Posted on 08/07/2007 9:30:37 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
RIVERSIDE, Calif. – A research team, including UC Riverside biologists, has found experimental evidence that supports a controversial theory of genetic conflict in the reproduction of those animals that support their developing offspring through a placenta.
The conflict has been likened to a “battle of the sexes” or an “arms race” at the molecular level between mothers and fathers. At stake: the fetus’s growth rate and how much that costs the nutrient-supplying mother.
The new research supports the idea of a genetic “arms race” going on between a live-bearing mother and her offspring, assisted by the growth-promoting genes of the father...
(Excerpt) Read more at eurekalert.org ...
“Saying I am lying about my credentials...”
I question them...and I still do.
“...and then saying that even if I did have those credentials all I was qualified for was sweeping up the lab wasn’t an attack?”
No, not really...it was an honest observation. Your intellect in using logic during this discussion is much lower than found on this site so I just made an honest analysis.
Sorry if I ruffled your feathers.
“I didn’t bring up my qualifications to try an ‘appeal to authority’.”
I will just say it seems that your trying to impress someone.
You seem to be trying to play a shell game with the questions in order to prove that evolution has some predictive ability.
Evolution does not merit anything of value to the sciences that have been stated here in this forum...as much as you do not like that... its just a fact.
“I told you in a previous post that science deals in evidence, not proof”
So??? I know that science is supposed to, but look at how it is misused by many...even you have been caught up in defending and espousing something false in the name of science.
I love science and support it to its fullest...even theories in hopes that the facts will be obtained...unfortunately, evolution is a theory (unproven) that is masked and taught as fact. Any evidence that is found has to somehow fit the frame of evolution rather than upset the apple cart.
Evolution is akin to the church of Scientology...that is also fact.
If a professor does not accept it he/she will not be able to teach at a vast majority of our universities. FACT
I know it makes you type comfortable to not be challenged but it does not help in your pursuit of truth...if that is indeed what you seek.
Just because I do not answer the question means that somehow evolution is validated?
I think you just want to shuffle the shells in the game. Try to pick the shell and lose...
The question, while interesting, does not credit evolution for any predictive ability.
Lets give science a little more respect than that...
I said: Evolution is akin to the church of Scientology.
“Sorry, that’s a flat-out lie. You do no credit to your argument by cranking up those whoppers.”
I am not trying to do anything, but speak the truth to a false religion that seems to have a legion of acolytes more willing to defend it than the catholic church in medieval times.
In regards to its defense:
Evolution is a modern day Scientology.
Challenge it...just even question its supposed facts and see just what comes out of the woodwork. A fundamentalist could only dream of the support they would get like this...
Evolution is a modern day Scientology with many playing the part of Tom Cruise.
I refer you to post #58.
Unless you can come up with something better, I will not be responding again.
==YOU made the same ole baseless claim you always make. PROVE it
You obviously know nothing or next to nothing about the field of epigenetics. So before you ask any more needlessly incredulous questions, I suggest you read the following (carefully) as a primer:
https://notes.utk.edu/bio/greenberg.nsf/0/b360905554fdb7d985256ec5006a7755?OpenDocument
Coyman,
It is sad to meet someone who can quote some truth and yet be using it to defend a religion that science itself would banish.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”
Joseph Goebbels
“A lie told often enough becomes truth”
Vladimir Lenin
These quotes that you brought up in an earlier dovetail perfectly with the religion of evolution. Not one supporter of evolution can defend that which is in itself indefensible
I love and defend science as long as it remains science and does not become a religion.
==You base your knowledge of the distant past on faith and trust, scienctists do not.
yeah right:
“I believe that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all ‘design’ anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection.”
—Richard Dawkins
“I will not be responding again.”
I haven’t noticed that you had responded...
“Wow, I thought being able to make ‘foolish comments’ and other free speech issues were one of the founding beliefs of this country, Good thing I’m now a citizen, or you might send me back.....”
And you may make foolish comments...
==“A lie told often enough becomes truth”—Vladimir Lenin
Lenin should know, he was a Darwinist.
Yes, he was a Darwinist.
What a wonderful legacy...lol
I will not play their shell game, but try to make them bring out their so called facts...to which they have none.
Evolution cannot predict or add a single thing to science and yet they want those who do not accept it to prove otherwise.
Actually, Darwinian evolution has been thoroughly discredited and therefore detracts from and impedes real science.
“Actually, Darwinian evolution has been thoroughly discredited and therefore detracts from and impedes real science.”
Absolutely, and this hurts science. Whatever does not fit the mold is cast out or “reasoned” away without giving it its due view.
The model: Evolution-
All evidence must now fit that model somehow...
Lets us now crack open our evolutionary books and look for oil and or predict what we will look like in uh....pulling from me arse....3 billion years....lol
Like that one show on animal planet with all the weird creatures...yeah that’s fact too...ar ar ar. Not sure if you have seen that show, but it’s right up there with Robert Tilton (phony preacher), pretty funny.
—Richard Dawkins
You are obviously confused. You are confusing the theological opinion of scientists (like this quote) with facts established by science (like common descent through evolution).
Are muddling this distinction deliberately, or do you really have trouble telling the difference between a collective body of scientific work and the personal opinions of one man?
==You are confusing the theological opinion of scientists (like this quote) with facts established by science (like common descent through evolution).
Dawkins speaks for millions of the Darwinist faithful. As for common descent being established by “scientific facts”, I’m all ears.
LOL! Again, a projection. Scientists don't have the need for "evangelical leaders" for their profession any more than plumbers or auto mechanics do.
As for common descent being established by “scientific facts”, I’m all ears.
Try some real science books (like biology textbooks) and museums (like the Smithsonian Natural History Museum), in lieu of religious propaganda. You might learn something. It takes years to understand any rigorously developed scientific theory thoroughly, so don't expect success overnight. Good luck!
Please tell us what you mean by "proof." What data would satisfy you?
Evolution is akin to the church of Scientology.
On what evidence do you base this assertion? Evolutionary biologists typically conduct experiments according to the scientific method and publish the results in peer-reviewed journals. Are you contending that scientology operates under a similar MO?
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.