Posted on 02/12/2009 10:24:51 AM PST by steve-b
Here’s a better link:
http://www.science-spirit.org/article_detail.php?article_id=181
But these are just interviews, and one says 50% and the other says 30%. It’s obvious the numbers are just off the cuff estimates.
I’m looking for the source of the numbers.
Yep! Agendas can muck it up. We all have them but vary in our ability to call them out in ourselves.
When I decided I wanted a Scion xB I suddenly saw them everywhere!
Choking is the result of trying to put something down our throat that won't fit correctly (aka gluttony) or wasn't designed to go down our throat, such as a bone. In my case, it is due to scar tissue caused by acid reflux that restricts passage. Therefore, I would go with modifications. God doesn't make junk ; )
Why fight like cats and dogs over it?
All this banter here makes me think of a poem I learned as a child. The guys been dead a long time so I am sure it is far beyond copyright, so I can post in it’s entirety.
Makes me think of us FReepers here, always fighting like cats and dogs over anything and everything!
Eugene Field. 1850–1895
The Duel
THE GINGHAM dog and the calico cat
Side by side on the table sat;
‘T was half-past twelve, and (what do you think!)
Nor one nor t’ other had slept a wink!
The old Dutch clock and the Chinese plate
Appeared to know as sure as fate
There was going to be a terrible spat.
(I was n’t there; I simply state
What was told to me by the Chinese plate!)
The gingham dog went “bow-wow-wow!”
And the calico cat replied “mee-ow!”
The air was littered, an hour or so,
With bits of gingham and calico,
While the old Dutch clock in the chimney-place
Up with its hands before its face,
For it always dreaded a family row!
(Never mind: I ‘m only telling you
What the old Dutch clock declares is true!)
The Chinese plate looked very blue,
And wailed, “Oh, dear! what shall we do!”
But the gingham dog and the calico cat
Wallowed this way and tumbled that,
Employing every tooth and claw
In the awfullest way you ever saw—
And, oh! how the gingham and calico flew!
(Don’t fancy I exaggerate—
I got my news from the Chinese plate!)
Next morning where the two had sat
They found no trace of dog or cat;
And some folks think unto this day
That burglars stole that pair away!
But the truth about the cat and pup
Is this: they ate each other up!
Now what do you really think of that!
(The old Dutch clock it told me so,
And that is how I came to know.)
Hair likes cool not hot!
Ahhh...you are a true Darwinist. Now I know this statement is no longer theory...
The reason the theory of evolution cannot be proven false is because when a discovery is made that disproves the theory of evolution; the theory of evolution is simply modified to incorporate the new discovery.
But the idea that design is detectable is the centerpoint of ID, and can be extended to organisms as well as anything else.
So, according to the list publisher, the imperfection and mortality of the product proves the non-existence of the designer. So a ship with a tendency to list in some situations proves the non-existence of the ship builder. Got it. Man, you guys are a bunch of geniuses. No wonder normal people have a hard time comprehending.
So it’s all up to global warming/cooling?? :)
Sooooooo, my question addresses the similarity of apes and some people. This similarity would seem to reinforce the evolution theory. Sooooooo, are some people more evolved than others?
And, actually, aren’t there still some dinosaur cousins around? And don’t they coexist with hippos?
Good question!!!
Those are signs of weakness?
By Darwin’s survival of the fittest yes, and thus Darwin was wrong imo.
By your definition of fitness.
The "processing" of wheat to which you refer is also known as "cooking." You are correct. Wheat (and other grains) must generally be cooked to be eaten, although I've consumed quite a bit of raw wheat germ and bran.
You are correct that wheat is found in small amounts in almost all processed foods. (So is corn in its varioius forms, BTW.) What I'm having trouble with is your assumption that these small amounts add up to a large consumption of actual wheat.
BTW, wheat was the foundation of almost all the early civilizations: Sumer, China (north, where their civilization started), Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc. It's not some recent invention of modern civilization.
The "genetic modification" of wheat to which you refer is also I believe known as "selective breeding" of plants and is also many thousands of years old.
I'm perfectly willing to agree that there are perhaps quite a few people who shouldn't eat wheat, just as there are those who can't adequately digest dairy foods. To jump from this to a claim that wheat is bad for everyone doesn't seem warranted to me.
Genetic Modification (GM) is different than cross breeding. We have been cross-breeding for thousands of years. You mate a red rose with a white rose and get a pink rose - thats cross breeding. Genetic Modification has only been around for the last 20ish or so years and involves inserting geneticially modified gene fragments of plant or animal with desired traits into plants to get a specifically desired trait. (short explanation) Yes, I DO know the difference - I have a degree in horticulture.
Wheat of today does not resemble the wheat of two thousand years ago. Although wheat has been around for centuries, it had not been cross bred to have the large amount of Genetically Modified gluten like it has today. Gluten is the offender not the wheat!
For someone who is wheat/gluten intolerant even the smallest amount of gluten can be a problem. Actually, Monsanto (yes the people that make Round-up) are invoved in GM crops. They are trying to GM wheat to make the gluten less "allergic" to celiacs!
www.celiac.com - find out more about celiac and gluten
And Imagine it occurred before man burned ANYTHING!!
I never said junk. Just stuff that looks like the result of a long series of small modifications, rather than things designed from the top down.
I don't suppose we could trouble you for an example.
I mean theories have to account for all kinds of unexpected stuff.
Gravity, for example, has to account for the fact that the moon is falling up, or receding away from the earth.
You keep jumping to that conclusion, but there is no way to prove the non-existence of an omniscient designer.
It is, however, possible to show that living things have the characteristics you would expect if they were the result of a series of slight modifications. Including some very odd features that make little sense except as the result of common descent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.