Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Science! Ask you question here. Biscuits NOT included and answers not guaranteed.

1…5681011…48

Comments

  • #212
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    OMG! Spoiler!
    [-0-] wrote: »

    JC is an enigma. He should be studied. I said he has a mental illness earlier, which was edited by Jernal but I wish to give further details on that. In fact let me just put this here: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/breakfast-socrates/201003/creationism-mental-illness
    You aren't the first to make this suggestion. I genuinely believe he needs help.

    MrP


  • #213
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    EdgarFriendly wrote: »
    Nope, I'm afraid it isn't. It's a hybrid. The male liger is completely sterile, the female liger produces sterile offspring. Therefore, they are not a new species. In order for them to be a species, the male Liger and female Liger must be capable of producing offspring, which in turn themselves are capable of producing more offspring.
    You are confusing speciation per se with the viability of the resulting offspring.
    Speciation can occur spontaneously or by hybridisation.
    A Liger is technically a new species (although not a very viable one) as it has serious breeding difficulties. It would appear that the spontaneous speciation capacity of all creatures is now practically exhausted ... but the variety of current viable species that can interbreed with each other (to some degree) indicates that very significant levels of speciation occurred within Baramin in the past ... and this is a key reason why Noah didn't have to bring breeding pairs of every species alive today onto the Ark ... he only need one sample pair from each Baramin.

    EdgarFriendly wrote: »
    Eh, no. If the Earth was only 6,000 years old and the lion and tiger shared a common ancestor - they would both still be that same common ancestor, as 6,000 years is nowhere near enough time for full speciation to occur in mammals.
    Speciation can be quite rapid ... as the divergence of dog breeds prove ... and it is obviously instantaneous where divergence of chromosome numbers is the cause.

    EdgarFriendly wrote: »
    We have fossil evidence, and historical record to prove that wolves lived in Ireland. We have no fossil evidence of Kangaroos living in Ireland, or historical record to verify their existence here.
    So what? Kangaroos (other than the ones in the Zoo) may never have lived in Ireland but we have had all kinds of exotic creatures including feral Bears, Wild Boar, Reindeer and Giant Elk in residence.

    EdgarFriendly wrote: »
    So, from two animals - we've found enough genetic diversity to repopulate the planet? Right. You're not very good at this whole biology thing, are you?
    From several thousand such pairs.


  • #214
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    wrote:
    Originally Posted by [-0-] View Post

    JC is an enigma. He should be studied. I said he has a mental illness earlier, which was edited by Jernal but I wish to give further details on that. In fact let me just put this here: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...mental-illness

    MrPudding
    You aren't the first to make this suggestion. I genuinely believe he needs help.

    MrP
    ... so when you have nowhere to hide with the logic and evidence that I have presented ... the ad Hominems emerge ... because that is all you have left.
    ... and thus you concede the debate.


  • #215
    Tope
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 154 ✭✭Tope


    J C wrote: »
    Speciation can be quite rapid ... as the divergence of dog breeds prove ...
    We've already addressed this JC. Dog breeds aren't separate species, and their physical varieties are entirely down to deliberate human intervention to select for specific characteristics. They're still entirely members of the same species: a setter and a spaniel are no more different species than a tall guy with red hair is a different species to a short guy with black hair. So no, "the divergence of dog breeds" proves nothing.
    Are you incapable of taking in new information to any extent whatsoever?


  • #216
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    J C wrote: »
    ... so when you have nowhere to hide with the logic and evidence that I have presented ... the ad Hominems emerge ... because that is all you have left.
    ... and thus you concede the debate.

    I don't believe I was engaged in the debate. I wouldn't even call it a debate, as you are blatantly ignoring evidence which is the basis of your position anyway.

    There are biologists on here who are able to defend the evolution position better than I ever could, and I let them do the talking.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    MrPudding
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,779 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    OMG! Spoiler!
    J C wrote: »
    ... so when you have nowhere to hide with the logic and evidence that I have presented ... the ad Hominems emerge ... because that is all you have left.
    ... and thus you concede the debate.

    No. Wrong. You present no logic you present no evidence. All you present are the symptoms of delusion and mental illness. There is no debate to concede. Anyone with half a brain can see that what you spout is utter rubbish.

    I am genuinely concerned for your mental health JC. The unfortunate thing for you is that your illness is religious in its foundation. As a result, due to the special treatment religious delusions attract, you are probably not getting the help you need. Regardless, you should seek help.

    Again, I say this not because you have won the debate and I am scarred, yet another sign of your delusional behaviour, but because you really do need help. Do yourself and your family a favour and get some.

    MrP


  • #218
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    [-0-] wrote: »
    bumper234, you're new here. You need to slow down a little or JC will just ignore everything you say; as if you don't exist. If you give him too much rope too quickly, he'll side step you and run for the hills.

    JC is an enigma. He should be studied. I said he has a mental illness earlier, which was edited by Jernal but I wish to give further details on that. In fact let me just put this here: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/breakfast-socrates/201003/creationism-mental-illness
    MrPudding wrote: »
    No. Wrong. You present no logic you present no evidence. All you present are the symptoms of delusion and mental illness. There is no debate to concede. Anyone with half a brain can see that what you spout is utter rubbish.

    I am genuinely concerned for your mental health JC. The unfortunate thing for you is that your illness is religious in its foundation. As a result, due to the special treatment religious delusions attract, you are probably not getting the help you need. Regardless, you should seek help.

    Again, I say this not because you have won the debate and I am scarred, yet another sign of your delusional behaviour, but because you really do need help. Do yourself and your family a favour and get some.

    MrP

    Please spare me your 'help'!!

    Those whom you would destroy ... you first declare to be mad!!!
    ... Materialist anti-God regimes have a long and ignoble history of declaring opponents to be mad ... and locking them up in assylums for psychological 'treatment'.

    I hope this isn't history repeating itself as farce!!!

    Quote:-
    In the twentieth century, systematic political abuse of psychiatry took place in the Soviet Union.[1] During the leadership of General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, psychiatry was used as a tool to eliminate political opponents ("dissidents") who openly expressed beliefs that contradicted official dogma.[2] The term "philosophical intoxication" was widely used to diagnose mental disorders in cases where people disagreed with leaders and criticized them using the writings of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Vladimir Lenin.[3] The process of psychiatric incarceration was instigated by attempts to emigrate; distribution or possession of prohibited documents or books; participation in civil rights actions and demonstrations, and involvement in forbidden religious activity.[4] Religious faith was determined to be a form of mental illness that needed to be cured.[5] Formerly highly classified government documents published after the dissolution of the Soviet Union demonstrate that the authorities used psychiatry as a tool to suppress dissent.[6]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union

    You're in despicable company on this one!!!:(


  • #219
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    Yup

    fc,220x200,white.u2.jpg


  • #220
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    J C wrote: »
    [/B]
    Those whom you would destroy ... you first declare to be mad!!!
    ... Materialist anti-God regimes have a long and ignoble history of declaring opponents to be mad ... and locking them up in assylums for psychological 'treatment'.

    I hope this isn't history repeating itself as farce!!!

    Quote:-
    In the twentieth century, systematic political abuse of psychiatry took place in the Soviet Union.[1] During the leadership of General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, psychiatry was used as a tool to eliminate political opponents ("dissidents") who openly expressed beliefs that contradicted official dogma.[2] The term "philosophical intoxication" was widely used to diagnose mental disorders in cases where people disagreed with leaders and criticized them using the writings of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Vladimir Lenin.[3] The process of psychiatric incarceration was instigated by attempts to emigrate; distribution or possession of prohibited documents or books; participation in civil rights actions and demonstrations, and involvement in forbidden religious activity.[4] Religious faith was determined to be a form of mental illness that needed to be cured.[5] Formerly highly classified government documents published after the dissolution of the Soviet Union demonstrate that the authorities used psychiatry as a tool to suppress dissent.[6]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union

    You're in despicable company on this one!!!:(

    :pac:

    You can play the martyr card all you like, it makes little difference. There is no case for Creationism, and to think otherwise is madness. It cannot be believed by any thinking person. It is quackery of the highest order.


  • #221
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    [-0-] wrote: »
    :pac:

    You can play the martyr card all you like, it makes little difference. There is no case for Creationism, and to think otherwise is madness. It cannot be believed by any thinking person. It is quackery of the highest order.
    I'm not playing the martyr card ... I'm just trying to give Mr P and yourself some pause for thought in relation to your beliefs that people of faith are mad.

    You're also not acting on Christopher Hitchens' idea of the Golden Rule of Secularism to not do unto others as you would not like to have done unto yourself ... I'm assuming that you would not like to be called mad when there is no evidence that you are mad ... yet you have done this to me.

    ... sounds like this particular Mr Hitchins' Secular 'Golden Rule' is somewhat 'patchy' in its application!!!


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    JC

    A question if you would be so kind.

    What sins were being committed 2000 years ago that made god go OH MY ER......ME these people deserve to die? What were they doing that was so bad it justified the annihilation of hundreds of millions of people (babies and fetus too) that is not happening 10 fold today? Are you saying the people of ancient times were breaking the 10 commandments more than our modern world is? Why has your "God" not ended it all again?


  • #223
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    [-0-] wrote: »
    There are biologists on here who are able to defend the evolution position better than I ever could, and I let them do the talking.
    There is a thing I notice about anti-creationist scientists with whom I debate ... they generally make statements along the lines that there are (other types of scientists) who can present the case against Creation, a young earth and Noahs Flood better than they could.
    I find that Biologists think that Geologists can do much better ... and Geologists think that Molecular Biologists can do so ... and Molecular Biologists think that Philosophers of Science are the ones to consult.
    The reality is that nobody can do so ... and all this shuffling of resposibilities is indicative of this.


  • #224
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Tope wrote: »
    We've already addressed this JC. Dog breeds aren't separate species, and their physical varieties are entirely down to deliberate human intervention to select for specific characteristics. They're still entirely members of the same species: a setter and a spaniel are no more different species than a tall guy with red hair is a different species to a short guy with black hair. So no, "the divergence of dog breeds" proves nothing.
    Are you incapable of taking in new information to any extent whatsoever?
    ... and neither are Silver Pheasants and Domestic Chickens separate species, if the production of fertile offspring is the definition ... yet they are defined as separate species (Lophura nycthemera and Gallus gallus).

    Speciation and defining separate species is also a bit of 'grey area' within conventional science where everything isn't as 'cut and dried' as your post is trying to indicate.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebird_hybrids


  • #225
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Yup

    fc,220x200,white.u2.jpg
    ... I have found the cure for religion ... and it is being Saved in Jesus.
    ... but everyone to their own beliefs ... I say.:)


  • #226
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 31,030 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    J C wrote: »
    ... but everyone to their own beliefs ... I say.:)

    And yet here you are, trying to convince everyone else that your own beliefs should be shared by the rest of us...


  • #227
    smcgiff
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Why has your "God" not ended it all again?

    Doesn't it say in the bible, roughly. 'MY Bad. Promise not to do it again' After the flood.

    Playing Devils God' advocate.


  • #228
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    smcgiff wrote: »
    Doesn't it say in the bible, roughly. 'MY Bad. Promise not to do it again' After the flood.

    Playing Devils God' advocate.

    So god made a mistake? Your all seeing all knowing omnipotent God made a booboo? :eek:


  • #229
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Insect Overlord wrote: »
    And yet here you are, trying to convince everyone else that your own beliefs should be shared by the rest of us...
    I am stating the reasons for my beliefs and listening to the reasons proferred against my beliefs and in favour of other peoples beliefs.
    The usual kind of thing ... on the Boards.ie actually.

    I am not trying to convince anybody of anything per se ... if people change their minds or even become more firmly attached to their current beliefs, I fully accept their right to do so as intelligent free-willed beings.

    ... and I'm certainly not accusing anybody who disagrees with me of being insane.

    I find it is good to have my ideas challenged and in turn to challenge other peoples ideas ... its a good way of testing the validity of my own and other people's ideas.


  • #230
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So god made a mistake? Your all seeing all knowing omnipotent God made a booboo? :eek:
    He didn't say that He made a mistake ... He just said that He would never destroy the world again by water.


  • #231
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Why not? If it was the right thing to do, why not do it again? If it was the wrong thing to do, then it was a mistake.
    Perhaps he was indicating (using His power of omniscience) that He would never need to destroy the World again by water.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    J C wrote: »
    Perhaps he was indicating (using His power of omniscience) that He would never need to destroy the World again by water.

    So we are safe then? No matter what mankind gets up to God will just let us on with it?


  • #233
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,247 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    bumper234 wrote: »
    So we are safe then? No matter what mankind gets up to God will just let us on with it?

    Hey, we got a free pass after the Nazis. I'm guessing we're free to do as we wish now and the head honcho won't intervene. Not that he ever has, mind.


  • #234
    Rayne Wooney
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,136 ✭✭✭✭Rayne Wooney


    Why are you allowed interpret stuff to suit your story but when anyone else does it it's wrong?


  • #235
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    JC

    A question if you would be so kind.

    What sins were being committed 2000 years ago that made god go OH MY ER......ME these people deserve to die? What were they doing that was so bad it justified the annihilation of hundreds of millions of people (babies and fetus too) that is not happening 10 fold today?
    A very good question ... just like the exact evil perpretrated at the Fall is 'skirted about' in Genesis ... so too is the exact nature of the evil that led to the Flood.

    ... it seems to have something to do with the sexual exploitation of women by other non-Human beings ... and the follow-on 'fallout' from this activity. God has chosen to not 'lift the lid' on this 'can of worms' ... and I think I will follow suit.
    bumper234 wrote: »
    JAre you saying the people of ancient times were breaking the 10 commandments more than our modern world is? Why has your "God" not ended it all again?
    Another good question. The answer would appear to be that everybody isn't continuously and irredeemably evil now ... which, seems to have been the case in the lead up to the Flood.
    Gen 6:5 The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.


  • #236
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So we are safe then? No matter what mankind gets up to God will just let us on with it?
    Not so ... we all must give acount when we die ... and the next time God will get 'close up and personal' with evil is at Armageddon.


  • #237
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 31,030 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    J C wrote: »
    ... it seems to have something to do with the sexual exploitation of women by other non-Human beings ... and the follow-on 'fallout' from this activity. God has chosen to not 'lift the lid' on this 'can of worms' ... and I think I will follow suit.

    g13371304382124686.jpg


  • #238
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    If he's omniscient why did he not realize he'd have to flood the world and go back to the drawing board and make people who weren't going to be so evil?
    Perhaps this was the 'least worst' scenario and all other possible Creations involving free-will would have had worse out-turns.

    Do remember that you and I are here under this Creation ... and we wouldn't be under any other one ... that alone IMO justifies God in His Creating the way He did!!!:):p


  • #239
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    FYI: This is Option Number Twenty-Five. Isn't this being a bit, uh, mean on the hamsters?
    J C wrote: »
    Not so ... we all must give acount when we die ... and the next time God will get 'close up and personal' with evil is at Armageddon.

    So he will wipe out humanity again?


  • #240
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    Hey, we got a free pass after the Nazis. I'm guessing we're free to do as we wish now and the head honcho won't intervene. Not that he ever has, mind.
    The leadership of the Nazis didn't get a 'free-pass' from the rest of the world ... and again, the situation worldwide during WWII could not be described as one where everyone was being continuously evil.
    Indeed the many good people who resisted the Nazis and gave their youth, health and even lives in doing so ... are proof that there were many good people with good thoughts in the World during WWII.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So he will wipe out humanity again?
    The jury is out on whether Humanity itself will largely beat Him to it.


Advertisement