*What Is Death To An Ahteist*?

[Skull Pilot]

Funny you guys seem to think and applaud someone who uses theory not proof to debate.

I am still waiting for proof that a child learns racism through evolution.

Care to tackle that question ?

I'm still waiting for your proof that god exists.

Where did I say a child learns anything through evolution? I said all behaviors are learned behaviors and all behaviors have roots in evolution.

Just as there are vestigial organs like the appendix that disappear over time there are vestigial behaviors that also change over time.

There may very well be a time in the future where there is less racism than there is today. But racism also is culturally based in human emotion and pride. You should know this.

How many primitive tribes were called savages and converted to christianity at the tip of a sword? That was naught but racism.

If our behavior and culture did not evolve then how did we come by them?

Wrong again, behaviors do not have roots in evolution ,most behaviors are learned. Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Exploring the psychological motives of racism | Psychology Today

Some scholars have argued that prejudice and racism in particular may be driven, in part, by basic survival motives. Humans evolved as a species that thrives in groups, and groups compete over scarce resources. And we do not have to look back at our ancestors to see this in practice. Even today, nations and groups within nations fight over access to limited resources (e.g., water, good land, ports, oil, etc). Classic social psychological research demonstrates that it is very easy to pit groups against one another if they are competing for a scarce resource. Remember the television show Survivor? Therefore, one cause of racism may be an innate proclivity towards group conflict in the service of resource acquisition. Of course, this is extremely problematic and maladaptive in the modern interconnected and mobile world. However, when humans evolved, our world was much different. Our brains evolved for that world, not the modern world we live in today. Therefore, we must strive to have belief systems that reject what may be a natural inclination to not trust or hold negative attitudes about people who look different than us. We have made a lot of progress, but we still have a long road ahead of us if there is any truth to the assertion that prejudice may be rooted in basic survival motives.

Gee isn't this exactly what I said?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sorry bout that,

There very well may have been. But animal remains are highly organic and in most cases fossils just do not exist as the conditions were not optimal for preservation.

And unless you want to excavate every square inch of the planet it's quite possible that many existing fossils will never be found.

Ok give an evoluitionist enough rope and eventually he will hang himself.

If we open coffins up will we find remains of the buried person ?

Explain how remains of dinosaurs have been recovered all over the earth but yet not one transitional fossil connecting major groups ?

1. Yeah explain away dude!
2. Check & Mate!
3. In your face's heatherns!!!!



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I'll ask you again

Has every square inch of the planet been sufficiently excavated as to find all existing fossils?

 

[pinqy]

Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Ok, this makes no sense at all. So to make things simpler, please state your understanding of how "macro-evolution" is supposed to work. Be as specific as possible.

 

[High_Gravity]

Skull Pilot is totally dominating this debate.

Probably because his arguments are based in reality as opposed to a lot of make believe.

How did he dominate this debate,explain ?

Bottomline he is saying a racist is a product of evolution did you not get that ?

Maybe because Skull is using common sense when you are just babbling.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'm still waiting for your proof that god exists.

Where did I say a child learns anything through evolution? I said all behaviors are learned behaviors and all behaviors have roots in evolution.

Just as there are vestigial organs like the appendix that disappear over time there are vestigial behaviors that also change over time.

There may very well be a time in the future where there is less racism than there is today. But racism also is culturally based in human emotion and pride. You should know this.

How many primitive tribes were called savages and converted to christianity at the tip of a sword? That was naught but racism.

If our behavior and culture did not evolve then how did we come by them?

Wrong again, behaviors do not have roots in evolution ,most behaviors are learned. Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Crikey!
Where did you learn your evolutionary theory?

Same place you did i just don't buy into explanations that are based on imagination rather then based on solid facts.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'm still waiting for your proof that god exists.

Where did I say a child learns anything through evolution? I said all behaviors are learned behaviors and all behaviors have roots in evolution.

Just as there are vestigial organs like the appendix that disappear over time there are vestigial behaviors that also change over time.

There may very well be a time in the future where there is less racism than there is today. But racism also is culturally based in human emotion and pride. You should know this.

How many primitive tribes were called savages and converted to christianity at the tip of a sword? That was naught but racism.

If our behavior and culture did not evolve then how did we come by them?

Wrong again, behaviors do not have roots in evolution ,most behaviors are learned. Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Exploring the psychological motives of racism | Psychology Today

Some scholars have argued that prejudice and racism in particular may be driven, in part, by basic survival motives. Humans evolved as a species that thrives in groups, and groups compete over scarce resources. And we do not have to look back at our ancestors to see this in practice. Even today, nations and groups within nations fight over access to limited resources (e.g., water, good land, ports, oil, etc). Classic social psychological research demonstrates that it is very easy to pit groups against one another if they are competing for a scarce resource. Remember the television show Survivor? Therefore, one cause of racism may be an innate proclivity towards group conflict in the service of resource acquisition. Of course, this is extremely problematic and maladaptive in the modern interconnected and mobile world. However, when humans evolved, our world was much different. Our brains evolved for that world, not the modern world we live in today. Therefore, we must strive to have belief systems that reject what may be a natural inclination to not trust or hold negative attitudes about people who look different than us. We have made a lot of progress, but we still have a long road ahead of us if there is any truth to the assertion that prejudice may be rooted in basic survival motives.

Gee isn't this exactly what I said?

The root of racism is based out of fear and hate or both.

I have talked with two older brothers who both happen to be psychologist and said it is a learned condition driven by hate and fear or both. It has nothing to do with evolving.

You don't wake up someday and decide you don't like someone that looks different it's something that is driven into the brain over time.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Sorry bout that,

Ok give an evoluitionist enough rope and eventually he will hang himself.

If we open coffins up will we find remains of the buried person ?

Explain how remains of dinosaurs have been recovered all over the earth but yet not one transitional fossil connecting major groups ?

1. Yeah explain away dude!
2. Check & Mate!
3. In your face's heatherns!!!!



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I'll ask you again

Has every square inch of the planet been sufficiently excavated as to find all existing fossils?

No, but do you believe enough has been found to say by now if there were transitional fossils shouldn't we have found one by now ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Ok, this makes no sense at all. So to make things simpler, please state your understanding of how "macro-evolution" is supposed to work. Be as specific as possible.

Depends on who you're speaking with.

Some evolutionist believe that aliens left DNA behind and thats how the first cell formed.

Some believe it took millions of years for for one species to evolve into s destinct new kind of species.

And then there are some who believe that changes appeared suddenly and that was a way to explain the lack of transitional fossils.

I believe you people are now teaching that for evolution to happen it takes new information that comes from somewhere that they can't explain or prove.

I do believe because it hasn't been disproven that they're using horizontal gene transfer as their explanation as to how new information can produce evolution change and or mutations.

So are you of the Neo darwinism crowd or the punctuated equilibrium crowd or some other crowd not mentioned.

Come on pinqy you have seen me debate and know that i have covered these subjects thoroughly on the Sean Hannity forum.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wrong again, behaviors do not have roots in evolution ,most behaviors are learned. Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce ?

Exploring the psychological motives of racism | Psychology Today

Some scholars have argued that prejudice and racism in particular may be driven, in part, by basic survival motives. Humans evolved as a species that thrives in groups, and groups compete over scarce resources. And we do not have to look back at our ancestors to see this in practice. Even today, nations and groups within nations fight over access to limited resources (e.g., water, good land, ports, oil, etc). Classic social psychological research demonstrates that it is very easy to pit groups against one another if they are competing for a scarce resource. Remember the television show Survivor? Therefore, one cause of racism may be an innate proclivity towards group conflict in the service of resource acquisition. Of course, this is extremely problematic and maladaptive in the modern interconnected and mobile world. However, when humans evolved, our world was much different. Our brains evolved for that world, not the modern world we live in today. Therefore, we must strive to have belief systems that reject what may be a natural inclination to not trust or hold negative attitudes about people who look different than us. We have made a lot of progress, but we still have a long road ahead of us if there is any truth to the assertion that prejudice may be rooted in basic survival motives.

Gee isn't this exactly what I said?

The root of racism is based out of fear and hate or both.

I have talked with two older brothers who both happen to be psychologist and said it is a learned condition driven by hate and fear or both. It has nothing to do with evolving.

You don't wake up someday and decide you don't like someone that looks different it's something that is driven into the brain over time.

You've never had to live in a world where you literally had to fight a life and death battle for resources to survive have you?

That's exactly the kind of world our ancestors evolved in. In that world anyone not of your tribe was a threat. The easiest way to determine whether or not one was of your tribe was by differences in appearance. The more different one was from a your tribe then the more of a threat they were to your tribe's survival.

There was no hate involved in the struggle to survive.

You can't seem to discern the differences between worlds of modern and prehistoric man.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Sorry bout that,










1. Yeah explain away dude!
2. Check & Mate!
3. In your face's heatherns!!!!



Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

I'll ask you again

Has every square inch of the planet been sufficiently excavated as to find all existing fossils?

No, but do you believe enough has been found to say by now if there were transitional fossils shouldn't we have found one by now ?

Obviously since there haven't been any then no there has not been enough excavation.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Exploring the psychological motives of racism | Psychology Today




Gee isn't this exactly what I said?

The root of racism is based out of fear and hate or both.

I have talked with two older brothers who both happen to be psychologist and said it is a learned condition driven by hate and fear or both. It has nothing to do with evolving.

You don't wake up someday and decide you don't like someone that looks different it's something that is driven into the brain over time.

You've never had to live in a world where you literally had to fight a life and death battle for resources to survive have you?

That's exactly the kind of world our ancestors evolved in. In that world anyone not of your tribe was a threat. The easiest way to determine whether or not one was of your tribe was by differences in appearance. The more different one was from a your tribe then the more of a threat they were to your tribe's survival.

There was no hate involved in the struggle to survive.

You can't seem to discern the differences between worlds of modern and prehistoric man.

I am an american indian, my ancestors surely had to fight for survival and it was a learned survival ,because of hate and fear.

Our tribe had to fight other tribes for protection and survival but what does this have to do with evolution ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

I'll ask you again

Has every square inch of the planet been sufficiently excavated as to find all existing fossils?

No, but do you believe enough has been found to say by now if there were transitional fossils shouldn't we have found one by now ?

Obviously since there haven't been any then no there has not been enough excavation.

So your belief is based on faith, thank you for the honesty.

 

[HUGGY]

The root of racism is based out of fear and hate or both.

I have talked with two older brothers who both happen to be psychologist and said it is a learned condition driven by hate and fear or both. It has nothing to do with evolving.

You don't wake up someday and decide you don't like someone that looks different it's something that is driven into the brain over time.

You've never had to live in a world where you literally had to fight a life and death battle for resources to survive have you?

That's exactly the kind of world our ancestors evolved in. In that world anyone not of your tribe was a threat. The easiest way to determine whether or not one was of your tribe was by differences in appearance. The more different one was from a your tribe then the more of a threat they were to your tribe's survival.

There was no hate involved in the struggle to survive.

You can't seem to discern the differences between worlds of modern and prehistoric man.

I am an american indian, my ancestors surely had to fight for survival and it was a learned survival ,because of hate and fear.

Our tribe had to fight other tribes for protection and survival but what does this have to do with evolution ?

It has a lot to do with the African continent and strangely enough comes full circle back to Darwin's theory in a round about way. Africa was fairly isolated and subject to the conditions of that continent as were the Islands that Darwin found the finches that had changed.

One can probably blame the hyena for the lack of abundance of humanoid bones in Africa. There was no animal we are aware of that crushed and ate bones the way a hyena does/did except in that part of the world..

Plate tectonics played a role also. Much of the rest of the land mass on the planet went through turmoil not experienced in Africa. It does not have the evidence of mountain ranges and upwelling of the earth that created great floods and one time sea beds. These tectonic disasters buried many dinosaurs in ways that Africa could not have. As mentioned there were no bone crushing animals like the hyena around to clean up the greater volume of carcasses in N.America and Asia where most of the dinosaur fossils have been found.

I believe that volume or lack of it had much to do with the scarcity of early humanoid remains also. There were just not many human type animals in the early days.

One sort of "proof" of the reasoning I suggest could be the lack of ALL bone fossils in Africa. There were surely far more antelope and wildebeast than any other animal around during the time period we are talking and where is the evidence of their fossils? Pretty much non existent. Why do you suppose THAT is? Because there were no grazing herd animals in Africa? I believe the lack of humanoid fossil is easily explained as I laid it out.

 

[Samson]

There were surely far more antelope and wildebeast than any other animal around during the time period we are talking and where is the evidence of their fossils? Pretty much non existent. Why do you suppose THAT is? Because there were no grazing herd animals in Africa? I believe the lack of humanoid fossil is easily explained as I laid it out.

My guess is that all the restaurants stopped serving Antelope and Wildebeast before 8 PM, and all the hungrey hominids had to settle for some sort of gawddamn "Antelope Cockail" with the sauce on the side.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You've never had to live in a world where you literally had to fight a life and death battle for resources to survive have you?

That's exactly the kind of world our ancestors evolved in. In that world anyone not of your tribe was a threat. The easiest way to determine whether or not one was of your tribe was by differences in appearance. The more different one was from a your tribe then the more of a threat they were to your tribe's survival.

There was no hate involved in the struggle to survive.

You can't seem to discern the differences between worlds of modern and prehistoric man.

I am an american indian, my ancestors surely had to fight for survival and it was a learned survival ,because of hate and fear.

Our tribe had to fight other tribes for protection and survival but what does this have to do with evolution ?

It has a lot to do with the African continent and strangely enough comes full circle back to Darwin's theory in a round about way. Africa was fairly isolated and subject to the conditions of that continent as were the Islands that Darwin found the finches that had changed.

One can probably blame the hyena for the lack of abundance of humanoid bones in Africa. There was no animal we are aware of that crushed and ate bones the way a hyena does/did except in that part of the world..

Plate tectonics played a role also. Much of the rest of the land mass on the planet went through turmoil not experienced in Africa. It does not have the evidence of mountain ranges and upwelling of the earth that created great floods and one time sea beds. These tectonic disasters buried many dinosaurs in ways that Africa could not have. As mentioned there were no bone crushing animals like the hyena around to clean up the greater volume of carcasses in N.America and Asia where most of the dinosaur fossils have been found.

I believe that volume or lack of it had much to do with the scarcity of early humanoid remains also. There were just not many human type animals in the early days.

One sort of "proof" of the reasoning I suggest could be the lack of ALL bone fossils in Africa. There were surely far more antelope and wildebeast than any other animal around during the time period we are talking and where is the evidence of their fossils? Pretty much non existent. Why do you suppose THAT is? Because there were no grazing herd animals in Africa? I believe the lack of humanoid fossil is easily explained as I laid it out.

Decay and and predators could be a problem i guess but really that is not a viable explanation when it comes to the lack of transitional fossils. There has been literally millions of fossils recovered but still no transitional fossils connecting major groups.

But there being the amount of predators in Africa it's easy to understand the lack of antelope fossils. There really is not many predators eating the remains of humans because humans bury their dead and in some cases burn up the remains.

How are fossils preserved ?

the state of preservation of most fossils requires the animals and plants to have been very rapidly buried, virtually alive, by vast amounts of sediments before decay could destroy delicate details of their appearance and anatomy. Thus, if most sedimentary rock layers were deposited rapidly over a radically short period of time, say in a catastrophic global flood, then the animals and plants buried and fossilized in those rock layers may well have all lived at about the same time and then have been rapidly buried progressively and sequentially.

How do you know plate tectonics did not occur because of the weight of the global flood ?

Our oceans are so deep and vast i'm sure they hide a lot of fossils but that does not explain why we find human and animal fossils together but none that connect major groups that supposedly evolved.

 

[HUGGY]

There were surely far more antelope and wildebeast than any other animal around during the time period we are talking and where is the evidence of their fossils? Pretty much non existent. Why do you suppose THAT is? Because there were no grazing herd animals in Africa? I believe the lack of humanoid fossil is easily explained as I laid it out.

My guess is that all the restaurants stopped serving Antelope and Wildebeast before 8 PM, and all the hungrey hominids had to settle for some sort of gawddamn "Antelope Cockail" with the sauce on the side.

I'm sure that the existence of some of God's creatures is based on myth perpetuated by the local native tribes.

 

[pinqy]

Depends on who you're speaking with.

No, it really doesn't.

Some evolutionist believe that aliens left DNA behind and thats how the first cell formed.

That has nothing to do with "macro-evolution" and why you think it's impossible.

Some believe it took millions of years for for one species to evolve into s destinct new kind of species.

And then there are some who believe that changes appeared suddenly and that was a way to explain the lack of transitional fossils.

Both are true, but it doesn't answer the question of what you think the process is.

I believe you people are now teaching that for evolution to happen it takes new information that comes from somewhere that they can't explain or prove.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I do believe because it hasn't been disproven that they're using horizontal gene transfer as their explanation as to how new information can produce evolution change and or mutations.

Ok, I guess I have to be more clear. You asked the question "Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce?" Of course genes are passed through sexual reproduction...no one denies that. I don't see how you think that makes "macro-evolution" impossible. And "when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce" I have to ask "when wouldn't they?" Humans can sexual reproduce. Except for individual cases of sterility and in some hybrids, all animals can sexually reproduce. So why are you asking when they had the ability?

Do you think "macro-evolution" happens throught hybridization?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Depends on who you're speaking with.

No, it really doesn't.

Some evolutionist believe that aliens left DNA behind and thats how the first cell formed.[/qutoe]That has nothing to do with "macro-evolution" and why you think it's impossible.

[qutoe]Some believe it took millions of years for for one species to evolve into s destinct new kind of species.

And then there are some who believe that changes appeared suddenly and that was a way to explain the lack of transitional fossils.

Both are true, but it doesn't answer the question of what you think the process is.

I believe you people are now teaching that for evolution to happen it takes new information that comes from somewhere that they can't explain or prove.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I do believe because it hasn't been disproven that they're using horizontal gene transfer as their explanation as to how new information can produce evolution change and or mutations.

Ok, I guess I have to be more clear. You asked the question "Macro-evolution is an impossibility because of the genetics the genetics are passed on through sexual reproduction , from the parents and the parents of those parents,so when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce?" Of course genes are passed through sexual reproduction...no one denies that. I don't see how you think that makes "macro-evolution" impossible. And "when did humans and ape like creatures have the ability to sexually reproduce" I have to ask "when wouldn't they?" Humans can sexual reproduce. Except for individual cases of sterility and in some hybrids, all animals can sexually reproduce. So why are you asking when they had the ability?

Do you think "macro-evolution" happens throught hybridization?

I don't believe in macro-evolution at all in any form.

Yes we both agree that genetics come from the parents and parents of parents and through sexual reproduction, But if you're gonna peddle this theory you have to prove new genetic information can be introduced in a way to produce macro-evolution.

You have not even come close to doing so.

 

[Youwerecreated]

There were surely far more antelope and wildebeast than any other animal around during the time period we are talking and where is the evidence of their fossils? Pretty much non existent. Why do you suppose THAT is? Because there were no grazing herd animals in Africa? I believe the lack of humanoid fossil is easily explained as I laid it out.

My guess is that all the restaurants stopped serving Antelope and Wildebeast before 8 PM, and all the hungrey hominids had to settle for some sort of gawddamn "Antelope Cockail" with the sauce on the side.

I'm sure that the existence of some of God's creatures is based on myth perpetuated by the local native tribes.

Huggy, why is it that mans history can only be traced back a few thousand years with solid evidence and it takes imagination to show man was on the earth earlier ?

 

[HUGGY]

There seems to be an enormously unbalanced burden of proof being placed on a science that has millions of REAL examples of evidence in the form of fossilized remains withe SOME holes in the sequence or chain of evolution. On the other hand the only source of counter to this science is an extremely questionable myth documented hundred of years after the fact with no scientific proof of it's theories whatsoever.

Faith is not a scientific method. It has no standing.