NC Angler Forums banner
41 - 60 of 83 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
That seems perfectly reasonable...................a zillion monkeys banging on typewriters ....for a zillion years........produce by random selection.............four genes that gets four generations of butterflies 3000 miles back and fourth to often the same exact tree. And expresses the gene in perfect order. What are the odds?
Incredibly, extremely high against it. That's why most new species fail. Hundreds and possibly thousands per year. And when one hits the magic combination we feel like there is more to it than random chance, especially if we like the colors of the wings if the species in question has them. Natural selection is brutal most of the time, but beautiful when things come together just right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
You say all this with such confidence.


I typed neodarwinism but my iphone changed it to darwinism


I think I'll posit Monarch Miracle question over here and see if it takes these guys a zillion posts to figure it out. They don't seem as self assured as you. http://www.debate.org/forums/politics/topic/18380/1/


I had to stop reading their thread I was laughing so hard I started to choke. Would that have been a case of extinction?
 
  • Like
Reactions: drjon

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
I try not to pass the torch and don't participate in pass the torch debates. If you can explain your point do so. Links to other threads to support a point are one thing; links instead of making any point at all are all together different. The cleaners will be along soon and this debate will probably never have happened by morning, so you don't have much time if you seriously have more than parroting. Or just ignore it if you got nothing...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
My point is folks confuse facts with Truths and should refrain from passing the former off as the latter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
My point is folks confuse facts with Truths and should refrain from passing the former off as the latter.
Passing off the latter for the former is far more dangerous IMO (ISIS would be Exhibit A to support my opinion). Our opinions differ and won't be resolved here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #46 ·
I'll also say that the Monarch posses a particular problem for intellectually honest scientists. They will admit they don't have a clue how they do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
I'll also say that the Monarch posses a particular problem for intellectually honest scientists. They will admit they don't a clue how they do it.
Scientists are pretty much intellectually honest by nature. I was raised by scientists and most of their friends were fellow scientists. I have had exposure to them discussing ideas most of my life. They are generally open minded. Sorry to burst a bubble but they love puzzles; they are the opposite of problems.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,806 Posts
Do you fellas think there's a missing link that would prove that human beings came directly from primates?


Sent from my kayak...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
Do you fellas think there's a missing link that would prove that human beings came directly from primates?
Are you making enough popcorn for everyone? :D

I am very much aligned with this article's thinking:
"Missing link is an outmoded term in biology, which I have to say most of us think should be forgotten and never used," paleoanthropologist John Hawks at the University of Wisconsin at Madison told Life's Little Mysteries. "On the one hand, it's a truism we can never recover every individual that contributed genetically to today's species, so we should expect 'links' to be missing. On the other, it implies total ignorance, where we usually know quite a lot about transitional forms."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,312 Posts
Discussion Starter · #50 ·
Scientists are pretty much intellectually honest by nature. I was raised by scientists and most of their friends were fellow scientists. I have had exposure to them discussing ideas most of my life. They are generally open minded. Sorry to burst a bubble but they love puzzles; they are the opposite of problems.
Y

Global Warming, the greatest scientific fraud in history, would indicate things have changed for this most current crop. Now days it would seem grant money and tenure supercede the raw data.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
Not taking that bait; thread will be closed for sure if we go down that rabbit hole. We disagree on some stuff, life goes on. Any wildlife activity today?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
Not going to post any of the hundreds of scholarly articles available to refute that; you won't believe them anymore than I will be swayed by blogs like that. Please respect our difference of opinion and the terms of use for this site. This is not the place. Let's talk wildlife and not get this thread closed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,806 Posts
I'll post it again, just in case:

Popcorn for what? Folks think threads get shut down because of the topic. Usually it's when folks get heated. Discuss as adults and things usually proceed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
OK. I will give you something that takes the discussion in a different direction - the Energy Balance:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page1.php

If they are correct, and it is my belief they are, the Earth is absorbing more energy than it radiates. Quibbling over whether the surface temperature data is correct, whether sea levels are rising (the people of Tuvalu are pretty sure that's happening since they have to evacuate their island) or arctic ice is shrinking are all side shows. The core issue is whether or not we are reflecting enough energy back into space and whether or not we can do anything about it if we aren't.

If anyone on either side of the issue says they are 100% sure they will probably lie about other things also.
A big factor to me is "what if they are wrong?". If it really isn't a problem and we go green anyway, we will pollute a little less and the energy companies might make less money. If it is a problem and we decide not to do anything, we eventually make the planet unfit for human life. Most scientists seem to believe it is a problem. Most arguments against it either attack specific data (some data is bad; that's no shock) or make vague unsupported statements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Wife said she smelled a skunk out behind the house yesterday. Not sure what that means. Hope my dog don't get sprayed when I let her out to do her business! Going fishing tomorrow. I'll keep an eye out for the road kill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
OK. I will give you something that takes the discussion in a different direction - the Energy Balance:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/EnergyBalance/page1.php

If they are correct, and it is my belief they are, the Earth is absorbing more energy than it radiates. Quibbling over whether the surface temperature data is correct, whether sea levels are rising (the people of Tuvalu are pretty sure that's happening since they have to evacuate their island) or arctic ice is shrinking are all side shows. The core issue is whether or not we are reflecting enough energy back into space and whether or not we can do anything about it if we aren't.

If anyone on either side of the issue says they are 100% sure they will probably lie about other things also.
A big factor to me is "what if they are wrong?". If it really isn't a problem and we go green anyway, we will pollute a little less and the energy companies might make less money. If it is a problem and we decide not to do anything, we eventually make the planet unfit for human life. Most scientists seem to believe it is a problem. Most arguments against it either attack specific data (some data is bad; that's no shock) or make vague unsupported statements.

If if we all paint our boat decks white and drive them fast enough to create a white wake, we can create a large enough reflective surface to reverse global overheating. There's lots of us casual fishermen/fisherladies, and with bigger enough tournament payouts to encourage more boats on the water, we could cause another Ice Age. I was hoping that the reflectivity from all those aluminum airplane wings and the shadows from the Airbus A380s would be enough, but it seems that it isn't. I'm off to Wow-Mart for a couple of spray cans of white paint (aluminum would work, but then you would be sitting on a solar cooker, which I don't think you would enjoy) and a fill-up of unleaded gas. I've asked the store to not sell plastic lures or non-biodegradable fishing line, but they have not yet responded. Don't forget to paint the truck, too.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
418 Posts
I'll never understand how a thread about skunks winds up going controversial on this site. I'll chalk it up to confirmation bias. Individuals on this site tend to be pretty like minded so it's easy to come here and post your questionable political and scientific views, knowing that most will be bound to agree with you. The vast majority in the scientific community may agree on climate change and other issues, but you know if you come to this site and crack a joke about it, you'll get plenty of laughs.

One article doesn't disprove climate change, by that logic the thousands and thousands of others arguing the opposite must prove it. And if you want to chalk it up to "grant money and tenure", know that for every dollar of grant money to research what is already generally agreed upon, hundreds more are thrown to get people to believe that there's actually a debate.

You guys act like Opti is some sort of extremist just because he disagrees with you, when in reality he is one of the most mild mannered of the frequent posters on this site.

As for the chipmunks, Nat's Dad, I'm not sure. I see them all the time. Maybe you're just loud and scare them away :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,624 Posts
I remember there being disagreement about chipmunks in Raleigh a while back. I absolutely saw one at the corner of Millbrook and Six Forks just a few weeks ago. I was stopped at the light and it was on the sidewalk only a few feet away; I am very sure that is what it was.

Thanks for the kind words. I do try to keep my disagreements polite. I try to respect the beliefs of others and win them over by explaining what convinces me of what I believe rather than belittling what they believe most of the time. But I am human and do let people get under my skin from time to time.
 
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
Top