477 replies to this topic

[FurthurBB]

Harsh86_Patel, on 17 September 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Do you know recent studies have shown that evolution of bacterial resistance to antibiotics never happened,the genes that give antibiotic resistance were found in bacterial cultures taken from very old frozen stocks before we started wide scale use of particular antibiotics.This means that some bacteria always had resistance to these antibiotics and over the period of time our constant use of antibiotics has killed the rest but the one's which 'always had the resistance genes' are the ones alive and multiplying.
Though the example yoiu gave shows that you are ready to think,since you don't like creationist website which have hence 'the bible is right' inference,here are a few more issues you can look into.
http://www.programme...ion_issues.html

Even if it is the case that every single gene that leads to antibiotic resistance already existed, what you are describing is evolution.  Your example is a perfect example of allelic frequency changing over time and natural selection.  It really helps to know a little bit about what you are trying to discuss.

[Harte]

LRW, on 03 December 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Crocodylomorpha, crocodiles or whatever you want to call them, lived in the time of the Dinosaurs, they looked like their fellow giant lizards and hunted like them. To seperate them from dinosaurs in not very scientific. Crocodilians are related to  Crocodylomorpha, and the latter is a remnant of the dinosaur era. Therefore crocodilians or whatever you want to call them are a continuum and are related to fellow giant ancestral lizards of the dinosaur era.  

Huge insects also lived in that era, hence dragonflies are dinosaurs as well.

LRW, on 03 December 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Seperating them from dinosaurs and calling crocidilians archosaurs is hypocritical, given the fact that the word "dinosaur means terrible lizard" They are still ferocious lizards like T-REX was.

Their fossils don't have the word "dinosaur" printed on them, so why is tthe use of this term not hypocritical in the way that the use of the term "Ancient Egyptian" is?

LRW, on 03 December 2012 - 05:37 AM, said:

Their skeletal structure and ferocity even resembles T-REX.

While some dinosaurs have skeletal structures that slightly resemble a few bones in crocs, the one you're talking about (T Rex) was dissimilar in a very high degree.

For example, T Rex had the pelvic bone (and feet)  of a bird. T Rex walked on two upright legs while croc's four legs are splayed out to the side.

The differences in the teeth are striking.  Croc's teeth are round, while T Rex teeth are triangular in cross section.

The jaw is completely different, as is the skull structure (front-facing rather than upward facing eye sockects, the number of plates making up the cranium and where they fuse, etc.

Turns out that you are only displaying your own ignorance here.  You claim a thing is a certain way only because you are ignorant of the facts and too lazy to spend the time discovering what is known.

I get the lazy part, BTW.

Harte

[Harsh86_Patel]

FurthurBB, on 03 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

Even if it is the case that every single gene that leads to antibiotic resistance already existed, what you are describing is evolution.  Your example is a perfect example of allelic frequency changing over time and natural selection.  It really helps to know a little bit about what you are trying to discuss.

My point was there was no new gene that had '"evolved".I have no beef with variation and natural selection,but these processes leading to class transitions is something i can't digest.

[JedI734]

It always amuses me to watch the religion of science followers bash the creationists or whoever else doesnt fully agree with what they believe. The pot never seems to get aquinted with the kettle does it. Science is ever evolving. What we knew to be facts 50 years ago have been proven to be false by today.

Seems to me Harsh just asks the questions alot of people have and has an immense amount of patience. Rock on.

[Clobhair-cean]

JedI734, on 07 December 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

Seems to me Harsh just asks the questions alot of people have and has an immense amount of patience. Rock on.

The issue is that he asks the questions and then ignores the answers.

[Harsh86_Patel]

JedI734, on 07 December 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

It always amuses me to watch the religion of science followers bash the creationists or whoever else doesnt fully agree with what they believe. The pot never seems to get aquinted with the kettle does it. Science is ever evolving. What we knew to be facts 50 years ago have been proven to be false by today.

Seems to me Harsh just asks the questions alot of people have and has an immense amount of patience. Rock on.

I am not a creationist.The answers are stupid and worth ignoring that is the reason why the questions still exist.These people do not follow science as a religion,they are only mainstream parrots.

[kampz]

With my way of thinking whoever runs this dropped dinosaur manifestations like cryptic animals in my opinion. Mokele-mbembe anyone? It's a cryptic dinosaur spotted in Africa. At least nowadays. There's your dinosaur figurines from our ancient past. I'm still postulating ideas. It's sabotage.

Edited by kampz, 15 December 2012 - 10:38 PM.

[Arbitran]

kampz, on 15 December 2012 - 10:25 PM, said:

With my way of thinking whoever runs this dropped dinosaur manifestations like cryptic animals in my opinion. Mokele-mbembe anyone? It's a cryptic dinosaur spotted in Africa. At least nowadays. There's your dinosaur figurines from our ancient past. I'm still postulating ideas. It's sabotage.

Both Mokele-Mbembe and the alleged "figurines" (I think I know which ones you're talking about; however, you have been quite vague so far) have been quite thoroughly debunked.

[Arbitran]

Harsh86_Patel, on 07 December 2012 - 07:27 AM, said:

My point was there was no new gene that had '"evolved".I have no beef with variation and natural selection,but these processes leading to class transitions is something i can't digest.

You yourself possess at least sixty genes totally unique to you, which you did not inherit from your parents. Your proposal that new genes cannot arise is categorically untenable. And your inability to "digest" a fact of nature does not affect its reality in the slightest.

[kampz]

Arbitran, on 16 December 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

Both Mokele-Mbembe and the alleged "figurines" (I think I know which ones you're talking about; however, you have been quite vague so far) have been quite thoroughly debunked.

The figurines mentioned on Ancient Aliens.

How was Mokele-Mbembe debunked? Nobody believed in the African guy? They searched the entire Jungle? Can we toss the rest of cryptic animals in the trash since Mokele-Mbembe has been debunked? Let me be perfectly clear on this point. Dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago. What's left of them is fossilized in stone and the actual scientist spend years to undercover. What John Hammond and InGen created in Jurassic Park are genetically engineered theme park monsters. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't think they put together fossils they found to be able to create such figurines and I don't think a guy popped in a VHS tape of National Geographic one day after flying down in a UFO. But how can I know if that didn't happen?

Edited by kampz, 16 December 2012 - 08:47 PM.

[Arbitran]

kampz, on 16 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

The figurines mentioned on Ancient Aliens.

Given I do not watch the programme with any sort of regularity (I have occasionally seen it, though nearly every word spoken is either utterly unsubstantiated or grasping at desperately distant straws), I don't know which you mean. But it sounds as though they were making another of their bizarre, sourceless claims. If you can actually give me a bit more to go on, then we could talk.

kampz, on 16 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

How was Mokele-Mbembe debunked? Nobody believed in the African guy? They searched the entire Jungle? Can we toss the rest of cryptic animals in the trash since Mokele-Mbembe has been debunked?

The African tribes which have been regarded as the originators of the Mokele-Mbembe legend have all stated, quite unambiguously, that the Mokele-Mbembe is a folkloric spirit, not an animal like a rhinoceros or elephant. Not a tangible, real-life animal. It's a legend. That is all.

No, we cannot dismiss all cryptids simply because one has been discredited; what we do need to do however is to refrain from speculation in the absence of evidence.

kampz, on 16 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

Let me be perfectly clear on this point. Dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago. What's left of them is fossilized in stone and the actual scientist spend years to undercover. What John Hammond and InGen created in Jurassic Park are genetically engineered theme park monsters. Nothing more, nothing less.

Um... what does Jurassic Park have to do with anything?

kampz, on 16 December 2012 - 08:37 PM, said:

I don't think they put together fossils they found to be able to create such figurines and I don't think a guy popped in a VHS tape of National Geographic one day after flying down in a UFO. But how can I know if that didn't happen?

You haven't even given me any reason to think that there are any "figurines" in the first place. And your latter two sentences are... I regret... unintelligible to me... What is their relevance?

[kampz]

"The African tribes which have been regarded as the originators of the Mokele-Mbembe legend have all stated, quite unambiguously, that the Mokele-Mbembe is a folkloric spirit, not an animal like a rhinoceros or elephant. Not a tangible, real-life animal. It's a legend. That is all."

Oh really?

http://arcturi.com/A...ofigurines.html

http://www.stupiddin...ving-that-isn-t

You can use a search engine to guide you.

Giant birds or thunder birds are being reported. People claim animals resembling pterodactyls and plesiosaurs. What's the difference between lake monsters or Bigfoot compared to dinosaurs?

It could be there imagination too. Mostly. (Dinosaur Figurines)

Edited by kampz, 17 December 2012 - 05:39 AM.

[Likely Guy]

kampz, on 17 December 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

"The African tribes which have been regarded as the originators of the Mokele-Mbembe legend have all stated, quite unambiguously, that the Mokele-Mbembe is a folkloric spirit, not an animal like a rhinoceros or elephant. Not a tangible, real-life animal. It's a legend. That is all."

Oh really?

http://arcturi.com/A...ofigurines.html

http://www.stupiddin...ving-that-isn-t

You can use a search engine to guide you.

Giant birds or thunder birds are being reported. People claim animals resembling pterodactyls and plesiosaurs. What's the difference between lake monsters or Bigfoot compared to dinosaurs?

It could be there imagination too. Mostly. (Dinosaur Figurines)

Your first link favours your argument, the second argues against it. Or maybe I'm confused.

Edit: No, I don't think that you've thought your way through this yet.

Edited by Likely Guy, 17 December 2012 - 05:59 AM.

[Arbitran]

kampz, on 17 December 2012 - 04:58 AM, said:

"The African tribes which have been regarded as the originators of the Mokele-Mbembe legend have all stated, quite unambiguously, that the Mokele-Mbembe is a folkloric spirit, not an animal like a rhinoceros or elephant. Not a tangible, real-life animal. It's a legend. That is all."

Oh really?

http://arcturi.com/A...ofigurines.html

http://www.stupiddin...ving-that-isn-t

You can use a search engine to guide you.

Giant birds or thunder birds are being reported. People claim animals resembling pterodactyls and plesiosaurs. What's the difference between lake monsters or Bigfoot compared to dinosaurs?

It could be there imagination too. Mostly. (Dinosaur Figurines)

Here's what five minutes' worth of research found on the Acámbaro figurines (yes, I had heard of them; just wasn't sure what you were talking about before):

http://detecting.org...and_Frauds.html

http://www.badarchae...om/?page_id=348

Yes, large birds have always been reported; first consider: do you realize just how hard it is to just the size of an aerial object, such as a bird? I get average crows around my house every single day that look like eagles or vultures from some angles when they're in flight. Reports of giant birds don't interest me in any great way.

And yes, there have been reports too of pterosaur- and plesiosaur-like animals; I find it suspicious that these reports only seem to appear after the discovery of pterosaurs and plesiosaurs. (Dragons and sea serpents don't count, sorry; pterosaurs aren't even slightly similar to the rather vivid descriptions given of dragons, and plesiosaurs would, without doubt, have been found by now if they persisted to modern day.)

[Abramelin]

I haven't read this before so this is what I think:

Let's assume some dinosaurs and pterosaurs did indeed live alongside humans, does that necessarily mean humans existed 65 millions or more years ago?

It could also mean only some dino species survived and lived till prehistoric times (I don't believe it, but just for the sake of the argument).

Yellyfish are truely ancient, and people have depicted them in art. Does that mean humans are billions of years old? No.

.

Edited by Abramelin, 17 December 2012 - 06:59 AM.