Misconceptions of Christian theology

[Aractus]

It is as incomplete as any scientific theory is. But its more accurate than any alternatives, by far. You wish perfection, 100% certainty. It doesn't exist.

1. Don't presume to tell me what I wish for and don't lecture me on science, I understand the scientific method and embrace it fully.

You are so fundamentally wrong about what science is, what science seeks that you cannot see several examples of other animals fighting amongst eatch other, in their own kind, to gain supremacy.

No, that's called a fucking assumption, numbnuts. DNA is incredibly versatile and allows creatures to adapt to their environments just fine without the need for changing it. The assumption made by those who pushed the "survival of the fittest" point of view was that DNA was rigid, which it isn't. As we have now learned so much more about DNA since the view was first suggested it seems less and less likely that the "survival of the fittest" is a strong enough mechanism to drive DNA, and some estimates as to its power to contribute to evolution overall at about 2 or 3% of the total effect of Evolution - ie, it works too slow and not efficiently enough to be a primary driving factor in Evolution.

My first though is lions, an example that blows all your argument out of the water.

My argument? What exactly do you believe that my argument is?

---

Since when do individuals in a species as a whole compete against each other rather than against other species?

Are you being serious?! Sorry to interrupt, but some of the questions/statements you theists make give me the chills.

My point is that it's been demonstrated time and time again that it isn't a strong enough driving force to drive evolution. If you believe it is, then you may as well also believe in perpetual motion machines and cold fusion because that's about how much scientific sense it makes.

---

You don't know a fucking THING about Evolution do you Danny boy?

It is you who doesn't know a fucking thing about Evolution, actually, Zen.

Shall I explain it to you?

The main mechanism for successful gene transfer is individuals competing against each other in a given species.

To quote; "A zebra doesn't have to be able to run faster than a lion, it just has to be able to run faster than the other zebras"

That's the "selfish gene" viewpoint 101 completely textbook. And by textbook I mean 1976 Richard Dawkins. Well done on schooling us on something nearly 40 years old and 40 years out of date.

Genes don't have a will, genes don't get to do anything in their own interests, the only thing they're allowed to do is serve the best interests of the host creature.

Let's for a moment consider that your argument, oh sorry, I mean Richard Dawkin's argument, is in fact correct and that genes that provide an advantage in physical agility will indeed beat those that don't. Never mind the other functions that said genes have FYI, dexterity, intelligence, and strength be damned! What about the gene that allows the Zebra to produce offspring 1 year earlier than the other Zebras? Wouldn't that win out over agility - now it doesn't matter if the Zebra is fat and lazy because it only has to survive a shorter length of time to reproduce. But that idea has a problem too. For instance, why the fuck do female turtles get progressively more fertile the older and older they get??? How does that make any selfish-gene "Evolutionary" sense!

Well it doesn't matter anyway because biologists have had 40 years to find evidence that the "selfish gene" provides a strong enough influence upon Evolution to drive it, and they have not found observations that provides this evidence - there may be a small "selfish-gene" effect, but it isn't strong enough in and of itself to drive evolution.

Do try to actually learn about the subject before you spout off or you'll start sounding like Cumfart or the Hamster(with even less credibility)

Oh get fucked Zen. I have a deeper belief in Evolution than you do, because my belief is blinder than yours. You believe in bullshit like the selfish gene - yet I disbelieve the selfish gene and STILL blindly believe evolution! Explain that one to me Zen.