myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Evolution
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1640
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
NW doth protest too much. In another thread he said:

Quote:
BTW, "the war on women" is a liberal term that is often used by you, and you ilk. When in reality it's a war on unwanted babies as being conducted by the left.


If that doesn't sound abortion obsessed, as well as making up things about other people, then I don't know what does.

Nice try palzy, since when does wanting the number of frivolous abortions to be reduced, have to be on religious grounds?
Isn't moral grounds good enough?
Obsession? Hardly, you won't see me out in front of Family Planning with protest signs, this issue is actually fairly low on my list of what's hurting our society.

The financial entitlement mentality is faaaaaaar worse IMO.
And BHO wanting to extend unemployment even further just feeds into that.
"But it's an emergency extension". Another one, why is that?
Isn't the administration saying that the employment numbers are heading in the right direction?
So what's the emergency?
And at what point do unemployment payments ever stop? Will it ever with this administration?
Nope, not if they get their way.
They need the unemployed, it's in large part keeping their base intact.

Sorry for getting side tracked, that happens sometimes.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3328

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 6:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simple problems have simple solutions.
Unemployment is simple.
It is welfare for lazy people.
Everyone on unemployment is a liberal.
They are all going to vote for Obama because he allowed them to have $130 week so their family of four has been living high on tax money.
There are jobs waiting for all these bums that make more than enough.
Most of them are gov. jobs because Obama has expanded the gov. by hiring
like crazy.

Complex problems have difficult solutions or none that work well.

Unemployment is complex.
It is welfare for working people caught in a crisis made by rich bankers.
Many unemployed are conservatives or can't afford politics because they have hungry families who can't afford rent or schoolbooks.
None of them is going to vote for Obama or anyone else since they lost their car and he isn't running for office.
There is one job, inc. min wage jobs, for each three unemployed people.
Gov. has shrunk under Obama in part because he reduced the gov. payroll.

I have doubts about extending unemployment ins. but also know which kind of problem this is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3512
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nw30 wrote:
mac wrote:
NW doth protest too much. In another thread he said:

Quote:
BTW, "the war on women" is a liberal term that is often used by you, and you ilk. When in reality it's a war on unwanted babies as being conducted by the left.


If that doesn't sound abortion obsessed, as well as making up things about other people, then I don't know what does.

Nice try palzy, since when does wanting the number of frivolous abortions to be reduced, have to be on religious grounds?
Isn't moral grounds good enough?
Obsession? Hardly, you won't see me out in front of Family Planning with protest signs, this issue is actually fairly low on my list of what's hurting our society.

The financial entitlement mentality is faaaaaaar worse IMO.
And BHO wanting to extend unemployment even further just feeds into that.
"But it's an emergency extension". Another one, why is that?
Isn't the administration saying that the employment numbers are heading in the right direction?
So what's the emergency?
And at what point do unemployment payments ever stop? Will it ever with this administration?
Nope, not if they get their way.
They need the unemployed, it's in large part keeping their base intact.

Sorry for getting side tracked, that happens sometimes.

A little historical precident, NW..since you have a problem with our country's history. The country has an abnormally high level of long term unemployed...14 of the past 17 times we have been in this postion, we have extended benefits. In terms of "the base", an equal number of these people vote repub, as do democrat. Many of these people are part of the Walmart South...the core base for the Rethug party.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5123

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

NW--you might want to take responsibility for the clarity of your communication, as well as its accuracy. I agree that abortion is a bad solution--so I suggest that you don't have any. I suggest that any man who feels that way do as I did--take responsibility for his sexual conduct so there wouldn't be any possibility of an abortion decision faced by his sexual partner. But I would remind you that it is her decision, consistent with established law-not that of any man, evangelical or not.

Now to the facts. Abortion is down--from 29.3 per thousand women in the early 1980's to 19.6 per thousand in 2008. For those of you who don't know statistics, that is significant, can't be accident, isn't noise, is actually a trend. Right to life groups claim responsibility, as do right to birth control groups. I'm willing to give them both credit for a good thing--but I'm not willing to give them control over my daughter's decision. I had my influence raising them--that is the proper male role.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scottwerden



Joined: 11 Jul 1999
Posts: 210

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GURGLETROUSERS wrote:

It appears likely that we will be unable to develop our brain size any further. (Though it has never been compulsory to be a Republican.) It is to do wiuth body temperature being at the top limit for further improvement in brain function. (Explains a lot!!! Wink )


Human evolution has effectively come to an end so even if we could have larger brains there is no selection mechanism to make that be a preferential outcome. The classic Darwinian selector was food - the evolutionary winner would eat and the loser would starve. But we now make sure nobody starves and nobody dies from the myriad diseases that used to kill people quickly.

If there is to be any evolving from this point forward it will more than likely be mediated by the medical industry. Or the military for their own nefarious purposes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 5123

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scott and GT said:

Quote:
Human evolution has effectively come to an end


One of the things that I find amusing is that many people don't read what is posted and engage in a conversation. What I began this thread with was information that showed adaptive changes in China between populations in Tibet and populations in Beijing--over the past 3000 years. Clearly evolution has not come to an end--although GT may be right about the limitations on size and brain capacity of the human animal.

Equally clear that the earth is not 6000 years old, and was not created in a static manner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GURGLETROUSERS



Joined: 30 Dec 2009
Posts: 1331

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Perhaps so Scott, but there is the evolutionary mechanism of accidental mutation. (Faulty replication of DNA) That could throw up an enlarged brain.

The problem would still be overheating from increased mental activity. Only a few degrees above our high 98.4 blood temperature leads to delirium. (Just had mild bout of flu myself.)

One obvious suggestion is the development of intelligent computers, but thankfully, I'll be dead long before that potentially dangerous possibility comes into effect. But if built into functioning robots, they would be the answer to space exploration.

The other point, of course, is that evolution seems to go in spurts of rapid changes after long settled spells of millions of years. Given that we, in our current form, have already used up about 3 million years without obvious development, perhaps we may be near such a point.

But, as you say, survival of the fittest no longer really applies to us (Medical science.) More to the point, survival of the unfittest is perhaps a worry, with dilution of our robust genetic stock, and increased susceptibility to dangerous illness. But to that, there is no obvious answer, except ever more potent anti-biotics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scottwerden



Joined: 11 Jul 1999
Posts: 210

PostPosted: Tue Jan 07, 2014 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GURGLETROUSERS wrote:
Perhaps so Scott, but there is the evolutionary mechanism of accidental mutation. (Faulty replication of DNA) That could throw up an enlarged brain.

The other point, of course, is that evolution seems to go in spurts of rapid changes after long settled spells of millions of years. Given that we, in our current form, have already used up about 3 million years without obvious development, perhaps we may be near such a point.

But, as you say, survival of the fittest no longer really applies to us (Medical science.) More to the point, survival of the unfittest is perhaps a worry, with dilution of our robust genetic stock, and increased susceptibility to dangerous illness. But to that, there is no obvious answer, except ever more potent anti-biotics.


The dominate thinking in genetics is that genetic changes are by selection within the gene pool and not through mutation. Mutation is a mechanism of change but it is minor, or so the thinking goes. Darwin believed, and most geneticists adhere to the idea of gradual, continual change that leads to speciation. Rapid speciation through so-called punctuated equilibrium is very interesting and has been the topic of more than one SciFi book.

The problem of a degraded gene pool due to human intervention in the natural process of removing bad genes is definitely not PC to be debating, although it is indeed a real problem. The Nazis of course recognized this to be a threat to their idea of a master race and used eugenics principles to justify killing people with undesirable genes (Down's syndrome, etc.). Moral considerations aside, modern medicine is definitely altering the makeup of our gene pool, a sort of reverse selection process.

While evolution solved the problem of how to deal with non-ideal genes over the past two billion years by selecting against them, we are now in an era in which human technology will be dealing with how to support these genes (at least in Homo Sapiens) which heretofore would have been removed. Very interesting social/political/moral issues for us to deal with when it comes to human genetics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stevenbard



Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 4048

PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why do sub-atomic particles behave differently when observed by humans?

It has been proven in experiments that sub-atomic particles change their behavior when being viewed by a human being in real time than if they were just recorded by a machine and viewed later.

What could the possible reason be that the sub-atomic particles seem to "sense" they are being watched and thus change their behavior?

Possible explanations:
1. It is God waving hello.
2. Human thought affects sub-atomic particles and thus, human thought actually can shape reality.
3. It's just weird.

Additional Details

Some say that this supports the theory that God (the Universal Quantum Consciousness) simply "thought" the Universe into existence and that is why, at the Quantum level, sub-atomic particles respond to thought.

Wouldn't it be weird if one day science actually proved the existence of an intelligent creative force behind all of this?

The basis for this is the famous DOUBLE-SLIT experiment

Saying that "God" and science cannot work together is just plain short sighted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
scottwerden



Joined: 11 Jul 1999
Posts: 210

PostPosted: Wed Jan 08, 2014 3:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uh, the double slit experiment has nothing to do with god or human thought. There are actually several variations on the experiment but in general they are all used to illustrate some of the oddities of quantum mechanics, the two most interesting results being wave-particle duality and so-called quantum entanglement. The results are all very well explained by the framework of quantum mechanics and there is no need to drag the concept of god into it in order to explain any of the results.

What has this to do with the thread topic of evolution?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 7 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group