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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (734)	9/13/2006 2:14:35 PM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 10087

Maybe you should post that to someone who is who thinks that way. Non-scientists look for excuses not to believe in evolution, so anything that can't be explained is "proof" that the entire theory is wrong.

To: Ilaine who wrote (734)	9/13/2006 3:00:20 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 10087

could be an energy force we can't see, measure or understand yet. I think we are in a little alien girl's aquarium and the 3k back ground radiation is her pump motor.

To: Ilaine who wrote (734)	9/13/2006 3:33:16 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10087

”The alternative to evolution is some form of magic.” Sorry, that is too black and white for me. Natural modification, adjustment, and adaptation to temporal changes is an essential characteristic of all creatures whether they survive for two seconds or over thousands of years. This is observable and we can replicate the phenomenon under controlled situations. That is science and it does not contradict various ideas about religious and non-religious creation beliefs/theories. The idea that evolutionary change and beliefs are contradictory opposites may be a fun debate but is unprove-able, it is much more rational to view the ideas as complimentary.. ”I am not aware of any other body of knowledge that is rejected, in its entirety, because some parts are not yet understood.” There are very scholarly people who build schools and libraries of thought supporting the validity of major world religions. The only people that I have seen who reject the whole body of knowledge from any of those schools are the uninformed bigots who refuse to open their minds to all ways of learning about existence, and insist on only one path to knowledge, even though it may be wrought with more paradoxical contradictions than proofs. I don’t know any rational person religious or otherwise who rejects natural adaptation as a science. There is no proof that the origin of the universe is a purely physical phenomenon void of creative force. ”I bet you can't explain magic, either.” Magic may be explained in two ways. 1) As illusion. Magicians commonly claim that their magic is the result of performing illusive tricks aided by slight of hand, smoke and mirrors, undetectable science technology like electromagnetic devices etc, with years of practice and cunning deception. 2) As expressions of the supernatural: Some people claim to be able to perform miraculous feats like healing with the aid of unseen forces, to control natural forces due to supernatural endowment, or to acquire knowledge and wisdom without the use of sensory perceptions. Pay up, gem