Posts: 692
Threads: 21
Joined: September 25, 2018
Reputation:
13
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 12:44 pm
Ray Comfort is spouting his bullshit on some mindless christian show and he's talking about dog evolution.
I will not show the video clip because it contains too much bullshit to walk through.
He says "Let's say I'm a believer in evolution and after millions of years, the first dog evolves. He's got a tail, legs, teeth, eyes. And it's good that he's got eyes because he needs to find a female. He's been blind for millions of years and now he can see. He's got to find a female. Now this female has to be evolved at the right place, at the right time, with the right reproductive organs and a desire to mate. Because without a female, he's a dead dog."
The mindless crowd cheers for his genius observations.
Insanity - Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result
Posts: 2872
Threads: 8
Joined: October 4, 2017
Reputation:
22
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 1:14 pm
(This post was last modified: August 17, 2019 at 1:17 pm by Abaddon_ire.)
(August 17, 2019 at 11:41 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 17, 2019 at 10:33 am)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Oh, stop with the lies. You know full well as you posted that it is Comfort and his baloney. If you really were unaware, you would never have made such a guess.
Comfort argued that the banana was designed by god to fit human anatomy. Embarassingly for him, it was pointed out that the banana had been genetically manipulated by humans to be what it is today. He even tried to pretend that it was part of a comedy routine when he was so embarrassingly found out.
But you clearly knew all of this before you posted. So what is your particular motivation for dishonesty?
Correct, knowing about Ray Comfort is why I assumed he's the referent of banana man. However, I'm unfamiliar with his story about male dogs. Therefore, asking Rahn127 to tell me the story is a reasonable thing to do, wouldn't you agree? Bull. Given that it is one of Comfort's goto arguments against evolution, I am not buying the notion that you have never heard of it.
ETA: And now that Rahn has posted it, you can't claim to be unfamiliar with it.
Posts: 8362
Threads: 47
Joined: September 12, 2015
Reputation:
42
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 1:29 pm
(This post was last modified: August 17, 2019 at 1:33 pm by Pat Mustard.)
(August 14, 2019 at 9:48 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: Yay, it’s back.
Lads, who's after dragging shit in around here?!
(August 17, 2019 at 10:35 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: (August 17, 2019 at 10:33 am)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Oh, stop with the lies. You know full well as you posted that it is Comfort and his baloney. If you really were unaware, you would never have made such a guess.
Comfort argued that the banana was designed by god to fit human anatomy. Embarassingly for him, it was pointed out that the banana had been genetically manipulated by humans to be what it is today. He even tried to pretend that it was part of a comedy routine when he was so embarrassingly found out.
But you clearly knew all of this before you posted. So what is your particular motivation for dishonesty?
Apparently he's an ex-Christian. They do it as naturally as breathing.
Yeah he's an ex-christian in the same way that I'm a world cup winning midfielder (well outside of a modified game of Football Manager, anyway).
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Posts: 69270
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
161
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 4:57 pm
(This post was last modified: August 17, 2019 at 5:00 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
Why should there be a gene for the english language, and is there any evidence for such a gene.
If my parents speak two languages do I get one, both, or a mix. Would a mix cause me to speak a hybrid language?
If there where no such gene, why should that be an issue for behavior? Wouldn’t it be simpler to say that language fits the extended?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 2072
Threads: 17
Joined: August 2, 2019
Reputation:
6
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 6:41 pm
(This post was last modified: August 17, 2019 at 7:09 pm by John 6IX Breezy.)
(August 17, 2019 at 4:57 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Why should there be a gene for the english language, and is there any evidence for such a gene.
If my parents speak two languages do I get one, both, or a mix. Would a mix cause me to speak a hybrid language?
If there where no such gene, why should that be an issue for behavior? Wouldn’t it be simpler to say that language fits the extended?
It wouldn't be an issue for behavior; only for the boundaries of phenotype. English doesn't exist until someone behaves it, so we're clearly dealing with behavior exclusively and not the environment like a nest or a dam.
Classifying it as an extended phenotype is fine, but the term seems to be used more for things that are out there in the tangible environment. English doesn't seem to be that.
Posts: 2872
Threads: 8
Joined: October 4, 2017
Reputation:
22
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 17, 2019 at 11:28 pm
(August 17, 2019 at 6:41 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: (August 17, 2019 at 4:57 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: Why should there be a gene for the english language, and is there any evidence for such a gene.
If my parents speak two languages do I get one, both, or a mix. Would a mix cause me to speak a hybrid language?
If there where no such gene, why should that be an issue for behavior? Wouldn’t it be simpler to say that language fits the extended?
It wouldn't be an issue for behavior; only for the boundaries of phenotype. English doesn't exist until someone behaves it, so we're clearly dealing with behavior exclusively and not the environment like a nest or a dam.
Classifying it as an extended phenotype is fine, but the term seems to be used more for things that are out there in the tangible environment. English doesn't seem to be that. Sure, take refuge in linguistic gymnastics all you like. But we all see it for what it is.
Posts: 6681
Threads: 82
Joined: May 31, 2014
Reputation:
56
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 18, 2019 at 12:16 am
(This post was last modified: August 18, 2019 at 12:19 am by GrandizerII.)
What is John even saying? English is inheritable, or? I'm missing something here obviously.
Physically speaking, English refers to the soundwaves that are manifested in such a way that they follow patterns in line with a specific language, generally speaking. These patterns are communicated intentionally and comprehended by a large membership of the human species. You have to teach the language as well. It's not instinct.
Posts: 13900
Threads: 263
Joined: January 11, 2009
Reputation:
82
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 18, 2019 at 4:58 am
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
Posts: 2072
Threads: 17
Joined: August 2, 2019
Reputation:
6
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 18, 2019 at 10:45 am
(This post was last modified: August 18, 2019 at 10:48 am by John 6IX Breezy.)
Posts: 3901
Threads: 31
Joined: August 9, 2015
Reputation:
27
RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 18, 2019 at 10:54 am
It has to account for its visual counterpart? How? Why?
Are you trying to say English words have to match the spelling we put to them? Because that would be about as far off as one could be describing English.
Anyway, Language is not inherited.
"For the only way to eternal glory is a life lived in service of our Lord, FSM; Verily it is FSM who is the perfect being the name higher than all names, king of all kings and will bestow upon us all, one day, The great reclaiming" -The Prophet Boiardi-
Conservative trigger warning.
![[Image: s-l640.jpg]](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/DjAAAOSwpIhe1HCM/s-l640.jpg) ![[Image: shopping?q=tbn:ANd9GcSBjdQ4tzp0y16OBYXxG...s&usqp=CAc]](https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbn:ANd9GcSBjdQ4tzp0y16OBYXxGHviuSEP1CY720s_6mHNAXBFKPTJmQ5aKe6O8np5DxULdG09YGTD5gaa-AmAZuKC8tFkJZJwfZQh38GsDXHmOwRvY6_Dp1nimsGi2cjo6jvSieJS1rNJHHxOdLs&usqp=CAc)
|
