Another reason to accept evolution.....

[Little Rik]

More BS.  

Why I have to hear such a garbage?  

All you have to do to know whether these two glands have terrible effect on the heath if not working is to click in your search engine.............disorders related to pineal gland and.......... disorders related to pituary gland.

If however rather then not working properly they are not there at all then you will not have disorders but you will have a catastrophe.  

Off you back side son and try to learn something.  

Since the question was about absent glands, not pathologically disordered ones, you still haven't supported your statement.

The fool   has spoken so the wise  give some material for enlightenment.  


Harry Kiesel
Harry Kiesel, M.D. from Hahnemann Medcial College (1975)
Answered Apr 29
Originally Answered: What are the effects of not having a pituitary gland?

If the pituitary gland were destroyed (and I can't imagine this happening" cortisol and epineprhine production would soon come to an end, resulting in death.

Arjun Tripathy, MBBS from Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (2022)
Answered Jun 2, 2017

U wud most likely die or will be kept for life on hormone replacement therapy

https://www.quora.com/What-will-happen-i...m-the-body


Now, if the lack of the pituary gland can kill you just imagine the lack of the pineal gland which is above and superior to the pituary one.
Researchers still don’t fully understand the pineal gland and it will take some more time before they understand her function and importance.
Here and there you find some people who say that they survived once their pineal has been removed but their lives have changed for the worse so I wouldn't bet a cent on living without it.  

---

I am not going to retract it. Anyone willing to debate on it is welcome. Otherwise, the proofs are out there, I'm not the only Theist in the world you can seek proofs from.

You're the only theist I know who claims to have seen such proof.  Here in this thread you argue that the matter depends upon your participation for resolution.  In another thread, you claim that it doesn't matter who presents the proof, the proof stands on its own merits.  Not only do you tell lies, you tell different lies on the very same day.  Either the proof exists independent of you, or it does not.  If all you're saying is that in your opinion, you personally have proof of the matter, then as noted, I couldn't give a shit.  If all you have is your opinion, then you've got dick.

You got a problem darl.  

You keep on asking for proofs 24/7 but what is the point of giving you any evidence considering that your life revolve around a cocoon of fantasy.  
You on the other hand would not give any proofs about your many claims.
Why don't you give any evidence about claims that you made or claims that other people made and you agree with them such as.........the consciousness is a product of the brain or the physical death is the total death?

Why don't you stop being a nuisance and start being a bit more honest?  

[Angrboda]

You're the only theist I know who claims to have seen such proof.  Here in this thread you argue that the matter depends upon your participation for resolution.  In another thread, you claim that it doesn't matter who presents the proof, the proof stands on its own merits.  Not only do you tell lies, you tell different lies on the very same day.  Either the proof exists independent of you, or it does not.  If all you're saying is that in your opinion, you personally have proof of the matter, then as noted, I couldn't give a shit.  If all you have is your opinion, then you've got dick.

You got a problem darl.  

You keep on asking for proofs 24/7 but what is the point of giving you any evidence considering that your life revolve around a cocoon of fantasy.  
You on the other hand would not give any proofs about your many claims.
Why don't you give any evidence about claims that you made or claims that other people made and you agree with them such as.........the consciousness is a product of the brain or the physical death is the total death?

Why don't you stop being a nuisance and start being a bit more honest?  

I have presented evidence of both of those to you in the past. That you are forgetful and incapable of learning is not my problem.

So take your lies about me and shove them up your ass. The only problem we have here is that you're an incompetent and dishonest twat.

You're just another religious nutball, who believes religious dogma because he's to stupid to see it for what it is, and comes to irrational conclusions about others as a result.

[*Deidre*]

There are many theists who ''accept'' evolution, but of those I know who believe the Bible to be entirely literal, and Genesis to be anything but an allegory, they don't accept evolution. But, a Creationist will be hard pressed to accept it. I believe in God, but don't follow religion. I have no problem accepting evolution.

[Mystic]

I use to believe the same, only I realized, it's because I relied on others to reflect for me and I gave into the bias of "scientific" authority. When you reflect over the issue as people in the past reflected over it, design can be proven.

[Little Rik]

You got a problem darl.  

You keep on asking for proofs 24/7 but what is the point of giving you any evidence considering that your life revolve around a cocoon of fantasy.  
You on the other hand would not give any proofs about your many claims.
Why don't you give any evidence about claims that you made or claims that other people made and you agree with them such as.........the consciousness is a product of the brain or the physical death is the total death?

Why don't you stop being a nuisance and start being a bit more honest?  

I have presented evidence of both of those to you in the past.  That you are forgetful and incapable of learning is not my problem.

So take your lies about me and shove them up your ass.  The only problem we have here is that you're an incompetent and dishonest twat.

You're just another religious nutball, who believes religious dogma because he's to stupid to see it for what it is, and comes to irrational conclusions about others as a result.

You presented evidence?  

I beg you pardon!
What evidence? Where? When?
Why you keep on being a liar yog?

All you said in the past is that science still doesn't know and in any case you never said such a things.
That however doesn't turn you clean because as far as you back those who keep on presenting these dogmas you automatically become part of the problem.
No excuses yog.
Or you come clean by saying that those ideas are dogmas (unproven beliefs turned into truth without evidence) or you keep on banging your skull on the wall by pretending that that is not a problem.
In that way you only hurt yourself.








(color mine)

[Whateverist]

There are many theists who ''accept'' evolution, but of those I know who believe the Bible to be entirely literal, and Genesis to be anything but an allegory, they don't accept evolution. But, a Creationist will be hard pressed to accept it. I believe in God, but don't follow religion. I have no problem accepting evolution.

I'm reading (well, mostly skimming now past the first chapter) a book by cell biologist Kenneth R. Miller called The Human Instinct. He apparently subscribes to old earth creationism or theistic evolution. So he/they accept everything science has to say about evolution, speciation and all. But they to varying degrees think God tosses in a 'random' mutation here or there. So one can argue that they don't actually accept 'natural' selection. But some seem to believe that God could have cooked the inorganic materials to ensure they would, under the right conditions, cross the organic threshold. I suppose, though I don't know anyone who says it, that such a believer might consistently believe that God didn't really care what we looked like - Adam didn't have to be an ape. Being 'made' in God's image just means possessed of reason, sentience, self-awareness and so on. Not sure if any nominally Christian would believe that though.

Please don't feel you need to repeat yourself yet again in response to this, Rik. Not addressed to you or your spiritual evolution shtick.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

What's the copyright date on the Miller book?

[Angrboda]

I have presented evidence of both of those to you in the past.  That you are forgetful and incapable of learning is not my problem.

So take your lies about me and shove them up your ass.  The only problem we have here is that you're an incompetent and dishonest twat.

You're just another religious nutball, who believes religious dogma because he's to stupid to see it for what it is, and comes to irrational conclusions about others as a result.

You presented evidence?  

I beg you pardon!
What evidence? Where? When?
Why you keep on being a liar yog?

All you said in the past is that science still doesn't know and in any case you never said such a things.
That however doesn't turn you clean because as far as you back those who keep on presenting these dogmas you automatically become part of the problem.
No excuses yog.
Or you come clean by saying that those ideas are dogmas (unproven beliefs turned into truth without evidence) or you keep on banging your skull on the wall by pretending that that is not a problem.
In that way you only hurt yourself.

(color mine)

Regardless of your disbelief, the evidence was presented. So go fuck yourself.

This thread is about evolution, not consciousness and the brain. You're just doing your usual bullshit of changing the subject.

Even if I had not presented such evidence, not answering your questions does not preclude me from asking Mystic the questions I did.

There is nothing wrong with asking for evidence. Period. I have provided you evidence in the past, but as we see here, my doing so was pointless.

You even accepted that the things I provided were evidence. So your own posts demonstrated that this idea that these are beliefs not based on evidence is wrong and another of your lies.

Now, because you're too stupid to make a note of important posts, and too incompetent to use the search engines to find those posts, you accuse me of lying.

You're simply full of shit, as usual. Now that you've had your little tantrum, I suggest you return to the thread topic.

[Whateverist]

What's the copyright date on the Miller book?

It is very recent, this year I believe.

---

You presented evidence?  

I beg you pardon!
What evidence? Where? When?
Why you keep on being a liar yog?

All you said in the past is that science still doesn't know and in any case you never said such a things.
That however doesn't turn you clean because as far as you back those who keep on presenting these dogmas you automatically become part of the problem.
No excuses yog.
Or you come clean by saying that those ideas are dogmas (unproven beliefs turned into truth without evidence) or you keep on banging your skull on the wall by pretending that that is not a problem.
In that way you only hurt yourself.

(color mine)

Regardless of your disbelief, the evidence was presented.  So go fuck yourself with a columnar cactus of enormous girth.

Fixed that for you with my bolded.

[EgoDeath]

Why accept evolution? Because it the most well-supported theory on the development of biological life forms we have to date. There are decades of evidence to back it up and though, colloquially, theory means a guess or a hunch, in the scientific world it is as good as 100% fact as we can get. Grow up, stop denying scientific facts.