71–80 of 117 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes you are creating something out of chaos because you have an algorithm. No algorithm, no programming means you can't create.
Nature has an algorithm, it is called physics. Of course if you believe in god then the rules of physics don't apply, so I guess that won't convince you either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The terns able to dive deeper (for whatever physical reason) survive and breed.
Exactly, survival for most animals are always based on their immediate ability to adapt, not the ability to adapt over thousands of years, that is the paradox of evolution. Animals supposedly evolved to have these specialized features essential for survival over thousands of years, but natural selection is in conflict. Animals need to survive their conditions immediately, they can't wait for their bodies to evolve.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nature has an algorithm, it is called physics. Of course if you believe in god then the rules of physics don't apply, so I guess that won't convince you either.
I believe in physics. Do you believe we understand everything about physics ? we don't. For example gravity, there still much to learn about the force behind gravity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems HN is just as prone to pulling out the "Save The Kids" rhetoric when it suits them. I wonder why you aren't lauding the NSA surveillance program, as it gives you exactly the kind of ammunition to perform such thought police style discrimination. You will never agree with everyone. The solution is never to "exclude" or "ban" a school of thought, but counteract it with logic and reason. I see no harm in teachi…
Except this isn't about beliefs and opinions, but about science. You can question evolution with the scientific method if you want to. And "save the kids" seems a bit more applicable when applied to teachers who are paid to educate said kids.
The way I see it, a parent has been forced to parent. While I don't have children, I remember my parents being forced to intervene with teachers on a whole host of issues. Does this mean we should ban all teachers who disagree with any parent on any issue?
We should exclude such people from educational institutes by nature of belief. They're not teaching science if they already have an agenda, bias or belief and allow it to interfere with objectivity and professionalism. In fact any religious school or education institute should be of independent of religion how the church and state supposedly are. This shit is unfortunately rife. I had to explain this to my daughter's…
It seems HN is just as prone to pulling out the "Save The Kids" rhetoric when it suits them. I wonder why you aren't lauding the NSA surveillance program, as it gives you exactly the kind of ammunition to perform such thought police style discrimination. You will never agree with everyone. The solution is never to "exclude" or "ban" a school of thought, but counteract it with logic and reason. I see no harm in teachi…
There aren't two sides to human origin. We might not know much about it, but we do know evolution was involved somehow.
When we discuss gravity in physics we don't have people clamouring for Yogic Flying to be taught - for both sides of gravity to be taught.
I love science & technology therefore I'm alarmed because so many scientist and technologist don't see the inherit paradox in evolution. Natural selection makes it virtually impossible for animals to adapt via the proposed mutations. Natural selection happens immediately, valuable life preserving mutations are suppose occur (typically) over thousands of years. To illustrate Arctic terns are dying because they are not…
Nowhere in evolution theory does it say that it has to take 1000s of years. Neither does it claim that every species would find a way to adapt to any change of environment. You are just creating strawmen to support your belief. Evolution theory is not even confined to biology. You can watch it life in computer simulations if you want to.
No strawman here, how long did it take for birds to evolve ability to fly ? A few days ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. The Catholic Church supports both the Theory of Evolution and the Big Bang Theory (no jokes about the TV show please). So don't blame the Catholic Church for this one. Given that South Korea is split between Catholics and Buddhists, it doesn't seem like there is a particularly religious reason for this trend.
South Korean christians are mostly protestants, not catholics. edit: it looks like Catholicism has been growing over the past 10 years, but there are still more Protestants. In any case South Korea is not "split between Catholics and Buddhists," the largest denomination is Presbyterian and 46% identify as not religious at all.
Christian 31.6% (Protestant 24%, Roman Catholic 7.6%)
Buddhist 24.2%,
other or unknown 0.9%
none 43.3%
(2010 survey)
Evolution can be further classified into "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Evidence for microevolution is directly observable (e.g. bacteria adapting to changes of nutrients in their environment, viruses adapting to vaccines). However macroevolution has never been directly observed. It is extrapolated from considering what occurs after a multitude of generations of microevolution. An interesting new documentary…
No, but we have found millions of fossils in the ground from different time periods, and it looks an awful lot like different species slowly changed over time (and occasionally branched off or went extinct). If this weren't the case, scientists wouldn't believe in macroevolution either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except this isn't about beliefs and opinions, but about science. You can question evolution with the scientific method if you want to. And "save the kids" seems a bit more applicable when applied to teachers who are paid to educate said kids.
"Save The Kids" is an appeal to emotion and is used to avoid addressing the logic and reason of the situation. If the children are in danger then you should have no problem listing the explicit points where such actions can cause irreparable harm. Otherwise you are simply trying to shortchange the debate and prevent discourse. The way I see it, a parent has been forced to parent. While I don't have children, I rememb…