Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (57886)	8/2/1999 3:05:00 PM
From: pezz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<<This in it self casts doubt on these odds.>> No it doesn't, but who cares?>> Whatdya mean it doesn't? Twice in one solar system life appears against such supposed odds doesn't change the concept that the odds are so outrageous? of course it does! Where is the supposed human result in the second instance that I assume you are claiming as the result of your creation theory? <<Yep and what was before you were your ancestrial human parents starting with Adam and Eve.>>....<<Whoops here comes your religion. You have no proof of this.>> You have responded to your own comment. Couldn't have said it better my self, thank you. << Adaptive changes yes. But there is nothing from these studies except a giant leap of faith that ties natural selection to creation.>>... Are you suggesting that the Idea that a adaptive change that is to a living creatures advantage and persistes is not related to the evolution of said living beings? That successful creatures won't have an advantage in influencing the gene pool with their DNA? That this being done on a continuing basis will not lead to changes that would be called new species? Thus ultimately leading to the current state of the art? A giant leap of faith?...I think not...A logical progression of thought is more the case....That some supreme being [ok,ok,big man in the sky was uncalled for ] doing it's thing [ as you say"you have no proof of this" or even any supporting evidence what so ever ]is what would be prudently be called " a leap of faith" IMO pez