Comments
1 - 20 of 472 Comments Last updated Jun 16, 2014
First Prev
of 24
Next Last
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 1, 2014
 
Whether you believe in materialist evolution or not, I'd like to know how plausible you find the mutants in X-men to be. Wolverine's original body should be pretty plausible, as well as his regenerative powers. Powers like Professor X's are an unknown. Evolution doesn't seem to have generated them yet, but hell...it's not like it's not generated comparable features. Then again, the domain of mental influences may be restricted to other people only, leaving the external world unaffected.

What say you?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
Whether you believe in materialist evolution or not, I'd like to know how plausible you find the mutants in X-men to be. Wolverine's original body should be pretty plausible, as well as his regenerative powers. Powers like Professor X's are an unknown. Evolution doesn't seem to have generated them yet, but hell...it's not like it's not generated comparable features. Then again, the domain of mental influences may be restricted to other people only, leaving the external world unaffected.

What say you?
Pure fantasy.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 1, 2014
 
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Pure fantasy.
And why wouldn't someone like Wolverine be a plausible future creation? Retractable weapons are found in nature, so are claws, so is regeneration. I don't see any reason why the latter couldn't be maximized to an extreme like Wolverine's was.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
Whether you believe in materialist evolution or not, I'd like to know how plausible you find the mutants in X-men to be. Wolverine's original body should be pretty plausible, as well as his regenerative powers. Powers like Professor X's are an unknown. Evolution doesn't seem to have generated them yet, but hell...it's not like it's not generated comparable features. Then again, the domain of mental influences may be restricted to other people only, leaving the external world unaffected.
What say you?
You know my position on you and your ignorant ideas. Now I know where you get your science from. No wonder you have such a screwed up understanding of things.

The X-Men is fiction and doesn't reflect reality. The implication of the story is that a mutation creates so many different and unbelievable phenotypes doesn't fit anything known or speculated.

You seem to have been manipulated in to thinking you know everything while claiming and showing you know very little. I doubt this power will even get you an arch nemesis.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
And why wouldn't someone like Wolverine be a plausible future creation? Retractable weapons are found in nature, so are claws, so is regeneration. I don't see any reason why the latter couldn't be maximized to an extreme like Wolverine's was.
I was going to jokingly say all but Wolverine but leave it to a creationist to ruin a joke.

Evolution involves the change in already existing features. The difference between parent and offspring would have to be small enough so that the changes would seem to be normal when looking at the parents. So what feature did Wolverine's parents have that could reasonable evolve into extendable bone spurs in one generation? What healing abilities did his parents have that could evolve into almost instant regrowth in one generation?

Actually the healing ability of Wolverine's is the truly amazing "mutation". That would require many many changes. In fact it seems that the current laws of chemistry would not allow it. That mutation is pure fantasy.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
And why wouldn't someone like Wolverine be a plausible future creation? Retractable weapons are found in nature, so are claws, so is regeneration. I don't see any reason why the latter couldn't be maximized to an extreme like Wolverine's was.
Radical mutations are not evolution. The radical mutations exhibited bely what we know of anatomy, physiology and physics. For instance the retractable bone knives that Wolverine originally possessed, retract into the backs of his hands and but do limit the range of motion and use of his wrists and hands despite their fair length. You can start a string of what if reasons this can happen, but with each one you will have to make another to explain the previous.

Mutations are the fodder for evolution, but they are not the process. A radical mutation like Wolverine would be destroyed by natural selection in the form of fundamentalist Christian Bible worshipers because they just knew he was possessed by Satan.

Your line of questioning is a desperate attempt by another fundie creationist to link science with fantasy. That might work on your other uneducated sheep brethren, but it doesn't fly here.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jun 1, 2014
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You know my position on you and your ignorant ideas. Now I know where you get your science from. No wonder you have such a screwed up understanding of things.
The X-Men is fiction and doesn't reflect reality. The implication of the story is that a mutation creates so many different and unbelievable phenotypes doesn't fit anything known or speculated.
You seem to have been manipulated in to thinking you know everything while claiming and showing you know very little. I doubt this power will even get you an arch nemesis.
You're nuts. I don't get my science from X-men, you dolt. There should be absolutely nothing to prevent certain characters from the X-men to have a future counterpart in reality.

Furthermore, you can only say that mutations create "unbelievable" phenotypes because you are aware of existing ones. If a creature like man did not exist, you could never say that he might based on past references.

I may not know everything, but I do know that your thinking is very limited.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jun 1, 2014
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I was going to jokingly say all but Wolverine but leave it to a creationist to ruin a joke.
Evolution involves the change in already existing features. The difference between parent and offspring would have to be small enough so that the changes would seem to be normal when looking at the parents. So what feature did Wolverine's parents have that could reasonable evolve into extendable bone spurs in one generation? What healing abilities did his parents have that could evolve into almost instant regrowth in one generation?
Actually the healing ability of Wolverine's is the truly amazing "mutation". That would require many many changes. In fact it seems that the current laws of chemistry would not allow it. That mutation is pure fantasy.
Who said anything about a single mutation?

Are you actually capable of not misrepresenting ideas?

I suppose a single mutation could be possible if the progenitor came into contact with some future DNA manipulating substance designed by humans, but never did I suggest that single mutations would be the cause of X-men like creatures. I'm not even sure what the exact lore is of the X-men universe as to why these abnormalities existed.

You know what....then again, if materialistic evolution is correct...I wouldn't be surprised if it could make pretty much anything. It's been used to explain everything, after all, even when it's far from justified.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jun 1, 2014
 
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Radical mutations are not evolution. The radical mutations exhibited bely what we know of anatomy, physiology and physics. For instance the retractable bone knives that Wolverine originally possessed, retract into the backs of his hands and but do limit the range of motion and use of his wrists and hands despite their fair length. You can start a string of what if reasons this can happen, but with each one you will have to make another to explain the previous.
Mutations are the fodder for evolution, but they are not the process. A radical mutation like Wolverine would be destroyed by natural selection in the form of fundamentalist Christian Bible worshipers because they just knew he was possessed by Satan.
Your line of questioning is a desperate attempt by another fundie creationist to link science with fantasy. That might work on your other uneducated sheep brethren, but it doesn't fly here.
Wow, it's like you're a robot designed to destroy creationists. You're like a sentinel. Maybe someday you'll develop the ability to think beyond your programming. You and fundementalists share a lot of similar traits.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
Who said anything about a single mutation?
Are you actually capable of not misrepresenting ideas?
I suppose a single mutation could be possible if the progenitor came into contact with some future DNA manipulating substance designed by humans, but never did I suggest that single mutations would be the cause of X-men like creatures. I'm not even sure what the exact lore is of the X-men universe as to why these abnormalities existed.
You know what....then again, if materialistic evolution is correct...I wouldn't be surprised if it could make pretty much anything. It's been used to explain everything, after all, even when it's far from justified.
All of your ideas are idiotic. "Misrepresenting" them is the kindest deed that can be done for them.


And you dodged my very reasonable question that showed the idiocy of your post.

Why did you do that?
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jun 1, 2014
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
All of your ideas are idiotic. "Misrepresenting" them is the kindest deed that can be done for them.
And you dodged my very reasonable question that showed the idiocy of your post.
Why did you do that?
I must have missed it as I was wading through the muck of nonsense you designed for yourself.
The only reasonable point you seem to have made was regarding the laws of chemistry, and even then it was an assertion sans explanation.

Shall I assume from now on that you will misrepresent my ideas out of the kindness of your heart?
What idiocy you see in them must be a reflection of your own.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
I must have missed it as I was wading through the muck of nonsense you designed for yourself.
The only reasonable point you seem to have made was regarding the laws of chemistry, and even then it was an assertion sans explanation.
Shall I assume from now on that you will misrepresent my ideas out of the kindness of your heart?
What idiocy you see in them must be a reflection of your own.
If you are going to be an ignorant idiot then you should not complain when people treat you like one.

Ask nicely and I can help you. Continue to act as you have and I will simply point out the idiocy of your posts, even if you do want to claim that I am "misrepresenting you".

I see that you make that claim towards everyone. Perhaps if everybody seems to be misinterpreting your posts the problem is with you and not with others.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jun 1, 2014
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are going to be an ignorant idiot then you should not complain when people treat you like one.
Ask nicely and I can help you. Continue to act as you have and I will simply point out the idiocy of your posts, even if you do want to claim that I am "misrepresenting you".
I see that you make that claim towards everyone. Perhaps if everybody seems to be misinterpreting your posts the problem is with you and not with others.
The only one being the ignorant idiot in this conversation is you, fool. Why would I ask anything nicely from the likes of you?

If everyone is on a mission to defend their idiotic worldview at all costs, then I suppose misrepresentation are par for the course. You all seem to use the same rhetoric and have common expressions of stupidity. So, yeah, I'd say the problem was with you.
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jun 1, 2014
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
All of your ideas are idiotic. "Misrepresenting" them is the kindest deed that can be done for them.
And you dodged my very reasonable question that showed the idiocy of your post.
Why did you do that?
Also, your questions were not reasonable at all. That's how evolution is claimed to have worked by you. Mutations accumulate over time and result in new functions. The retractable system would be formed by a series of random mutations. Natural selection wouldn't be needed because all the organism would have to do is survive. Natural selection, when it comes to population survival, doesn't work the same way in the human kingdom. So, the mutations may all be dormant or they may not, but eventually, if we take evolutionary theory to its logical conclusion, a Wolverine type being isn't something unexpected.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
Also, your questions were not reasonable at all. That's how evolution is claimed to have worked by you. Mutations accumulate over time and result in new functions. The retractable system would be formed by a series of random mutations. Natural selection wouldn't be needed because all the organism would have to do is survive. Natural selection, when it comes to population survival, doesn't work the same way in the human kingdom. So, the mutations may all be dormant or they may not, but eventually, if we take evolutionary theory to its logical conclusion, a Wolverine type being isn't something unexpected.
Sure they were, sadly you are just a moron and so cannot judge. And you have just illustrated that you do not know how evolution works, congratulations dunce.

Evolution works on the change of existing traits. What existing trait would you change by a "series of random mutations". Populations evolve, not individuals. Two significant changes in one generation is unheard of. You have one significant change at the most to form Wolverine, What the heck, since you are a halfwit I will give you twice that. What two significant changes of existing traits would allow a "Wolverine" to exist?
Evolutionisstupi d

Israel

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jun 1, 2014
 
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure they were, sadly you are just a moron and so cannot judge. And you have just illustrated that you do not know how evolution works, congratulations dunce.
Evolution works on the change of existing traits. What existing trait would you change by a "series of random mutations". Populations evolve, not individuals. Two significant changes in one generation is unheard of. You have one significant change at the most to form Wolverine, What the heck, since you are a halfwit I will give you twice that. What two significant changes of existing traits would allow a "Wolverine" to exist?
So you continue in your misunderstanding...

Where exactly did I say that the change would need to take place within a generation?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
So you continue in your misunderstanding...
Where exactly did I say that the change would need to take place within a generation?
You didn't. But thank you for emphasizing the point that you do not understand evolution.

Once again the halfwit comes through. And I see that you are still dodging the questions.

Of course that is a no win for you, those questions are designed to help you to learn. You don't want to learn, you are happy to sit and fart in your fetid pond of ignorance.

Here is a serious question, do you want to learn anything or are you happy being our plaything? Self sacrificing idiots are fun to kick around.

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
You're nuts. I don't get my science from X-men, you dolt. There should be absolutely nothing to prevent certain characters from the X-men to have a future counterpart in reality.
Furthermore, you can only say that mutations create "unbelievable" phenotypes because you are aware of existing ones. If a creature like man did not exist, you could never say that he might based on past references.
I may not know everything, but I do know that your thinking is very limited.
You don't get your science from the X-men? I don't think you realize they aren't real. No, you can say they are unbelievable because what we know of biology and physics makes that so. Good god man, do you want to discuss science or meander down the little used back roads of your tortured psyche? Get your head out the comic books and dig into some real science. I know at first you will be daunted by the lack of cartoon characters, word balloons and the increased presence of multisyllabic words, but in 10 or 15 years you may learn something.

X-men! That is freakin hilarious. What you got next for us dumbo? Dr. Seuss characters?

“I have upset the hand of god”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

Threats pending

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jun 1, 2014
 
Evolutionisstupid wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, it's like you're a robot designed to destroy creationists. You're like a sentinel. Maybe someday you'll develop the ability to think beyond your programming. You and fundementalists share a lot of similar traits.
Wow it is like you are an idiot with no sound programming. Setting around babbling "Me like cake". I share nothing in common with you, but you are entitled to your data-less, ranting opinion.

You have my permission to continue your uninformed tailspin in support of your fundamentalist agenda.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jun 1, 2014
 
What isstupid does not understand is that some of the traits of the X-Men could appear if IDiocy were true. It cannot be done with evolution. An intelligent designer might be able to change a person enough to have retractable bone spurs in one generation. It could not be done through evolution.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 24
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••