Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- Phinatic on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- Regular on Open thread 11/24
Open thread
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted July 11, 2006 at 12:09 a.m.
- Filed under Uncategorized
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
174 Comments
FAVORITE PLACE/AREA in KANSAS? AND WHY?
Alright I thought I would start this off with something a lot less heavy than what we normally gripe about(Bush/GOP). This back and forth political smack is getting old. Im guilty of it too, but I need a break. I really care for all my fellow Americans, and wish us the best in the future. Dont worry I truly believe we will have peaceful prosperous times again.
Any ways what is your favorite place/area in Kansas?
Mine is the Manhattan region. I spent the past five years there and I wish I could have stayed. Lots of trees, pretty hills, and Tuttle Creek looks like an ocean bay from the dam. It has everyting you want from a big city (shopping,coffee shops, bars),but only on a smaller scale.
Your turn
Actually, there are several places in Kansas that I love.
Many of the State parks are really nice, but I guess Kanopois Resivoir is my favorite. They have over 25 miles of horse and hiking trails. They have a ‘horse’ campground with full hook ups for your RV plus a corral for your horses.
In the fall, getting up early and on the trail at sunrise, you see all kinds of wildlife and the trees are changing colors….
There are hundreds of horse trails in Kansas, most of them are free or very cheap, Flint Hills has many comercially organized trail rides and many free ones you can go on yourself. Kanopolis also has a commercial outfit that is pretty cheap.
Anyone that is bored in Kansas is just lazy!
Hank
Coronado heights outside Lindsborg. You can whack 600 yard drives from the top on a windy day. Testosterone at its max:-)
Another blogger letter to the editor published: I got mine published today about the KBOE.
J.M. “Hal” Walker: I read your letter to the editor about an hour ago in this morning’s EAGLE but of course didn’t tie the names together. Congratulations on getting your letter published.
the “lie” of Evolution? Oh brother. Yes, there are some gaps in Evolution theory, but that does not make it a “lie”.
Of course, that is just my opinion, along with dozens of Nobel Prize winning scientists. I would put a lot more faith in proven scientists than the babblings of a BoE that is more interested in pushing religion and hiring unqualified yes men than working toward quality education.
Published some time ago …
Football at Wichita State?
Proponents of bringing big-time football to Wichita State University have been pressing their case lately. However, their advocacy of this action lacks a plan to make this happen. I would like to propose a concrete action plan to bring football to WSU:
1. Hold a mammoth rally at Cessna Stadium to demonstrate community support for the effort. Proponents of a big-time football program should expect tens of thousands of fans to attend the rally. At that rally collect money that would serve to begin the establishment of an endowment fund for the football program.2. Place the funds collected into a secure account to serve as the base for further fund raising. The University can provide information to the football advocates as to the level of revenues required to establish the program.3. Continue fund-raising until enough money has been raised to cover the costs both of renovating Cessna Stadium and of building a football program.4. When sufficient funds have been collected; turn the account over to University officials so that they can establish the program.
If, in fact, there is sufficient support in the community for a viable football program at WSU the proponents of such a program should have no difficulty in raising this money. If successful, this fund-raising will demonstrate that support.
Lindsburg/Coronado Heights is a nice part of Kansas.
Can we “have a” HAVA thread again? It’s back in the news.
Walker, sent you a congrats email before seeing this thread.
I’m wondering, of the whole theory of evolution, is there any one thing that has been proven to be true?
Hank
PS Sorry GaryC, we did give it a try.
I agree with Coronado Heights, you can almost see the Kanopolis reservoir from there!
Hank
Good on you your editorial J M!
But I think some here are confused which one it was!
raptor and Jwink? I am just about 100% sure J M is John of Bel Aire and not Hal from the outer limits!
I used to live in Lindsborg. Roxbury, which is about 10 miles east of Lindsborg along Smokey Valley Road, is on the southwest edge of the Flint Hills. Kanopolis is about 15 miles west of Lindsborg, with the bulk of the lake stretching north of that line. If you want, you can drive from Kanopolis to Roxbury in a more or less straight shot, west to east.
IMO, from Kanopolis east to Roxbury is pretty nice country. There’s a locally famous Wichita artist whose name escapes me (she’s a fine painter but her commercial focus on bunny rabbits and prairie still-life’s isn’t my cup of tea) who lives on Smoky Valley Road. Her house is remarkable, imo, not least because it’s in one of the most scenic stretches of this area. She DOES have a fine eye, I must admit.
This drive traces a subtle geographical change from the Smokey River “valley” to the edge of the Flint Hills, but it’s quite beautiful. Especially in the fall.
I read your leter to the editor as well JM. It was definately an exercise in stupidity. When are you ID/Creationist wackos going to get in the 21st century? The theory of evolution is the accepted SCIENTIFIC expanation in the natural world. Your attempts to discredit evolution only makes you look foolish. We know your agenda, to establish your form of Christianity as the state religon. Sorry, that’s not going to happen. Read the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. You keep your religion in your home or church, keep it OUT of the public classroom!
I know/knew J.M.
Apophis, you don’t know J.M.
Sorry, for the corny imitation, but the above is true.
My favorite place in KS?MY COUCH.
I like the Cosmosphere and after my visit of the Museum of World Treasures, I think I could enjoy that place too… I’m a history and space buff…
The Cosmosphere has more space artifacts than ANY other museum in the country (except the Smithsonian), perhaps the world…
I enjoy it… I also enjoy some of the various state, local parks…
Lloyd Bentsen: “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy”
What Bentsen said to Dan Quayle in the VP debate in
1988.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator,_you‘re_no_Jack_Kennedy
The point being, Apophis, is that Walker’s letter to the editor was the one that you and I would define as sane.
Just to clarify:Hal is not me. I am John. I was hoping that would be unnecessary, but I see different. I am a bit disappointed that you would confuse me with Hal. I now have some of you in my sites:-) . . . bastids!!!
My extreme apologies JM. I applaud YOUR editorial. I won’t make this mistake again. I again ask for your forgiveness
JM– I KNEW THE DIFFERENCE!
Apophis: The bottom line in the evolution/creation debate should be “what is the truth”. We do not know what occurred. Science has its best guesses, based on the limitation of the evidence. But evolutionary theory has some big holes in it. Yet the scientific and the public education community has set it up as the undeniable truth.
Teach evolution with an asterisk. By that I mean teach the subject, but in some minor way let the students know of the problems with the theory. You need not teach alternatives to satisfy most on our side. Just let the students know that this is science’s best theory, but that the truth may ultimately be found to be something else. What’s wrong with that?
outlander……………..we will NEVER teach evolution with an asterisk. You need to deal with that!
I’d call it proof of evolution J M!
Walker posts that he got a letter published.Jwink gets the wrong letter and posts. Mutation. “Walkers letter” has now evolved into a completely different form.
raptor weighs in and gets it wrong too. Now the mutation of “Walkers letter” has become the “dominant species” so much that even though I attempted to clarify, Apophis ALSO gets it wrong and attacks the monster that is “Walkers letter”
Not much of a debater are you Apophis?
There is NOTHING to “debate” outlander. Evolution is science and ID/Creationism is religon…..Apples and Oranges.The KSBOE can write into the standards anything they choose, but they cannot make us follow them. We teach to the National Science Education Standards and generally ignore the RWingnuts in Topeka.
Hey JR, I DID apologize for the miscue, that has to count for something.
Put ID where it belongs.In a mythology class.
Apophis: Notice that I did not at anytime advocate teaching ID or Creationism in our public schools.
It appears to me that you support evolutionary theory with a religous fervor. You seem willing to hide or at least gloss over problems with evolutionary theory from your students. Why? Are they not entitled to know? Or are you afraid where their thought process might lead them?
See this book at the WSU library which describes over 300 experiments in natural environments that demonstrate the mechanism of Darwinian natural selection:
http://libcat.wichita.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=3&ti=1,3&Search%5FArg=Endler%2C%20John%20A%2E&Search%5FCode=NAME%5F&CNT=30&PID=6104&SEQ=20060711100336&SID=1
See this book (Pulitzer Prize winner) for an account of the strength of the theory of evolution:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/067973337X/103-6960865-7555859?v=glance&n=283155
I am aware that providing these links will be insufficient for people inclined to spread falsehoods about the theory of evolution. As KFG would say – 1 is too many, 1000 is not enough.
No theory is perfect. Perfection, contrary to the misinfomed/disingenuous, is not a requirement. Evolution has been an extremely useful theory for nearly 150 years. There is no debate among knowledgable people about the foregoing statement.
What I find extremely troubling these days is reflected not just in this particular debate, but in many, is that any person’s opinion is supposed to be on the same level as empirical evidence. I don’t get this philosophical positon — and can’t help but wonder where it comes from. Discrediting science is a step backwards that some seem determined to take. I will decline that journey. Thank you very much.
One thing, one thing that is true about evolution.
Just name one!
Hank
OOOOOPS! A thousand pardons…I saw it was about BoE..and got confused. Well…I still think the letter that is there calling evolution a lie is a pile of smelly stuff. At least I didn’t make any personal insults…
Sorry about that…My inexcusable error on that one…
One thing, one thing that is true about evolution.
Just name one!
Hank
Hank,Read my links above and we shall talk. I would be happy to lend you my copy of the second link. Email me and tell me how to arrange it. Being the good Christian that you are, I know you will “forgive” my suspicions about your intent. Have a good day.
I drive all over the state of Kansas as part of my job. I really like the scenic by-ways that Kansas has desinated.
Between Coldwater and Medicine Lodge is awesome.
Kanopolis is pretty cool. It’s actually scray crossing the dam. I wouldn’t want to drive on that in icy conditions, but the glimmer of the sun bouncing off the lake in the evening is a spectacular site.
But my favorite place is Wichita. I guess I’m sort of urbanized and just like the city.
Dear DD,
I guess I need to know what you mean by evolution, neither one of your links really show anything ‘true’ about evolution.
There is no evidence that natural selection has ever resulted in the evolution of a new species.
I don’t believe in evolution. However, the defense of the theory cannot continually rely on calling Christians stupid to prove itself.
Hank
J.M. Walker or J.D.E. of Bel Aire: I apologize for my error. I read the EAGLE in a hurry this morning because I had to leave for a meeting. Now I have to leave for a WIBA noon luncheon so must be quick here again.Notice that in my earlier post, I only congratulated Hal on getting a letter printed in the EAGLE. I didn’t say I agreed.
Now, I generally agree with your real letter. I disagree with the idea that seems to be prevalent that the term, “intelligent design,” is the same as “creation.”
To me, intelligent design refers to the question of what happened before the so-called big bang some 12 to 14 billion years ago, which some say is a field called “astro-physics?”
In any case, as an engineer myself, I agree high school students need to be well-grounded in the sciences without complicating it with opinions about creation in high school classes.
As I have said before, science standards need to be formulated by the thousands of Kansas professional science teachers, not by the Kansas Board of Education members whose education credentials are suspect if they exist at all.
Dear Joe,
We have some friends that have property SW of Medicine lodge. Out in the middle of nowhere ther is a light pole with an electrical outlet and a corral. If, if it isn’t going to rain, one of the best places in the world to park your RV and ride your horses!
Hank
The Galápagos Islands have species found in no other part of the world, though similar ones exist on the west coast of South America. Darwin was struck by the fact that the birds were slightly different from one island to another. He realized that the key to why this difference existed was connected with the fact that the various species live in different kinds of environments.
Haven’t lived here long enough to find a favorite place in Kansas… I have been to the world’s largest ball of twine, tho. (nope..definitely NOT my favorite place!). The geographic center of the 48 states would be high on my list tho..it is nicely done.
We have a friend that runs a ’sheep camp’ south of Osbourne, KS. It’s part of the state that is easily bypassed, but has a lot of interesting sites. I aggree the geographic center of the US is rather nice!
Hank
Wow this sounds like a back to school essay “What’s your favorite summer outing”…
My favorite place in Kansas would be my back deck. We live on the far outskirts of a (very) small town. Our back deck overlooks our back 4 acres, our neighbors pasture and a corn field across the road. It is a wonderful area to relax the stresses of the day away – very calm, very peaceful.
I do love the rolling hills of NE Kansas, some great fishing up in Jefferson County.
Dear Julie,
Joyce loves our screened in porch the best. We sit out there in the evening and look out accross the lake. We are high enough that I can sit back and relax with a glass of wine without seeing the weeds in my garden!
Hank
Three words.
Cedar Bluff Reservoir.
And the clear, cold water of little Downer Creek that feeds it.
The runner up? The Depot in Collyer for the Friday Night Lenten Fish Fries.
And there is also this little hidden grassy spot where my sweetie and I like to park…
:) hehehehehe
I like the view from the rounded front steps that my grandfather and father built together. Faces the garden and the windmill and at sunset out here it is just too beautiful for words.
And at night, on those same steps, with no noise and no light pollution, the stars are like little diamonds nestled in black velvet, shining like earrings when you open the jeweler’s box.
The silence is good for getting a fix on our place in time.
When I go camping, with no sound but the rippling of the creek, I can also consider how many thousands of years other people also sat on the banks of the Downer and wondered about the space between the stars.
“There is no evidence that natural selection has ever resulted in the evolution of a new species.”
Not true. The evidence for this is contained in the fossil record, where there are multiple examples of species change.
Evolution = natural selection + selective pressures + genetic drift (this latter unknown to Darwin).
I know you don’t believe in evolution, and I certainly hope you weren’t addressing me with the statement about calling Christians stupid. I do not recollect ever doing that.
My offer still stands on providing you with reading material that supports my positions. I don’t expect to change your mind. I make this offer in good faith that you might be a reasonable person when it comes to evaluating information.
Dear DD,
I’d be interested in debating your claim that the fossil record supports the premise there has been species change through natural selection. There is no evidence to my knowledge.
The evidence of the fossil record supports creation more than evolution!
Hank
Dear DD,
I really do appreciate your offer to share your books! You might be surprised to see my collection.
I would actually like to read the “Beak of the Finch”.
Hank
Actually,
I got to thinking about it, you probably wouldn’t be surprixed by my library!
Hank
Hank
Email me on how I can get the book to you. My email is live.
I recall you talking about your library – medical history, naval history, and such. I know you have other book subject collection interests, but I am not remembering those now.
I am going to let someone else more knowledgable on the fossil record debate that with you. I know the “Cambrian explosion” is one feature that creationist people point to as evidence for creation. As pointed out in the “Beak of the Finch” – evolutionary change is aperiodic and can happen very quickly, however. There are no vertebrate fossils from the Cambrian era.
Let me know on how to get the book to you.
Hank, you and Darwin’s ought to go on a ‘debate/speaking tour’.
It’s an interesting topic, and you two could make a great show of it!
This could be the best thing since G. Liddy debated Tim Leary on tour!
“This could be the best thing since G. Liddy debated Tim Leary on tour!”
Ya, but which one’s gotta do the acid?
DD,
I’ll get back to you late tonight, I’m too busy right now.
Hank
It seems that some states are staring to take measures to combat the wetback menace. It is a damned shame that our traitor governor is unwilling to undertake similar measures, here in Kansas!
Viva La Raza Blanco!!!
By Daniel B. WoodStaff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
LOS ANGELES – While the US House holds on-the-road hearings on reforming federal immigration laws, states and localities have already passed a raft of statutes that take aim at the economic magnet drawing illegal immigrants to the United States: employers.
In the past six months, at least 30 states have considered more than 75 bills targeting companies that hire undocumented immigrants. So far, 44 have been enacted, while a handful have been vetoed and several are awaiting a governor’s pen, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
In applying pressure to employers, the individual measures are spotty: They lay out hiring requirements for public agencies, for example, or for businesses with state contracts. But collectively, they signal Washington that many states are impatient for reform. Such enforcement efforts add up to the broadest assault on employers in years, experts agree.
“The primary reason you have millions [of workers] here illegally is because of the federal government’s failure to enforce sanctions against the employers that hire them,” says Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which backs tighter immigration controls. “Now, state and local governments are starting to take action against employers on their own as a response to overwhelming public pressure.”
Georgia recently enacted requirements that all public employers will have to verify that they have not hired any illegal immigrants.
Full articleSource: Christian Science Monitorhttp://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=9525
I think my favorite location in Kansas is a place southwest of Chapman where I used to park with girls back in the high school and college days. It’s off the road a ways, a huge limestone barn, a couple of huge round horse tanks fed by a spring. Very small meadow beside a hill surrounded by woodland. I discovered it when I was 13. I stacked many a hay bale in that old barn.
I am taking careful note of all of these nice places in Kansas for future travel plans.
Jwink, raptor, and Apophis ya don’t need to heap ashes on yourselves or anything. It was actually kinda funny to watch a misconception grow legs….and almost wings! Poor J M though! He gets a letter printed and then for just a bit gets “credit” for a letter that is the polar opposite of the one he wrote!
Don’t forget areas not too far from Kansas. Tulsa and OKC offer some great attractions in a long one-day trip, or an overnighter. The Missouri Ozarks are really nice, and theNorthwest Arkansas Ozarks are awesome, for an outdoors-oriented 2-3 day weekend getaway weekend. The part of the former Kansas Territory known as Colorado can be nicely visited on a 4+ day driving vacation. Last summer, my boys and I (three road trippers) left here early Thursday, put on backpacks in the Wimenuche wilderness on Friday, camped overnight, then went down to the San Juans on Saturday and did some great fishing, and got back to Wichita Sunday afternoon.
I’ve been disappointed at the tone of the recent attacks against Mayor Mayans.The point ought to be this: the people of this city have voted for change the last three elections. The only candidates who have kept their word to the people are Jim Skelton and Carlos Mayans.And now, the elitist-loving Eagle is trying to barbeque him for it.Nothing good is going to happen to this city until we are rid of Gary Rebenstorf, Cathy Holderman, and a number of other “city employees” who are nothing more than tools of the elitists.What do the people of this city have to do before the rest of the council gets a clue…storm the 13th floor and start hurling people out the windows?
JR,Thanks for watching my six, bro . . . but . . .how much of that “just about 100% sure” were you? Like 99%? 98%? What was the other 1 to 2 % thinking? :-)
Well J M
I read Jwink and raptor BEFORE I read the editorial page.
Now Jwink was vague enough and not really opinionated. But he did suggest the “hal” part. raptors post fell into that and seemed to show you going in a direction of thought that knowing you as I do did not make much sense! But you are known occasionally to play at humor, hyperbole, sarcasm etc.
Then I went and read the two letters. They are direct polar opposites! Worse, the one that 2 posters had credited to you was……well……nutty!
So, I’m sitting here laughing, shaking my head and trying to figure out just how this happened.
Like I said, I was almost 100% sure that the 2 posters had made a mistake. It wasn’t really uncertainty. I was trying to 1) Say in a nice way “You guys are WRONG how foolish of you!” and 2) Avoid inflaming the issue further by taking a hard stand. IE “Walker could never write something like that!” Hard stands only make other people take hard stands.
Darwins was there for you too by the way. Frantically trying to remember a quote! I just am fininshing this after being away from the keyboard for a few. SO probably you already thanked him.
JR,Bro, I was messin whitcha! I loved the spiel about the Raptor/ Jwink thing and evolution . . . cracked me up.
O, ya . . . DD and Gster: Thanks for the stand up also. I do appreciate it.
Hank,Is creationism so important it flies in the face of evolution? Or visa versa? I have no problem whatsoever believing in God creating man, but I also have no problem whatsoever having it happen in an evolutionary way.
God took a rib from Adam and made Eve? Give me a break. Simple words for basically simple people of the time. I think man has come along scientifically enough to realize that.That God impressed free will on man at some point in his developement is probably what really happened.
As for evolution and examples: Look at land animals whose ancestors roamed the seas, or sea creatures that evolved over time to become land animals. The evidence is there for those willing to see it. For the others, I suppose dinasour bones could be manufactured in some plant in China.
For the rest of us, evolution works out just fine, with no problem including God in the mix.
JM- No problem, I should have said more. I Know that you have been given apologies by the parties concerned, but I couldn’t believe how they reacted rather than acting, as if they were spring-loaded.We all can turn ourselves into asses at any given moment, but I wouldn’t expect nor trust much from them for a while . Just my opinion.Watch your 6!.
Gary
When ever I go scuba diving, I usually see flying fish. They actually have wings and fly quite a distance! I can’t help but believe that I’m seeing the process of evolution. The part I love about evolution is that the possibilities are endless. The nature of life is so remarkable.
Dear JM,
Funny you should ask! Yes, creation is important to me! Genesis is the foundation of the Bible!
Now, before we get to hung up on creation, let’s define terms, OK? I’m a young earth creation/great flood fundamental Christian. Which is different from an old earth creationist.
Evolution is a myth. There is no science at all to back it up. None. In fact, most of the science as it developes actually supports creation more than Darwinian evolution.
Intelligent design is actually supported by a lot of scientists. A lot of them are not creationists, young or old earth. Christians like to jump on the ID bandwagon because we know who the Intelligent Designer is!
However, the proponents of ID merely use it to explain the holes in evolution. Many things are so complex that the possibility of them evolving through natural selection are impossible.
I on the other hand I believe that even the simple things originated from the Creator. The new science standards that everyone has their panties in a wad over only allow teachers to mention the controversy. I don’t think that ID is even mentioned in the standards.
I personally don’t care if Creation is taught in school. I don’t care if ID is mentioned in school. The last thing I want is a bunch of teachers that can’t teach Johnny to read explaining Genesis to a bunch of kids! I just want the truth to be taught about evolution. Only the truth!
Hank
Show us some proof of intelligent design, Hank. You can’t because it’s faith based, it’s a religion. No serious scientist accepts that evolution is a myth. Just because someone has a PHd, that doesn’t make them a scientist. It’s a fact that the “scientists” you refer to are a laughing stock to the real scientific community.
Please pray for the soul of Dave Hanna.
Please pray for his children and family.
You may run on for a long time, (run on for a long time)Run on for a long time,Let me tell you God Almighty’s gonna cut you down
You may throw your rock and hide your handWorkin’ in the dark against your fellow manAs sure as God made the day and the nightWhat you do in the dark will be brought to the lightYou may run and hide, slip and slideTryin’ to take the mote from your neighbour’s eyeAs sure as God made the rich and poorYou’re gonna reap a-just what you sow
You may run on for a long time, (run on for a long time)Run on for a long timeLet me tell you God Almighty’s gonna cut you down
And after much thought, and a couple of weeks of yoga, I am now “chill” about the whole evolution/ID thing. Seriously, what difference does it make if kids are hearing that there’s an evolution controversy in school? The ones that don’t plan on studying science will believe that it’s flawed and go on with their lives. The kids who end up going to college to study evo-devo and related fields will learn that there is no controversy. Science minded parents can refute the supposed flaws in evolutionary theory taught in schools at the dinner table.The people who count–the anthropologists and biologists–aren’t going to be affected. There is no controversy within the scientific community and that’s why no reputable scientists bothered to “testify” at the KS BOE hearings.
Who cares? Let them teach the controversy. I’m sick of getting pissed off about it. It’s like trying to explain to a 5 year old that the ocean is not actually blue, it just reflects the sky. Does it really matter if they believe it or not?
Well today at least proved that arguements “evolve”!
I would be VERY interested in Hanks take on dinosaurs.
Hey, any west siders in here?
Anyone notice that they are already having to repair the new road? There are work crews out tonight looking at the Maize Road bridge. They are looking at the sections of pavement running up to and backing off of the actual bridge. Its already sinking and sinking fast.
Some of you may notice that exact same problem has been repaired many times out east between hillside and CBD. Heck, CBD east bound has some huge bumps that need to get fixed bad…
Wonderful job city…
“This could be the best thing since G. Liddy debated Tim Leary on tour!”
While Tim Leary was a psychologist at Harvard and a man I respect, Hank would have to play the part of Dr. Leary.
Let’s see him try. HahaHa
Oh, I forgot; Ha!
Tara,
But if we didn’t argue about evolution, what else would there be to argue about? School spending reform? Tax reform? Campaign Finance Reform? School Funding? Casino’s?
I mean, why would you want our legislators discussing real topics like that when they can be wasting time on such an important topic?
Hank,We will never agree on the creationism/evolution debate., On that I can see. But you missunderstand both my post and intent. The “myth” of evolution, as you and others call it, has much science to back it up. You are walking through life with blinders on if you fail to see that.
I gave examples of evolution that really happened. You gave . . . nada. I would like to hear from you a scientific explanation of how certain species differ that couldn’t be explained by evolution. Now that would be interesting.
Dear JM,
“As for evolution and examples: Look at land animals whose ancestors roamed the seas, or sea creatures that evolved over time to become land animals.”
I am willing to discuss your science with you. Your examples were generalities. Why don’t you give me one specific example of any one thing that you believe that science has proven to be true about evolution?
You see my friend, my point is that one would have to have more faith to believe the incredible stories that evolutionists hatch than I have in creation.
Tell me one specific thing that you know to be true about evolution. Just one.
Hank
Dear Damoon,
I am not debating ID. I am merely asking for one thing that you know to be true about evolution. On thing.
Darwinian evolutionists claim creation can’t be true because it relies on God. ID proposes an un-named intelligent designer. So that’s just a backdoor way to get God in the schools.
Give me one example of science backing up Darwin’s theory, Damoon? anyone?
Hank
So, Gentle people,
Let’s not debate creation vs. evolution. I wish to understand why you believe in evolution!
Let’s have an evolution vs. Darwin debate! Bury me in your examples of science!
Hank
One thing known to be true?1)Viral strains evolve from year to year and also regionally, under the process of natural selection.We produce new drugs and the strains that survive develop immunity.
And no, this is not totally different with larger organisms.The same basic principals apply.
Hank…………..deal with it. There is no controversy about evolution except in YOUR mind. There will be no “controversy” taught to public school students regardless of what the state standards say.
The vast majority of science educator just won’t play that idiotic game. This is why the mainstream science community boycotted to staged BOE “hearings”.
Keep yammering all you want about your alleged “controversy”, it is NEVER going to be accepted by rational thinking people.
Apop, thanks for the unintended compliment. (rational thinking)
If you can’t except the rational explanation, then how about this one:GOD TOLD ME THAT EVOLUTION IS HIS PLAN FOR LIFE ON EARTH.
That’s not any less rational than a 900 ft. Jesus demanding donations to Oral Roberts.
Believe it or not Tracy I (and many science educators and scientists alike) can accept a statement like that.I see the fundamentalists labeling those who accept evolution as “atheists” because many of us to not believe the many times translated and transcribed bible as the absolute literal truth.
I agree with the above, there is no controversy regarding evolution except in the minds of a few misguided religious fundamentalists. There is nothing to debate.
“One thing known to be true?1)Viral strains evolve from year to year and also regionally, under the process of natural selection.We produce new drugs and the strains that survive develop immunity.”
Tracy: You have given an example of natural selection within viruses. It is analagous to Darwin’s finches. This is not evidence that viral mutation produced a higher organism, as Darwin’s finches did not change into something not a finch.
A new and improved form of life that has it origins in a previous form of the same species is still evolution, you can pick fly shit outta’ pepper all day long and it is STILL evolution.Besides, outie, if you do just a little research you can find that your statement is incorrect. Each time it mutates and becomes more drug resistant it has evolved into a higher form, unless you want to argue semantics, in that case I give up. We could debate the meaning of ‘higher form’ whilst we’re picken’ that fly shit outta’ the pepper.
Tracy: Nice try.. Well actually not a nice try. Everyone knows that “evolution” WITHIN SPECIES occurs. In this example, it is still a virus.
We are talking about the theory of Darwinian evolution whereby lower forms of life evolved into higher forms by micromutations. Yet the no one can demonstrate an example or reproduce it in a lab.
Tracy: For purposes of discussion, let’s also define “higher form” as a more complex organism of another species. In your example the virus that now survives may not be any more complex. In fact, its mutation may make it more vulnerable to other drugs or less able to reproduce in certain environments. It is not higher, it is simply different.
Out
That is because no one could live long enough to complete an experiment like that.
MACRO Evolution by natural selection works over time scales of thousands and tens of thousands of years.
“Darwinian evolutionists claim creation can’t be true because it relies on God.”
Darwin was silent on how life began. Please provide one example of what you’re claiming. I don’t think you can. Another example of a creationist straw man. Just one of many.
Outlander -How do you define species? Being the biologist you are, I am sure you can enlighten us.
For example, my son has tropical fish, who are different species, but they can mate with one another (Platies and Mollies). Are they different species?
DD, he’s already changed to the semantics thing.I’m outta’ here.
He’s defining what evolution si or is not, but doesn’t belive in it?Hmmmmmmmm……
Dear Tracy,
When a virus mutates or changes it doesn’t become a ‘new and improved’ form of life. It merely becomes a subtype of the parental virus.
The H5N1 virus is merely a subset of the bird flu virus strain. There are many strains. There is no scientific evidence that a virus has ever evolved to a higher form of life (species).
Adaptataion and change within a species is not evidence proving Darwinian evolution. Sorry.
Hank
Tracy:
“Evolution” is an elastic term with meanings including everything from minor changes within species, to the theory of common descent.
I believe in evolution within species. I do not believe in common descent.
I have to leave now DD. I will address your question when I get back.
Dear JR,
Thanks for entering the fray! Maybe you can give us some scientific proof of ” MACRO Evolution by natural selection”.
Maybe you could give us some scientific evidence that natural selection has ever resulted in a new species.
Hank
Hank?
You are a biblical creationist yes? The world is only 6000 literal years old and all?
DINOSAURS Hank
MY science tells me that they dominated the Earth for more than 100 million years. Geologic strata and cabon dating back this up. Care to prove them wrong?
If you attack evolution, you are attacking more than just biology. You are pretty much attacking all science.
I do not begrudge folks the right to “believe” in whatever they would like.
But the subject here was originally what it is that we should teach as scientifically backed up fact.
Kansas City attorney John Calvert will give a 2 hour presentation on the Intelligent Design theory of creation at the Alford Library on South Meridian on Sunday, July 16th, 2006 at 2PM.
SOMEONE PLEASE SHOW UP AND GIVE ‘EM HELL!
Have you noticed how rational discussion about evolution gets these fundamentalists into a froth? Scroll back up to one of Tracy’s posts. I think she made a very profound statement. Why can’t you fundamentalists accept that evolution might be God’s plan for life on Earth?Oh yea, could it be because this might not being exactly what’s written in their Bible?
Apophis, I have evolved into a 46 yr. old father of two, grandfather of another two.
I got used to being the boy named Sue. How do you do.
And believe it or not, I am a practicing christian.
I have prayed and petitioned God for an answer to all this, and he gave evolution the nod as His plan.So that is His answer to me, I don’t know what he’s tellin’ you other folks.
Sorry Tracy………I won’t mistake you for a female again! I too am 46, the father of three and a grandparent of two.
RD, if you are reading, did you notice outlanders’ strategy of leaving the room? I cant remember the number of that one…
…and where has heckler been lately? And joe blow? And some other nics that seemed to disappear with nathan’s departure?
Remember, I said weeks ago to watch which nics disappear when he leaves. And notice how the total number of posts has been waaaayyyy down? Coincidence?
I noticed that too kfg.
Things that make ya go hmmmmmmmmmmm.
heheheheh. And now I see “heckler” has appeared on an ancient thread.
hehehehehehehehehe. He is usually here for these young earth discussions. Why not now?
Since TB was run off this blog, I wonder if any of the righties will say anything about someone else’s multiple personality, multiple nic disorders?
Naaawwwww. IOKIYAAR
Dear DD,
Interesting question. I assume that when you say “mate with each other” you mean there are progeny. If so, I would ask you the same question, are they a different species?
I would guess not. I would guess that what you have is merely an example of a ‘mulefish’. A mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey. A mule does not procreat. So, like your fish I don’t think it has much use in explaining the developement of a new species through Darwinian natural selection.
Hank
Kinda makes ya wonder if TB was so hated because he has/had multiple identities? Or because he is CORRECT so much of the time?
Or because he has an ability to make the ingnorant show their colors?
heheheheh. Any ONE of those things will certainly draw the wrath of the self righteous posters. And I see sts is whining about how susan wagle’s son is being treated?
Family tragedy. As the immortal CF once said, it’s the mother of all IOKIYAARs.
I read TB on other blogs now. He’s still rockin’.
And this blog?
…some plaintive bleating here too.
CF, come baaaaaaaack! I miss your posts!!!
Maybe he decided to stay in the Live Music Capital of the World. The City of Ideas.
Dear JR,
Dinosaurs fit into my understanding of the ‘creation/flood’ model of the world quite nicely. Thankyou!
In fact, dinosaurs are more of a problem for Darwinian evolutionists than creationists. I’m afriad that geology and carbon data add very little to the understanding of evolution.
Carbon dating is not accurate for anything older than the recorded history of man. Furthermore, it can only be used to date things that were once alive. It can’t be used to date fossils, because the original biological material has been replaced with mineral deposits. Useless for dating dinosaurs.
The geological strata can be nicely explained by the great flood.
I’m not ‘attacking’ evolution! All I wish to demostrate through a rational discussion is that to believe in evolution requires a faith much greater and incredulous than my faith in the Bible!
Also, I don’t believe you need to be a ‘fundamental’ Christian to go to heaven.
Hank
As far as all of the wishful and paranoid blathering concerning Nathan goes, he’s not gone.
In the wonderful world of BLOGs and cyberspace, being out of town is not the same as being gone.
Nathan has never been shy about his opinion. He has never posted under any name other than his own. He has never posted anything that he was not willing to back up in person.
He’s just busy right now, they’re teaching him how to keep the sand out of his shorts when he goes to Iraq.
His Pa,
Hank
PS Call me boy I need to talk to you.
KFG, yes, I’m reading. I’m not surprised. I believe that’s #13, but I’d have to look.
As a fromer Christian, I took a look at the evolution vs. Bible thing and determined the following:
If God always was and always will be, a “day” in his heaven/worldwould not necessarily measure the same it would on earth. The Bible was written by men who would measure in things they knew.
And have you ever noticed how men measure time? “I’ll be back in a few minutes,” means 2-3 hours. “A little while” is about half the day. Considering their definition of time, I’d say millions of years or more for God’s day is acceptable.
Hank,”Maybe you could give us some scientific evidence that natural selection has ever resulted in a new species.”
That kind of depends on how you define “new species”, or diferentation of a new species. Since you don’t accept science, what standard do we use?
The commomly accepted standard among people who believe in science is:”One of the most popular biological definitions of species is in terms of reproductive isolation; if two creatures cannot reproduce to produce fertile offspring, then they are in different species”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species(You’ll have to do some reading to find the reference but it’ll do you good. It’s science)
If you accept that inability to breed demarcates species, I submit as an example of one species changing to another the sub-Saharan Cape Buffalo. It evolved from cattle, but through genetic drift, it is no longer capable of breeding with it’s predecessors.
There are many instances of new species in the plant world, variations both natural and hybrid, and provable through genetic and DNA testing. You may not believe in the science of DNA and genetics. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, just that you refuse to accknowledge it since it’s science.
“While studying the genetics of the evening primrose, Oenothera lamarckiana, de Vries (1905) found an unusual variant among his plants. O. lamarckiana has a chromosome number of 2N = 14. The variant had a chromosome number of 2N = 28. He found that he was unable to breed this variant with O. lamarckiana. He named this new species O. gigas.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html#part5
Dear XXX,
I’m a little disapointed in you! Where did you get the notion that I don’t believe in science? I’ve been begging for scientific proof that natural selection has ever resulted in a new species.
I just get the run around. You need to focus. We’re talking evolution. Darwinian evolution. We’re talking about scientific evidence that species have evolved through natural selection.
OK now lets get something straight. I believe in science. I believe in genetics. I have several books on genetics. (My wife helps me with the big words, she has a BS in genetics. She also has one in chemistry. And one in biology.)
Give me one example of science (your definition) of proving anything about Darwinian evolution to be true.
Hank
The Noahs flood brings several question to mind that whenever I have asked creationists dance around and never give clear answers.First if their was a flood that covered the whole world where did the water come from and where did it go?Why don’t Greenland, or arctic ice-flows show or tree-rings show any evidence for a world wide flood?If dinosaurs and man coexisted why don’t we find fossil evidence of them together?Where are the dinosaurs now? Did they get left off of the Ark?How did two of every animal get on the ark its a long trek for Kangaroos and kolas.Their are several million species of animals how did they fit into a 400ft boat.What did they eat Panda, Kolas have specific diets. Lions tigers eat other animals large mammals elephants eat hundreds of pounds of food. Then there are issues of waste removal, how the animals got back home. Genetic bottlenecks caused by lack of diversity.How does Noahs small family do all this?
The blog crashed today. Maybe the Eagle eds will tell us why.
Almost all the posts from earlier today this thread are lost.
Among those, Hank had no problem squaring dinosaurs with creation myth.
He did NOT explain why the dinosaurs got left off the ark as Dingus asks about.
Hank also called carbon dating into question. I think his post was that “Carbon dating is not useful beyond the recorded history of man”
JR.
I think the GOP got tired of us making real points and progress so they contracted Halliburton to crash the site…
Hank,I read the christian site denouncing carbon dating as totally inaccurate. They are wrong to the bone. Scientists with no agendas, other than the truth, find carbon dating to be accurate to 1% to ages dating back 50,000 years.
Then there involves radiometric dating, which involves the use of isotope series, such as rubidium/strontium, thorium/lead, potassium/argon, argon/argon, or uranium/lead, all of which have very long half-lives, ranging from 0.7 to 48.6 billion years. Subtle differences in the relative proportions of the two isotopes can give good dates for rocks of any age.
Surprise: The fossils of dinasours found among geological formations dating back millions of years have been found with little or no carbon 14 in them, thus making them older than the accepted life of 60,000 years for the oldest carbon 14 contauning fossils.
While the great flood my naccount for some displacement of geological formations and their respective fossils, it has never been scientifically proven the great flood really happened. In fact, ther is scientific evidence the flood occured in the area of the Black Sea. For a better explanation than I could do in this thread, read this: http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1192.htm
AS stated, there may have been more than one “great flood” and may have taken place in many parts of the world and been caused by natural disastors.
What I’m saying here, Hank, is in my opinion, it takes a greater leap of faith to believe the biblical story of genesis, the great flood, and a myraid assortment of spiritually leveled disastors and miracles, than it does for me to believe the dating techniques in use today, or that they all were cause naturally, by the earth process.
While I believe God created man, I don’t believe in the seven day biblical account, as posed by our 24 hour clock. Nor do I believe the great flood flooded the entire world at the same time. I will admit there may have been many, smaller floods, but all caused by nature.
As for giving you proof positive evolution is the one true scientific explanation for how life came about and ended up as man, I can only point you to many more learned scientists, who know a hell of a lot more about evolution than I do. That’s not a cop-out, hank, but pointing you to thousands of links that contain proof of the evolution of man and beast seems to be a waste of time. The proof is out there, but you have to be willing to view and understand it.
But you, on the other hand, give me nothing but faith in believing the world is 7000 years old. For me, that is not enough.
Tony – watch out for Tara – she would definitely be your match. Maybe she can post that link with her picture again …
Dear JM,
Fair enough, but in all honesty I did not enter this debate to ‘prove’ creation. Nor did I enter it to disprove evolution. Most of the time on this BLOG I don’t even bother to enter in to discussions on evolution, the State BOE, etc.
The State BOE is an elected body. Don’t like ‘em, don’t vote for ‘em. But, like it or not, they do reflect what Kansans believe. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your mind set) they actually have very little to do with what is taught in our schools. They have no control over the content of the text books. They have no control over the mind set of the teachers using the text books. They are a political body.
As far as evolution goes, I only ask if anybody can scientifically prove anything about the theory to be true. You have a right to challenge my belief in creation, but I don’t want creation to be taught in school. I don’t want ID to be taught in schools. I’ve never proposed that. Therefore, I don’t have any responsibility for defending my faith.
But, if you think evolution is a fact. If you think it should be taught as fact with my tax money in the public schools then maybe (just maybe) you have a responsibility to defend your beliefs.
Challenging my beliefs to prove your own doesn’t wash. I can GOOGLE up 50 definitions for evolution, 50 definitions for a species, but we all know what the controversy is about. Darwinian evolutionists believe this all came about by chance. It is taught is school like God didn’t have anything to do with it. If so, then give me one example of anything about evolution that you know to be scientifically proven.
All I ask is that they teach it as a theory, a theory that may or not be true.
Hank
Hank – evolution IS taught as theory. So is gravity.
Hank is very deluded isn’t he?
Don’t get me started on gravity!
Hank
Yep, that theory of gravity is sooooooooooooooo controversial!
” Laura makes great gravity, no lumps at all! It’s great on smashed potatoes.”
“Darwinian evolutionists believe this all came about by chance. It is taught is school like God didn’t have anything to do with it.”
Uhm, wrong again, Hank.
Darwinists have no opinion about how life began. Some scientists have surmised that life could spontaneously emerge from inorganic matter. But that is not part of Darwin’s theory.
In fact, if you look at the most popular scientific theory of how the universe began (again, NOT part of Darwin’s theory), the “big bang,” it is essentially the same as the Bible’s description.
God spoke, and everything was created from nothing.
It’s only you LITERALISTS that have a problem with it. The Biblical view and the scientific view are in agreement.
It’s just the people who worship the Bible instead of the essential meaning of the Bible that refuse to see the similarity.
Appoligies Hank,I was being snotty. I’ll get back with you on science and evolution if I get time this evening. Lunch isn’t working….busy.
In fact, now that I think about this, the “big bang” theory argues rather in favor of the existence of God rather than not.
Because scientist acknowledge that during the creation event, physical laws were violated.
Matter for instance travelled faster than the speed of light. That’s impossible according to Einstein’s theories. In fact, my high school physics teacher SHOWED us mathematically how it was impossible because it would require more energy than the universe holds for a particle of matter to travel even as fast as the speed of light.
A time of no universe, no physics, no time. BANG! Suddenly there is an expanding universe, physical laws stabilize, time and space exist.
Who could do that if not for God?
Bookworm,
You’re a reader but haven’t read Angels & Demons? Fiction, yes, but after you read it, check out CERN’s (European Organization for Nuclear Research) Fact or Fiction take on the book.
http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Content/Chapters/Spotlight/SpotlightAandD-en.html
If nothing else, it’s food for thought.
Note: For those who aren’t aware of it, CERN is the birthplace of the World Wide Web. ;)
Quote of the Day:
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.”– Ariel Sharon, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998
V.L.R.B!!!
While doing a little research, I ran across something I wasn’t aware of.
I’m sure most of us saw Anderson Cooper on the news in New Orleans during Katrina. I haven’t really watched CNN much since the Gulf War, so he was a new face to me. His emotionaly plea to those in charge was definitely moving. But there’s a reason for this.
http://www.webmd.com/content/Article/123/115184.htm
I didn’t know he was Gloria Vanderbilt’s son, either. Interesting.
Hey! Did you know that if I joined the army and kill innocent women and children in Iraq I’d get a free boony hat!? Free boony hats? Alright!!!
Hank, you almost got me. Your original query was, “Maybe you could give us some scientific evidence that natural selection has ever resulted in a new species.”
I believe I answered that. Then you changed it to “Give me one example of science (your definition) of proving anything about Darwinian evolution to be true.”
How about Genetics and Paleontoligy through tracking of DNA, fossil records, and carbon dating. Just because you refuse to believe in carbon dating and such doesn’t make your view valid. Carbon dating does indeed work with fossils. As far as science “proving” anything about evolution, I’d say we’ll have a long wait for any lab experiment to run it’s course.
Does science “prove” evolution? We can see the results of evolution through scientific observation.
Does the Bible “prove” the existance of God?
What, no thread on the Supremes BARELY upholding the 800-year right of habeus corpus? Maybe because it proved what anyone awake could see, mainly that Alito and Roberts are dangerous fascists?
Well, Rhonda?
Science LOVES criticism. In recent years, with the emergence of molecular phylogeny, we have to reclassify tons and tons of species. I’m working on a population genetics project whose higher goal is to help reclassify algae species. It’s GOOD to disprove the norm.
In fact, if a scientist could somehow disprove evolution (for instance, finding a dog that magically mutates into an alligator), he or she would be famous! That’s what every scientist wants…to discover something new that shatters the walls.
The reason scientists cling so tightly to evilutionary theory is because of the mountains of evidence supporting it, not because it’s a “religion” as anti-evolutionists claim.
Hank,”Fair enough, but in all honesty I did not enter this debate to ‘prove’ creation. Nor did I enter it to disprove evolution.”
What it seems you entered this debate for was to throw stones and see who you hit. Claiming evolution is nonsense, then making a statement like the above is very confusing.
Your whole argument is based on faith, while rejecting scientific realities. That reminds me of the so-called christian world that tortured and killed people for believing the earth was not the center of the universe and believing it was round.
Faith based beliefs have a really lousy track record when it comes to science. In fact, it has held science back at the cost of peoples lives. So please excuse me if I have serious doubts when it comes to placing the words, “christian” and “science” in the same sentence: they are polar opposites.
The saying, “through God, all things are possible” evidently doesn’t apply to science in the minds of Christians.
If you want evidence of evolution, you need look no farther than the development of the human fetus.
It traces all the stages human life went through to get to human life.
Why does a human fetus have a tail until right before it’s born? Why does it have gills like a fish? Why does it look almost exactly like a dog or a pig fetus at similar stages of development?
It’s all laid out right in front of our eyes.
There’s your scientific proof right there, Hank.
“He has never posted under any name other than his own.”
Blatent lie Hank. Ask nathan about “barb”. I caught him and he admitted it.
I notice still that ever so many of the conservative nics have disappeared since he is no longer posting regularly.
I wish Nathan well and hope he comes home safely. The WE blog will not be keeping up it’s “we’re number 2!” status without him and his many little imaginary friends. :)
We can’t drop to #3!!I’ll have to resort to surrogate trolldom to save our highly respected ranking.
WE’RE #2, WE’RE #2 !!
I think you’re right, KS Farmgrrl.
I’m pretty close to positive Nathan is also Patriot. Hank posted as “esod” for a quite a while. XXX posted as “nightrider.”
Practically everybody has posted under more than one nic.
There’s nothing really wrong with it as long as you don’t pretend to be a different person. It’s not really trolling, IMHO.
But it is nice not having to hear “heckler” and “joe blow” constant and unthinking right-wing blather.
Then who are you Blogorama?
Blogorama: That fetal development example used to be included in science textbooks. It is one of the embarrasments for evolutionists because it is not true. You need to get yourself up to date.
Okay, Hank, go to this website:
http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/evolution/lectures.html
Click on the third “holiday lecture series” lecture–”Fossiles, Genes, and Embryos”
Fast forward to ten or eleven minutes in.
The lecturer describes how simple one-celled creatures are found in the oldest fossile records, multi-celled creatures in the later times etc. exactly as predicted by Darwin.
He uses the manatee as an example of a land animal that evolved into a sea mammal. It still has toenails and a vestigial hip joint. Where are the intermediate fossiles? They’re in Jamaica and all over the Carribean . . . he shows abundant examples of intermediate forms between the ancestor land mammal and the modern manatee.
That’s just for starters . . .
One of the most sleepless semesters I spent as an undergrad was the semester I took developmental vertebrate biology. This was back in the day, when PC’s were still called workstations (and thus not personal) and when all lab study was done by slide and by dissection.
Lab day 1: pick up 3 HEAVY boxes of slides. Each box represented a different vertebrate’s stages of development, from blastocele to, I think, 6 months of development. The animals were a Drosophila fruit fly, a frog, and a pig. (the flies aren’t vertebrates, but this course followed a genetics section wherein the Drosophila genome was studied heavily – thus Drosophila study here was intended to use the genetics as context).
The lab drill was to spend countless hours basically memorizing stage anatomy well enough in order to declare an oral exam in which we were asked to trace various stages of each’s development. Many a night I left that lab at 10pm, and that was a brutal final exam (there was a written section as well as the oral section).
But yeah, you’re exactly right, Blogorama. It’s not necessary to concentrate on vertebrate dev, the study of any developmental biology will tend to remove any lingering doubts about Darwinian evolution’s existence. Lots of strange magic happens in development as certain vestigial organs appear and disappear. And did you know that at a certain stage of development removing one cell and placing it in another place can result in, say, an ear grown on a pig’s back? Or a leg grown on a frog’s head?
Even today when I visit the zoo I find myself seeing the similarities between, say, a hyena’s hind leg and a gorilla’s foot. And trying to trace out just how similar these seemingly separate animals really are…
kfg: My theory is that, if posts are down on this blog, it is because you are not posting as much and getting everyone worked up. If the Eagle is losing money because of this, they need to see you. Maybe you could work something out!
Is there ANYBODY here (besides me) that has NEVER posted under other names?This has always been my real name and my real email address.You know when I first started commenting here, another regular suggested that I never post under my real name & that I use some phony email. Due to whackos and loonies that may want to do evil things, I guess. This person said I would end up getting fired from my job, my family would be harrassed, etc.I’m not stupid enough to think that phony names and addresses would protect me from those kind of people anyway. My work, home, and family have never been bothered by any unsolicited contact.
“Even today when I visit the zoo I find myself seeing the similarities between, say, a hyena’s hind leg and a gorilla’s foot. And trying to trace out just how similar these seemingly separate animals really are…”
flike: Same maker.
ANYBODY??
sorry tracy, doesnt sound like n e one wants to admit to posting under multiple names…
Tracy–I think the regular that told you that was me.
I didn’t say YOU would have bad repercussions because of what you post. I said that I knew of plenty of examples of people that did have bad repercussions.
It’s not just post-ers who get it. A woman was fired from her job in Alabama when she drove to work with a “Vote fo Kerry” bumpersticker on her car.
It also depends on WHAT and HOW MUCH you post. If you call Bush an idiot, a war criminal and an inveterate liar, and that the people who voted for him have the blood of innocents on their hands (as I do), you tend to draw a lot of fire and take a lot of heat.
Tracy, I’ve always posted as flike, and my email address has always been the same (and live).
Excellent post by FLIKE!
I’m starting to look forward to reading his stuff these days . . .
Sir Galahad?Is that U??
If it is, just nod and wink.I won’t leak your true identity!
My favorite place in Kansas? Anywhere I can exit this state!!!
PHX, I can think of a few abandoned mine shafts near here!
Gentle People,
I’m snowed in at work today, I’ll explain science and evolution to you non-believers tonight.
Hank
PHX? Phoenix? Well, I noticed that Alice Cooper has a regular radio show there–pretty cool–but I don’t know if living in Sheriff Joe’s dominion would be worth it!
Notwithstanding the ticket-happy Tucson police and the unofficial right-of-way (the largest vehicle wins!), 100 miles to the south seems to work for me, so far.
PHX, regarding Kansas, I have just one word for you: Winfield. Ask any musician, and they’ll tell you the rest. It’s incredible.
Was there a thread on the Supremes’ tribunals decision, and I just missed it? Just curious.
P.S. Tracy, always been Rage, with same e-mail, except for some very obvious jokes (e.g. DorkWithNoLife, Nietsche).
Back to work. . .
Okay, great, Hank.
I’m sure you’ll do it much better than all those biologists and geneticists published in scientific journals with all them there fancy initials after their names.
There are times , with certain people, that de-evolution isn’t such a bad idea. If you can move them a couple of notches down the chain, things might get better. Just a ramble.
I know Hank won’t watch it, but for those of you who find science interesting and haven’t already closed your mind to it, you should really click on this link.
These videos work on dial-up or broad band. They go into depth but they are introductory.
Really excellent overview of why the scientific community finds the overwhelming data on the side of evolution.
http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/evolution/lectures.html
In fact, the manatee and porpoise and whales are good examples of how intelligent design CAN’T be true. They’re not that intelligently designed. They have vestigal skeletal “legs” that are unattached to the spinal column, can bear no weight, and have no function.
If God designed every species “intelligently,” then why did She leave in all these unnecessary anatomical features that clearly show evolution?
P.P.S. Mr. P., the odds of being stalked by a psycho are fairly low, but. . .I hesistate to state my reasoning, and thus give the hypothetical psycho any hints! :-)
I’ll drop you an e-mail tonight if you like.
Are we not men, gster?
Blogorame: Why would this so-called efficient engine of creation called evolution create something that inefficient?
It’s not that efficient.
Who said it was efficient? Not Darwin or Stephen Jay Gould or anybody else who’s studied it . . .
Sigh. . .I swore to myself I would keep out of the 111th evolution debate.
Out, evolution makes things work, and that’s about it. If anyone called it an “efficient engine” I don’t know what they meant. Genetic algorithms are a good analogy: Using chunks of data as genes (basically), they often arrive at surprisingly good solutions–but don’t try reading the code–it’s a mess!
It’s really not much of a “debate,” Rage, as you well know.
It’s people like us who respect science using facts and evidence to counter anti-science pot-shots at seeming contradictions or inconsistancies in Darwin’s theories.
It’s not a debate because they got nuthin’, but it is a sad commentary on how people will delude themselves rather than change their pre-conceived conclusions.
Yeah, I know, BR. Same old crap, over and over, just in different ways. The objection is theological and philosophical, and I could respect that, if they would just be honest about it. Oh well.
Lt. Columbo is now really leaving. . .
Discovery Channel is doing a good piece on the science of Climate change this weekend. I watched it; it is well done and well founded in science. I strongly recommend it.
It’s people like us who respect science using facts and evidence to counter anti-science pot-shots at seeming contradictions or inconsistancies in Darwin’s theories.
Blogorama: You mean like citing the fraudulent claim in regard to embryology?
Evolution is science’s best guess that does not include God. That’s its limitation. Well, that and science’s insistance that evolution (common descent etc..) is the unquestionable truth, while ignoring or glossing over the holes in the theory.
It’s a wearying business, arguing with Creationists. Basically, it is a game of Whack-a-Mole. They make an argument, you whack it down. They make a second, you whack it down. They make a third, you whack it down. So they make the first argument again. This is why most biologists just can’t be bothered with Creationism at all, even for the fun of it. It isn’t actually any fun. Creationists just chase you round in circles. It’s boring.
“Creationists just chase you round in circles. It’s boring.”
Evolutionists, on the other hand, never get bored because they’re changing all the time.
JM, I believe that’s the definition of the word “evolve.”
RD,Shoot, I knew I was having fun!