1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. We've had very few donations over the year. I'm going to be short soon as some personal things are keeping me from putting up the money. If you have something small to contribute it's greatly appreciated. Please put your screen name as well so that I can give you credit. Click here: Donations
    Dismiss Notice

Politics Dark matter and politics

Discussion in 'Tilted Philosophy, Politics, and Economics' started by Street Pattern, Apr 21, 2015.

  1. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    North Carolina
    Now you introduce "accepted", my question was not in the context of "accepted". My point was related to the general lack of thought into the theories of evolution. And if you have read what I have written I have tried to be clear that when I am talking about evolution there are theories in plural. When talking about evolution I have tried to be clear regarding what I meant - in the case of humans I believe we have seen evolutionary changes related to superficial characteristics - i.e. skin tone, nose shapes, body shapes in terms of fat, hieght, etc.

    You are not clear. You seem to assume this is simply one concept, one topic.

    I do not believe humans have evolved from another species. I do not believe that humans will evolve into a higher form of humanity. I do not believe the concept of natural selection is applicable to humans. I do not believe in the concept of survival of the fittest. I do believe that in the name of evolution, Darwin's work, some have misused his work for immoral purposes.

    Again, I am clear in my position. You have not been clear in yours.

    I further state that my believe is grounded in my faith, that we are what we have always been, all human life is of equal value (even the unborn), I do not know the basis of your belief or what keeps your views of science in check.

    Evolution has provable evidence that takes us to a point. Evolution theories do not have provable evidence to close certain gaps. This is clear and obvious. You and others try your best to make these issues convoluted.

    What is fact? Do you consider it a fact that humans evolved from other species? What is the evidence?

    Again, what is fact? In order to conclude the globe is warming we have to have a basis, I asked you several questions in this regard - questions that you could not answer.

    Live life a day and you will experience a cycle related to temperature. Live life a year and you will experience a cycle related to temperature. There are oceanic cycles, lunar cycles, solar cycles that can be related to temperature. My point is we do not even know, what we don't know - and I have no idea how supposed scientist will ever say climate science is settled - I am not even mentioning the scores of other problems with man caused global climate change theories. You and other have the nerve to look down on those of us who have questioning approaches to these subjects.

    What's ignorant about wanting to acknowledge facts?[/quote]
    --- merged: May 1, 2015 at 3:06 PM ---
    The US is not being killed in the sciences. Here are some facts related to the real world -

    Ranking the Top Biotech Countries

    I think there is a problem with education in the US - there is education to the general population and there is education to the elite - or those who apply science to practical affect. In one area there is weakness in the other strength.
    --- merged: May 1, 2015 at 3:12 PM ---
    Coal Returns to German Utilities Replacing Lost Nuclear - Bloomberg Business

    We do not think Germany is going to turn back the clock 100 years, but it is funny.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 8, 2015
  2. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    Okay, then perhaps tell me your view of how modern humans compare to other hominids such as Neanderthals and Homo erectus. How do you account for the relationships we share with these other hominids (or "humans and relatives of humans closer than the chimpanzee")? I know you're a Christian, but I don't know whether you are a biblical literalist. Do you believe that modern humans were put on earth as they are now directly from God? How do you account for older (and partly contemporary) species such as Homo neanderthalensis? Do you believe that all life does not evolve, or are modern humans (Homo sapiens sapiens) exempt because of God?

    More generally, how familiar are you with this concept? Most recent common ancestor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Does this mean you believe humans are supernatural?

    What is your definition of survival of the fittest? I'm assuming you have a definition that is a misunderstanding of Darwin's work. Or maybe you just don't believe natural selection exists at all.

    Again, I'll ask you: Do you know how genetics works?

    You are clear but seem to misunderstand the concepts, and I apologize if I'm not clear.

    My beliefs are rooted in perceiving and synthesizing reality. I've never been religious because I have not seen any evidence of a supernatural power. If I ever do, I may revise my position on deities.

    This speaks a lot to my general worldview:

    If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.​
    —The Dalai Lama, The New York Times (12 November 2005).​

    It's unfortunate that much of Christianity is caught up in literal interpretations of Iron Age texts.

    Of course there are gaps, but you seem to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Much has been proven, but you refuse to accept a lot of it because it doesn't fit into your worldview, which is limited by Christian dogma.

    I don't know, maybe 6 million years of fossils and tools in addition to the study of genetics of apes? There is a wealth of evidence, but you choose to ignore it because it's not accounted for in The Book of Genesis.

    I could answer them (talk about reading what one writes), but I'm not going to spend the time because this is easily accomplished by anyone with a high school education.

    But we do know what we know. You just choose to ignore it. It's good to have a skeptical mind, but sometimes it can be harmful to be too skeptical.
    Last edited: May 1, 2015
  3. redravin

    redravin Cynical Optimist

    Just because we have more biotech firms doesn't mean much.
    It just means the US has more money to float in order to get them started.
    Take a look at the PISA, for math and science.
    I'm not a fan of standardized tests, especially word tests but this is as close as we have.
    We come in at 28 for science under Vietnam and Estonia.

  4. omega

    omega Very Tilted

    Well remember, don't try to do what is best for society. Do what's best for business, and then somehow society will magically benefit. Just have faith in the system, redravin. Have faith in John Galt. All you need is faith. Stop trying to measure and calculate things. Don't use science or statistics,unless they fit your worldview. And try to obfuscate any ideas that confuse you or try to make you think. And live under a bridge.
  5. Aceventura

    Aceventura Slightly Tilted

    North Carolina
    Just one example used to illustrate a point. The point being in the context of usable application of science and technology the US leads. And to further add clarity to the broader point, I agree that in terms of general education for the general public the US is falling behind, but in terms of high level education the US is not. I simply think the point being made was too general. I am not being argumentative, just adding clarity.

    The smartest people in the world come to the US for our higher education system and our freedoms that allow for the advancement in science. Again, US leads. The fear that the US is falling behind in this regard is false.

    Having the general population score marginally higher or lower than other general populations on standardized tests has little value to the practical applications of science.
    --- merged: May 1, 2015 at 6:24 PM ---
    I am not Christian.

    Perhaps you can tell us what you think. Do you believe humans evolved from other species?

    Did you not understand what I wrote, or are you being difficult for the sake diverting the discussion. I believe there is provable evidence of evolution. I believe....just re-read my post!

    Not a Darwin concept. Others came up with the concept bastardizing his theories in my opinion. Darwin spoke of natural selection, there are some differences. Survival of the fittest suggests that some forms of human life are of more value than others and it has been used to justify many inhumane atrocities - many in the name of science. Recall this:

    Tuskegee syphilis experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Twisted scientist using humans to see who survives and possibly why.

    Genetics is a relatively new science, I do not know much about it, already answered this question. What is your point? Are you saying you are an expert in this field?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 8, 2015
  6. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    My mistake. You are a monotheist at least, right?

    You mean like how we all have some Neanderthal DNA? I believe that and other things, sure, but what does it matter what I believe?

    It's confusing. Why would modern humans be exempt or limited in evolution? Are we supernatural? Please explain.

    Why did you bring it up? We're not talking about discredited ideas here.

    No, I'm no expert. But you need to understand genetics to understand evolution. I don't think you have a very good understanding of either, and that's what's causing a problem with our exchanges.
  7. redravin

    redravin Cynical Optimist

    It's even more fun when teachers try to sneak it into the class rooms in public schools.

    CA. teacher banned from using Bill Nye/Ken Ham evolution debate to sneak creationism into classroom

    California high school teacher has been banned from showing his students a debate between science educator Bill Nye and creationist Ken Ham as a way to insert creationism into the classroom.
    According to the Friendly Atheist, science teacher Brandon Pettenger of Arroyo Grande High School has been showing the video to his students, and then having them summarize the debate by posting on creationist websites.
    Pettenger has been accused of “teaching the controversy” despite scientific consensus that the theory that God created the universe roughly 10,000 year ago has no basis in fact.
    The debate, between the popular TV science personality Nye and Christian author and Creation Museum founder Ham, took place in February of last year at the Creation Museum and has been viewed by millions
    Due to the efforts of the the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science, Pettenger has been instructed to desist from bringing creationism into the classroom via any source.
    According to the FFRF, Arroyo Grande High School principal Conan Bowers and Assistant Superintendent for Human Resources Chuck Fiorentino instructed Pettenger, “to immediately cease using [creationist materials] and not to instruct at all on the topics of creationism, intelligent design, or anything related,” and to stick to state-adopted science standards.
    Additionally, the science teacher’s school webpage was scrubbed of any mention of creationism.
    FFRF Co-President Dan Barker issued a statement expressing pleasure with the school for taking swift action.
    “We are very pleased with the swift response of the school district on this important matter, and are glad they are taking strong measures to take inappropriate religious teachings out of science class,” he wrote.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Baraka_Guru

    Baraka_Guru Möderätor Staff Member

    • Like Like x 2