Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71068 Jan 15, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
potential of what exactly?
potential of of a big bang...you know they say that the big bang came out of nothing...nevermind.lol
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71069 Jan 15, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know, but after it's all gone and there's nothing left, some scientists say you have the potential of a Universe.
food for thought.
That would violate the conservation of mass! I'm a law abiding citizen, you know!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71070 Jan 15, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
yes...and they weren't very nice neither.lol
I know exactly what you mean.
I mean it happens all the time. But today was different.
Avanzado

Kansas City, MO

#71071 Jan 15, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
potential of of a big bang...you know they say that the big bang came out of nothing...nevermind.lol
And, God came from what? Out of nothingness...alot of nothing? Well, they lied to you from birth so, you probably will never know......

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71072 Jan 15, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>

I want a replacement for the Democratic party. I'm counting on people like you to make the Dems downfall written in stone. You WILL USE it! You WILL obey your MASTER!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/...
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71073 Jan 15, 2013
Cybele wrote:
That's still the Democrooks.

In order for a break from the status quo, we need to keep every candidate running for office on a leash with a deadman trigger. The neo-democrats might want it to be compulsory to never endorse a candidate who does not observe a party term limit for cumulative elected positions. Career politicians are the problem.

If the career criminals jump ship, the neo-dems should even consider being spoilers and get the Republican elected. It has to be understood. There are no aristocrats in the new order.

I'd do the same with the Republican party but they're too far gone. They had their day with Lincoln. Not a pretty moral to that story either if you were Abe, eh?

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71074 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm... 2 percent of the population or so, a general contradiction of biology, let alone the improvised mechanics of gratification and you don't think deviant applies?
Same sex sexual behavior is not a contradiction of biology. That you would write such a thing speaks to how little you understand biology.

- almost all primate species have been observed engaging in same sex sexual behavior
- it's prevalent among most mammals
- all human cultures include it

How could you possibly call that "a general contradiction of biology"???

Rather, it is something we can explain via evolution - like all other biological phenomena.
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71075 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Same sex sexual behavior is not a contradiction of biology. That you would write such a thing speaks to how little you understand biology.
- almost all primate species have been observed engaging in same sex sexual behavior
- it's prevalent among most mammals
- all human cultures include it
How could you possibly call that "a general contradiction of biology"???
Rather, it is something we can explain via evolution - like all other biological phenomena.
Among mammals, you'll find consistent behaviors like epilepsy too!

Explain your phenomenon. Is it one of strategy, or is it a common anomaly, based on similar strategies with similar weaknesses. What you WON'T find is a specific gene for homosexuality, thus my conclusion that homosexuality is a symptom of overstimulation of a portion of the brain.

I consider it similar to Autism, Tourette's and other such ambiguous disorders. Some cases are mild while some are major obsessive-compulsive disorders. It's irresponsible to politicize the condition, and to ignore the results of the medical condition. Most people don't like to suffer with a mental disorder, but obsessive-compulsives do, but remain in a perpetual state of confused feelings.

They can't change the state of "normal" psychology. They can only act out their fantasies and further alienate themselves in a self-propelled cycle of obsession, while disrupting the lives of others, increasing the likelihood of "criminal" emotional responses from others.

The pseudo-science community likes to reference things like the bonobo societies to claim that such behavior is the very nature of human existence, but I disagree AND I can tell you why, but you're not going to listen. You'll now demand science from me while you've provided nothing but "opinion" which we all know means NOTHING!

Here's the reality. Bonobos live in trees and live a passive, vegetarian lifestyle. Humans don't. If you want to examine human behavior analogies, you're far better off observing terrestrial species such as baboons.

Yes, baboons exhibit symbolic homosexuality to show dominance in their herds, but that is all about alphas who are intent on maintaining control of harems. So, here's another question in political context, because this IS JUST a political debate.

Is it profane to engage in bigamy? Is it unconstitutional to deny our citizens the right to practice bigamy? See? We're not bonobos. We're not baboons. The Constitution is not about individual "rights" as a mandate without exception. One to two percent of the population does not have a "right" to disrupt what the majority considers essential to order.

The scientific thing to do is to recognize the medical condition. This politics is worse than medically unethical. It's like selling smallpox infested blankets to Native Americans. It's an attempt to engage in State sponsored atrocities AND unethical animal abuse.(since you like to insist that we're animals in all their various niches.)

Level 5

Since: Apr 12

Taizhou, China

#71076 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
One to two percent of the population does not have a "right" to disrupt what the majority considers essential to order.

Not sure I follow your argument here.
Don't minority rights count too?
What if 98-99% of the people of Akron, Ohio decided that anonymous should be stoned to death.
Should they do it?
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71077 Jan 16, 2013
Thomas Robertson wrote:
anonymous wrote:
One to two percent of the population does not have a "right" to disrupt what the majority considers essential to order.
Not sure I follow your argument here.
Don't minority rights count too?
What if 98-99% of the people of Akron, Ohio decided that anonymous should be stoned to death.
Should they do it?
I guess that depends on why they decided such a thing!:o)

It also depends on whether or not due process is followed. The Bill of Rights does address specific individual rights essential to engage in a democratic consensus. Racial discrimination, sexual discrimination and religious discrimination are legally forbidden.

I'll be honest. The religion part is a bit iffy. Since children are often born into a faith at the will of their parents, I'll go along with it for the most part. Religion is largely a shield behind which most people engage in political conflict. That should not be protected. That is probably the only reason most people engage in this forum debate.

Consider me your "fly in the ointment". I don't approve of sitting around and ganging up on any Creationist who's dumb enough to take it, as if their God will save them, but they do disrupt meaningful dialog. The last time I blew off this forum, it was because the Evolution crowd were meandering around like kids looking for ants on their driveway to burn with a magnifying glass. For now, I consider this a good test of your REAL belief in scientific discipline.

....and no, I don't think most people have any scientific discipline. They just like the way they think science props up their anti-religion politics. The Creationists who have a lick of common sense see this. They just don't say it because they don't want their politics to get sacrificed to religion in a logic argument. They tried pitching Atheism as a religion and all that junk. We've been there. Just a bunch of married White folk who never leave their own houses except to go to Wal-mart or Disneyland.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71078 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
Explain your phenomenon. Is it one of strategy, or is it a common anomaly, based on similar strategies with similar weaknesses. What you WON'T find is a specific gene for homosexuality, thus my conclusion that homosexuality is a symptom of overstimulation of a portion of the brain.
I consider it similar to Autism, Tourette's and other such ambiguous disorders. Some cases are mild while some are major obsessive-compulsive disorders. It's irresponsible to politicize the condition, and to ignore the results of the medical condition. Most people don't like to suffer with a mental disorder, but obsessive-compulsives do, but remain in a perpetual state of confused feelings.
They can't change the state of "normal" psychology. They can only act out their fantasies and further alienate themselves in a self-propelled cycle of obsession, while disrupting the lives of others, increasing the likelihood of "criminal" emotional responses from others.
The pseudo-science community likes to reference things like the bonobo societies to claim that such behavior is the very nature of human existence, but I disagree AND I can tell you why, but you're not going to listen. You'll now demand science from me while you've provided nothing but "opinion" which we all know means NOTHING!
Here's the reality. Bonobos live in trees and live a passive, vegetarian lifestyle. Humans don't. If you want to examine human behavior analogies, you're far better off observing terrestrial species such as baboons.
Yes, baboons exhibit symbolic homosexuality to show dominance in their herds, but that is all about alphas who are intent on maintaining control of harems. So, here's another question in political context, because this IS JUST a political debate.
Is it profane to engage in bigamy? Is it unconstitutional to deny our citizens the right to practice bigamy? See? We're not bonobos. We're not baboons. The Constitution is not about individual "rights" as a mandate without exception. One to two percent of the population does not have a "right" to disrupt what the majority considers essential to order.
The scientific thing to do is to recognize the medical condition. This politics is worse than medically unethical. It's like selling smallpox infested blankets to Native Americans. It's an attempt to engage in State sponsored atrocities AND unethical animal abuse.(since you like to insist that we're animals in all their various niches.)
It's the product of natural selection.

You're mistaken when you compare same sex sexual behavior to psychological problems. That demonstrates your Western cultural upbringing and your inability to separate biological phenomena from your learned cultural construction of sexuality.

Your comparison of humans and bonobos is rife with ignorance.

First, behaviors that are shared among related species demonstrate phylogeny - shared ancestry. If a behavior is present in related species, it was present in the ancestral species. Therefore same sex sexual behavior predates humans.

Second, humans quite easily engage in bigamous relationships. Where to begin? More than a third of the world's cultures are polygamous. Many are polyandrous. In all cultures, strict monogamy, with no partner cheating, is a rarity. Something like 85% of all marriages have one partner have an extra-marital affair in America. Clearly, humans are not very good at being monogamous.

Third, baboons and bonobos have very different social structures and mating patterns. Humans and bonobos are more related to each other than either is to baboons - humans and bonobos are equally related to baboons, actually, and more closely related to each other. It's no surprise that the bonobos mating patterns are more similar to human mating patterns than they are to baboon ones. So the main thrust of your argument is buried in ignorance.

Fourth, societal laws have little to do with biological reality.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71079 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
I consider it similar to Autism, Tourette's and other such ambiguous disorders. Some cases are mild while some are major obsessive-compulsive disorders.
1. You're living in the past if you believe such things.
2. OCD is not related to Tourettes or Autism. You don't seem to know anything about psychology and appear to be spouting nonsense.
It's irresponsible to politicize the condition, and to ignore the results of the medical condition.
Your politicizing it by making false, unsupportable claims to medicine.
Most people don't like to suffer with a mental disorder, but obsessive-compulsives do, but remain in a perpetual state of confused feelings.
Huh? You are now claiming that OCD people want to suffer from mental disorders???

What a stupid, hurtful claim.
They can't change the state of "normal" psychology. They can only act out their fantasies and further alienate themselves in a self-propelled cycle of obsession, while disrupting the lives of others, increasing the likelihood of "criminal" emotional responses from others.
Now you are claiming that OCD people are acting out fantasies?!? And they're criminal???

You quite clearly know nothing about psychology but love to spout BS.
... I disagree AND I can tell you why, but you're not going to listen. You'll now demand science from me while you've provided nothing but "opinion" which we all know means NOTHING!
Your disagreement with scientists is irrelevant. You've demonstrated amazingly well how little you understand science and how bigoted you are.

We simply don't care what you think, to be brutally honest. Your opinion is uninformed, bitterly biased and without self reflexivity. Yes, I mean refelxvity and not reflection. I'm not surprised that you don't know the difference.
Here's the reality. Bonobos live in trees and live a passive, vegetarian lifestyle. Humans don't. If you want to examine human behavior analogies, you're far better off observing terrestrial species such as baboons.
Yes, baboons exhibit symbolic homosexuality to show dominance in their herds, but that is all about alphas who are intent on maintaining control of harems.
Wow. Total ignorance.

First, bonobos are not passive. They're highly social, political beings, who live in complex societies.

Second, baboons do not perform "symbolic homosexuality," whatever the hell that is. You just made this nonsense up. Baboons also do not have "dominance" as you describe it.

Baboons live in multifemale, multimale societies that are matrilineal. They have a ranked social hierarchy, with high and low status families led by socially dominant mothers. Families are ranked in this order: mother, youngest child, next oldest child all the way to oldest daughter.

Male social hierarchy is dependent upon males being in good social standing with the females. Baboon society is matrilocal - males migrate out from their natal families. Males must therefore move into new troops and, through patience, social maneuvering and poise, earn the respect of females to attain high rank. Or not.

Listen: I'll be blunt. I'm an evolutionary anthropologist. I study this stuff and teach it at a tier 1 research university. So shut the f*ck up with your bs. I know this like the back of my hand and you're lying through your teeth.

If you want to know more about bonobos, read Shirley Strum. If you want to know more about primate homosexual behavior, read Paul Vasey.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71080 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Among mammals, you'll find consistent behaviors like epilepsy too!
Explain your phenomenon. Is it one of strategy, or is it a common anomaly, based on similar strategies with similar weaknesses. What you WON'T find is a specific gene for homosexuality, thus my conclusion that homosexuality is a symptom of overstimulation of a portion of the brain.
I consider it similar to Autism, Tourette's and other such ambiguous disorders. Some cases are mild while some are major obsessive-compulsive disorders. It's irresponsible to politicize the condition, and to ignore the results of the medical condition. Most people don't like to suffer with a mental disorder, but obsessive-compulsives do, but remain in a perpetual state of confused feelings.
They can't change the state of "normal" psychology. They can only act out their fantasies and further alienate themselves in a self-propelled cycle of obsession, while disrupting the lives of others, increasing the likelihood of "criminal" emotional responses from others.
The pseudo-science community likes to reference things like the bonobo societies to claim that such behavior is the very nature of human existence, but I disagree AND I can tell you why, but you're not going to listen. You'll now demand science from me while you've provided nothing but "opinion" which we all know means NOTHING!
Here's the reality. Bonobos live in trees and live a passive, vegetarian lifestyle. Humans don't. If you want to examine human behavior analogies, you're far better off observing terrestrial species such as baboons.
Yes, baboons exhibit symbolic homosexuality to show dominance in their herds, but that is all about alphas who are intent on maintaining control of harems. So, here's another question in political context, because this IS JUST a political debate.
Is it profane to engage in bigamy? Is it unconstitutional to deny our citizens the right to practice bigamy? See? We're not bonobos. We're not baboons. The Constitution is not about individual "rights" as a mandate without exception. One to two percent of the population does not have a "right" to disrupt what the majority considers essential to order.
The scientific thing to do is to recognize the medical condition. This politics is worse than medically unethical. It's like selling smallpox infested blankets to Native Americans. It's an attempt to engage in State sponsored atrocities AND unethical animal abuse.(since you like to insist that we're animals in all their various niches.)
Homosexuality is genetic. It has something to do with hormones and how the brain responds to stimuli that produces arousal. This trait can be passed on. Although straight people also engage in homosexual behavior maybe out of curiosity. Sometimes it's a phase that one goes through when trying to learn about one's own sexual orientation. You know 'experimenting' while developing the id, ego and super-ego of the mind.

Autism, OCD, and other psychological disorders are anomalies or conditions associated with disabilities that disrupts normal mental functions. Being gay doesn't make one mentally handicapped. There is no medication for homosexuality that makes them attracted to the opposite sex. Gays aren't placed in special ed classes like how children are with mental disorders.

It is a trait that others consider abnormal. But it's more social and personality problem than anything. Perhaps it started out as a deviant behavior. But it has evolved into being a normal trait. It's in all cultures. There are even gods and goddesses that were homosexuals. lol

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71081 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm an evolutionary anthropologist. I study this stuff and teach it at a tier 1 research university.
This is going to be fun. lol

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71083 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I mean it happens all the time. But today was different.
What was so different?...

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71084 Jan 16, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
What was so different?...
It has something to do with what Jung called it synchronicity. Have you ever read a book and experienced something that is related to what you're reading?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71085 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Same sex sexual behavior is not a contradiction of biology. That you would write such a thing speaks to how little you understand biology.
- almost all primate species have been observed engaging in same sex sexual behavior
- it's prevalent among most mammals
- all human cultures include it
How could you possibly call that "a general contradiction of biology"???
Rather, it is something we can explain via evolution - like all other biological phenomena.
and just how would homosexuality fit into the evolutionary scheme, other than population control?... when one of the most fundamental idea of evolution is the procreation of a species? In fact I would say that is unsupported more in the ideas of evolution, than any religion.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71086 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
It has something to do with what Jung called it synchronicity. Have you ever read a book and experienced something that is related to what you're reading?
wow...I didn't know they had a term for it....I have had experiences
with this for years now...it's kind of second nature to me.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71087 Jan 16, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
and just how would homosexuality fit into the evolutionary scheme, other than population control?... when one of the most fundamental idea of evolution is the procreation of a species? In fact I would say that is unsupported more in the ideas of evolution, than any religion.
http://www.thegodmurders.com/id74.html

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71088 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
It has something to do with what Jung called it synchronicity. Have you ever read a book and experienced something that is related to what you're reading?
Have you ever read the book, or seen the movie Sphere by Michael Crichton?

It's loosely based on the same concept.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 3 min SLY WEST 4,427
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 6 min Sublime1 28,855
Why do YOU get on Topix? 18 min modhippie1 73
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 19 min honeymylove 138,857
El's Kitchen (Feb '09) 19 min Crystal_Clear722 38,657
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 39 min Jennifer Renee 8,955
What's for dinner? (Feb '12) 46 min modhippie1 7,132
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 2 hr Wolftracks 155,551
did tally have a stroke 3 hr Chilli J 34
Lets Discuss Men (Dec '13) 4 hr modhippie1 848
More from around the web