Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[Hidingfromyou]

Serah wrote:

<quoted text>Other way around, according to the experts;
*** Like the plants, animals evolved in the sea. And that is where they remained for at least 600 million years. This is because, in the absence of a protective ozone layer, the land was bathed in lethal levels of UV radiation. Once photosynthesis had raised atmospheric oxygen levels high enough, the ozone layer formed, meaning that it was then possible for living things to venture onto the land.
The oldest fossil evidence of multicellular animals, or metazoans, is burrows that appear to have been made by smooth, wormlike organisms. Such trace fossils have been found in rocks from China, Canada, and India, but they tell us little about the animals that made them apart from their basic shape.
http://sci.waikato.ac.nz/evolution/AnimalEvol... ***
Everything came from the sea......... if you believe it!!

Yes. And the whales went back.

The reason land animals are shaped the way we are - flat ventral to dorsal, the opposite of most fish - is b/c the immediate ancestors who lived in the tidal zone, before the evolution to terestrial living, were shaped flat. They had to be, it's the most efficient way to locomote, get food, hide, etc., in areas of low water and muddy ground.

[Clementia]

_BobLoblah_ wrote:

<quoted text>18Nov12.....
Dear 'Ditz'....cementia...
.....Your Heeengliish, grammmar, and centence stuctures are atrocious.
Ps:....How did you ever manage an 'E' in grades!!!
Love..
Forever and Ever
BobLoblah

i got A's and even one A star, i don't need to act clever for no reason, i only do it to get good grades in exams and get a good job, who cares otherwise!! i don't!!!!!!

Also, i'm most likely going to marry a rich guy, who likes hot dumb girls, so whats the point of acting clever when i have found out that men don't like it??? there isn't one, it don't work for me!!!

[Hidingfromyou]

blacklagoon wrote:

<quoted text>Then by your logic the Whale should still move its tail from side to side. Deers and other animals with tails do not use it for locomotion. You know about the transitional fossils, you posted them a few posts ago. The transitional fossils show the gradual movement of the nostrils toward the top of the head, obviously a much more efficient position to an animal that will spend its life in the sea. You people are famous for that traditional fossil game. You see two fossils and you say "OPPS, there is a gap between fossil one and two, you have no transitional fossils." You really should stop paying attention the the conscience of creationist web sites.
BTW I'm not trying to "win you over" I could care less that you chose to ignore the mountain of evidence available. I'm just curious how anyone with a fair amount of intelligence can do that.

He's mistaken, anyways. White tailed deer move their tails up and down.

[Tide with Beach]

Clementia wrote:

<quoted text>
ok, lol!
no, is it good?
i think i'm going to watch the new films at christmas time, when i got 1 month off uni!
have u seen new spiderman? oooooooooooooooooooomg it was tooooo good, i'm just waiting to see if batman is going to beat it! i really hope it does!!

I like it.

I haven't seen the newest Batman yet. I think the Batman movies are better than the Spiderman movies.

[Hidingfromyou]

blacklagoon wrote:

<quoted text>I comment on the horrible design of Whales and you respond by telling me how magnificent they are and what a wonderful song they have, too funny. Why not address the comment directly? Do you agree that Whales fare a terribly flawed design?
Yes there could have been designed better, I could have designed them much better here:
1.) I would have given them gills so hunting for food and giving birth would have been much easier. This would also cut down on the number of newborns that drowned before MOM could push them to the surface.
2.)I would have given them a dorsal fin like all other fish, including Dolphins, to make swimming more efficient.
3.) I would have given them a spine more like a fish and sharks were the side to side motion is more efficient.
And they are NOT the elite of the sea Sharks are. Unlike the Whales that have evolved from a land mammal, the shark is so well designed his characteristic have no change in millions of years. Sharks eat Whales, especially baby Whales. The slightest sign of weakness or blood and the sharks amass and tear the whale to bits.

You know what's interesting is that whales aren't the first land animals into the ocean. Prior to them were the lizards.

So these animals aren't necessarily competing with fish - they're competing for the "niche" that is occupied by large bodied predators of fish.

[turkey]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>
Awesome. I'm pretty sure that all of us here on the "Faith" thread in the atheist forum do. I recommend, if you want to post that stuff, to start a thread on Food Safety in the Modern world - there, it would be on topic and you'd have lots and lots of people interested in your ideas.
I guarantee it.

Hi carcass lady, whats your specialty?

[Hidingfromyou]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
I see whales completely different Doctor. I don’t see a flawed design. If they had gills we wouldn’t get the chance to see them come up to the surface in all their grander.
Not to mention these mammals are extremely intelligent with their own language.
Sharks are preprogrammed biological robots. At sea world you don’t see sharks doing tricks. They’re just not trainable. Dolphins and whales are the opposite. They’re capable of doing a lot of things including communicating with humans.
How many sharks have you seen play basketball? I’ve see dolphins play it at sea world. I’ve never seen a shark do that.

You're both mistaken. Whales are very well adapted, but have "evolutionary baggage" because of where they came from. That's what Blacklagoon is talking about. It's not poor adaptation, though, it's a phylogenetic history that, as time goes on, will continue to be selected against (although it's more accurate to say that mutations that damage the genes that produce these ancestral traits, like the hind limb buds, will not be selected against - I'm probably writing above your level here, Eagle, sorry).

Sharks are not machines. They are organic, intelligent creatures, too. They have been observed engaged in sophisticated pack hunting. A group of sharks will surround a school of fish in the same manner that dolphins do. They keep them schooling, trapped, in the middle. Then, one by one, the sharks will swim in to eat their fill and then return to the line.

Whales and sharks do not normally compete for the same food. So they're not in direct competition all that often. Each has created a niche, a way of exploiting the environment for energy and each does this so well that they remain extant, surviving and reproducing. It's true that sharks attack whales for their babies and weak, but it's also true that whales attack sharks and that whales have complex solutions to ward off the predation of sharks.

[Clementia]

Tide with Beach wrote:

<quoted text>
I like it.
I haven't seen the newest Batman yet. I think the Batman movies are better than the Spiderman movies.

That's what I thought before I saw the 'amazing spider man' movie. I think it's ALOT better then the older ones, I really didn't like Tobey maguire!!!!!!!!!

[Clementia]

Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:

<quoted text>No, they are not.
Only the recent Batman movies and that is only since they changed them from dark to light movies.

Yh only the one's with sexy Mr Bale in them, the older ones were bad!!

they changed dark to light??

[Tide with Beach]

Clementia wrote:

<quoted text>
Yh only the one's with sexy Mr Bale in them, the older ones were bad!!
they changed dark to light??

I wouldn't pay any attention to the Troll of Many Names. Hit him with a rolled up newspaper if he humps your leg.

The new ones are collectively called the Dark Knight Saga.

Most of the older ones were not very good, especially Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. They were yuck.

[Clementia]

Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:

<quoted text>No, the problem with the old ones had to do with the fact that they were made into dark movies.
Dark and light has to do with lighting.

i didn't like them coz they weren't serious, dangerous and they weren't mature, if u get what i'm saying? it's like, if i want to watch something like that, i could watch a hindi film!

i didn't pay attention to the lighting, i will now tho.

[River Tam]

Hidingfromyou wrote:

<quoted text>

You also have to remember that Eagle was trying to claim that the first 46 chromosome hominin was "Adam."

Adam was a potato.

[Clementia]

Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:

<quoted text>See, this is the point, you are comparing Batman and Spiderman movies, and Toby Maguire to Arnold, Jack Nicholson, Sharon Stone, Jim Carey, and that means that the stars were carrying the Batman movies.

that's not true, i never heard of Andrew garfield, but i loved watching him on the screen. he's not even really my type but i really loved watching him! i don't really like any of those actors!!

also, it was nice to see irfan khan in it, but his acting wasn't that great, maybe being in american film scared him!

[River Tam]

Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:

<quoted text>Carp and chicken. It's a gay thing.

My wittle boi is a gay thing. Yes he EEEiis.

[Clementia]

Tide with Beach wrote:

<quoted text>
I wouldn't pay any attention to the Troll of Many Names. Hit him with a rolled up newspaper if he humps your leg.
The new ones are collectively called the Dark Knight Saga.
Most of the older ones were not very good, especially Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. They were yuck.

u mean the poster who's jealous of hot people?

i can't stand robin or the older catwomen, they annoying and not even sexy!!!

[Clementia]

River Tam wrote:

<quoted text>
My wittle boi is a gay thing. Yes he EEEiis.

Hi Tam! Tam, u know today or maybe it was yesterday, there was a pic of a girl on your avatar thingy, was that the real u??

[Tide with Beach]

Clementia wrote:

<quoted text>
u mean the poster who's jealous of hot people?
i can't stand robin or the older catwomen, they annoying and not even sexy!!!

Yes. That poster is the Troll of Many Names.

Uma Thurman was pretty hot as Poison Ivy. But that's just Uma Thurman. The character was silly. I liked her a lot in the Kill Bill movies. She was also in one of the best movies ever, Pulp Fiction.

[Hidingfromyou]

ATTENTION ANYONE

who is interested in evolution. From the National Academy of Sciences comes a number of FREE books on the subject.

For those of you who are creationists, there's a book for you, too.

The link is below. Once you register, you can download the books for free as pdfs. If you want to own the book in hardcopy, it costs money.

http://www.nap.edu/collection.php...

[Hidingfromyou]

Eagle12 wrote:

I see whales completely different Doctor. I don’t see a flawed design. If they had gills we wouldn’t get the chance to see them come up to the surface in all their grander.
Not to mention these mammals are extremely intelligent with their own language.
Sharks are preprogrammed biological robots. At sea world you don’t see sharks doing tricks. They’re just not trainable. Dolphins and whales are the opposite. They’re capable of doing a lot of things including communicating with humans.
How many sharks have you seen play basketball? I’ve see dolphins play it at sea world. I’ve never seen a shark do that.

“We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny
and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as ’one theory among others’ is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical
thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator.... We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science
remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.”

—“The Clergy Letter Project” signed by more than 10,000 Christian clergy members. For additional information, see
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/clergy_pr... .

[Clementia]

Tide with Beach wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes. That poster is the Troll of Many Names.
Uma Thurman was pretty hot as Poison Ivy. But that's just Uma Thurman. The character was silly. I liked her a lot in the Kill Bill movies. She was also in one of the best movies ever, Pulp Fiction.

well u a guy, u no more about hot women then me and then i guess beauty is in the eyes of the beholder!! i can't remember her as ivy, but yh pulp fiction was awesome, i remember that coz my favourite actor is john travolta and he's my dream man(when he was young, lol). i've never seen kill bill.