| Home | FAQ | Views | Group Description | Quotes | Group Polls | Essays | Facts | Links |
Views, Questions, and points shared
| Add more views |
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
| Subject: Re: "Believe In....." |
| How could an organsim evolve to suit its
surroundings? What possible function could exist that pushes it to evolve that way? Yes, DNA varies, mutates and such, but how could it possibly mutate in such a way to naturally suit it's enviroment? Natural selection has to happen. Some bacteria can replicate every 30 minutes, after 100 generations (Taking Just over two days ) There would be 633,825,300,114,114,700,748,351,602,688 Bacteria Cells!!! Obviously not all of them could survive, some couldn't make it to reproduction. The ones most likely to survive would be the ones with the best traits to survive. Gradually, they reproduce, spawning offspring with similar traits. The weak ones, unable to prosper in their surroundings, would die out. The strongest survive, survival of the fittest. So mutations offer variance, natural selection picks the best variances. |
| From: "odi_brassicium" |
| Subject: Re: Political beliefs? what is urs? |
| "LOL That's an odd way of looking at things. Arn't you using technology at this very moment to write your little post? Are you saying that the world would be as stable as before without ppl to run it? The anarchist way of small communities working together to make it flow isn't a very stable theory, i.m.o \Fredrik" "i am a anarchist/marxist!!! i believe the only way to a happy society is to eradicate current political structures and technology!!! i hate living in this unfair world we live in!!! fuck the world we live at the moment!!! where the giant, fascist, imperialistic, materialistic, harsh, USA...... rules the world!!!! they can get away wit anything, they wouldnt if their was no technology or political structures!!!" Eradicate technology? How does taking away government and techonology make the world fair? Wouldn't that be a bit like reverting back to the middle ages, except worse, because there are 6.5 billion people on this planet...and growing! How would people be fed? how would roads be paved? How would the sick be tended? Do you think everyone would voluntarily give up their technology, especially with no one telling them to? No, this world isn't fair, far from it. America doesn't always to a good job to help the matter either. In my humble opinion there are a few problems that we need to get rid of, to ensure the best possible future for us...I'm not really a political expert, but I think they make some sense. 1. The population crisis is way out of hand. There are just way too many of us, the more people on earth, the less freedom each individual can have (not to mention the less resources). If we can lower this down to...ergh, say 400 million (Ugh, that's a pure guess, anyone else think of a good number?) we'll all have much more room, freedom, and natural resources to consume. 2. Nations, I just don't understand them. Things would function so much better if we all lived as one humanity. Things are looking good for this right now, trade is getting easier between nations in general, the united nations holds strong. Nationalism is one thing that started WWI (Which arguably started a chain reaction to start WW2, and possibly Veitnam) If we make descisions for the good of humanity, we'll be to busy to point are guns at each other. 3. War...what an idiotic idea! This can be ended...and I think it's on its way. If countries got together (preferably the most powerful) and signed a treaty never to wage war on each other, or on anyone else unprovoked, and then offered incredible economic benefits to each other (and refused trade with hostile nations) war should become progressively less of a problem. Small countries would have a hard time not being involved with the treaty. Yes you'd get a rebellion probably once in a while, but I it could probably be squashed easily. Yeah, there are more, I'm sure, but that would be a nice start I think. Democracy seems like the best system we have as of yet. I think it's important that the public gets to choose their leaders for themselves, instead of having them handed to them. I'm not sure if any of this would work, but like I say, I'm not exactly a political expert... |
| From: "odi_brassicium" |
| Subject: Re: What is hard for me to understand...... |
| Techonology evolves...man, not so much anymore. We
still have those old animal instincts of fear and hope in us, allowing us to beleive some pretty irrational things. Sadly, I don't think that will ever really change, no matter how smart we get as a whole...people will always believe irrational things. Luck for example...I don't get it, how could a force exist that brings situations to your liking when you find a four leaf clover. How could bad situations arise simply by breaking a mirror, it makes no sense. |
| From: "odi_brassicium" |
| Subject: Re: "Believe In....." |
| Centuries ago Creation (in whatever form) was the
most logical explanation (aside maybe from believe everything has always existed) They didn't have enough science or knowledge to suggest any other way. So it made sense. |
| From: "odi_brassicium" |
| Subject: Re: re creation vs evolution. |
| Know and understand their creator? How do you figure?
I have never seen my dog get on it's little front legs and pray, I've never seen it reading the bible or going to church. In fact, all I really see my dog do is eat sleep and relieve itself. Maybe my dog is an atheist, but I think most animals do pretty much the same thing when it comes to that. How can you come to the conclusion they know their creator? Also, where do you stop calling them animals? Mammals? Multi-celled organisms? Single celled organisms? Viruses? Organic molecules? Where would you draw the line, and why? |
| From: "odi_brassicium" |
| Subject: Re: "Believe In....." |
| AAAAAAGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!! NO - Atheists do not "believe in" evolution. I thought I explained that clearly. I am an atheist. Therefore, I am NOT a Christian and I DO NOT believe in something else. I DO NOT "believe in" ESP, I DO NOT "believe in" the Easter Bunny, I DO NOT "believe in" fairies, I DO NOT "believe in" gods, ghosts, heavens, hells, angels, or any other hokus pokus that requires "belief". |
| From: "tout_de_sweet" |
| Subject: Re: [what_do_u_believe] Re: re creation vs evolution. |
| Dawn chours?? Don't quite understand that one... Animals don't have anything less then what we humans have. We are constructed almost the same way. |
| From: "Fredrik Malmquist" |
| Subject: Re: [what_do_u_believe] Re: "Believe In....." |
| There isn't much else to believe in. Evulotion is a
really proven fact. What questions are you referring to?? |
| From: "Fredrik Malmquist" |
| Subject: Re: [what_do_u_believe] What is hard for me to understand...... |
| Heh.. I wouldn't have described it quite so... colorfully, but I quite agree with you. |
| From: "Fredrik Malmquist" |
| Subject: Re: [what_do_u_believe] Re: re creation vs evolution. |
| Agreed. I don't quite understand how one could come to the conclution that an animal prays and believes in his "creator". Animals just don't have the need for religeon, they accept the world as it is. |
| From: "Fredrik Malmquist" |
| Subject: Re: [what_do_u_believe] Re: "Believe In....." |
| Hmm... Belief... Dude/dudette, when we say believe in, we do mean "accept as a fact". It's more comfy to say, and you mix up belief and faith too much. |
| From: "Fredrik Malmquist" |