To: LibWhacker
Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up...what's that? You can't? Oh...
*Note: feel free to attack me Darwin-bots, but I'm not buying (and the usual disclaimer: I am not pro-creationism.)
2 posted on
04/11/2006 5:19:55 PM PDT by
ECM
(Government is a make-work program for lawyers.)
To: ECM
5 posted on
04/11/2006 5:25:21 PM PDT by
Coyoteman
(Interim tagline: The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT!)
To: ECM
This cross-generational partnership is made possible, Thornton explained, by the similarity in form between aldosterone and the ancient hormone that once partnered with the receptor.
"The story is basically that a new hormone evolved later and exploited a receptor that had a different function previously to take part in a new partnership," said Thornton.
So a hormone-receptor pair evolved because the hormone can bind with the receptor of a previous hormone-receptor pair.
And so that hormone-receptor pair must have evolved because the earlier hormone can bind with the receptor of a previous hormone-receptor pair.
"Why, it's turtles all the way down, of course."
6 posted on
04/11/2006 5:28:15 PM PDT by
NonLinear
(He's dead, Jim)
To: ECM
"*Note: feel free to attack me Darwin-bots, but I'm not buying (and the usual disclaimer: I am not pro-creationism.)"
Such a lovely personality.
8 posted on
04/11/2006 5:40:58 PM PDT by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is grandeur in this view of life....")
To: ECM
"Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up...what's that? You can't? Oh... "I'll be happy to educate you. Tuition is $20K a semester. I'll get back to you when your check clears.
13 posted on
04/11/2006 5:47:11 PM PDT by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: ECM
Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up...
Just show me planetary formation in a lab. Just show me the big bang in a lab. Just show me. . .
Well, anything you don't want to believe in, really.
Serious cop out, but what the heck, eh?
15 posted on
04/11/2006 5:59:05 PM PDT by
Filo
(Darwin was right!)
To: ECM
You seem unusually defensive for someone who's in the thread on post 2. Especially when you claim to have no preordained issues.
19 posted on
04/11/2006 6:23:04 PM PDT by
VadeRetro
(I have the updated "Your brain on creationism" on my homepage.)
To: ECM
[Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up...what's that? You can't? Oh..]
I know what you mean. That's the same reason I don't believe that the sun and other stars exist. They are probably just little balls of flame floating in our atmosphere just a few hundred feet up, and the idea that they're much larger than the Earth and powered by multi-million degree fusion is just arrogant atheist scientists' fantasy.
38 posted on
04/11/2006 7:00:43 PM PDT by
spinestein
(The mainstream news media are to journalism what fast food chains are to fine dining.)
To: ECM
Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up...what's that? You can't? Oh... *Note: feel free to attack me Darwin-bots, but I'm not buying (and the usual disclaimer: I am not pro-creationism.)Calling attention to oneself with mindless drivel... is definitely NOT the Darwinian way to happiness and success. Instead, might I suggest throwing a dinner party for your friends? There is a lovely recipe for pastry puffs in the "downhome cooking" thread.
45 posted on
04/11/2006 7:11:43 PM PDT by
BagelFace
(BOOGABOOGABOOGA!!!)
To: ECM
Well, just show me macro-evolution in a lab and I'll sign right up... ...he says, and then a few sentences later in the same post warns that he's "not buying", which sounds like "I don't care what evidence there is, I've decided in advance to reject it."
what's that? You can't? Oh...
What's that, you *presume* the answer in advance? Ah, I hear the sound of a mind slamming shut.
Hint: There are many more ways to demonstrate the validity of a process beyond "showing it to you in a lab".
Hint #2: We can't recreate the Hawaiian Islands in a lab, either, but we can still verify the processes by which they formed, beyond any reasonable doubt.
This "show it to me in a lab" canard is a frequent cheap excuse for "I'll believe what I want to believe, whatever the evidence overwhelmingly indicates" based on either a) a complete ignorance of how science validates things, or b) a purposely dishonest attempt to ask for something the questioner knows is unworkable EVEN IF THE PROPOSITION IS TRUE and verifiable by other methods.
*Note: feel free to attack me Darwin-bots, but I'm not buying
Funny, *you're* the first one to issue an attack on this thread (e.g. "Darwin-bots").
And I have no interest in attacking you. I feel sorry for you.
(and the usual disclaimer: I am not pro-creationism.)
So your mind is equally closed in every direction?
140 posted on
04/12/2006 4:30:29 PM PDT by
Ichneumon
(Ignorance is curable, but the afflicted has to want to be cured.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson