Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:There's Your Problem Right There (Score 1) 1108

Sorry, but I wasn't saying I wanted to kill you, just that the discussion should be civil, like between friends. But you have no arguments just personal attacks. Should I guess where your compassion comes from, why you are such a zealot for hate? How many people have you wanted to kill on this subject? It's easy to track.

I did like this comment from a code discussion:

Scientific method is for research, and it involves devising theories that make sense.

If you would only apply your logic to the religion of evolution maybe we could advance science.

Comment Re:There's Your Problem Right There (Score 1) 1108

So, in order to prove gravity, you are requiring us to show you where every object in the entire universe drops towards planets/items with greater mass at particular speeds? Not just showing that occurs and showing how it is consistent every time we look at it, but show you every single object in the universe? Because that's about as likely as what you're asking (approximately, not exactly).

Please do not compare things like gravity, that are observable and measurable, to evolution, it is not scientific. We need to apply the same scientific standards to evolution not give it a pass.

Evolution has been shown to happen, we have SEEN species that have evolved into other species over time.

Please show the fossil record for the mutations of any species, any at all, from one animal to another. This would be all over the news if it existed. Darwin predicted there should be thousands for any single animal. There are only nodes on the tree chart without the evidence of the branch connections.

But no matter how many times we look and no matter how many fossils are discovered, there is never any evidence AGAINST evolution.

There is the cell. It's been around for 3.5 billion years, as per evolutionists. It has factories in it such as a DNA sequencer, molecular folder, transport mechanisms, along with the programming data to run everything. Assuming that the Earth is a little over 3.5 billion years old, when exactly did this irreducibly complex structure evolve, or even have time to evolve?

Now I've heard evolutionists explain that there are no irreducibly complex structures. Some how a more complex structure boot strapped the process. This makes absolutely no sense when discussing the cell at the beginning of the Earth. What more complex structure, that could have evolved into the less complex cell, existed then? How was the control programming randomly written? You ever try to write a random program for something like an assembly line? It is just too ridiculous for reasonable people to accept.

You have free will and can believe in the religion of evolution if you want, but it is not science.

Comment Re:There's Your Problem Right There (Score 1) 1108

The only way to 'prove' to a lot of people who give the argument that you do that a specific creature evolved from another specific creature is to have a PERFECT fossil record that contains every individual between the first creature and the second. That will NEVER happen because of the physical reality that fossils are not common.

And that is what sceince requires, the proof. Otherwise we are not buying into the religion of evolution. Sorry.

Comment Re:There's Your Problem Right There (Score 1) 1108

Its amazing that she could get a degree in biology without "believing" in evolution.

That's a strange statement. Belief is a religios concept. Science is dirived from the scientific method where things are proven such that no belief is required. Gravity can be measured and observed. The Electron Theory can be measured and observed. But evolution still requires belief. Do you believe that all the missing fossil evidence will be found someday? Or, do you disbelieve all the evidence found by molecular biologists that the cell itself is irreducibly complex and can not possibly have evolved?

Comment Re:There's Your Problem Right There (Score -1, Troll) 1108

Ummm, the latter is exactly what evolution is. Mutations occur, the resulting changes are either propogated because they provide some objective benefit, removed from the system because they are detrimental, or become part of the background noise of genetic variation if they are neither harmful nor beneficial.

So where are the mutations in the fossil record? 120 years ago Darwin said we could discard his theory if we didn't find the fossils. Millions of fossils later we don't have the evidence. There should be thousands of mutations per species and yet only nodes exist on evolutionary diagrams.

How many mutations does it take to go from land to sea dwelling? One mathematician roughly calculated a minimum of 50,000. You ask Evolutionists what the average time for a mutation is and they will avoid the question like the plague. When you factor in the time it would take for all the creatures on the Earth to evolve you run out of time. The Earth is only so old. Then Evolutions move the problem off Earth to gain more time, but they don't say how long the alien's planet existed. lol This is science?

Carl Sagan told us that Molecular Biology would show us the truth. And it has. They can now look into the cell itself. Inside the cell are multiple factories such as a DNA sequencer and molecular folding machines, along with transport facilities. The cell's factories are controlled by programming instructions, intelligent data. Have you ever tried to program anything via random mutation? Good luck with that. The cell itself is irreducibly complex. Molecular biologist must tell themselves, "this is not designed, this is not designed," because they can now see the design.

Evolution requires belief in things unseen which is a definition of religion. And I'm thinking that you don't want religion taught in public schools. Science should follow the scientific method, not a belief system.

Comment Where's the Degree? (Score 1) 688

Guess they're a bit clueless at CNN. Has anyone seen a Software Engineering job posting that didn't require a degree? I haven't and some require a Masters. Have even seen Electronic Tech jobs requiring a degree. Want a software job? Go to college, get good grades and then maybe, just maybe, you can get into a good software job. But I should tell you that the other Software Engineers I knew who had degrees were still having difficulties finding work. People like myself with decades of experience and no degree are pretty much out of luck.

Comment Re:Google Docs? (Score 1) 180

So we should boycott those companies because they support this new law that doesn't use Due Process. You can accuse websites and have them removed from the DNS. Or, you can post copyrighted material to sites you don't like to take them down. Because of the way the "law" is written, it is an attack mechanism and has nothing to do with piracy. Sounds similar to the Patriot Act in scope. Eventually you'll be able to use The Bill of Rights for toilet paper with laws like these.

Slashdot Top Deals