201. Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions

Comment #163322 by phasmagigas on April 18, 2008 at 7:42 am

Homosexuality does not prohibit mating with the opposite sex, just biases against choosing to do so.

If the genetic contributor in males also causes increased fertility in female offspring then there's a long term cancelling effect.

It would then become a trade off between decreased chance of replication in male generations versus an increased chance of replication in subsequent female ones.

its an interesting hypothesis or sure, as homosexuality (bisexuality?) seem to be goverened in part by the maternal hormonal conditions??????? and this is determined genetically and influences the mothers own fertility and that of her offspring subsequently.

its amazing that if the connection were true then homosexuality is merely a collateral condition as such, quite amazing, enough of that burn in hell choice nonsense. if true iit would be interesting to see if the most fertile women CAUSE homosexuality.

I must admit its an iteresting thing in its own right how members of one sex supposedly primed to be attracted to he opposite sex do not in the case of homosexuals, and indeed in talking to gay men they seem to be even more 'into' other men than are women, but thats probably just men generally. its almost fetishistic, where the guy will focus very heavily on a particular body trait, im not sure women do that, well not overtly anyway.

202. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162349 by phasmagigas on April 16, 2008 at 5:30 pm

generally. is special creation (ie on one day suddenly) testable in that you could propose a hypothesis that said 'if special instant creation were true i predict to find rocks with no fossils underlaying rock strata that contain all the major taxonomic groups that we have ever known to exist'

of couse the hypothesis fails as nothing like that has ever been found, but as its testable, is that a scientific notion?

ah, edit: actually i suppose it depends upon exactly how thick a layer of rocks you want to incluse as representing a short time, creationists decide that all rocks were laid down during the flood, so you can probably make up any old story realating the deposition of the rocks. i suppose its a non starter as the (YE)creationists assume beforehand that all the rocks above are of close age and of recent origin, i suppose its all down to that running up the hill that people do so well, leaving all those trilobites behind in the lower but similar age rock layers, silly things.

203. Evolution fray attracts top scientist

Comment #162347 by phasmagigas on April 16, 2008 at 5:23 pm

i just wonder what ID/creation 'science' would actually say? how would it be presented? I'd like to ask an pro ID school teacher something like 'hey miss, i read that the sydney funnel web spiders venom is toxic only to some mammals, well as far as I have read anyway, seems that it only affects primates and people, can you give us a good creationist explanation for that miss, i mean if goddidit dont you think thats a dreadful thing?? the only primates on australia were people until recently so do you think godidit exculisevly to hurt prey animals AND native Australians??? well Miss"

of course the evolutionary explanation is rather simple and i suspect the words 'toxic to primates by chance' are part of the explanation. notice how the creationist answers will always be rather silly and varaible and of course untestable.

if kids start actually asking questions as to the whys? regarding ID the teachers will constantly have to fall back on the nauseatingly ubiquitous 'god works in mysterious ways'. pathetic.

204. The Art of Creating Controversy Where None Existed

Comment #161110 by phasmagigas on April 14, 2008 at 8:15 pm

remember this? the opening sequence to the french cartoon 'once upon a time man' very cool, i now know why im a nasty atheist, i used to watch this as a kid. its actually quite moving, the only bit the twisted religites will like are the last few frames. i also posted this on pharyngula just cos its so good.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8_pM_JdgkE

205. British schools are falling for the pseudoscience of Brain Gym. Why fill kids' heads with nonsense?

Comment #160558 by phasmagigas on April 14, 2008 at 7:43 am

for the love of god, the creator of brain gym sorely need to try his own system, hes not even good at hiding the fact he knows nothing, sounds familiar???? that interview is truly gut wrenching to watch, what an ass.

206. British schools are falling for the pseudoscience of Brain Gym. Why fill kids' heads with nonsense?

Comment #160526 by phasmagigas on April 14, 2008 at 7:23 am

'ive been teaching now for 37 years...' says the head teacher on that video.

the kids are more receptive, calm etc, well thats got zero to do specifically with brain gym over the simple act of a group performing some silly little ritual, the novelty of which will get the kids a bit more focused perhaps. I could set up a similar thing where they all form letters of the alphabet with their hands together and hum at the same time, i bet that will calm them all too, $$ please. the neuroscientist mentioned that its just the simple diversion that focuses the kids, teachers have been doing this stuff for years, morning prayer, stand behind desks, sit, fingers on lips, arms folded, all say 'good morning miss teacher' the scary thing is the kids are about to become as daft as those teachers by giving the ritual some specific cult like position!!

my god, so learning difficulties can be overcome by rubbing your chewing muscles?? so ive been a genius all this time and never known it!!

207. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #160504 by phasmagigas on April 14, 2008 at 7:01 am

im not sure what the point is meant to be. im sure most art isnt actually religiously inspired but even if it was it says nought about god of course. im still confused though, that business about people falling at dawkins feet, seems hes saying someting like: dawkins hates religion but has become a religious figure himself so what he rallies against is actually 'true' and if we didnt have religion we'd have no nice pictures and music.

hmmm.

it does piss me off when people talk of worship for dawkins/darwin or whoever, it fucking ridiculous, i need to work out a really good refutation of that. the people who make this ironic 'criticism' cant see that theres just no equivelence and that they are simply weakening their own silly position.

I remember last year talking to some born again weirdo who every time said the word jeebus, went all googly eyed like a baby being shown a big rattle, i remember thinking that the only way for me to go all googly eyed to that degree i'd have to have be on ecstasy and be presented with a beautiful naked woman(ok, i might not need the drug but you get my point). i dont worship anybody, anything, not even a man who died a long time ago)

anyway i digress........

208. British schools are falling for the pseudoscience of Brain Gym. Why fill kids' heads with nonsense?

Comment #160496 by phasmagigas on April 14, 2008 at 6:52 am

i saw this product in a shop or online or somehwere. i didnt look into it but i assumed (wrongly)that it was a load of puzzles like suduko and logic. hmm, looks like its actually far, far easier.

for those critics of the skeptics who say 'open your minds, stop being limited by your own limitations of reality' i'd ask them if they would like to accept a single $ or UK pound giving me 20 in return as according to my new theory 'LESS is fundamentally and quasisynergismically MORE and exchanging more for less channels the oojumistic energy fields from one individual to another' so they will actually reap the benefits later on, maybe in minutes, maybe years but you will get the benefits!!

lets see how open minded they are now.

209. Inadequate, private and late apology with grotesquely inadequate excuse

Comment #159268 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 8:01 pm

davis said something that she had probably never even really thought about (maybe), she said something that could be described as VERY naive, hopefully shes actually realised that ridiculous statements and false logic will be noticed in public.

An unsophistcated audience would generally miss this type of thing but once good ol' PZ got a hold of it it was brought to view as it should have been.

210. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #159000 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 10:13 am

IBIJesus.

welcome, seems there is a reasonable theist here at last, im not being patronising, its just that a new creationist troll arrives avery week or so with

'you STUPID atheists, you just dont gettit do YOU, darwin is your stupid god, wake up and see the truth of the BIBLE, prove it, wheres the FOSSILS, haha, got you now'

thats the type of thing we find here and it gets boring fast.

actually theree was one this last day, a 'DIOgenes' who was pratting on about dawkins being our idol and that dawkins was gullible and just general nonsense, he/she seems to have deleted their own posts and vanished, very odd, but anyway iyou get the point im sure.


people here appreciate thoughtful discussion as im sure you do.

PG

211. The simple falsehood at the heart of Expelled

Comment #158893 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 6:38 am

At the end of the day it boils down to the fact that ID/creationists do not have any legtimate positive presentation for their beliefs, ie no science to back it up so they have to do something else to get people to take notice of their beliefs.

They claim supression from the scientific establishment (we have the science we just arent allowed to research/show it). they try erronously to show that evolution=atheism=nazis, as they are trying to persuade dimwits in the first place they have no problem with this fallacy.

what they are trying to say is ID is true and evolution is false (or just nasty) because it leads to nazism. Even if their evo acceptence>atheism>nazism were true its says nothing about the process by which species were arrived at on this planet.

They are the most desperate fuckers imaginable, they run around saying science supresses us and evolution makes you evil and thats their case, simply because they have no case at all, they cant even see themselves how dishonest and erronous are their tactices. Maybe schools should be teaching logical fallacies early on, with those mental tools perhaps less of this nonsense will be lapped up.

212. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158875 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 6:19 am

I drink all day and night and have lost count long ago. I have built up so much caffeine tolerance that I can have a double shot of expresso and go right to bed..

hardcore, maybe you need to try 'yorkshire tea' by taylor and harrogate from the UK, thats probably one of the better mainstream teas, good flavour and strength, im no expert and similarly with red wine and beer my appreciation is limited to: do i like it? not at all, a bit or a lot!!

213. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158869 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 6:15 am

I suspect she will be changing over to tea or cocoa rather than wine when she gets to Scotland, bit colder up there than Oz!

i would firmly recommend the ales instead.

214. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158851 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 5:54 am

Do you mean just tea or tea as in tea with cucumber sandwich? I dunno, I drink tea the whole day and there is no schedule to it. I have a tea stained cup in front of me and I usually use two tea bags in one cup.. Cheap tea, of course.

Didn't Veronique use to say things like "bloody hell, it is 12:31, time for another glass of wine.." I prefer tea, as I am not very alcohol tolerant.. get terrible high with only one drink and wake up the next day with a head ache. Tea I can drink all day all night..

remember yorkshire tea used to have 'one bag makes two cups of tea' on their boxes, now it doesnt, they may have found they were losing sales! i drink about 2 cups in the afternoon, the perfect relaxant and pick me up in one! i even like it sometimes before i got o bed, its has this weird soporific but feel awake kind of effect.

bonzai, just how big is this one drink???

215. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158848 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 5:46 am

ive flagged that troll again, i suggest we feed the persons 'no intelligence allowed' paranoia and get them outta here, unless he/she can present some reasonable discussion instead of prattling on about dawkins foolishness and that hes an idol i suggest we dont feed the troll. what a rude ass, admittedly the lowest common denominator believers are going to be attracted to this site, i wish some honestly sincere and thoughtful theists would engage in some debates but they dont, i wonder why???? aside from the youtube style creationists have we ever seen a single ID/cretinist proponent offer any reasoned explanations for their position? no, and for good reason.

216. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158841 by phasmagigas on April 11, 2008 at 5:36 am

Bloody hell, its 12:31, its time for more tea!

as a brit in the USA I always make sure i have a supply of yorkshire tea, if i run out i find 'trader joes' irish blend to be pretty good.

217. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #158554 by phasmagigas on April 10, 2008 at 6:02 pm

ive flagged the very boring troll because i feel like being a twat tonight.

I only flag real trolls because i personally dont go onto primarily religious sites and start taking the piss, why would i even do that, its like somebody deliberately wanting to start a fight at a party, very thoughtful of them.

why cant trolls emerge and throw some valid arguments this way, im still waiting for some falsification of evolution so i can stop using it as an explanation for everything i see in nature, its just so easy!

218. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #158296 by phasmagigas on April 10, 2008 at 9:48 am

i wonder about the concept of theism and wonder if it can be trustworthy, at the end of the day the theist has a vested interest (as they believe) in thinking what they think, ie they go to heaven and get all googly with god. the atheist has no vested interest, theres no motive for not believing, thats partly why i feel more comfortable as an atheist.

some theists migh variously say there is a motive, a selfish one as it means you feel you can eat pork, or wear a condom, accept blood, drink beer, have gay sex, have straight sex outside of marriage, work on sunday, dont waste time praying, dont eat halal etc, etc.

i wonder if anything specifically bad happens to a soul if that person had gay sex WITH a condom?? its a question i might ask a catholic priest to see what the answer is, he should aftre all answer it thoughtfully and sincerely.

219. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #157526 by phasmagigas on April 9, 2008 at 8:28 am

peters support of ID was his ultimate downfall in this debate, he called it a theory!

unlike the whole unknowable god debate evo/ID is very easy, its like showing that your pond has frogs (you can see them) but being unable to show that it has an invisible all powerful giant salamander which you can debate over forever.

220. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #157504 by phasmagigas on April 9, 2008 at 7:49 am

just why did peter bring up the very flimsy connection between hitch and the pornography guy???? laughable.

221. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #157495 by phasmagigas on April 9, 2008 at 7:26 am

hmm, peters brings up the attacks from teenagers and says these kids are 'active atheists'.

its true to say this type of thing is rare in say the USA, you dont get grannies being beaten up by a gang of 14 year old girls very often but of course hes got it all wrong. Had these kids been forced into moral submission by a local church then yes, they might well have not have the nihilistic, violent tendencies that they show but that says nothing about god only religion.

These kids are the product of modern times with weak family ties, weak parenting, drug use, weak schooling, a realistaion of their untouchable position as juveniles, an obsession with clothing fashion and status over any type worthwhile endeavours, often low ability kids from low ability parents, they cannot be called atheists as they dont even know what that means, they are like any 'untrained' animal, they will behave how they want.

Aside, as we are quite aware there are lots of atrocities commited by the faithful and precisely BECAUSE of it, thise kids dont think 'i can do what i want because there is no god' they simply dont think atall, our species will have always had versions of social control through its history, religion is only part of it, social control has vanished for these individuals, their minds degenerated into apathy as they have grown.

edit, i see hitchens makes a similar point in part 8.

222. The Atheist Next Door

Comment #157466 by phasmagigas on April 9, 2008 at 6:07 am

the atheist next door.

well its interesting that a family (a very pleasant one too)in our street who are homeschoolers and very religious often invite me to their home when their kids want to know something about an animal/bug they have found, they seem to feel im a very amiable person and obviously trustworthy, (its interesting though that dad might ask me something like 'so is this creature in the same family as that creature'!!!!!!!!!! GO FIGURE, and he opposes darwinism).

anyway i not sure how they would feel if they knew just what i really am although i'm finding it difficult to hide the horns, they are still short but the velvet is starting to break down at the moment!!

223. The Atheist Next Door

Comment #157461 by phasmagigas on April 9, 2008 at 5:57 am

the tone of that piece is a bit odd, its almost like atheists are some curiosity, normal on the outside but behind the curtains have something they hide suitable for a circus side show. Once again, redundant questions on trust and goodness, thats all they have left, straws to clutch.

224. Anti-evolution bill clears another hurdle

Comment #157164 by phasmagigas on April 8, 2008 at 3:44 pm

'problems with the theory'

hmm, news to me, i wonder if anybody elaborated on this, no transitional fossils maybe??

225. Get out of here, atheists!

Comment #156422 by phasmagigas on April 7, 2008 at 2:11 pm

its interesting how the naive believer, one who doesnt encounter much counter argument sets ups false arguments from the start.

why is he not fighting guns in school? what has he got against god, this is the land of god, shes trying to demonise him and will of course succeed, shes no better than any fundie pastor preaching to the ignorant anywhere.

226. Fleabytes

Comment #156215 by phasmagigas on April 7, 2008 at 5:57 am

When a religious person says "I'll pray for you" to me, I generally respond with "And I'll think about you when I'm next on the toilet. I doubt it's going to do either of us any good though".

I reckon i might have to sing that marilyn manson song to them, thats quite good!

actually the whole 'i'll pray for you' is an acceptence of defeat. the theist has resorted to using their last piece or 'arsenal' from their unknowable, unprovable, unfalsifiable world view weapons bag, its a bit like running away from a gang of schoolboys and shouting back 'i'll get my big brother on you' when you dont even have one. Like imaginary big brothers 'i'll pray for you' is a silly infantile scare tactic (though the big brother one is understandable coming from a child), luckily some of us did/will grow up.

227. Fleabytes

Comment #156213 by phasmagigas on April 7, 2008 at 5:46 am

I love this. What fantastic proof of the fantasy world that some atheist live in. Disney and Dawkins get it together. The Golden Rule is 'do unto others as you would have them do to you. And this is found all over the animal kingdom. So the next time a seal takes a bite out of a salmon, a lion attacks a young deer, or a bird swipes up a worm - I must think this is the Golden Rule at work! Hilarious stuff!

this man must never have sat still in a meadow for an hour and watched the myriad of invertebrates at knee level just going about their daily business.

You will see it all: an ant milking an aphid, an earwig protecting its babies under a stone, a grasshopper chewing a grass blade, a fly atop a stalk with emergent fungus and if you are lucky enough you might catch sight of a crab spider grabbing a fly visiting a flower.

I dont understand davids point about the golden rule and nature, can he be that ignorant???

228. Fleabytes

Comment #156210 by phasmagigas on April 7, 2008 at 5:39 am

dont you just hate it when a religious person says they will pray for you (in this context)esp as they walk away.

I find it the one of the most imposing, insulting, patronising, condescending, obnoxious acts that one can do to another.

Its like patting you on the back and saying 'never mind little one, i know best and i'll try my very best for you and if you fuck up please, please, please dont blame me because i really, really was thinking about you'.

and of course it could be directed at a non believer or equally at a person in a different religion/sub branch.


The irony of course is that its somehow meant to be a 'good thing' but you really wonder how they feel when they actually say that, are they genuinely interested in our souls or have just realised that some cannot be persuaded to accept jesus and have to uses a lowest common denominator tactic.

david, im sure there are lots of muslims and jehovas in this world who will pray for you too.

229. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155533 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 5:07 pm

If you are going to accuse Dawkins of attempting conversions and yell that such needs fair balance to alternate views then so be it. Start living your own rhetoric.

they will all however have to give out the same food during missionary sessions: spaghetti and meatballs.

230. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155526 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Not quite the correct comparison. The geo-centric solar system model is not technically wrong, it is just a lot more complicated. The helio centric model provides great conceptual and technical simplifications.

the problem lies in all those who think the universe is 'themselvescentric. 'did i walk down the stairs, no the stairs moved up..FOR ME!!

231. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155221 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 8:41 am

But not all knowledge, like it or not, is in fact contained within the realm that is scientifically observable

just what i was thinking, as quetz says, how can you know theres even anything that cant be known??

232. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155209 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 8:31 am

If the God of the Bible does indeed exist, there might be a very strong case for being prepared to meet him, don't you think? If he does not, not all that much is lost by believing in Him.

allah forgive you.

pascals wager: a fair bet for the feeble minded.

artful, you are wasting your time here, why not try and persuade some people on a muslim or hindu formum somehwere, they have a deity belief system ready in place, you only need have them exchange the words 'koran' and 'allah' for 'bible' and 'god' it must be easier than dealing with people round here ('origin' and 'darwin' dont count, not the same thing)

233. Dawkins warns of human extinction

Comment #155201 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 8:26 am

Incredulous, this is classic Dawkins-speak but it will cut no ice with anyone who actually realises to what extent the Bible has shaped our culture to which science grew out of (bit did not outgrow) a Biblical worldview.

and so what if it did?? does that mean that god exists and jesus is his son, should we be somehow grateful to christianity, christains, who, what???

'biblical worldview', that one of those 'euphemisms' that makes me need a bucket.

234. Whale 'missing link' discovered

Comment #155179 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 8:13 am

i remember a few years ago a muslim girl in the UK asked me if i was a christian, i told her i didnt have carry a belief in god, and she looked at me in amazement and said 'how do you get through life', i answered with 'well i obviously do don't I?'

god to my mind is like having closets full of junk, just shit you really do not need, actually i need to work on that one, prior to marriage I tried to be a minimalist as best as i could but compromise with a partner stopped that very, very quickly!

235. Whale 'missing link' discovered

Comment #155165 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 8:02 am

If you are going to spend time on your knees, there are better things do be doing than praying to an imaginary friend.

;)

236. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155159 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:55 am

Not all cells. Boys make new sperm all the time. But the eggs in your ovaries are as old as you are. They decline in quality with each passing year.

in any given 1 cell zygote i wonder what is the fate of the actual base pairs in relation to each other? new ones are made to synchronise with opposite pairs but the the original ones stay put in a cell somewhere until that cell dies, i guess????

237. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155152 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:48 am

There was a very nice question from someone who said she didn't find it too hard to imagine how chimpanzees might evolve into humans (yes, I know that isn't QUITE how it happened!) but found it harder to imagine how bacteria might have evolved into chimpanzees - to which Richard gave an absolutely spectacular reply, outlining 4 billion years of evolution in about 3 minutes. And this got the other huge round of applause of the event.

thats the crux of it, a lak of imagination.

'chimp' to human managable but bacteria to human not, she needs to do the whole human > primate > ratfink > early tetrapod > fish like > amphixous like > wormlike > bilateral flat thing > blobby multicell thing > smaller blobby multicell thing > few cells thing > one cell > bacteria.

little chunks are always easier to swallow.

238. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155132 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:36 am

This may only be my naive little brain being unable to ascend to higher thoughts, but to what extent are religious people ever not creationists to some extent?

to be sure. when you engage a creatiost ALWAYS ask them what type of creationst are they, theres a full on spectrum from YEC adams rib brigade to evolution plus the soul added (when??) brigade, its important as you'll find quickly that they usually arent even sure themselfves, a great waty to start dissecting their claims, only the really weak ones say 'oh, you know, they way it sez it in the bible'.

239. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155127 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:32 am

Creationism is just a gibbering idiot frothing on the sidelines, it doesn't really belong in this debate at all.

the problem with creationists though is that as they are the gibbering mental wrecks they are ethe ones who especially feel thay have it right.

240. Protests no concern for outspoken atheist

Comment #155123 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:30 am

He said he had been given a ticket to attend the lecture and hoped to ask Prof Dawkins about his belief in evolution.

i wonder which bit he'd like explained??

Derick Gillies, of the Free Church of Scotland, said there was an unbalanced debate between those believing in creationism and those believing in evolution.

oh its unbalanced alright, one relies on facts and evidence like any branch of science the other relies on old stories like any mythology.

241. Whale 'missing link' discovered

Comment #155097 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 7:04 am

aragorn2007, you're joking, eh?

aragorn, you notice that goldy asked the above and you many wonder why?

well thats because forum members often make deliberately sarcastic posts (theres a few above in this thread)just for the fun of it or when theres no choice but to ridicule, thats the thing you see.

Its easy to satirise/parody and charicature creationism, so your post here looked like it could have been a parody, thats because no knowledge is required. you cannot do the same as effectively for evolution, if you parody evolution with intricate details and correct explanations then it means there is a degree of technical understanding and an individual with that is unlikey to oppose evolution (there are exceptions, rarely) as they will have actually understood it, i know personally no creationist who knows what evolution even is, not even close!!

to my mind it says a great deal that its easy for an 'evolutionist' to mimic a creationist but not the other way around.

242. Whale 'missing link' discovered

Comment #155084 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 6:38 am

Do you just care for the truth,whatever this is?
Have you really thought that if God does not exist
our life may very well be meaningless?

massive yawn.

heard this before.

yes, i care for the truth whatever it is, we can never know about god (and of course you can have god and evo! it just doesnt make any sense atall, our bodies are just as hotch potched and frail and subject to gravity etc just like that of a fly or a worm, we have no special priveleges). but... if there was no god, SO WHAT, you give your own life meaning, well i do, waking up is great, literally smell the coffee and make myself and wife a cup, play with my dogs, check the spring plants growing, see if one of my tarantulas has moulted, grab cup of coffee #2, cook some breakfast, eggs on wholemeal and some fruit (very healthy), so delicious, the cupboard is full, life is great, then again im lucky, i live at a very fortunate time, what has got us all these goodies and privelege, not praying, but manipulating and studying teh environment, its called science. the majority of the people on this planet are not so fortunate, hardly the work of a benevolant god, things are difficult, thats why they need gods, bashing science in the west is an insult to all the ingenuity that scientists and engineers in the past have brought to us.

its really sad, you WANT a priveleged place in the universe, how selfish is that, so you decide you dont like evo, so you dont like science, and then you have disdain for those who do, like the people you will meet here. then all you can muster is an ill founded argument from personal incredulity, 'how can THAT be a whale' is that all you can offer?????

i dont need god to give my dogs a good life and im quite hapy knowing that about 65-70 million years ago, my dogs and I were one and the same within our common ancestor, i like to imagine what that animal was like, (it certainly wasnt a half dog/half man as creationst like to erronously think)a small rather generic mongoosy ratty little thing, that they could morph in multiple directions over time to 'create' both man and dog is truly mind expanding, it is the most amazing thing to imagine, it feeds, dare i say it, the soul.

aragorn2007, come back when you have something new, insightful or interesting to say.

you probably feel like we are a nasty sarcastic bunch here but honestly weve heard it all before, beleif in god is one thing but the antievolution mentality really gets my goat, the arguments are squashed before they even start, they get sooo boring, try to challenge evo here through argument, you will shocked that nobody stands back and goes 'ohh, hes got a point there' it hasnt happened yet, if it does then you will find yourself in the annals of science one day. we are here with open ears.

243. Whale 'missing link' discovered

Comment #155068 by phasmagigas on April 4, 2008 at 6:04 am

aragorn 2007.

yours is a position of personal incredulity (i call it lack of imagination). you cannot imagine an animal form very slowly shifting incrementally until from any given start and finish point they look very different from each other. What you are basically saying is 'i cant imagine it, there for it didnt happen and you are wrong'. you offer no other explanation.

we are not laughing at our grandparents who could well have had evolution explained to them. with each added bit of evidence evolution is more and more firmly cemented as the most likely explanation we have for lifes diversity. as yet NOT ONE, NOT ONE SINGLE shred of evidence on this entire planet has falsified the theory.

post 36, ah, i now see your position very clearly. you dont want evolution to be true because if it is then it suggests a designer wasnt needed and you cannot cope with that, in a nutshell it suggests that when you die you might really turn to dust and thats it, and thats what you cannot deal with. it amazes me how wishful thinking can so cloud ones judgement.

if you want to discuss evolution youve come to the right place, if you want to criticise it you need some weaponry, unfortunately there is none as yet, any anti evolution argument you pose will be sliced and diced, it happens every time an antivolutionist comes on here, some leave feeling they have learned something, some just vanish after they realise all they have left is hurling scriptures and idle threats of hell.

I hear this type of nonsense all the time

We are not
much different than garbage.Next time you see some
garbage, don't think little of it.Give it some million of years.It can become a beautiful colored
bird.

thats pathetic, so if some event showed evo to have actually be true youd see people as garbage?? thats the problem isnt it, appreciation, goodness and morality are only injectable via the syringe of a deity. a pile of garbage doesnt become a beatiful little bird, creationsist like saying things like 'just how can some slimy rock become a human'. This demonstrates straight away a total lack of understanding of evolution at a level that an average 12 year old could achieve

aragorn2007, you dont know what evolution is, you havent studied it, you have no comprehension of how it works despite its actual simplicity, i dont look 'up' to evolution, thats is you transferring your requirement for guidance upon me.

actually the indohyus (incorrect spelling in the article) is most cerainly not the actual ancestor of whales but is a transitional form close to the ancestor, ie a sister branch to those animals that become whales. confused?? then learn some evolution, cladistics and palaentology.

244. Cult leader Pyotr Kuznetsov tries suicide after realising he was wrong about doomsday

Comment #154762 by phasmagigas on April 3, 2008 at 5:15 pm

its all quite sad isnt it, people believing some guys crazy ramblings, its not really different from any form of believing though is it?

245. CEAI Action Alert for Science Teachers

Comment #154339 by phasmagigas on April 3, 2008 at 5:52 am

i can really see those tired teachers out there getting all excited to get to the evolution unit.

Unlike with the other science units they do this one differently. They stand on their desks stamping their feet shouting 'fact, fact, fact' and threaten eternal suffering if the students dont repeat 'survival of the fittest' every morning.

And if they ask a question.......well by darwin woe betide anybody who asks ANY question about evolution, FACT, FACT, FACT.

246. Police: Girl Dies After Parents Pray for Healing Instead of Seeking Medical Help

Comment #150612 by phasmagigas on March 27, 2008 at 7:09 am

heres a quote from the parents from another website:

"We are remaining strong for our children," she said. "Only our faith in God is giving us strength at this time."

now i hate the following americanism but im going to use it 'hell-OO-OO'.

its so sad its pathetic.

247. Gay scientists isolate Christian gene

Comment #150193 by phasmagigas on March 26, 2008 at 2:46 pm

well funny.

anybody watching that and not realising its a spoof is very likely a believer and also not especially scientifically literate, sounds familiar?

248. Expelled Overview

Comment #149517 by phasmagigas on March 25, 2008 at 7:46 pm

in a country where the media can help to bring a single cornflake (the one shaped like illinois) to an auction price in excess of $1000 I have little hope. idiocy does seem to reign supreme.

249. Does Richard Dawkins exist?

Comment #148607 by phasmagigas on March 23, 2008 at 11:49 am

i suppose this is one of those 'what do we know whats real and whats not' so therefore 'god does exist and when i die i will sit next to jesus and he will let specifically me play with his testes.'

250. The science of religion: Where angels no longer fear to tread

Comment #148489 by phasmagigas on March 23, 2008 at 7:48 am

much as a sceptic cannot benefit from the placebo effect of homeopathy

people who take homeopathic stuff can be the type of people who like to take 'something' for everyting, they like things in bottles, things they can touch and buy, they probably also read those 'love yourself' books and benefit from those.

im not sure the skeptic not benefiting from the placebo effect is a bad thing!!