Moontanman

I am well aware of what is being discussed/asserted here and so far you have failed to show any of it to be anything but faith and belief, I have no problem with that but to assert it as empirical evidence your god is real is simply not supported by what you keep claiming is evidence...

I want a elephant the size of a dog... or a centaur! Genetic engineering gives me goose bumps...

Missing links? let me know if you want to discuss missing links... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitional_fossil

Ok Immortal, I watched your videos, I saw no scientific evidence of the existence of your god, in fact the entire video danced around that concept in favor of the Vedas being historically accurate. This does not support the existence of your god but only the antiquity and relative accuracy of the vedas compared to what westerners thought happened in the area. If there is some part you think i missed that was support for the existence of your god feel free to give me the time index of the statement. Again it would seem that your idea of what constitutes Empirical Evidence appears to be evidently different from what everyone else defines as empirical evidence... having said that if I take the narrators word at face value it is evident that Vedic Culture was mischaracterized due to prejudices of western researchers and some of the history described in the Vedas is accurate despite what the Western researchers thought to be true. But at no point did the videos or the guy who made them claim the existence of your god or gods was confirmed by anything in the Vedas. the best he could do was say that the Vedic description of the universe was somewhat more accurate than other religious writings... His claims of technology in the Vedas, while interesting, do not support this position either, in fact the whole thing is after the fact transposition of information that appears to describe technology but cannot be used to create technology is not indicative of anything anymore than ancient writings that describe flights to the moon were prophecy... If you disagree with my assessment feel free to give me the time indexes for the information i missed...

Again, you evidently have a completely different definition of Empirical EVIDENCE than the rest of us do....

Immortal, I am going to recommend you watch the following video, it is mostly targeted at creationism but it makes some pretty good points about the Holy nature of various religious writings. You keep saying the Veda's are somehow evidence of God or some sort of god but the first five minutes of this video gives very good logical reasons why this cannot be true. I realize you will not watch this, but I feel the need to at least give you the opportunity to see just how irrational the idea that any writings, much less yours are somehow written by a deity. AronRa gives a very good summation of why this is certainly not the case and what we would expect a god to write...

Yes bacteria communicate with each other chemically. I tend to question the idea that life must reproduce with variation. I can see the possibility of a planet that it's entire biomass is one organism... Opps already been thought of Gaea.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

Plants respond to stimuli, some directly some indirectly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life

I don't know why you got neg rep for just asking the question but stars do not qualify as life because they do not reproduce with variation. in fact I doubt you could make a good case they reproduce at all. While they do shed outer layers the end result is not necessarily a new star in fact since they use up hydrogen and will eventually result in all the hydrogen in the universe being used up. If a star can be defined as life a fire would also qualify. A fire grows, reproduces via sparks, but it is not alive...

How do they reproduce?

31 gods, kinda like Baskin Robbins ice cream? This has gotten silly, immortal you win, your 31 gods beats my rational mind approach, have fun cow towing to 31 gods for an eternity... sounds like hell to me...

Actually there is a funny story behind that. My sister is 5 years younger than me and of course she always wanted to follow me around and get in the middle of anything me and my friends were doing. When she would inevitably get knocked down or what ever she would go home to mom crying and of course mom would come and get me wanting to know what happened. Mom would always kiss my sister to make her feel better and would insist i do the same thing. Eventually it got to the point where I would kiss her immediately hoping she would not disrupt what ever game we were playing by going to momma... Of course my biddies always ragged me hard about my mom making me kiss my sister to make her feel better. One day in school we were playing at lunch break in the school yard and there was this girl... Barbara Ashworth... oh yes I was in love, 2nd grade, i was enamored beyond belief with Barbara Ashworth... one day, playing tag, I accidently knocked her down and you guessed it I immediately kissed her to make her feel better... the rest of the year was a living hell as my buddies teased me incessantly... my first kiss... well non family member kiss...

I didn't say that common ancestry was based on chromosome fusion. I said it can be explained and that it supports evolution... Please watch this video, then we can talk...

Please show some evidence of these beings immortal, show some evidence they control any aspect of human existence. From where I stand you are no better than any other god botherer standing on a street corner preaching some obtuse interpretation of what bronze ages savages believed about god...

Only if you assume they are true with no evidentiary support. Immortal, so far you have done nothing but dig a hole you cannot escape from. You claim special knowledge but fail to show how you can show this knowledge as anything but your own assumptions about what you think god should be like. You believe what you do because of faith in your beliefs... totally circular reasoning if it can be called reasoning at all. Your so called comparative studies is nothing more than your own conformation biases supporting what you think should be true. Your views on this do not significantly differ from Ken Ham's biblical glasses... So far, and I have been keeping track, all you are doing is making unsupported claims asserting things you cannot possibly know to be true... Faith in your beliefs, that is all you have, yes we came to this conclusion a while back, and you admitted you had no empirical evidence then, you still don't immortal, it might very well be enough for you to believe but it fails miserably when you try to show this "faith in your belief" as part of empirical reality...

neanderthals had 48, 24 pairs, Other apes also have 24 pairs. Yes evolution can explain this, google fused chromosomes, humans and apes... Why do you think this is an unanswered question? I would say this makes science stronger not weaker...

http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/2013/01/01

Actually the use of fire is thought to have started 1,000,000 years ago not 125,000 years ago. http://www.livescience.com/19425-earliest-human-fire.html Human brains are shrinking, maybe we will end up with brains the size of walnuts... http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep/25-modern-humans-smart-why-brain-shrinking#.UPBDtuTO1Rw

Higher plants are are aerobic organisms, some photosynthetic bacteria are not...

I think the idea that it would result in a paradox is interesting by it's self. How does gravity work at relativistic speeds? Would the increase in mass not have gravitational effect? From the stand point of an object traveling at very close to the speed of light doesn't the entire universe appear to be behind it as a point? Similar to the way the universe would disappear as you fell into the event horizon of a black hole? I am operating on memories of some of the odd effects of black holes and very near c travel as described by, I think it was Carl Sagan, in a TV show, maybe Cosmos... I may be well off mark here, it was a long time ago...

No, actually you state things as you want them to be and then get annoyed when everyone doesn't agree.... more than a bit of difference...

If we get 3 neg reps we should get more pos rep too... I like to give out pos rep.

You said: you simply cannot support that assumption, it is obviously false because I do not agree, there fore "we all" do not agree... I don't understand what you are saying...

Nope No way to intelligently speculate on that. mammals have brains that are pretty much unique to mammals. other creatures on the earth have various sized, shaped, and efficiency of various degrees and we are all vertebrates... octopus like intelligence's when you consider that an octopus, very nearly all species, only live for a year or two but they are capable of some astounding feats of learning and apparent intelligence. Their brains are quite different than ours and we share a major portion of our DNA with them and some distant ancestry. Creatures from another planet would share zero history with us... I'm not sure that can be supported... but the success of theropod dinosaurs might support your position about bipedal predators... I thin colonial insects and their ability to manipulate the environment shows that to be a weak position... Creatures from another planet are unlikely to resemble earth life at all. Vertebrates like us were not destined to rule the large animal niches on our planet. Then there is the possibility of vertebrate like hexapods, Centauroid... I can see an octopus like intelligence evolving on a large planet with low gravity, deep atmosphere.... no way to assert it as likely... It's easy to assert the humanoid shape as ideal for tool using technological creatures but it's difficult to show them as more likely in any other biosphere... I guess the real question would be "if the tape was replayed"

I'm a bit of a cook too but my wife is the real deal, southern cooking, she puts Paula Dean to shame...