Moontanman

Can you offer any positive empirical evidence of that world salad you call a post or are you just going over the edge due to inability to come up with anything but "I can't understand it so it couldn't have happened that way"?

Irreducible complexity is horse feathers zorro, the complexity of the many eyes that have evolved independently in animals on our Earth is easily explained by evolution, in fact examples of all stages of eyes from eyes no better than light detectors to eyes that make the best sighted humans legally blind by comparison are present on the Earth right now... Your void argument is based in ignorance and incredulity and is either trivially falsified by demonstrable natural processes or simply unknown at this time and unknown does not equal goddidit... I suggest you learn the difference between deity and diet, how complexity arises out of chaos, not to mention positive feed back loops and what does Genome and emotions have to do with each other? ...

I don't know zapatos, my world shook when I found out John had the biggest penis in the world, I am in 2nd place now, Anthony Wiener is in third, I guess that leaves you bringing up 4th place...

Reminded me of this joke from the jokes thread post #1469...

In the case of the Earth you are incorrect, night time is the Earth's shadow...

Any chance you could clarify the difference a little more precisely?

How true, then there is that whole parthenogenesis thing, Lets make sure we have our facts straight... Jesus was a female? Kind of hard to tell under all those robes and long blond hair...

Interesting take zorro, let me get this straight, you are asserting the completely natural process of child birth confirms god or they are voids? Hmmm... no sorry makes no sense what so ever to me... care to try again? No! Wait! I guess it does support my vast Brobdingnagian creature that mindlessly excretes universes as part of it's natural digestive system... whew! Almost missed that one... BTW what does the complexity of the eye have to do with anything? Come on zorro, don't ignore me, you've made some serious assertions here, how does a void before the beginning of the universe have anything to do with the completely natural process of child birth? I have personally been present for child birth from beginning to end nothing supernatural about it, no miracles, no faith required and definitely no void...

That last bit makes sense, but the chicken and the egg... Chickens evolved from Jungle fowl, the origins of eggs can be traced back quite a long ways and at no point would it be proper to say the creature laying the chicken egg was anything but a chicken nor would anything hatch out of that egg but a chicken...

Where I live I personally know of a beaver damn at least a mile long, maybe quite a bit more but since most of what they eat are small trees and the big trees are already swamp trees their impact on the trees is small, in fact if you didn't know what you were looking for you might miss the damn and the water it holds, this particular damn is only a foot high and it's the only place I've been riding along in the swamp and realized the water along the side of the road was higher than the road... Alligators tend to keep them in check...

According to the info in the videos the only reason we didn't go with Thorium reactors to begin with was the plutonium production of an uranium reactor which was used so they could make bombs. Thorium reactors are just as easy to operate as uranium reactors and produce much less much shorter lived radioactive waste. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHs2Ugxo7-8&list=PL46C2BD92EA739A33

Mandy, the answer lies in the way different wave lengths of light are absorbed. The air is more or less clear to visible wave lengths but not to longer wave lengths that are emitted after visible light is absorbed by the solid earth...

What part of the Higgs was so difficult to find they called it the god damned particle did you not understand? You suggest I not blaspheme? I suggest you get a clue... Good science will always ignore god and the no true Scotsman argument is silly no matter how hard you try to hide it... and since I hold no belief in any god the first commandment is irrelevant to me... btw the word you were looking for was wicca...

This was meant for you but I posted it in another thread, I'd blame it on the pain pills I'm taking for an ear infection but they don't seem to be working anyway. What astonishes me is the arrogance of the theist to argue something they really know nothing about. "I've read most or some of the bible" "I know my god doesn't promote violence" and yet there are passages where god demands the deaths of not only armies but the women children and babies of the enemy, god demands the deaths of witches, homosexuals and unruly children. In one passage god tells his people to kill all the men women and male children but to keep the female children for their own pleasure. Another passage tells of god calling two she bears out of the woods to kill several children because they made fun of his prophets bald head... If you are going to argue for theism you should do much more that just read some of it... and then there is the arrogance of assuming your particular god is the only god and having no evidence what so ever to confirm that train of thought. Theism is the height of arrogance based on nothing...

Embarrassing as it is i have to apologize, I posted this in the wrong thread, amazingly it is still relevant to this thread, so I stand by my post number 37 but this post was a mistake and i apologize for it...

Quite the contrary I think i am dead on topic, the idea of presupposing that science is discovering god is arrogant beyond belief. If Science is discovering anything it is discovering that god is irrelevant to any discussion of science and has no place in the natural world. You have every right to your own beliefs but you do not have any right to your own reality, God is not an answer to anything, the concept of god has no evidence much less the concept of any particular god. If science is revealing god then which god? Krishna? Adrianna, Allah? Xenu? Why assume something that has no detectable effect on anything and is functionally no different than assuming angels push the planets around the sun... If science is revealing or explaining anything it is explaining why god is not necessary to existence, and that god serves no purpose other than allowing a few to control many with lies and deceit...

LFTR reactors safer than current fission reactors and produce less, shorter lived waste... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWUeBSoEnRk

Did you mean endoskeletol or exoskeletol?

I should have asked if you respect the validity of those other gods as much as you do yours.... In that case i would refer you to the 1st commandment...

I did not ask about people, Do you respect their beliefs enough to admit they are as justifiable as yours?

I agree, at one time snake locomotion was considered supernatural, in fact i remember being told that snakes were not natural creatures and were evil incarnate and they moved via magic.... when I was a little boy, of course avoiding T-Rex was more important back then than worrying about snakes

So you give equal respect to Mormonism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Neo Paganism, Jewish, and all other god concepts?

What astonishes me is the arrogance of the theist to argue something they really know nothing about. "I've read most or some of the bible" "I know my god doesn't promote violence" and yet there are passages where god demands the deaths of not only armies but the women children and babies of the enemy, god demands the deaths of witches, homosexuals and unruly children. In one passage god tells his people to kill all the men women and male children but to keep the female children for their own pleasure. Another passage tells of god calling two she bears out of the woods to kill several children because they made fun of his prophets bald head... If you are going to argue for theism you should do much more that just read some of it... and then there is the arrogance of assuming your particular god is the only god and having no evidence what so ever to confirm that train of thought. Theism is the height of arrogance based on nothing...

Yes the enormous range of animal types on Earth from cephalopods to arthropods, echinoderms to vertebrates and the sometimes really weird animal types from the Cambrian explosion many of which died out sometimes for reasons that were quite random from asteroid hits to mass lava outflows and super volcanoes there is a real random element to that which survives even if the "tape" of earth were replayed the outcome would almost certainly be wildly different resulting in life forms as alien as any we would expect on another planet...

I have to admit that if I was to consider theism this would come close to the stance i would have to take because no holy book contains any information not already available to the people who wrote it... . But I can't go there because of the total lack of positive evidence for god, in the face of a total lack of positive evidence for god the default position is there are no gods...