Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history, Do You Agree?

by American☆Atheist Posted 2012/05/27 08:14:39

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	yes, even religious nuts will accept it	13 votes	34%
	no, religious nuts will never accept it	21 votes	55%
	GAWD IS REaL AND eVilUtun is of da Devil!	4 votes	11%

More polls by American☆Atheist

Radical Ed to reaper 2012/05/27 10:40:23

+3
requesting links.

reply
BHGOzzy to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 10:43:56

+5
Here ya go

reply
Radical Ed to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 10:47:34

+3
requesting zelda.

reply
BHGOzzy to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 10:52:36

+2

And like a Fed-Ex man, I deliver!

reply
BHGOzzy to reaper 2012/05/27 10:43:08

+2
Sounds like a mental disorder I've seen before. Disjointed sentences and nonsensical topic swapping at complete random.

reply
reaper to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:06:04

+1
for one schizophrenia comes to mind.

reply
BHGOzzy to reaper 2012/05/27 11:09:51

Possibly with bi-polar mixed in, yeah. Like I said, I've seen it before. Only worse.

reply
America... to VoteOut 2012/05/27 10:39:52

+3
What planet are you from, lol?

Evolution is already fact, this question was if even nut cases like you will accept it.

reply
America... to America... 2012/05/27 10:53:01

conservatism?

reply
VoteOut to America... 2012/05/27 10:54:19

+1
and which theory of evolution is fact? Have you ever heard of epeigentics ? or know what came out of the findings of the genome project. or is it still monkeys for you

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:06:01

Dude, get your medication and start taking it regularly again before you make another post. If you're not assigned medication, SEEK PROFESSIONAL PSYCHIATRIC HELP NOW!

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 10:42:31

+2
What, precisely, does Quantum Physics, which deals with the very very small, as in, below the level of subatomic particles... what does that have to do with Speciation by way of Natural Selection and Reproduction with Variation, which is a study of Biology?

Also, what medication are you currently out of that makes your sentences completely disjointed and nonsensical?

reply
Radical Ed to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 10:49:43

+2
I think he is referring to this:

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/encyc...
http://whyevolutionistrue.wor...
http://www.epigenetics.ch/gpa...

reply
VoteOut to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:19:36

+1
getting close in essence epigenetics says the environment plays a much greater control/effect on genetic expression and creation then does the DNA. and I could be theorized that environment plays a much greater role/effect/control on Genetics then genetics does on the environment, but this is all on a material/biological level, when there is also the non biological and energetic levels that also evolve. The planet has been evolving for millions of years before man was even around. We are but a drop in its ocean of evolution.

reply
Radical Ed to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:36:29

From what i have read, epigenetics does not actually debunk the theory of evolution, it merely expands on Darwin's original idea. The main point of contention is that natural selection may not be the only factor influencing evolutionary changes throughout the generations. As you have said, it is noted that the nature vs nurture may have a more equal ratio in genetic changes than was first thought. Epigentics is still, however, quite new in the scientific field and will require a couple of years, even a decade, to properly piece together and create accurate models that people can understand and use.

reply
Radical Ed to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 10:50:07

+3
i will attempt to find an objective thesis on this.

reply
BHGOzzy to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 10:55:53

Good on ya

reply
VoteOut to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:25:15 (edited)

+1
there is some much deeper work on this but, Bruce Liptan Ph.D gives and interesting take in studies of epigenetics

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n...

reply
VoteOut to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 10:58:17

+1
oh is that all that quantum physics deals with LOL ever heard of the higgs boson ? Do you ever look up into space?

reply
Radical Ed to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:02:20

+1
how are you inferring the higgs boson into this discussion? can you elaborate more.

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:03:45
VoteOut to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:01:21 (edited)

+1
natural selection is not accurate and too malthusian based. So you never heard of epigenetics or fractal geometry or even Lamark for that matter? do you used stand how gene expression happens and mutations occur ? Do you know what came out of the genome project? Because it would be hard to even have a conversation on it if you have not.

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:04:03

WHAT THE HELL IS MALTHUSIAN? EXPLAIN THIS PLEASE!

reply
Radical Ed to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:13:08

+1
That a population will overreach and multiply beyond the point where sustainability is possible.

reply
BHGOzzy to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:15:10

I didn't know that was anywhere in Darwin's Theory. I know that it's possible, but generally environmental pressures tend to stop that in most species. Of course, if it doesn't then the species crashes and either adapts to a new form or dies out.

reply
Radical Ed to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:19:47

+1
usually predator/prey relationship will even out the numbers. that or, as you said, environmental pressures or disease will cause a mass depopulation. It may be that humanity will reach a point of unsustainability although we are likely to kill each other off before that happens.

reply
BHGOzzy to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:20:32

True, but our massive adaptability may allow us to survive and do the one thing no other species on this planet has done. Expand beyond our own atmosphere.

reply
VoteOut to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:12:21

+1
I know I did use some big words you may never heard of before but that is ok life is a process of learning

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:13:42 (edited)

+1
Punctuation. Proper Grammar. Learn it, love it, use it. Also, if someone has repeatedly asked for clarification on a subject, and you ignore them to be snide and condescending, then YOU are the ass, not the person who has given up on being polite to you.

reply
VoteOut to BHGOzzy 2012/05/27 11:38:18

+2
hey my friend I am just mirror you whom first started the conversation/reply to my comment/reply on the post in a nasty, insulting and condescending way so I just added communication back in way I thought you prefer to communicate with others.

As point of interest I never usually respond to someone's post with out first doing a little research on my own as to what they stated so I can have a synergetic conversation.

Many times I just type the thoughts as they flow from my head and not going to spend the time for proper grammar, as most people can get the jest from the context, nor do I debate people on the points of the same or spelling/grammar mistakes when I get what they said. I would rather debate the point of their context instead the structure of the sentences.

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 18:55:26

Holy crap you took your meds!

No, seriously, the difference between your first post and this is massive. You're articulate, using proper grammar and punctuation and presenting a coherent point. We can actually understand you now!

reply
socokid to VoteOut 2012/05/27 12:41:44

It seems the article was clearly concerned about biological evolution on the planet Earth. The one theory of "evolution" anyone ever thinks of when pitting against faith based dogmas... especially here in the US.

With that assumed, the scientific theory of evolution has no comment on quantum physics, life origins, how the Universe began, or why my pants keep falling down.

reply
Lady Whitewolf 2012/05/27 09:47:15

no, religious nuts will never accept it

+3
Too many Sheeple out there.........

reply
Radical Ed 2012/05/27 09:38:42

no, religious nuts will never accept it

+2
What 'debate'? the scientific community has never seen anything that would dispute evolutionary theory after it was published. The only ones that want to debate it are the creationists who think that their faith-based belief can bypass scientific scrutiny.

reply
VoteOut to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 10:35:55 (edited)

+1
one would guess you have not followed the latest in epigenetics and quantum physics, Dawin's malthusian theories/affirmations have long been debunked and even where so at the time by lamarkian as well as the genome project

reply
Radical Ed to VoteOut 2012/05/27 10:39:51

+4
please provide links to these and i will read them wholeheartedly.

reply
VoteOut to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:07:42

you want me to help educate You?, , Its not a big deal I can get you started on hopefully the right path, But if you are a learner you would already have done a search on epigenetics before even commenting in contrary to it and my reply.

I have not even talked about religion/faith , only the latest in science, biology and physics that you seem to have a problem with.

reply
Radical Ed to VoteOut 2012/05/27 11:16:27

+3
I have been reading, actually, and am continuing to do so as we discuss this. Epigenetics has been shown to me before but not by that term - that being a ghost in the genes. you are making the presumptions, not i, in this discussion.

reply
VoteOut to Radical Ed 2012/05/27 11:46:08

+1
Fractal geometry is also a great field of study and can be part and parcel with epigenetics as well as quantum physics. In the field of medicine we have Newtonian medicine as well as energy medicine each incomplete with out the other. Presently the the Cern and Femi Labs particle accelerators and search for the higgs boson are all relavant and anybody talking about evolution on just a darwinain level are the ones that have failed to evolve.

Darwin was a Thomas Malthus disciple and his work was biased and inaccurate in that way.

reply
BHGOzzy to VoteOut 2012/05/27 10:44:58

+2
What in the world is "malthusian"? Also, when was Jean Baptist Lamarck in on the "Genome Project"?

reply