views on evolution
- Thread starter Hercules Rockefeller
- Start date
- Status
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
You are right of course. We must preserve the mundane and the terrible as a warning to our children.
and?
have a problem with teaching your child love, peace, and goodwill towards mankind?
there are numerous things that must be taught to children.
i also believe violence without remorse would come easily to those without divinity.
Last edited:
What the hell are you on about, precisely?
What do love, peace and good will have to do with invisible friends?
treading the waters of philosophy and morality.
probably one of the primary reasons for all the BS in regards to the debate.
not if you are the type of person that doesn't require a lot of hard evidence and is content with the word of others.
Here is hard evidence of the actual science that is being denied:
- Every species is fertile enough that if all offspring survived to reproduce the population would grow (fact).
- Despite periodic fluctuations, populations remain roughly the same size (fact).
- Resources such as food are limited and are relatively stable over time (fact).
- A struggle for survival ensues (inference).
- Individuals in a population vary significantly from one another (fact).
- Much of this variation is inheritable (fact).
- Individuals less suited to the environment are less likely to survive and less likely to reproduce; individuals more suited to the environment are more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce and leave their inheritable traits to future generations, which produces the process of natural selection (inference).
- This slowly effected process results in populations changing to adapt to their environments, and ultimately, these variations accumulate over time to form new species (inference).
Do you deny any of this?
i do not deny anyone of their opinion.
Aqueous Id
Darwin provided a huge volume of evidence back in 1859. And the evidence has been continuing to accumulate voluminously ever since. Leopold seems blissfully (for him) unaware of any of it, and just waves his hand in dismissal, calling it "opinion".
You'll never win a debate with an idiot like that.
Rich
Darwin provided a huge volume of evidence back in 1859. And the evidence has been continuing to accumulate voluminously ever since. Leopold seems blissfully (for him) unaware of any of it, and just waves his hand in dismissal, calling it "opinion".
You'll never win a debate with an idiot like that.
Rich
Do you deny any of the tenets of evolution posted above under Darwin's picture?
If so which ones, and why?
you should be careful of what you assume about someone.
yes.
listen dude i've been forbidden to post what i know.
You won't get busted for what I'm asking.
I'm just asking which of these ideas you disagree with.
For example, do you agree, with this:
you asked "Do you deny any of the tenets of evolution posted above under Darwin's picture?"
i said "yes".
i will discuss this no further with you.
It's stupid, plain and simple.
There's no need to appeal to the divine when discussing morality, there's no need to appeal to anything other than survival instinct. Altruism is just another tool for survival.
- Status