-
↑ see post ↑
13101 -
Oh you got it, ok great. I was going to post a YouTube video of Katt. LOL
First, what does basketball have to with anything? LOL (The image looks like two basketballs to me.)
I think evolution has some major questions that need answering. I do not believe that the selection was "natural". God? Maybe...but I am betting more on alien intervention.
There is simply NO scientific explanation (that I am satisfied with) to explain HOW we cave dwellers went from hairy apemen to the magnificent space-travelling intelligent creatures we are today. It's as if someone 'flipped a switch' and we suddenly 'evolved' into what we are now. I don't buy it.
ALIENS!!!My Affiliate Programs:
Porn Nerd Cash | Porn Showcase | Aggressive Gold
Over 90 paysites to promote!
Now on Teams: peabodymediaComment
-
more (just relases study today) on how this discovery creates important questions around Darwin's theory::::::::::
Significance
An ancient deep-sea mud-inhabiting 1,800-million-year-old sulfur-cycling microbial community from Western Australia is essentially identical both to a fossil community 500 million years older and to modern microbial biotas discovered off the coast of South America in 2007. The fossils are interpreted to document the impact of the mid-Precambrian increase of atmospheric oxygen, a world-changing event that altered the history of life. Although the apparent 2-billion-year-long stasis of such sulfur-cycling ecosystems is consistent with the null hypothesis required of Darwinian evolution?if there is no change in the physical-biological environment of a well-adapted ecosystem, its biotic components should similarly remain unchanged?additional evidence will be needed to establish this aspect of evolutionary theory.
Abstract
The recent discovery of a deep-water sulfur-cycling microbial biota in the ∼2.3-Ga Western Australian Turee Creek Group opened a new window to life's early history. We now report a second such subseafloor-inhabiting community from the Western Australian ∼1.8-Ga Duck Creek Formation. Permineralized in cherts formed during and soon after the 2.4- to 2.2-Ga ?Great Oxidation Event,? these two biotas may evidence an opportunistic response to the mid-Precambrian increase of environmental oxygen that resulted in increased production of metabolically useable sulfate and nitrate. The marked similarity of microbial morphology, habitat, and organization of these fossil communities to their modern counterparts documents exceptionally slow (hypobradytelic) change that, if paralleled by their molecular biology, would evidence extreme evolutionary stasis.
the key part:
additional evidence will be needed to establish this aspect of evolutionary theory.
Sulfur-cycling fossil bacteria from the 1.8-Ga Duck Creek Formation provide promising evidence of evolution's null hypothesisComment
-
Comment
-
OK, you gotcha'd me on my thinking this was another study. good gotcha. Not sure what difference it makes, I am simply trying to create dialogue around the discovery and came across another quote that strongly states this dicovery requires more research.
but not sure why you feel the need to gotcha me on a technicality re: what I am clearly trying to have fun chatting with y'all about. but again, good job on that.
Comment
-
the basktballs threw me off too! Darwinism is still only a theory. It's certainly very most likely valid, but that's why discoveries like this are fun and exciting. They create new angles of challenging conventional wisdom and from that either comes more validation of the theory or proof that more proof is still needed, since you know, it's still a theory!Comment
-
I wasn't coming at ya like that man!
I read your post, the article you linked to, and the study your article linked to. It reminded me of something I learned in high school so I looked it up.
Skype: CallTomNow
Comment
-
right on. i lumped your comment in with the others whose assumptions were being challenged.I wasn't coming at ya like that man!
I read your post, the article you linked to, and the study your article linked to. It reminded me of something I learned in high school so I looked it up.
I see this as an opportunity to move closer to proving the theory as fact, not the opposite. If we can further and better explain the theory in the lack of evolution then it makes sense we move closer to validating the theory.
there's also the option that this sort of testing misses out on some evolution. perhaps the organism evolved, then evolved back. DNA mapping then matching seems to be a more thorough testComment
-
I agree. How many times they're going to reconfirm the same thing via these scientific papers?
As you can see from my link, they discovered this in 1968, in mud, in Australia. Since then it's been reconfirmed over and over again, I think 6 or 7 papers now since then. At what point does it finally become fact?
Skype: CallTomNow
Comment
-
In my view, the results from all of the attempts over the years strongly suggest the theory as fact add up to mean it's valid to assume that evolution is a fact. BUT the important part is that science continues to try and proof it as fact. If all of science simply agreed years ago that evolution is fac and moved on, then gobs and gobs of science would not have happened.Comment
-
dyna mo, forgive me in advance for insulting you. but you are the case study of why artificial intelligence will never work. i have never seen such high minded trite emanate from another individual. you are like a geyser of nonsense. if you were a robot, you would simply walk into a wall, & keep walking into it, forever.
Comment
-
do you even science?dyna mo, forgive me in advance for insulting you. but you are the case study of why artificial intelligence will never work. i have never seen such high minded trite emanate from another individual. you are like a geyser of nonsense. if you were a robot, you would simply walk into a wall, & keep walking into it, forever.
Comment
-
I'm going to proof in one sentence how fucking stupid this attempt at insult is.dyna mo, forgive me in advance for insulting you. but you are the case study of why artificial intelligence will never work. i have never seen such high minded trite emanate from another individual. you are like a geyser of nonsense. if you were a robot, you would simply walk into a wall, & keep walking into it, forever.
The simple fact that scientists smarter than everyone in this thread put together are still devoting their lives, experience, strength and knowledge to adding more evidence to the theory of Evolution shows just how naive and vitriolic your attempt to use this thread to insult me really is.
Comment
-
you're like the nelson of science.dyna mo, forgive me in advance for insulting you. but you are the case study of why artificial intelligence will never work. i have never seen such high minded trite emanate from another individual. you are like a geyser of nonsense. if you were a robot, you would simply walk into a wall, & keep walking into it, forever.
Comment
-
Funny stuff doesn't always have to make a lot of sense.I'm going to proof in one sentence how fucking stupid this attempt at insult is.
The simple fact that scientists smarter than everyone in this thread put together are still devoting their lives, experience, strength and knowledge to adding more evidence to the theory of Evolution shows just how naive and vitriolic your attempt to use this thread to insult me really is.
see: prison guy from in living color - In Living Color - Booked on Phonics - YouTube
and: dad from brady bunch - The Brady Bunch Movie: Tattle tail - YouTube<!--BEGIN SIMUTRONICS PLAY BUTTON CODE -->
<p align="center">
<a href="http://buddy.play.net/dr?TMOREAU1">
<img src="drplay.gif" width="128" height="64" alt="Play DragonRealms!"></a></p>
<!--END SIMUTRONICS PLAY BUTTON CODE -->Comment
-
do you even socratic method?
fucking duh.Socratic method is a form of inquiry and discussion between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to illuminate ideas. It is a dialectical method, often involving a discussion in which the defense of one point of view is questioned; one participant may lead another to contradict themself in some way, thus strengthening the inquirer's own point.
The Socratic method is a method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. The Socratic method searches for general, commonly held truths that shape opinion, and scrutinizes them to determine their consistency with other beliefs.
gotcha denied
why not enjoy the topic instead of trying to gotcha me on an arcane tanget comment?
i mean really.Comment
-
"do you even socratic method?? That statement makes no sense, and "Socratic" should be capitalized, i.e., "Socratic" not "socratic".
“Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.” Mark Twain.
'Nuff said.Comment
-
My Affiliate Programs:
Porn Nerd Cash | Porn Showcase | Aggressive Gold
Over 90 paysites to promote!
Now on Teams: peabodymediaComment
-
Clearly this needs to be said with most of the stupid comments in this thread:
Comment
-
Nice read.
Comment
-
The other day I saw a homeless vagrant I've been seeing on the street for the past ten years.
Same clothing as 2005.
Evolution has passed him by. Perfectly adapted to his environment.Comment
-
alien engineered us.
Comment
-
My Affiliate Programs:
Porn Nerd Cash | Porn Showcase | Aggressive Gold
Over 90 paysites to promote!
Now on Teams: peabodymediaComment
Comment