Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I don't know what any of that means.
I was trying not to sound like that. Sorry if I did. I meant a large change is an accumulation of thousands of small changes. Hence, they cannot be the same thing. 1 is not the same as 1000. It is the same concept, which I already stated, but we don't have enough time to actually observe the large change.
Bacterium operating entirely different than they were originally is a rather large change. It would be like copying Windows over and over again and later you end up with Linux. We have not seen entire new phylum of animals spontaneously erupt, but that doesn't mean "large scale" evolution can't be proven.
I agree, the Earth does not have four actually corners, the bible is full of metaphors.
gov't coverup of the truthwhere there is sun there is mirage
where the temperature is not absolute zero there is mirage
From wikipedia:
"A superior mirage occurs when the air below the line of sight is colder than the air above it. This unusual arrangement is called a temperature inversion, since warm air above cold air is the opposite of the normal temperature gradient of the atmosphere. Passing through the temperature inversion, the light rays are bent down, and so the image appears above the true object, hence the name superior. Superior mirages are in general less common than inferior mirages, but when they do occur, they tend to be more stable, as cold air has no tendency to move up and warm air has no tendency to move down."
This is precisely what is happening there at Chesapeake Bay. A place know for marine layers.
***####***ERROR LOADING FACTS***####***
***####****TERMINATING LOGIC****####***
***###***LOADING CONSPIRACY SCAPEGOAT***###***
darknavyseal, do not make low content posts in the upper fora. Consider this a warning.
gov't coverup of the truthwhere there is sun there is mirage
where the temperature is not absolute zero there is mirage
From wikipedia:
"A superior mirage occurs when the air below the line of sight is colder than the air above it. This unusual arrangement is called a temperature inversion, since warm air above cold air is the opposite of the normal temperature gradient of the atmosphere. Passing through the temperature inversion, the light rays are bent down, and so the image appears above the true object, hence the name superior. Superior mirages are in general less common than inferior mirages, but when they do occur, they tend to be more stable, as cold air has no tendency to move up and warm air has no tendency to move down."
This is precisely what is happening there at Chesapeake Bay. A place know for marine layers.
lol. So, a human who has a mutated gene in africa giving him immunity to malaria is the same as a lizard evolving into a bird. I didn't mean they are called different things, I meant that we can observe small changes in genetic make up, but not species hopping mutations, simply because it takes too long.
Small changes and large changes are the exact same thing, this is a core concept of evolution. You also seem to have that notorious notion that animals evolve "into" other animals. A lizard didn't lay an egg with a raven in it, if that's what you're wondering.
I myself believe in evolution, but I have yet to see an experiment that definitively proves large scale evolution.
Evolution is evolution. There are no scales.
I myself believe in evolution, but I have yet to see an experiment that definitively proves large scale evolution.
There are several, if you actually look. I can't remember the name of the researcher or the paper off the top of my head, but I remember reading a paper in which some scientists made a strain of bacteria evolve into a new species that was capable of digesting starch. Or something like that. It took several months and an amount of generations equivalent to tens of thousands of years of human evolutionary time.
Evolutionary flat earther. I can view evolution with my own eyes and do relevant biological experiments with my own equipment. I can even watch the Flu virus evolve on a yearly basis. I can't "see" creationism happen, so it wouldn't be very Zetetic to say that's what happened.How does an evolutionist answer the question, "why does evolution take place?"
The question "why" is irrelevant. Surely, you meant "how?"
The question said on, not in. Context is relevant.
Using the phrase "Life on..." is a common phrase and this is part of the context. You cannot ignore the common usage of a phrase.
The words "on" and "in" have very different, distinct definitions. The phrase "there is a strain of acne-causing bacteria on you" does not imply that there is acne-causing bacteria inside of you.QuoteQuoteHe would have gotten different answers if he had been asking for evidence of life inside of planets.
This is an assertion for which you have no preexisting evidence.
As I said, the question would have been answered differently.
The Satan conspiracy is held by bible literalists, a horribly hypocritical group of people. This society has no direct ties to any religion, and as such should not deploy such a cop out as blaming the devil for the evils of the world (the conspiracy). The fact that some bible literalists (a small population of them) believe the earth is flat is only due to the bible.
I am never going to see the earth from a distance
Why do you believe in things you cannot, and will never, see?
Probably for the same reasons that you believe in an infinite plane, flat earth.
It looks that way from *very* high up.
It looks that way up close.
DuckDodger, this is the upper fora. Please refrain from low content posts. Have a nice day and consider this a warning.
The starts are rotating above the surface of the earth.
nope, it depends on where you are on Earth.
http://physics.weber.edu/schroeder/ua/StarMotion.html
The title of that article is "Motion of the Stars," which suggests that the stars are indeed in motion above the earth.
Yes indeed, it is an astronomy lesson. I would imagine for a newbie because the motion of the stars is apparent. It is what a child thinks until they get an education. It is what everyone thought until we discovered better explanations. The article explains this anyway, stop focusing so much on the title.
The article says explicitly that the stars are in motion:Quote"Here’s a time-exposure photo that vividly illustrates the motion of the stars through a portion of our sky:"That means, relative to the SKY, the stars are moving.Quote"As time passes, the stars rise in the east (just like the sun). But notice that they rise diagonally, not straight up. The diagonal goes from north (left) to south (right). After a few hours, these same stars will appear high in the southern sky."SameQuote"Turning to face south, we see that the stars there are moving from left (east) to right (west):"Same.Quote"And in the north, the motion is most interesting. Stars rise in the northeast...again, relative to the SKY which was explicitly stated in the first quote... and set in the northwest, moving in counter-clockwise circles around a point that's high above the northern horizon:"
If the horizon was perfectly flat left to right and did not wrap around you, the earth would have to be infinite.
If the earth was a flat disk, well that picture is what you would expect.
Ancestors: Circa 3000-5000 years ago. Thought the Earth was flat.So now you're going to start equivocating on the word "ancestor"?
Ancestors: Circa 2000 years ago. Thought the Earth was flat.
Ancestors: Circa 500-600 years ago. Thought the Earth was round.
Am I missing something? It seems to me that the Flat Earth Society is doing "Ancestor worship", not us roundies. I see nothing wrong with believing something our ancient ancestors did, but Muggsy brought it up. Why is it bad?
