SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (12038)1/3/2011 2:31:06 PM
From: Solon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
Biologists have studied the digestion of fish and whales for centuries. They are all different and it is of course ludicrous to even consider the possibility that a man could survive for 3 days without oxygen and while being digested.

However, there are far too many thousands of species of fish to be gotten through to play your game, so let us concede that some scientists might think it possible that a man could live without oxygen for 3 days while doing half mile dives in the water pressure. Not a problem. After all, the question is not really fair to you because the great fish that swallowed Jonah and digested him for 3 days could be long extinct and you would be unfairly prevented from bringing your own scientific data to bear on the question.

A better way to determine if you are for or against science is to look at issues that no scientist has ever disclaimed and which no internet article on physics or science has ever disputed (and which does not involve potentially thousands of species of fish--some of which no longer exist).

Scientists believe that rainbows are caused by refraction (I can show you as many studies as you like, if you doubt this). Scientists believe that rainbows are the effect produced in certain instances of light being refracted through water droplets.

en.wikipedia.org

That is undeniably what all scientists believe. Do you agree or disagree on the cause of rainbows?