Wow, you posted it without any true evidence. But i guess since it 'sounds' scientific and says science in it, that it must be true. I will always believe what ramdon people post without evidence from now on...
FTW!!!!
Originally posted by: kogase
Did you know that our understanding of delicious pastries is also woefully lacking? Although many so called "scientists" and "people" have claimed a tight authority over the realm of buttery bread products, several new discoveries have forced us to redefine our concept of the old pan du jour. For example, in 1997 it was discovered that the Virgin Mary blessed a low-fat croissant and the resulting loaf came out of the oven sligtly mishapen. In 1995 a strawberry struedel was baked at a temperature well below 50 degrees centigrade, yet came out a slightly overdone banana shortcake. And in 1957, well before either of the two former events, it was determined that a high gluten flour was incompatible with the common breakfast anchovie... yet the Japanese have continued to this day baking Anchovie and Pumpkin Lard Flakey Cakes.
And while many so called "mainstream" science publications have ignored these important discoveries, I ask you: how reliable are our baking techniques if we can't even decisively explain an Anchovie and Pumpkin Lard Flakey Cake?
Originally posted by: M00T
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: M00T
I love the flawed logic behind so many arguments by you chrisitans. Stop being so afraid to admit science is more important than your little bible.
Have any of you thought about how your religion has evolved to survive the times? Old Testament > New testament... creationism > creation science > intelligent design.
Why are you turning this into a religious debate? Let me take what you said and use it against you...
I love the flawed logic behind so many arguments by you so called 'scientists'. Stop being so afraid to admit that there are things you cannot explain.
Have any of you thought about how your religion has evolved to survive the times? Think gravity, think astronomy, think biology...
What I posted were unexplained events that I hoped would raise some intelligent discussions about what may be the case. Instead I get whacos who have nothing better to do than spout off mindless drivel about they are right and everyone else is wrong.
(yet I expected as much...)
I'm sorry but you are being absurd. You aren't looking for intelligent discussion. This IS a religious debate because you are spouting of the same BS advertised by every anti-evolutionist(aka creationist).
Your little "gravity, astronomy, biology" example is ignorant. You have no eduation in those scientific fields do you? Go jump off the roof of a building and tell me how little you believe in gravity. Have you read a biology textbook? Have you heard the quote "without the light of evolution, nothing in biology makes sense" ?
I spent an entire semester in college focused on the biology, psychology and philosophy of evolution. 3 professors who debated the issues. Your statement saying that without evolution, nothing in biology makes sense is stupid. Any biologist who says that clearly doesn't understand evolution. Evolution is the current paradigm. In 20 years, we will look back at our current beliefs and laugh at how stupid we were.
The intelligent design movement is using impressionable young minds like yours to contest the fabric of science. Do some research on the movement, and you'll see exactly where all these ignorant ideas of yours are coming from.
Why are you rambling on about intelligent design? Can't you people go one threadwithout going off on a crusade against religion? Give it up already. This has nothign to do with religion. Stop trying to make it about religion!
Trying to question a peer reviewed scientific paper? Come on... are you really that dumb? Don't be the prime example of the education system's failure or a sheep for the religious fundamentalists.
I guess that we should forget about all the great minds in the past who challenged scientific doctrine. Yea. If scientists say it is so, then LET IT BE SO! According to you, there has never been a scientist who has been wrong, or a scientist who has been corrupt. Well, let me be the first to welcome you to the real world. Scientists are just as corrupt as politicians and CEOs. You are proof that brainwashing works.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
I spent an entire semester in college focused on the biology, psychology and philosophy of evolution. 3 professors who debated the issues. Your statement saying that without evolution, nothing in biology makes sense is stupid. Any biologist who says that clearly doesn't understand evolution.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Evolution is the current paradigm. In 20 years, we will look back at our current beliefs and laugh at how stupid we were.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Scientists are just as corrupt as politicians and CEOs. You are proof that brainwashing works.[/b]
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Don't get me wrong, science has done a lot and is a great thing (and will do lots of great things).
Originally posted by: XZeroII
But you people are really ignorant if you really think that we know everything there is to know and there is nothing out there that challenges our current scientific beliefs (which is what I posted).
Originally posted by: XZeroII
If you can't even entertain the idea that a single item in that list could possibly be true, then you have no right to even quote a scientist.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas. What makes you so sure that we are living in the precice moment in time when science is finally open and non-repressed? Look at history and you will see today. Nothing has changed.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Well, who controlled science back 2000 years ago? Who controlled science 1000 years ago? Who controlled science 500 years ago? Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas.
Originally posted by: Meuge
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Well, who controlled science back 2000 years ago? Who controlled science 1000 years ago? Who controlled science 500 years ago? Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas.
Yeah... unfortunately, it was controlled by religion. Since thankfully that's no longer the case, we've progressed more in the last 250 years then in the previous 2500.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Meuge
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Well, who controlled science back 2000 years ago? Who controlled science 1000 years ago? Who controlled science 500 years ago? Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas.
Yeah... unfortunately, it was controlled by religion. Since thankfully that's no longer the case, we've progressed more in the last 250 years then in the previous 2500.
Technically speaking, science didn't exist back then. Modern Science is unique in history. IMO.
That said, XZero has a funky view of all things scientific. So don't be shocked by what he posts.
Originally posted by: abj13
Originally posted by: XZeroII
I spent an entire semester in college focused on the biology, psychology and philosophy of evolution. 3 professors who debated the issues. Your statement saying that without evolution, nothing in biology makes sense is stupid. Any biologist who says that clearly doesn't understand evolution.
Please. If evolution is not necessary, then what in the world validates the usage of the mouse, yeast, Xenopus, Drosphila and so on as model organisms? Why would scientists waste their time on non-human organisms, if evolution is so inconsequential?
To try to validate your opinion by claiming you have a SEMESTER's worth of experience is totally unpersuasive. To suggest that biology can be clearly conveyed in a semester and that one can make the conclusion that evolution is not necessary to understand biology, is completely absurd. Try taking an upper level biochemistry course, heck even an upper level cellular biology course, that's where the nuts and bolts of biology are examined.
Read what I said again and then what you wrote again. You are putting words in my mouth.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Evolution is the current paradigm. In 20 years, we will look back at our current beliefs and laugh at how stupid we were.
What tells you that evolution will suddenly be laughed out the door in 20 years? Its already lasted 150 years, and has mountains of evidence supporting. In the end, the only "refutations" of evolution come fromfringe arguments from hack websites, that usually end up quote mining and providing fabricated authority figures who actually know nothing.
The only refutations come from hack websites? Wow. There is so much wrong with what you just said that I dont' know where to start. First, 150 years is NOTHING. Second, evidence does not equal proof. I can provide mountains of evidence for things that are not true. Third, you make a HUGE assumption that there is no credible evidence out there that refutes evolution. If you label anyone who finds evidence against evolution a hack, then yes...there is no evidence out there that refutes evolution. (hopefully you see how stupid that argument is).
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Scientists are just as corrupt as politicians and CEOs. You are proof that brainwashing works.[/b]
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Don't get me wrong, science has done a lot and is a great thing (and will do lots of great things).
If science is sooooooo corrupt, then why do you waste your time listening to all those corrupt scientists?
Great comeback! Let's hop in my time machine to when I was 6 and those kinds of arguments were very persuasive.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
But you people are really ignorant if you really think that we know everything there is to know and there is nothing out there that challenges our current scientific beliefs (which is what I posted).
Wait, wait, wait. You had one "semester's" worth of education, and all you could come up with is a bunch of fraudulent claims? Seems to me, you haven't done jack with your homework. If you had so much knowledge, you could have at least talked about something like the cisternae maturation model for the Golgi, as that would at least demonstrate some understanding of the controversies in science. But to rely on a bunch of BS? Please.
What BS? I didn't even post anything related to the class. I just pointed out some generalities. Why are you making assumptions about the class when you don't even know what it was about? I am NOT using the class to say that the stupid articles are true! They are JUST STUPID ARTICLES!!! Open your freaking mind to the possibility that you are not the center of the universe and you are not all knowing.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
If you can't even entertain the idea that a single item in that list could possibly be true, then you have no right to even quote a scientist.
No. You automatically assume those articles of "evidence" have some sort of contradiction in history and science. But that's the limit of whatever thought you put into the OP. The realistic vantage point is that how can we even assume, for example, a handprint is actually human made? That is exactly where each of these "artificats" break down, people automatically assume they are abnormal, when they might not even be human or even extraordinary. In fact, you have continually failed time and again to even address the multitude of links that refute these "artifacts." Therefore, your OP is completely worthless since you have provided nothing that suggests that these "artifacts" are really "puzzling."
Show me ONE place where I said that those articles were evidence of anything. Just one. You are putting words in my mouth and making assumptions.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas. What makes you so sure that we are living in the precice moment in time when science is finally open and non-repressed? Look at history and you will see today. Nothing has changed.
Tell me, in the table of contents from Genetics, how many DIFFERENT authors do you see? How can science be so "repressed" when in ONE journal, for ONE month, there are ~100 different authors contributing work? If science is so repressed, then why aren't you actually showing why instead of making a bunch of baseless claims?
Who cares about numbers? I can give you hundreds of names of people who say that the world is flat!
I make NO CLAIMS WHATSOEVER in this thread regarding the articles. Good lord. Are we even referring to the same thread here?
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: Meuge
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Well, who controlled science back 2000 years ago? Who controlled science 1000 years ago? Who controlled science 500 years ago? Science has never been a free and open exchange of ideas.
Yeah... unfortunately, it was controlled by religion. Since thankfully that's no longer the case, we've progressed more in the last 250 years then in the previous 2500.
Technically speaking, science didn't exist back then. Modern Science is unique in history. IMO.
That said, XZero has a funky view of all things scientific. So don't be shocked by what he posts.
Science is no different than it was back then. We just think we are unique, just like every generation before us.
Yes, I do have a funy view of all things scientific. I am not a sheep who blindly accepts what I am told. I do not close my mind to other possibilities in this world. I accept that I am ignorant, as is the rest of the world. Life is about finding the truth for yourself, not just reading a magazine and thinking that you are now smart. As in this article, I made no claims whatsoever, I mearly posed questions and I have been attacked relentlessly for it. Assumptions have been made about me without any form of evidence or reason. If this is the 'science' that you all speak of, then I want no part of it. Look at yourself before you start criticizing others.