What religion are you?

[Woody]

Since the world at large is so intelligent, why do foriegners come to the US for an education by professors of inferior intellect?

Einstein is estimated to have an IQ in the 140s. Even a dummy like me knows how to make an atomic bomb from my nuclear physics training. Why couldn't all those brilliant german scientists figure out the atomic bomb? They were trumped by a mediocre mentality on the world intelligence scale -- how interesting!

 

[mustafhakofi]

you think a lot of yourself for xian dont you woody.
einstien IQ was above 160, the highest recorded is 228 I believe, my arse can make an atomic bomb , but why would it. and I think you'll find people from the US go to colleges in europe as well

 

[Woody]

Musta,

I thank the Lord for what little God-Given talent I have. At least I have a brilliant mind, and I thank Him for it. That doesn't make me better than someone else.

I've heard it said that you really have to be a stupid, unscientific person if you don't believe in evolution. Well I had the evolution junk crammed down my throat, and I even believed it for a while. But the biology teacher couldn't answer simple questions like: Where are the in-between sizes from modern day whales and the supposed otter-sized creature that they came from? Can somebody show us a good mutation? The fossil record should have an overwhelming abundance of partially developed species that are in transformation -- where are they? Oh yeah, those american salamandars that supposedly speciated, well the real reason they couldn't reproduce with each other had nothing to do with genetics. Remember Java man -- a hoax, Piltdown man -- another hoax, australopecanthesis prometheus -- a giant gibbon, not a man. Cromagnon man -- I suppose that's what I am, or am I homo sapiens -- what's the difference? What useful purpose does ageing serve in the evolutionary scheme of things -- it's an inferior genetic trait?

If faith came from intelligence, that would leave out a lot of people, including me. I guess I was just a dummy when I asked those kinds of questions about evolution in my high school class.

Do you know how to make a uranium bomb too? My college room-mate never could get the theory right even though he was taking physics.

 

[lowefly]

If Jesus would have wanted his followers to fight for him in religious wars why did he not have his followers fight for him when he was here? I'm a Christian but I don't believe in fighting wars for Christ. I also don't believe in pushing my religion on anyone. If You believe in either of these concepts then you're not a true Christian. Doesn't the Bible say we are free moral agents with the right to make up our own minds as to whether or not we choose to follow God or not to? If this is so then there is no reason to push your beliefs on others and absolutely no reason to fight religious wars. That being said then a muslim or Jew or taoist have the right to believe or not believe anything they want, as well as an athiest.

 

[audible]

woody"quote":At least I have a brilliant mind
no woody you have a good mind, unfortunately your 136, is below average.
your not in the top 2%, nowhere near infact.

if there are ten people in a room, five of which are have a IQ of 50-100 and five are between 100-190 this means the average IQ is 120.
and if the top five died say then the average would be between 50-100 which would mean an average IQ 75,
on the other hand if the bottom five died then it would be between 100-190, therefore the average IQ would be 145.
so the more intelligent people in a given area, the higher the IQ, and the higher, the average.
the more unintelligent people in a given area, the lower IQ and the lower, the average IQ.
this not to say they are unintelligent, just lack of education, the average in africa is 70.
as the education levels increase in developing countries so will the IQ average.
at present the world IQ average is 140, however your IQ level does not change like the average, but you can increase it by study, if your lucky.
I'm sorry if this sounds condescending it's not intensional.

 

[Prester John]

musta said:


Snip

As far as Jesus really existing, did his disciples get together and make it all up? How do you know Confucious, Mohammed, Alexander the Great, or anyone else existed if you can't believe eyewitness accounts?

There are multiple independent sources of information that attest to for example the existence and deeds of Alexander the Great. This is just not true for Jesus. The gospels are not even eyewitness accounts of Jesus and his deeds, there is no evidence for the existence of Jesus outside the Bible. THe bible is rather obviously a biased source. The question is if Jesus really was all that why didn't anyone notice outside the bible? Maybe because he is an invention, a personification of a greek concept?

 

[audible]

woody: which jesus do you believe in, heres something you may want to read.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=40933
then perhaps you can tell us which one.

 

[Woody]

Matrix: I'm glad you are entertained

I'm also glad to see you understand something about statistics. I'll match math whits with anyone. I never had much of a problem with math -- my math GRE score was 730 -- good enough for any graduate school.

Currently I'm studying for the six sigma black belt exam -- things like analysis of variance, Goodness of fit, etc. Calculus was a breeze except I did have some difficulty with differential equations though I still got an A.

By the way, I passed the engineering principles and practice examination which 50% of all qualified engineers fail. So on someone's intelligence scale I'm an above average degreed engineer, but engineers are below average in intelligence. Woahh!

You were sounding fairly intelligent until I heard you say:

A uranium bomb is an atomic bomb, moron.

Hmmm sounds like something a teenager would say. I'm odviously dealing with a juvenile.

I know how to make a uranium bomb, but I do not know how to make a hydrogen bomb -- not that I would ever want to. Most people, even those who are fairly intelligent, think that an explosion like TNT (chemical reaction) is required to start the atomic fission process (a nuclear reaction). Not so with a uranium bomb!

I like your response too,

of course you know how to make an atomic bomb because it's already been invented

(notice I sanitized it a bit to improve your communication). As I've heard it quoted before "Hindsight is 20-20" though your average person doesn't know the difference between foresight and hindsight. As one of my bosses said, "The average person in this world is a dumb ass." He surely got it right.


I like this discussion, I too am entertained

 

[Lemming3k]

Rofl, you know how to make one because it's already been invented stupid fuck, back then no one had built one before.

I was gonna let that go just to see what else he comes out with But since you spoilt it then yes, once somethings been invented it can be reproduced easily and anyone could make it given the training.
The first atomic bomb didnt have a previous blueprint for people to work on, so naturally anyone these days can make one when so many scientists couldnt figure it out before.
Just a little information while im here, the first atomic bomb was a uranium bomb, however most ones since then have been plutonium.

 

[audible]

Audible wtf are you babbling about. A 100 IQ is defined as "average", the center of the bell curve. 130 IQ is two standard deviations from the mean and thus is the top 2%.
:

Ii'm not try ing to be awkward matrix, but the world average is 140 the average in america is 100,

I quote

" Even at 190, it is hard to comprehend her IQ rating . Einstein's IQ has been
placed at only 161 by most references . Many have "guessed" Plato's as about
170 . I have heard of so many people who "claim" to have high IQ's that it
seems that the world average is at least 140.

To give you a better idea, I took the following from a Mensa BBS . I hope the
information sheds a little light on the subject. In the mean time, I would
question anyone who claims to have an IQ higher than 190 ."
taken from http://www.ufomind.com/misc/1997/dec/d28-001.shtm
posted by mustafhakofi on page 2 of this thread.
you should take a look at what she wrote too.

 

[Prester John]

Musta,

I thank the Lord for what little God-Given talent I have. At least I have a brilliant mind, and I thank Him for it. That doesn't make me better than someone else.

I've heard it said that you really have to be a stupid, unscientific person if you don't believe in evolution. Well I had the evolution junk crammed down my throat, and I even believed it for a while. But the biology teacher couldn't answer simple questions like: Where are the in-between sizes from modern day whales and the supposed otter-sized creature that they came from? Can somebody show us a good mutation? The fossil record should have an overwhelming abundance of partially developed species that are in transformation -- where are they? Oh yeah, those american salamandars that supposedly speciated, well the real reason they couldn't reproduce with each other had nothing to do with genetics. Remember Java man -- a hoax, Piltdown man -- another hoax, australopecanthesis prometheus -- a giant gibbon, not a man. Cromagnon man -- I suppose that's what I am, or am I homo sapiens -- what's the difference? What useful purpose does ageing serve in the evolutionary scheme of things -- it's an inferior genetic trait?

If faith came from intelligence, that would leave out a lot of people, including me. I guess I was just a dummy when I asked those kinds of questions about evolution in my high school class.

Do you know how to make a uranium bomb too? My college room-mate never could get the theory right even though he was taking physics.

Through the magic of the internet all your questions can be answered and you can regain your faith in evolution

Transitional fossils:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html

I'm not aware of american salamnders speciating

Hoaxes, not really relevant, the evidence stands up just fine without the requiement for making it up.

Cro Magnon man:

Cro-magnons are, in informal usage, a group among the late Ice Age peoples of Europe. The Cro-Magnons are identified with Homo sapiens sapiens of modern form, in the time range ca. 35,000-10000 b.p. ...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/cromagnon.html

Aging:
From the evolutionary point of view our purpose is to reproduce. Evolution will tend to favour organisms that are fit/healthy enough to reproduce and carry out any parental reponcibilities. Once this is done there is little evolutionary benefit for survival. Thus the development of self repair mechanisms to operate after reproduction will not occur. Our bodies age because of a number of factors which build up over time and cause a reduction in our physical and mental capability.

 

[Woody]

Aging:
From the evolutionary point of view our purpose is to reproduce. Evolution will tend to favour organisms that are fit/healthy enough to reproduce and carry out any parental reponcibilities. Once this is done there is little evolutionary benefit for survival. Thus the development of self repair mechanisms to operate after reproduction will not occur. Our bodies age because of a number of factors which build up over time and cause a reduction in our physical and mental capability.

So let me see if I am understanding you correctly with a hypothetical. Let's say your average male lives to be 80 years old and is capable of reproducing from the time he is 14. He averages 3 children over his lifetime. He dies from old age symptoms.

Then let's say someone genetically engineers a change so that another man does not age after he reaches the prime of his life. Let's assume this new man gets no fatal diseases or has no fatal accidents for 2000 years, and he remains a young, virulent, attractive male for that entire period. He continues having a new wife after each previous wife dies and they have children. He averages three children with each wife.

Question: All other factors being equal, who adds more genetic information to the human gene pool? The average man or the one that does not age?

According to my calculations (assuming the genetically engineered fountain- of-youth-trait is a dominant trait, and none of the offspring die from diseases or accidents): the answer is many thousands of times more genetic information is transferred to the gene pool in the 2000 year period.

PS: What's the genetic difference between cro-magnon man and homo sapiens besides whatever some evolutionist decided was necessary for his belief system?

 

[Prester John]

So let me see if I am understanding you correctly with a hypothetical. Let's say your average male lives to be 80 years old and is capable of reproducing from the time he is 14. He averages 3 children over his lifetime. He dies from old age symptoms.

Then let's say someone genetically engineers a change so that another man does not age after he reaches the prime of his life. Let's assume this new man gets no fatal diseases or has no fatal accidents for 2000 years, and he remains a young, virulent, attractive male for that entire period. He continues having a new wife after each previous wife dies and they have children. He averages three children with each wife.

Question: All other factors being equal, who adds more genetic information to the human gene pool? The average man or the one that does not age?

According to my calculations (assuming the genetically engineered fountain- of-youth-trait is a dominant trait, and none of the offspring die from diseases or accidents): the answer is many thousands of times more genetic information is transferred to the gene pool in the 2000 year period.

PS: What's the genetic difference between cro-magnon man and homo sapiens besides whatever some evolutionist decided was necessary for his belief system?

Perhaps we should have wings and could then fly as well! A 2000 year life span would be a luxury. Reproducing once is enough to pass the genes on. Your argument actually supports the view that the selfish gene argument. Additionally the only way we could get a 2000 year lifespan when we take the state of other life on our planet into consideration is by divine intervention. The lack of a 2000 year lifespan counts against god!

PS I think you are trying to trick me because you surely know having read the article i linked to that no one claims a difference between us and them

 

[Prester John]

Its also pertinant that to develop a long life span is an energy investment. It takes effort that could be used for other activities that would have a greater impact on being able to reproduce. Dying because of old age is a relativly recent phenominum, so why develop longevity as a trait when you would probably die many years before it became useful from disease or injury. Better to be able to run faster or think quicker and live to reproduce.

 

[camphlps]

Im other, the closest thing i am is christian because i believe in Christ. However, i do not allow myself to be forced in believing in a set of beliefs i do not believe. Example: Baptist believe that once you are saved you cannot turn away from God.

 

[Woody]

Prester my man,

So you don't believe longevity, virility, and physical fitness figure at all in the evolutionary equation. I gave you all the benefit of the doubt, and you don't see an advantage from an evolutionary point of view.

Survival of the fittest: Who has a better chance of survival -- someone in their prime or some old guy like me. Why do you think the military prefers 18 to 20 year olds?

Virility: Who has a better chance of reproducing, someone that is in their prime or some old codger like me?

The gene pool argument: I'll give you one on that. But think of it this way: the guy that can live a thousand years in the prime of his life is going to have a lot more children than someone like me.

As far as the biblical part of it goes: Methuselah lived 969 years and several others lived many hundreds of years. God knew how to get the earth populated fast -- make people live longer.

By the way I am glad to see DNA being used in the analysis of hominids and it may blow the lid off evolutionary theory. I was really getting tired of all the junk science out there. Here's a report from the National Health Museum:

Neanderthal Man not Related

When I was in highschool I was brainwashed into believing modern man came from neanderthal man. Now we find out he is no more related than a chimpanzee and shouldn't be called a man at all. :bugeye:

Gee whizz it seems like everything I was taught about the "evidence" keeps on turning out to be fiction. Real science doesn't change. Junk science is whatever you want it to be, and I don't see why this crap is taught in school.

 

[spidergoat]

The reason a 2000 year lifespan is not favored is that reproduction tends to fix errors in the genes caused by cosmic rays. Over 2000 years, your genes will be of poor quality. Also, the gene pool will be 10 times slower to adapt to environmental changes.

"PS: What's the genetic difference between cro-magnon man and homo sapiens besides whatever some evolutionist decided was necessary for his belief system? "

-larger brow ridges, smaller brain (but still enormous for a primate), more robust bone structure, possibly more hair...

Tell me, woody, what would a hypothetical transitional creature between humans and apes look like?

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

Where are the in-between sizes from modern day whales and the supposed otter-sized creature that they came from?

Whales are the most closely related to hippos. There in between sizes of whale even within the whales that live today, some are huge, some are dophin sized. Why do some whales still have vestigal pelvic and hind leg bones deep within their bodies?

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

Can somebody show us a good mutation?

Adult human lactose tolerance, which evolved after human domestication of cattle.

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

The fossil record should have an overwhelming abundance of partially developed species that are in transformation -- where are they?

All the fossils ever found are transitional species. Every intermediate step must have given some benefit to the species, or it would be selected against.

------

Remember Java man -- a hoax,...

No, Java man is not a hoax.

Piltdown man -- another hoax

Yes, Piltdown man was a hoax.

 

[spidergoat]

You know, even if you only go with the skullcap of Java man, they found another almost complete skeleton with an almost identical skullcap. The skeleton was bipedal with a large brain, much larger than a gorilla brain, but as tall as an adolescent human, and a slightly built body like modern people.

Again, if this isn't an example of a transitional species, what is?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

camphlps: Im other, the closest thing i am is christian because i believe in Christ. However, i do not allow myself to be forced in believing in a set of beliefs i do not believe. Example: Baptist believe that once you are saved you cannot turn away from God.
*************
M*W: Did you mean "saved" or "slaved?" Once you are totally brainwashed to believe that you will somehow overcome death and receive eternal life because some dying demigod savior of ancient mythology died and rose for you, you are doomed. There are no xians in heaven and there are no atheists in hell.

 

[spidergoat]

Evolutionists claim that they are the smart ones, and anyone that believes in god is just plain stupid.

They don't think belief in God is stupid. God and evolution are entirely compatable. If God is present in everything, then evolution is how God works. It's scientifically unnecessary, but it couldn't be disproven.

Last time I had my IQ measured it was 136. Newton, Einstein, Edison, Kelvin, and many other notable scientists believed in a god. Evolution theory was around in their day (except for Newton).

I would guess they believed in evolution too.