Posted on 02/08/2005 3:50:43 AM PST by PatrickHenry
Theories are never proven, only partially confirmed or refuted. Evolution is an observed fact. The theory of evolution is the only candidate for a scientific explanation. The theory that the Entire Universe was creatied Last Thursday with the appearance of being ancient isnt't refutable but isn't science either; this theory can't be distinguished from the theory the Universe will be created Wednesday Next, either.
I don't care particularly whether evolutionary theory is correct or incorrect. If correct, it can be(and has been comercially) used to make useful predictions about the world. If incorrect, it will be replaced with something that works better.
No, it's a grouping of mathematical and biological views that describe apparantly fatal flaws in the construct that everything can be explained via random mutation and natural selection then posits that life designed by intelligence -- regardless as to how it was done -- is a more rational way of looking at reality.
I disagree. he referred to "the" inbreeding, not "YOUR" inbreeding
then again, I might have been mistaken
Not when you use the wrong formula.
For example: The number of ancestors required for me to have exist doubles every generation into the past, this must happen. 2 parents, one generation back, 25 years. Eight great-grandparents, 3 generations back 75 years.
20 generations back I must have had 1,048,576 grandparents, this is all in one generation of time,500 years ago.
30 generations back, 1,073,741,824 grandparents, of course evenly half men, half women. 750 years ago. 35 generations back it required 17,179,869,184 grandparents for me to exist as I am today.
You have not described exponential growth. You have only described the left-hand side of the parabola: f(x)=x^2
Populations tend to grow exponentially over time until they reach some bounds which limit their growth such as the amont of food or space available, at which time the growth flattens out.
The correct formula to describe ideal exponential growth is transcendential function using powers of e. The size of a population at any given time t with a starting population P and a growth rate of k can be expressed as P(t)=e^(k*t)
Using this equasion one can calclulate what the population will be at a certain time. Conversely, given the current population one can calculate what the population was in the past without reaching the false conclusion that there were many billions of people in the past for each person alive today.
This is a misuse of mathematics, either stemming from a lack of understanding of exponential growth, or a desire to disprove evolution, or both.
The Bible doesn't spell it out. Have you read it?
Too many people think too little.
Conservative leader Stephen Harper : you're outed?
sounds like balance... sounds like...
"the amount of ongoing thinking in the universe is a constant"?
;)
What do you interpret them to be made of?
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. -- A. Einstein
Excuse me, but...JEWISH FAIRY TALES???
(Rom 1:18 KJV) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
(Rom 1:19 KJV) Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
(Rom 1:20 KJV) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
(Rom 1:21 KJV) Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
(Rom 1:22 KJV) Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
(Rom 1:23 KJV) And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
(Rom 1:24 KJV) Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
(Rom 1:25 KJV) Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
(Rom 1:26 KJV) For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
(Rom 1:27 KJV) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.
(Rom 1:28 KJV) And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
(Rom 1:29 KJV) Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
(Rom 1:30 KJV) Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
(Rom 1:31 KJV) Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
(Rom 1:32 KJV) Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
"the difference between genius and idiocy is that genius has its limits." - unknown wit
so, you gonna concede on the matter of the DiscoveryChannel "Eve" that you brought up, or are you gonna attempt rebuttal?
by the way, here is the full grotesque overstatement from DiscoveryChannel's official website:
"Eve Explained: Find out the science behind the theory that all humans alive today can claim as a common ancestor a woman who lived in Africa some 150,000 years ago."
not 20,000, but 150,000 years.
so, not merely "substantially older" than 6,000 years, but VASTLY so.
the rest of what I posted last night stands.
what the hell?
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2716
patrilineal mitochondrial inheritance?
Excuse me, but the single mother gene came out long before Discovery channel aired any program. I heard this in the 80's.
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.