|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 8:05 am
God Emperor Akhenaton Azkeel God Emperor Akhenaton Azkeel God Emperor Akhenaton Azkeel Survival of the fittest and gentic mutations... Well I'll just throw in the eyeball. It would be a mutation, and it would be useless at it's first stages and wouldn't even have sight. Unless you admit something so complex can just happen. So, since the begining form of the eye would not have sight since it would happen over a period of time. The eye would really have no reason to develope into something with complexity perhaps even be weeded out because it would have been useless at it's first stages. Simplicity is really the key here. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB301.html No! bad! I could have thrown links up supporting me but I decided to take the time and write it in my own words. So in other words I'm not gonna take the time to click that link. Unless if it's a link to a funny video... And with that being said; how I don't use links, I guess we could call it... The missing link! Haha but yeah I'm not going to go out of my way on this one cause I really don't care. If I wanted anything other then the basic run down on evolution I'd study it on my own. Other then that; most of my questions I possed on here are my own other then the eye one. nothing against you though. When you defy TalkOrigins, all you are really doing is stalling for time to make me look like a fool when in reality, you are one. These are people with PhD's and when you are a professor in field of evolution, you tend to be subjected by tons of questions mainly from creationists. Trust me. There is nothing that anyone who is anti-evolution came up with that even remotely has a seed of truth. I'm not stalling for anything, once again I don't care for the subject. And a PhD means nothing. Oh so you are one of those people. Oh yes, one of those people. Related to them that are also known as they. Watch this, I can actually admit I can't defend my posistion well. I most likely strolled into the wrong thread because I am clearly wrong on my standpoint because I can't back it up. But I will stand by my statment a PhD means nothing to me.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:05 pm
Azkeel God Emperor Akhenaton Azkeel God Emperor Akhenaton Azkeel No! bad! I could have thrown links up supporting me but I decided to take the time and write it in my own words. So in other words I'm not gonna take the time to click that link. Unless if it's a link to a funny video... And with that being said; how I don't use links, I guess we could call it... The missing link! Haha but yeah I'm not going to go out of my way on this one cause I really don't care. If I wanted anything other then the basic run down on evolution I'd study it on my own. Other then that; most of my questions I possed on here are my own other then the eye one. nothing against you though. When you defy TalkOrigins, all you are really doing is stalling for time to make me look like a fool when in reality, you are one. These are people with PhD's and when you are a professor in field of evolution, you tend to be subjected by tons of questions mainly from creationists. Trust me. There is nothing that anyone who is anti-evolution came up with that even remotely has a seed of truth. I'm not stalling for anything, once again I don't care for the subject. And a PhD means nothing. Oh so you are one of those people. Oh yes, one of those people. Related to them that are also known as they. Watch this, I can actually admit I can't defend my posistion well. I most likely strolled into the wrong thread because I am clearly wrong on my standpoint because I can't back it up. But I will stand by my statment a PhD means nothing to me. Let me put it this way. A PhD doesn't mean that they know everything. Nobody knows everything, however that does mean they know more than you. Understand this. They studied evolution for 6+ years ad at least an additional 2 years of independent research on evolution just to get their degree whereas you on the other hand admitted that you have very little interest in the study of evolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:16 am
Dalcain Obscurus "Survival of the fittest" can be a deceptive term. There's a certain deer species that has large, strong males that fight for dominance and it also has smaller, sneakier males that just go off with the females and mate while the larger males are fighting each other. Those males aren't stronger or better fighters; they just see an opportunity and they take it. Survival of the fittest: Brain Edition. To be fit is to be above in mind or body. While the stronger fight for control and first dibs to the females, the weaker are smart enough to just take the females. Crickets do it all the time. As you know, they rub their wings together to make songs. Some of them can't make as pretty songs, so when they hear another crickets "singing", and see the female running towards to meet it's singer, the smarter one runs up and steals the spotlight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 8:14 am
jazmynjellybeanz Dalcain Obscurus "Survival of the fittest" can be a deceptive term. There's a certain deer species that has large, strong males that fight for dominance and it also has smaller, sneakier males that just go off with the females and mate while the larger males are fighting each other. Those males aren't stronger or better fighters; they just see an opportunity and they take it. Survival of the fittest: Brain Edition. To be fit is to be above in mind or body. While the stronger fight for control and first dibs to the females, the weaker are smart enough to just take the females. Crickets do it all the time. As you know, they rub their wings together to make songs. Some of them can't make as pretty songs, so when they hear another crickets "singing", and see the female running towards to meet it's singer, the smarter one runs up and steals the spotlight. HA! I did not know that. That is comical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
