Consistency Posted February 13, 2013 Author Share Posted February 13, 2013 So you are not part of the plan? calling black helicoters Plan.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Plan.... Come dude, you know... the world wide conspiracy to hide the truth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consistency Posted February 13, 2013 Author Share Posted February 13, 2013 Come dude, you know... the world wide conspiracy to hide the truth... Hahahhaa... I meant... Science is manipulation the evidence and the world. There's no need to hide this unethical behaviour with lots of fancy words. There is no truth from the majority of scientists because most are like chickens with their heads cut off... hence they wont stop making assumptions and manipulating everything in a negative way for the sole purpose of looking important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Hahahhaa... I meant... Science is manipulation the evidence and the world. There's no need to hide this unethical behaviour with lots of fancy words. There is no truth from the majority of scientists because most are like chickens with their heads cut off... hence they wont stop making assumptions and manipulating everything in a negative way for the sole purpose of looking important. Yeah, it's pretty bad, science has so failed to bring anything to the world, no new knowledge, i still think medicine is bollocks as well, Science is so useless, we would all be so much better off with out science and the so called scientific method... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Deductive reasoning may be used in court cases Moontanman, but as a system of logic it does have a flaw. As pointed out by Godel, certain self referencing algorythms result in non-sensical logic. What do you deduce from "This statement is false". But seriously, at the base of evolution is mutation, whether good or bad is determined solely by environment, This is where the oft quoted ( but not quite accurate ) statement "survival of the fittest ( for that specific environment )" comes from. And I don't think there's doubt in anyone's mind that good and ( mostly ) bad mutations do happen all the time. They manifest themselves in the abnormal ( is there a normal ? ) DNA structures leading mostly to deseases and cancers. Sometimes they lead to abnormalities like webbed or 6 toes or fingers; unfortunately there is no advantage to such a mutation in our environment. As a matter of fact, one could argue that a sufficiently advanced species such as ours is able to affect or modify the environment we inhabit to suit us and have no need to evolve futher than the current 'norm'. So forget about the big bulging heads and childlike bodies with atrophied muscles of science fiction, we have effectively stopped evolving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Deductive reasoning may be used in court cases Moontanman, but as a system of logic it does have a flaw. As pointed out by Godel, certain self referencing algorythms result in non-sensical logic. What do you deduce from "This statement is false". But seriously, at the base of evolution is mutation, whether good or bad is determined solely by environment, This is where the oft quoted ( but not quite accurate ) statement "survival of the fittest ( for that specific environment )" comes from. And I don't think there's doubt in anyone's mind that good and ( mostly ) bad mutations do happen all the time. They manifest themselves in the abnormal ( is there a normal ? ) DNA structures leading mostly to deseases and cancers. Sometimes they lead to abnormalities like webbed or 6 toes or fingers; unfortunately there is no advantage to such a mutation in our environment. As a matter of fact, one could argue that a sufficiently advanced species such as ours is able to affect or modify the environment we inhabit to suit us and have no need to evolve futher than the current 'norm'. So forget about the big bulging heads and childlike bodies with atrophied muscles of science fiction, we have effectively stopped evolving. you are mistaken, the vast majority of mutations are neutral, you were born with around 120 mutations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ophiolite Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 ...we have effectively stopped evolving. This is wholly incorrect. There is a case to be made that our evolution has accelerated since the introduction of agriculture and it is certainly ongoing at the present day. I am surprised you have arrived at this startlingly wrong conclusion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consistency Posted February 14, 2013 Author Share Posted February 14, 2013 (edited) Deductive reasoning may be used in court cases Moontanman, but as a system of logic it does have a flaw. As pointed out by Godel, certain self referencing algorythms result in non-sensical logic. What do you deduce from "This statement is false". But seriously, at the base of evolution is mutation, whether good or bad is determined solely by environment, This is where the oft quoted ( but not quite accurate ) statement "survival of the fittest ( for that specific environment )" comes from. And I don't think there's doubt in anyone's mind that good and ( mostly ) bad mutations do happen all the time. They manifest themselves in the abnormal ( is there a normal ? ) DNA structures leading mostly to deseases and cancers. Sometimes they lead to abnormalities like webbed or 6 toes or fingers; unfortunately there is no advantage to such a mutation in our environment. As a matter of fact, one could argue that a sufficiently advanced species such as ours is able to affect or modify the environment we inhabit to suit us and have no need to evolve futher than the current 'norm'. So forget about the big bulging heads and childlike bodies with atrophied muscles of science fiction, we have effectively stopped evolving. We are still evolving.. there is no tigers to eat the weak. The weak over-run the planet. Your comment made my point. Humans manipulate chemicals by creating pesticides(toxins we spray on fruit) which damage our DNA. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18418871 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19064416 Yeah, it's pretty bad, science has so failed to bring anything to the world, no new knowledge, i still think medicine is bollocks as well, Science is so useless, we would all be so much better off with out science and the so called scientific method... We would since scientists majorly LACK morals. Edited February 14, 2013 by Consistency -4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted February 14, 2013 Share Posted February 14, 2013 We would since scientists majorly LACK morals. ! Moderator Note All right then, I guess my warning fell on intelligently-designed deaf ears. Time to close this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts