charles darwin

Norred

Norred

Active member
charles darwin was a naturalist. he wrote the organ of the species. it was very long people got upset about it and had trials to see if it was really true. he sort of said god's days were not just 24 hours but without watches. who knew anyhow? i dont get it.

'and his name is RENTALRIDER2! hahahahahahahahahaha. I can just imagine a blinged out gangsta walking into a tourist ski rental shop and coming out with oldschool white boots and k2 4's.' -davidh
 
good guy

99% of my life i have been baked at my wedding i said screw this and headed strait for the cake
 
um, what exactly don't you get?

song of the week to download: 'let me love you down' by INOJ

Willard: 'How many people had I already killed? There was those six that I know about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time it was an American and an officer. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?'
 
yeah... the organ of the species... was that about the musical insturment,perhaps a book on bach? or some part of the physical anatomy?

Mercy's eyes are blue

When she places them in front of you

Nothing holds a roman candle to

The solemn warmth you feel inside

 
It's like that inherit the wind play when they bring it up. It's how people picture the length of time, experts say that God made the earth like at 11,000 B.C. which is incorrect in Science.

So they say that God's days in which he made the earth are they longer then 24 hours just because there is no set time. So could the first day that he began to make the Earth and stuff be millions of our days? I dunno i kind of get it but then again it doesnt makes sense.

---------------------------------------------------------

Team Fresh
 
god made the earth in 7 days or something like that... but he made day and night on the 3rd day (i think)... so there was no possible way to measure the length of the 1st 2 days...

-------------------

Member # 2038
 
you know whats funny, how the mayan calendar ends in 2012??

-getting an inch of snow is like winning 10 cents in the lottery-
 
some christians say that it was at 11000 bc but only the ones that cant accept scientific dating, most say that it was actually much farther back, the same date as evolutionists believe it was created. The only difference is that they believe life came around differentley

One life. One world. Live, or die trying.
 
joey taht earth scince really payed off.........stay off my fuckin im name bitch

XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx

ya, i know, mommy and daddy got me a cell hpone, but it was for safety reasons while driving the lexus they bought me.
 
^so the 1st and 2nd days could've been really long and it took him a really long time to do watever he did on the first and second days.

JIBARITO

(its actually a restaurant in Peurto Rico)

Guitaring for life

 
ancient civilizations

lumerians - walked the earth over 800,000 years ago

the people of Mu - inhabited the world 250,000 years ago until about 12,000 - 10,000 BC when Mu and Atlantis crashed into the Pacific and Atlantic Ocean

Mayans - Ancient civ around 1000 BC to today 1697 when the Spaniards defeated the ttza of tayasal and the last independant Maya kingdom side note here the end of the world isnt actually 2012 it doesnt say the end of the world on there wheel of time it says that in 2012-2013 the earth will start wobbling and the wobble will accelerate and this in turn will start a new evolution of our species as our current dimension unfolds and we are brought into the 5th dimension where there are more civilized races waiting for us, and only those who recognize the changes within will evolve and survive this great earthly cataclysm.

anyways fools

this earth has been pinned arout 4.6 billion years or something now according to geologists and prolly older, I wouldnt worry about dying to much either, are you going to be able to care that your dead when your well dead, have to wait and see.

For a kick ass trip on drugs, pussies and wusscores stay away, try Salvia Divinourm 10 timex extract its fucking crazy smoked half a gram and I lefy this earthly vessel of a body and was shown this 5th dimension, come smoke a phatty and join me in evolution mwuahaha.

 
this is not very related, but charles darwin's great grandson goes to my school and is one of the biggest drug dealers in our town...i find it hilarious, obviously he didn't get his intelligence from the father's side...

Reppin' area code 207

As long as i'm alive i'ma live illegal

ESE TAKEOVER....woohoo
 
7 days to create the Earth, & seperate Kindom of Animals, and 7 Continents in the world

lol

The smart man does not know everything, rather the smart man admits when he knows nothing.
 
^^holy shit dude, thats some crazy shit

XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx

ya, i know, mommy and daddy got me a cell hpone, but it was for safety reasons while driving the lexus they bought me.
 
i have some serious issues with darwin's ideas. theoretically, evolution seems plausable, except for the fact that it is based upon chance and random change resulting in increased organization. the only way for the changes of evolution to occur is through random genetic mutation over huge amounts of time, as he proposed. but random mutation in nature never leads to enhancements in a species ability to survive, which would promote natural selection, in fact quite the opposite is true. this kind of mutation leads to freakish, and mutated species, much like birth defects and developmental malfunctions. basic laws of physics say that disorganization will ensue from this kind of situation in nature. entropy naturally increases. randomimity leads to chaos. darwin's theories were illogical. and don't even get me started with the big bang thoery. the problem is scientists often become infatuated with the excitement that accompanies discovery. I personally accredit this to some of the biggest mistakes in the scientific community. anyways, this is just my humble opinion. thanks for listening to it, if you did.

***ZOOLANDER***

You think you're too cool for school, well I got a newsflash for you Walter Cronkite,...you aren't

***DUMB AND DUMBER***

I'm talking about a place where the beer flows like wine, a place where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano . . . I'm talking about a place called ASSSSPEN. I don't know Lloyd, the french are assholes.

 
^ but you forget just how many genetic mutations there are in the animal and plant world every day. Millions of new species (animal and plant)are born everyday with genetic mutations, so even if only 1 out of 100000000000 are positive, it is still enough to significantly change a species over time.

_______________________________

(ross)

SRMC

cbf

'Im going extreme for jesus'
 
One more thing, if you look at how long you've been alive, it is NOTHING compared to how many millions of years are needed to significanty evolve a species. Even the amount of time humans have existed is nothing, so dont be suprised that nothing has happened overnight

_______________________________

(ross)

SRMC

cbf

'Im going extreme for jesus'
 
DO a little research, my friend. Science itself makes evolution impossible. I will post a little more info in a couple days when I get home, I'm at a friends for the weekend and don't feel like typing a ton.

________________

-Jeff

Bush '04
 
looks like earth science payed off for ross too

XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx

ya, i know, mommy and daddy got me a cell hpone, but it was for safety reasons while driving the lexus they bought me.
 
Darwin took back everything he every said regarding evolution one his death bed because he knew he was wrong.

Driving that Train
 
the thing i dont get about theorists, is how they can only explain up to the beggining...most of them dont explain how the hell that shit was made before things started to evolve, and so on

 
the problem with evlolution is while small minute changes take place in animals every day, simaltanious evlolution is much harder. To get a complex system to form, there are many tiny little chemical reactions and subsystems that must form. Darwin proposes survival of the fittest, but unless the entire system, such as the eye were to develop the other parts would have no purpose. If one single element developed with out the many other protiens and light sensors needed, it would die out becuase it would be a function that would have on superior function or purpose. A great book on evolution is Darwins black box...if anyone likes to read.

One life. One world. Live, or die trying.
 
if there is no sun how do you tell how long a day is

--------------------

HIGH NORTH SESSION 4

The Hot Sauce Champion of the World
 
mutations are random but you cannot assume that random mutations lead only to mutations that are not useful, saying that that is illogical is absurd. random equals random - randomness isn't perpetuated by any destination, such as chaos. you clearly haven't read up enough on physical anthropology to be suggesting such things. random = random. nothing is predetermined or heading in any suggested direction, if it was it wouldn't be random. you must realize that every time a species has seperated from its original species (in combination with geographical seperation) there has been a genetic mutation (or a gene that has developed abnormally, which still qualifies as a mutation). the thumb = mutation. the whisker = mutation. the trigger fish fin = mutation.

i don't know if charles darwin took back any of his theories, that sounds like complete bullshit to me, but even if he did he didn't take them back because he knew he was wrong, he did in fact later in life realize that his discoveries led him to denounce personally any possibility of a creator.

i suggest that any of you who have doubts about the genius of charles darwin and alfred russel wallace, go to your nearest college bookstore and buy yourself a textbook, because you clearly don't see the whole picture.

song of the week to download: 'let me love you down' by INOJ

Willard: 'How many people had I already killed? There was those six that I know about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time it was an American and an officer. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?'
 
Anewmorning, I was thinking the exact same thing when i read that...

Anyways, hold on, I'll see if I can find the relevant thread with all the insanely awesome posts by gravteck and phattim.

------------

In a haze

A stormy haze

I’ll be around

I’ll be loving you

Always

Always

Here I am

And I’ll take my time

Here I am

And I’ll wait in line

Always

Always...
 
and here i am thinking he wrote 'The Origin of Species,' huh.

Jack and Jill went up a hill riding on an elephant. Jill got down to help Jack off the elephant.
 
alpinecowboy: micro evolution does happen and is a fact that exists for sure, eg, humming birds addapting in different areas of the world to be able to eat from a specific plant, but while its easy enough to say that a whisker or fin is an addaptation, a mutaion that was random, and occurred, the speciece found that it was benificial and natural selection took place. But what truely needs to be looked at is how that change actually takes place, what chemical or cellular imbalance, or imbalance in the cell or cellular structure must take place for that to occur. Something simple suck as a wisker or fin could have a potential plan layed out of how it could have evolved in a darwinian manner, but something more complex that is ireducibly complex such as a flagelum or cillia is virtually imposible to explain in a darwinian manner unless a person has an over active imagination. Even out of thousands of papers writen on cillia and flagelum in the last 10 years, only 2 or 3 have even suggested that it could have formed through a darwinian evolution. The bottom line is that the scientific comunity hasnt eventried to explain it beacause it is not logical.

One life. One world. Live, or die trying.
 
what I was trying to exlain in a few words, because I'm too lazy, was that the ramdomimity of genetic mutation leads to only small, and degenerative changes in an organisms physiology. It's not one gene in DNA mutates, like one cytosine molecule is replaced by a guanine molecule, and now all of a sudden that animal will grow with opposable thumbs. Too many changes would all have to happen together and work in conjunction to create the more complex systems in a species physiology. It just won't happen. Random mutation has only ever led to disorganization. It always has, and always will. And really only a portion of the scientific community agrees with evolutionist theory and the others believe it is a crock of shit. Some of the most brilliant minds in history have opposed Darwin's ideas.

***ZOOLANDER***

You think you're too cool for school, well I got a newsflash for you Walter Cronkite,...you aren't

***DUMB AND DUMBER***

I'm talking about a place where the beer flows like wine, a place where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano . . . I'm talking about a place called ASSSSPEN. I don't know Lloyd, the french are assholes.

 
I'd like to hear some other theories you guys have, because as of now, besides creationism or whatever, I havent heard anything else put forward. If you dont believe in the evolutionary theory, then at least put forward what you do think

_______________________________

(ross)

SRMC

cbf

'Im going extreme for jesus'
 
people, you cant argue with science

XxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXxXx

ya, i know, mommy and daddy got me a cell hpone, but it was for safety reasons while driving the lexus they bought me.
 
we dont need to. science argues with itself.

Mercy's eyes are blue

When she places them in front of you

Nothing holds a roman candle to

The solemn warmth you feel inside

 
Considering evolutionary theory is taught in most schools, I would wager a little more than 'some' scientists believe it....

BTW, Randomness will not always lead to more chaos in the sense as you use it. The fact that only the strong will reproduce is the limiting factor that will reoganize.

How big is too big? (pant sizes)

'As long as you can walk, it's cool'- Peter O

 
eton i do agree there are aspects of science that cannot explain. but if 99% of something can be explained by science and 1% cannot i don't thats a justifiable means of arguing that there is evidence of a creator. there are plenty of things that were inexplicable 20 years ago that are well reaserched and explainable today. science is an ongoing process and i understand that it may defy logic, but that doesn't mean an explaination isn't possible.

one must also consider the capabilities of the human mind, the universe is beyond our understanding/comprehension. our brains can only theorize to a certain extent, beyond that everything is inexplicable. there are a myriad of patterns that we haven't even noticed yet, that we unknowingly skip right over. i still stand on the idea that there is far more to argue against creationism than there is to support it. creationists find tiny questionable areas of scientific theory in order to condemn science as a whole, which is of course absurd.

song of the week to download: 'let me love you down' by INOJ

Willard: 'How many people had I already killed? There was those six that I know about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time it was an American and an officer. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?'
 
(by the way eton, its nice to see an intelligent and informed response, well written)

song of the week to download: 'let me love you down' by INOJ

Willard: 'How many people had I already killed? There was those six that I know about for sure. Close enough to blow their last breath in my face. But this time it was an American and an officer. That wasn't supposed to make any difference to me, but it did. Shit... charging a man with murder in this place was like handing out speeding tickets in the Indy 500. I took the mission. What the hell else was I gonna do?'
 
Well i cant deny the fact that creation is not an outcome that can be deffended due to the reason that it is a belief with out science to back it up. You make a good point regarding scientific findings, but from our knowledge and the lack of evidence ie: fossil records darwinism does not seem fisable. Now as you said there is an infinite amount of information that we do not know about the universe which means that there is the deffinite possibilty that there could be another method or process from which life resulted. The problem with darwinism is that he sugests that small changes can occur and as a result of natural selection the organisms with a mutation that benifits them will survive and the process will repeat resulting in the humans, and potential other organisms in the future. The only problem is that unless simultaineous evolutionary mutations take place in a cell or organism, the minor change will result in a negative or usless effect on the organism, meaning that it will die out rather than flurish. I wish that there was an easy answer but at this point science has only uncovered enough information to disprove darwinism, but not to sugest an alternate theory. Maybe as you say in future as we find out new and intriguing aspects of our universe some sence will be made of it all, but untill then speculation will continue, with regards to evolution, multiple dimentions, and parallel universes.

One life. One world. Live, or die trying.
 
^i concur

***ZOOLANDER***

You think you're too cool for school, well I got a newsflash for you Walter Cronkite,...you aren't

***DUMB AND DUMBER***

I'm talking about a place where the beer flows like wine, a place where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano . . . I'm talking about a place called ASSSSPEN. I don't know Lloyd, the french are assholes.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top