are 20 centimeters (= 8 inches) taller – on average! – than only 100 years ago

again i would have to agree with RK and i would doubt those figures as the last figures i heard put people over 6 feet tall in the less than 10% category and 8 inches well that would put the 19th century people at about 4'11"-5'2" range. how small were the 18th century people? if we go back far enough maybe the Hobbits were actually giants in their time period.

and you all thought the hobbits were not natural, according to that figure, they would fit right in with other humans.

sorry for the sarcasm but that figure doesn't make any sense nor does it fit with the historical record. Spouting a figure without providing source material is really just blowing smoke.

[Rokcet Scientist]

[...]It's arguable whether any of this is down to natural selection, or just natural progress. If it was the former, we would have seen a 'Black Death' style demographic catastrophe first, surely?

Not first, but all the time! There you go! You mentioned one yourself: the Black Death. Or how about the Spanish Flu, that killed 35 million Europeans in a matter of 4 months in 1919 (FIVE times as many as WW1 killed in 4 years!)? Or how about HIV/AIDS? And we got the 'H5N1'* flu coming straight at us as we speak! Both you and I may have succumbed to 'natural selection' by this time next year...
Look around you, natural selection is all over the place! Survival of the fittest!

* H5N1 is the lethal 'human variety' of the avian flu now literally flying around the globe...

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

The 'Flu Pandemic has nothing to with people being taller now, since it was a one off which never repeated itself. It didn't matter if survivors had built up immunity or not.
Considering the 20th century was practically one long war, according to your reasoning the descendants of the survivors of both World Wars, Korea, Spanish Civil War, Greek Civil War etc should all be about 2 metres tall now. But if all the urban myths about smoking are correct, then we should all have inherited stunted growth from them which would cancel out the 'natural selection' you claim.
Think of the London 'smogs' which still claimed lives in the 1950s; they don't happen now, or not to the same extent. That must have saved tens of thousands of lives itself over the last half century, along with medical advances, and realisation of the effects of smoking, consuming alcohol, unhealthy diet etc.
Natural progress, not selection.

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

As for 'Bird Flu' being the latest Armageddon, last year it was MRSA, 20 years ago it was AIDS, 27 years ago it was Herpes, 35 years ago it was Hepatitis B........
If the panic button keeps getting needlessly pushed this regularly, one day the 'experts' really will get caught out by something they didn't take seriously enough.

[Rokcet Scientist]

You want to call it 'progress' rather than 'selection'? Fine, be my guest. Shakespeare described it as "a rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet".
Whatever you wanna call it, it doesn't change the facts.

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

The 'facts'? Like it being patently obvious that you don't know what you're talking about?

[Rokcet Scientist]

In soccer, if you attack the player instead of the ball, you get a red card, you're sent off the field in shame, and you get suspended for a number of matches.
I'll apply soccer rules.

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

I don't see you listed as either Admin or a Moderator. So you can stop blustering now.

[Rokcet Scientist]

That's not the only thing you're not seeing

[RK Awl-O'Gist]

A piece of advice; save the Testosterone-fest for someone who is actually impressed by it. Right now, you come across as a spoiled brat throwing a tantrum.