12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI try once more:
as far as i am aware i am the one asking the questions around here, your insinuations are defamatory as per usual and reek of pompousness to the hilt, ...
Originally posted by FabianFnas
I don't like you call me any flimsy names, flobbie carottie! When you know how to behave, then you can come back.
Do you deny that you are the l ...[text shortened]... case between any animal of today and their historic ancestors, then you have learnt something.
Do you deny that you are the link between your parent and your children? Do you deny that you are not a copy of your parents, but are alike in some details and not in others? Do you deny that your children are not a copy of you, but are alike in some details and not in others?
When you understand that this is the case between any animal of today and their historic ancestors, then you have learnt something.
Perhaps you don't want to answer the question, then just say so instead of trying new robbie retorical tricks.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by Proper Knobi do not doubt it at all, for this is my very point, that we seem to have progressed more in the last five thousand years than at any point in our history, this however begs the question, why the last five thousand years if we have supposedly existed for hundreds of thousands?
In 63 yrs man went from flying the first aeroplane to landing on the moon, and you doubt what man can achieve ie. writing.
You creationists view our ancestors in a very poor light.
You and i have been through this subject before, and i am in a perfectly good mood.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasof course there is a link, is not the genetic code 'designed', to perpetuate like characteristics? i apologise to you (now retracted) and to Whitey for i had wrongly assumed he was talking of 'links', between differing species, which now, is apparently, not the case! you have, in your sensationalistic manner jumped on this misunderstanding and cried your usual 'liar liar pants on fire', when nothing could be further from the truth!
I try once more:
Do you deny that you are the link between your parent and your children? Do you deny that you are not a copy of your parents, but are alike in some details and not in others? Do you deny that your children are not a copy of you, but are alike in some details and not in others?
When you understand that this is the case between any a ...[text shortened]... 't want to answer the question, then just say so instead of trying new robbie retorical tricks.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWould you agree that if evolutionary theory is correct, then every organism or species is still a 'link'?
ok, I apologise, to you and to Fabian 🙂
Would you also agree that if evolutionary theory is correct, it would be stupid to go around looking for special 'link' species that have a special 'weirdness' factor due to their being 'links'?
Would you therefore agree that galveston75 original comment shows a lack of understanding of the Theory of Evolution regardless of whether it is true or not?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOnce we devleoped the ability to write, knowledge could be written down and passed onto the next generation without being lost. The foundation of knowledge was laid which is still being built upon today.
i do not doubt it at all, for this is my very point, that we seem to have progressed more in the last five thousand years than at any point in our history, this however begs the question, why the last five thousand years if we have supposedly existed for hundreds of thousands?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadno one disputes that there is a genetic link between 'species', of the same kind, what we are disputing is the 'transmutation' of 'species'. As for the other questions i am not at liberty to state anything.
Would you agree that [b]if evolutionary theory is correct, then every organism or species is still a 'link'?
Would you also agree that if evolutionary theory is correct, it would be stupid to go around looking for special 'link' species that have a special 'weirdness' factor due to their being 'links'?
Would you therefore agree that galveston ...[text shortened]... ack of understanding of the Theory of Evolution regardless of whether it is true or not?[/b]
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by Proper Knobyes Noobster, a little more than five thousand years ago, is it not astounding?
Once we devleoped the ability to write, knowledge could be written down and passed onto the next generation without being lost. The foundation of knowledge was laid which is still being built upon today.
12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you will, from now on discuss in a civil manner, and continue to proceed a discussion about the evolution be or not to be with no more retoric tricks of yours, commonly known as robbie retorics?
of course there is a link, is not the genetic code 'designed', to perpetuate like characteristics? i apologise to you (now retracted) and to Whitey for i had wrongly assumed he was talking of 'links', between differing species, which now, is apparently, not the case! you have, in your sensationalistic manner jumped on this misunderstanding and cried your usual 'liar liar pants on fire', when nothing could be further from the truth!
If so, I accept your apology.
"of course there is a link, is not the genetic code 'designed', to perpetuate like characteristics?"
This is not English is it? I don't understand your meaning of this statement. Be clearer, remember that English is not my native tounge. Don't make me misunderstand you, you know English better than I do.
Is there a link between an individual of today and its (his) parental individual? Can we extrapolate this iteratively that it holds fro two generations too, and 10 or 100 or 1000 generations, and even more? Do we have to find an evidence, or fossil, of every link to make it probalbe that they are genetically related? Does even one missing link mean the evolution is false?
This is my question, robbie. Avoid it and your apology means nothing.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by Proper Knoboh Noobster, this profusion of knowledge, this 'advancement', its unprecedented at any time in the entire history of humanity. if one was to draw a time line the last five thousand years would not be a blip, nor could one determine and establish a gradual gradient, it would reach the point five thousand B.C and sky rocket at an angle roughly equivalent to ninety degrees.
What are you talking about?
12 Nov 09
3 edits
Originally posted by FabianFnasyes Fabians, Yes! there are for the second time genetic links, it is what DNA was 'designed ', to do! ok apology is reissued with the imminent hope that it shall be accepted. No it does not mean that it is false, only unsubstantiated 🙂
So you will, from now on discuss in a civil manner, and continue to proceed a discussion about the evolution be or not to be with no more retoric tricks of yours, commonly known as robbie retorics?
If so, I accept your apology.
"of course there is a link, is not the genetic code 'designed', to perpetuate like characteristics?"
This is not English i lution is false?
This is my question, robbie. Avoid it and your apology means nothing.
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe apology is accepted, as long as you reamin within limits.
yes Fabians, Yes! there are for the second time genetic links, it is what DNA was 'designed ', to do! ok apology is reissued with the imminent hope that it shall be accepted.
...and that the DNA are slightly altered by random from generation to generation meaning that there are small changes from individual to individual within the same specie?
12 Nov 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat does this have to do with evolution? Do you think the ability to write is an evolved trait?
i do not doubt it at all, for this is my very point, that we seem to have progressed more in the last five thousand years than at any point in our history, this however begs the question, why the last five thousand years if we have supposedly existed for hundreds of thousands?
12 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by FabianFnasyes but one must also understand that DNA is 'designed', to resist these random changes! for as it has been stated elsewhere in the spirituality forum for example, enzymes are produced to continually repair any genetic damage and in the case of significant damage to DNA molecules there is induced an emergency response in which increased quantities of repair enzymes are synthesised. I propose an experiment, take a fully functioning system, say your p.c, not nearly as complex as a living organism, and randomly poke around inside with a soldering iron.
The apology is accepted, as long as you reamin within limits.
...and that the DNA are slightly altered by random from generation to generation meaning that there are small changes from individual to individual within the same specie?