warwgn

Evolution!! The real deal is, bible thumpers wont believe what we can prove, and cant prove what they believe. Those are the facts

I have no idea, cause I dont evan know how he died, but probally " well this feels wierd"

nothing because he was dead !!!

here's some more It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun. The controversies about evolution lie in the realm of the relative importance of various forces in molding evolution. - R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for Truth" Bioscience 31, 559 (1981) reprinted in Evolution versus

evolution 1 evolution 2 here is what the last one says, if you still need more explination I will post more links if your too stupid to find it yourself. Like I said this information is not like the bible and told in bullshit stories with hidden meanings, it's black and white easy to see. hen non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories of the mechanism of evolution. Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as anyone else: In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was." Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered. Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution. - Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981 Gould is stating the prevailing view of the scientific community. In other words, the experts on evolution consider it to be a fact. This is not an idea that originated with Gould as the following quotations indicate: Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms. - Theodosius Dobzhansky "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, J. Peter Zetterberg ed., ORYX Press, Phoenix AZ 1983 Also: It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution. It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past. There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now. It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans. No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun. The controversies about evolution lie in the realm of the relative importance of various forces in molding evolution. - R. C. Lewontin "Evolution/Creation Debate: A Time for Truth" Bioscience 31, 559 (1981) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism, op cit. This concept is also explained in introductory biology books that are used in colleges and universities (and in some of the better high schools). For example, in some of the best such textbooks we find: Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain how life evolves... it is important to understand that the current questions about how life evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution. - Neil A. Campbell, Biology 2nd ed., 1990, Benjamin/Cummings, p. 434 Also: Since Darwin's time, massive additional evidence has accumulated supporting the fact of evolution--that all living organisms present on earth today have arisen from earlier forms in the course of earth's long history. Indeed, all of modern biology is an affirmation of this relatedness of the many species of living things and of their gradual divergence from one another over the course of time. Since the publication of The Origin of Species, the important question, scientifically speaking, about evolution has not been whether it has taken place. That is no longer an issue among the vast majority of modern biologists. Today, the central and still fascinating questions for biologists concern the mechanisms by which evolution occurs. - Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology 5th ed. 1989, Worth Publishers, p. 972 One of the best introductory books on evolution (as opposed to introductory biology) is that by Douglas J. Futuyma, and he makes the following comment: A few words need to be said about the "theory of evolution," which most people take to mean the proposition that organisms have evolved from common ancestors. In everyday speech, "theory" often means a hypothesis or even a mere speculation. But in science, "theory" means "a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed." as the Oxford English Dictionary defines it. The theory of evolution is a body of interconnected statements about natural selection and the other processes that are thought to cause evolution, just as the atomic theory of chemistry and the Newtonian theory of mechanics are bodies of statements that describe causes of chemical and physical phenomena. In contrast, the statement that organisms have descended with modifications from common ancestors--the historical reality of evolution--is not a theory. It is a fact, as fully as the fact of the earth's revolution about the sun. Like the heliocentric solar system, evolution began as a hypothesis, and achieved "facthood" as the evidence in its favor became so strong that no knowledgeable and unbiased person could deny its reality. No biologist today would think of submitting a paper entitled "New evidence for evolution;" it simply has not been an issue for a century. - Douglas J. Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology, 2nd ed., 1986, Sinauer Associates, p. 15 There are readers of these newsgroups who reject evolution for religious reasons. In general these readers oppose both the fact of evolution and theories of mechanisms, although some anti-evolutionists have come to realize that there is a difference between the two concepts. That is why we see some leading anti-evolutionists admitting to the fact of "microevolution"--they know that evolution can be demonstrated. These readers will not be convinced of the "facthood" of (macro)evolution by any logical argument and it is a waste of time to make the attempt. The best that we can hope for is that they understand the argument that they oppose. Even this simple hope is rarely fulfilled. There are some readers who are not anti-evolutionist but still claim that evolution is "only" a theory which can't be proven. This group needs to distinguish between the fact that evolution occurs and the theory of the mechanism of evolution. We also need to distinguish between facts that are easy to demonstrate and those that are more circumstantial. Examples of evolution that are readily apparent include the fact that modern populations are evolving and the fact that two closely related species share a common ancestor. The evidence that Homo sapiens and chimpanzees share a recent common ancestor falls into this category. There is so much evidence in support of this aspect of primate evolution that it qualifies as a fact by any common definition of the word "fact." In other cases the available evidence is less strong. For example, the relationships of some of the major phyla are still being worked out. Also, the statement that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor is strongly supported by the available evidence, and there is no opposing evidence. However, it is not yet appropriate to call this a "fact" since there are reasonable alternatives. Finally, there is an epistemological argument against evolution as fact. Some readers of these newsgroups point out that nothing in science can ever be "proven" and this includes evolution. According to this argument, the probability that evolution is the correct explanation of life as we know it may approach 99.9999...9% but it will never be 100%. Thus evolution cannot be a fact. This kind of argument might be appropriate in a philosophy class (it is essentially correct) but it won't do in the real world. A "fact," as Stephen J. Gould pointed out (see above), means something that is so highly probable that it would be silly not to accept it. This point has also been made by others who contest the nit-picking epistemologists. The honest scientist, like the philosopher, will tell you that nothing whatever can be or has been proved with fully 100% certainty, not even that you or I exist, nor anyone except himself, since he might be dreaming the whole thing. Thus there is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact. For the evidence in favor of it is as voluminous, diverse, and convincing as in the case of any other well established fact of science concerning the existence of things that cannot be directly seen, such as atoms, neutrons, or solar gravitation .... So enormous, ramifying, and consistent has the evidence for evolution become that if anyone could now disprove it, I should have my conception of the orderliness of the universe so shaken as to lead me to doubt even my own existence. If you like, then, I will grant you that in an absolute sense evolution is not a fact, or rather, that it is no more a fact than that you are hearing or reading these words. - H. J. Muller, "One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough" School Science and Mathematics 59, 304-305. (1959) reprinted in Evolution versus Creationism op cit. In any meaningful sense evolution is a fact, but there are various theories concerning the mechanism of evolution. does that help????? now lets see some information with real facts backing up you bible!!!!!!

everything didnt come from the same cell, your thinking of adam and eve shit. The reason for all the different life is just that, stuff evolved all over the planet at different times and in different conditions from different "cells" to make it simple. Bible thumpers try to equate science like the bible, and make it seem like it comes from one point, which is impossible(adam and eve), eveolution is about adapting to your envionment where ever that is.

your comparing cows to humans!!! how many black people just suddenly pop out a red or white kid?? not unless the milkman had something to do with it. So the big things that debunk the bible creation story for me: 1) All the people of color and different genetics came from just adam and eve? (oh yeah they had super genes) 2) Noahs ark was a massive wooden boat able to hold 2 of every animal, plus all the food, plus enough water, plus enough people to clean and feed all of them, then still have the capacity to stay afloat with all that weight. All of that for 40 days and nights then how long untill the water went down enough to let them all out. This massive ship that was so incredibly built to withstand all that weight and hold all that stuff and it just disappeared off the face of the earth with out so much as a single refrence ever again?? 3) Why didnt all the chinese and japanese drown, did they build boats too, they have written history accounts that date back further than the bible. And we see no proof of any of this in other places? 4) The bible dont say shit about dinosaurs ruling the earth for millions of years, but we have bones to prove that was the case. And for that matter all the factual evidence of man and civilazations before the times of the bibles all together. The reason the bible is so screwed up and doesent make sence is it was written by men of long ago who didnt know shit about the world or the universe, or technology. So it fooled people then and perfect sence, but if you still belive it as fact and cant see through it completly you are a fool. The message and intent of the bible may all be good and spirtual, I have no idea, but if you take it as fact thats crazy. Belive the ideals and the message or the teachings if it makes you feel better, thats the important part anyway I guess. But dont try and make up some bullshit to try and pass it off as fact. And people keep saying evolution and the big bang is impossible since everything would have to be perfect for that to occur. It is all just a lucky shot, there is no reason for it we are all here and alive just because it happened, no reason for it. Thats why we still havent found any other planet like earth yet because it is so rare, it's not like we are 1 out of 10. Do some real research, it is easy, you dont have to interpret the meanings of it, you dont have to have faith in it, you dont have to belive it to see it. It's all in black and white, and can be proven in several other sources. If you want proof go look in any physics book for refrence!!!!!

helldriver your question was first, but after that we need to come back to adam and eve!

actually 1 boy killed the other so they had the 3rd boy, so only 2 of them were doin mom, then did their own sisters so they could have kids? Or am i missing something?

so genetics aside, they had 3 boys, so the boys were doin the mom then right??

ok, so god created adam and eve. then they had kids and so on and so on for billions of times. Then how in the hell, are there white people, black people, chinese,japanese, native, pygmies, mongols, or all the other races?? If we supposedly came from only one set of gene's, and if they only had 3 son's then where the hell did their kids come from? was there mom and grandma the same person? And if that is the case, forgetting the total lack of genitic meltdown from inbreeding, shouldnt we all look pretty much the same? Or at least be the same race. And evolution seems impossible? Give me a break.

make up your mind, is it this post or the other quote".science has not explained muc hof anything on origins of man ,they explained plenty of theorys no doubt ." holeswe havent filled " is a major understatement IMO and really how much time does science need ? they supposedly have billions of years of things on earth to study,analyze,and probe so it should be an easy no brainer since this process happend billions of times over billions of years to illistrate their ideas and concepts of the origin of man ,yet we have not one true example of where an animal magically changes to another or a misisng link or why man cant create" I guess we need a little more than .93 seconds, we are only just now getting the technology needed to prove the theriories. Remember science runs on facts not faith, so we cant just make shit up and say people are stupid, dumb, or going to hell cause they dont belive it.

we can find dinosaur bone from millions of years ago, but Noahs ark is still lost? Dont forget the bible has been writtn by men, just like the Di Vinici code, it is most likely full of errors! if you cant find the information on the physics of how the earth was formed or our galaxy then you must not have went to school or watch the discovery channel. that is fact that has been proven plenty. And repeated expermints do not always end the same, look into quantam mechnics for that answer. Science has explained much of the origins of the universe and of man, but not all of it, so your right there are holes we havent filled YET but give it time. Give it the same time as people have been trying to figure out god and the bible and we will be way closer than they are. Look at the size of an aircraft carrier, and how often it has to be supplied with all it's modern equipment. It cant go for 40 days with out resupply, what the hell makes you think a wooden boat full of 2 of every kind of animal could do it. you would have to shovel shit non stop just to keep it afloat!! There are less holes in science than religion, and with science you dont need blind faith, you get hard facts that can be proven or dis proven. There is a lot of cover up and horse shit in religion just to keep it going and make sence. It all comes down to what you belive, either you belive what you are told or you belive what can be proved. I have my own theories as to where man came from, but at some point evolution took it's course and we did evolve. Early man has a time line and fossil record showing evolution, then suddenly there was a leap to modern man and in between nothing to show how, but we wiped the old people off the earth. The question is not did we evolve, but where, and how did we get to earth?? God had nothing to do with it in my opinion.

Thats not an idea or magic, it's physics, and the earth took millions of years to form not 7 days. There is just a tad more proof in physics then the bible. Not bagging on you but if you want people to do research, you should do the same.

dont forget about the flood

Religion is about control, no matter what religion it is! You do what it says you get rewarded, you go against it you get punished. Just like santa claus, we use it to control children and make them be good, once they are to old for santa it switches to satan. They are both just stories to make us behave.

I really think the world would be better off with out religon, there would have been a lot less wars. The muslims wouldnt hate us, the crusades would not have happened, and maybe hitler would never have come to power. We would fight wars for good reason like more land,and more money, or more oil. We do anyway, at least it would be more honest why we are doing it, and would end quicker. Plus all the witch trials wouldnt have happened with out the idea of evil and all that crap.

Now thats funny!!!!!!!

odaen, well thats my point, you just gonna lay down and die if theres no God? I doubt it, your still gonna love your kids and still ride the banshee right. So whats the difference if there is a god or not?

Just watched a show last night and they were tearing don brown up. These people were doing everything they could to make sure people knew this book/movie is a big fake, and that all the statements he has as fact were wrong. I dont get it, who cares if it's true or not, what's the differance if jesus was married or not?? so what if he had kids or not, I dont see how that changes the world at all. after more thought, what differance would it make if there were no god?? If some one proved without a doubt there was no god that it was all a big fake, what differance would it really make. Other than the obvious loss of control and massive amount of money revenue that religion generates. All the churches would be usless, the priests would be out of work, all the money and power the vatican has would dissolve. Think of how much money is really tied up in religion and the support of it. All the churches and cathederals that have been built, all that money comes from regular people. If money is the root of all evil why is so much required by the church?? Anyway back on topic, would you really live you life different if there was no god? I would still do the same things I do now, work,rest,play it would make no diff to me at all. I think for most of the world it would be the same as well after the initial blah,blah was over everybody would go back to their normal lives. We have laws to govern ourselves, and i dont really think people think about god when they do something wrong, but they think i hope the cops dont catch me. So what do you think, what would you do different if there was no god anymore? How much would your life change?

there going back on the wifes quad tomorrow, they were only supposed to be temporary anyway untill I got my a arms.

The price per barrel going up is due to the increased competion from china and Inda who 10 years ago did not buy half of what they do now. The rag heads are pumping up the price since we arent the only ones buying a shit load of oil any more. The oil companies are still making a killing on gas/stocks or they would not have such a large profit margin. Other countries do hate us, and we are falling apart from the inside out. Too many imagrants bringing their culture and beliefs from their shitty countries and trying to make ours shitty so they feel at home. Then why the hell did they leave their shitty country to begin with, if you want to come here for a better life then live like we do, speak like we do, read like we do, all in english and be an American not some other shit hybrid like afro/American, asian/American, mexican/American or where ever the hell you came from!! We need a really good war right here on our own soil, so we can thin out the population of assholes and boost the econmy back up! I vote we have the war in southern california so we can get rid of a bunch of the illegals, and clear out some prime land so after the war we all have a really good place to go ride!!!!!

Well got everything all put together, new stem,the bars,the adapter for the bars, and the desert seat. Took it out yesterday, and first impressions were good. I have added a total of about 3 inches in height to the stem with the adapter but the fast flex bars are lower than stock and the desert seat is 4 1/2 inches thick so the bars came out at just about the same sit down riding height as normal. The 12 deg. bend is the way to go for long arm prople, I love the feel of the bars being straight across so now my wrists arent turned in and my elbows are out instead of at my sides. I switched to the medium compound bushings in the bars and was ready to ride. At first it seemd way to easy to steer and was un comfortable, but after a quick adjustment and rotating the bars back about 3/4 inch it was right on. I still felt like I had more leverage to turn and it would go in a corner to fast and I would have to over correct to bring it back. I am using completley different muscles to control it as before so I was getting sore very fast and still feel it today. Now this ride was not with out complications, after about only 6 miles of riding the bars went crooked, I was all freaked out and finally stopped to check it out. Turned out to be a bent tie rod and tie rod end?? I dont remember hitting anything or taking a harsh bump. It broke before I got to the truck, so the truck had to come to me, also when I got it home I find the other sides tie rod end is slightly bent too. So either the bars work so good I didnt evan feel it when I hit what ever I hit, or the tie rod components have just had enough abuse, or the wheel spacers are putting too much leverage against them and they cant hold up. I have had the wheel spacers on for about 120 miles to the point when the tie rods broke and 60 mile of that was during a race. I am gonna loose the wheel spacers and replace the bad components so I can give it another try this sunday. But so far, my impression is I like the ergonomics of these bars very much and from the small amount of riding I did I never got a hard jolt through the bars. Do they reduce arm pump? not yet, I am sore from riding with them, but that is due in part from the change in angles, and probally from fighting the steering due to tie rods. For now my opinion is I think after I get used to the angle, and get the front end sorted out I am gonna love these bars. After I get a good ride I will give the final result.

your saying make the grip shorter..right? I dont understand the point behind that unless you have very small hands I guess. You toss the thumb throttle in the trash when you install a twist anyway so I dont get it??

gotcha huh, dont feel bad it got me too!!