Did we Evolve to astrological seasons?

[Hellbender]

Actually, where does reality begin then? Looking on the past?

 

Reality is what I see, hear, feel, touch. Now, I don't want to get into a metaphysical discussion here, becasue I think metaphysics are, for the most part, worthless. This is about your claim that stars somehow affect evolution, a claim which you have yet to back up with any serious evidence, instead going into new-age rants about who-knows-what.

 

You have to realize that at some point reality and the present takes place. To constantly equate reality to the past and look at the present as some sort of "craze" or "New Age" that will simply blow over is abnormal. You have to, at some point, realize that the present is very much a part of the past.

 

And the past is much more part of the present. Although I really don't see what you are getting at here.....

 

I will agree, however, that a lot of people take things to the extreme and revolve their lives around the astrological teachings, however, for those who are not fanatics and don't get swept away by the current, it's a useful and real tool.

 

provide evidence on how it is a "real tool" then, if not, as Flareon pointed out, a placebo-effect deal.

 

You cannot deny truth for an imbalanced exception, because exceptions are often too much or too little--somewhere a balance exists. Culture is just as real as the culture of the first plants or dinosaurs, or even microorganisms, that appeared on earth.

 

As a person who took Cultural Anthropology in college, I can say you have a very odd idea about what culture really is.

 

It's culture that helps shape the path things take, and if you let the culture become murderous, the future will look back on the effects the murderous, enraging culture took on their Evolution--like an abused child. Did the culture become more loving or hateful because of those effects? Did monkeys evolve fingers for climbing trees to get away from a predator, or did they evolve claws for digging holes?

 

What the heck are you talking about?

 

The stars' effects extend beyond an indulgent branch of culture. Stand up and refuse those extremists, those deluded, and refuse them the right to possess the truth as a hostage--such as studying the stars and astrology--just because they may make someone feel wary or insecure (skeptical) of entering into those areas because of their delusions.

 

No they don't. Show me some evidence of how stars can directly affect what you are claiming (preferably in a non-poetic form please). And are you saying I am afraid to truly study astrology because I am delusional about it being false? Face it: there is no evidence stars directly do what you say they do.

 

I don't stop eating food because someone might stuff their face to the brim with it and become unhealthily fat...no, one must keep a healthy balance and sanity on things.

 

True, but even using drugs like heroin once and a while is bad, right? (in the parlance of you analogies)

[Sayonara]

I think you're being shallow in your estimations. I honestly believe they have such a huge effect on Evolution.

"Honest belief" is not going to carry you very far if you don't even perceive a mechanism.

[Hellbender]

"Honest belief" is not going to carry you very far if you don't even perceive a mechanism.

 

The very essence of all CS's posts.....

[Christ slave]

Actually, you asserting a placebo-effect is very much in warrant of my support. And, it's ridiculous for anyone to assert that my reference to even the cultural significance of the stars and the profound effects of NASA on society are not shaping, and very much a part of, Evolution. Evolution is like God, it takes no break.

 

So, if somebody wants to assert that I have provided no support, you are absolutely ignorant and in fact I question your motive and intent...malicious, ruthless attempts at winning arguments are very much poor and an aspect of the self and ego (or, "rich" in the sense that it is truly fueld by the ego).

 

Oh ruthless and lying generation, how long will I put up with your garbage that I am a nin-compoop without any fragment of logic, rationality, reason, or support to my claims? How long will I put up with your stubborn idiocy? Do you honestly assert NASA is somehow exempt from Evolution, life, death, and the like? Do you honestly assert that the stars, apart from the obvious effects it has on our consciousness (and likewise choices, our actions, our entire Evolution), only have an effect when a human-being notices them?

 

You are wrong. If there were no stars, then the behaviors of all of us would be so much more differently...vastly different, and perhaps there would be no human-beings. They affect the amount of light one sees, and with the considerable amount of less light in the event of no stars would truly affect Evolution...perhaps the eyesight, and over millions of years, these "tiny" facts echo an enormous effect (a ripple). Perhaps a dinosaur, blinded by no stars, would have been eaten by another dinosaur. We are on the grounds of the past. To allow a ditch to be created (an alteration the past) would mean that the entire village may in fact be utilizing this newly formed ditch and this echoes infinitely the effect it has on life simply because of its existence.

 

Don't you see? With or without a certain house, the world knows it and is Evolving to it. With or without a hill, with or without a tree, with or without whatever...it effects the entire world, be it the course of the wind, the sunlight, the rainfall, etc. Sure, it may be so very miniscule to you, but reason cannot deny the ripple it has. So, to assert that the stars have little to no effect is foolish...and even if it was true that they had "little" effect, in millions or even 10 years, this ripple gets bigger, doesn't it? Why? Because Evolution is piling up on the past.

 

Throw a pear in a pile and a pile over the pear, the pear helps create that pile. Regardless if you want to assert it has no effect...perhaps someone will see that pile and then they have this memory and event with them forever which affects their lifetime. Their life then affects everything, be it now and the longrun. Perhaps this pile, a milimeter or an inch larger, casts a shadow and then throughout time everything is evolving to the existence of this pile. Everything has it effect. I for one claim the stars are just as relevant as everything--as relevant as an atom dropping into the ocean and then throughout time this atom is affecting every atom in the sea and likewise every creature, every speck of sunlight, every shore, every animal, every cloud--everything! Everything affects Evolution.

[Flareon]

CS, are you stating that distant heavenly bodies have some degree (how much is up to debate) of influence on human personality in an empirical sense, or are you stating a belief in astrology ("Geminis are loquacious" things of that sort)? For the sake of argument, let's assume the two are mutually exclusive.

 

Edit: I don't wish to make you repeat yourself, but I find your posts difficult to understand. Sorry.

[Christ slave]

Do you believe the theory of relativity? Essentially, time itself is not too distant from space. It's like the environment...depending on the space something is born in, that is its environment and it immediately (well, continuously and always) is adapting, growing, conforming, and being shaped by it...be it a tree in a certain yard with another tree, or grass in another yard, or a plant in a field as opposed to a plant in a forest, etc.

 

Likewise, Einstein's theory of relativity and how space and time go hand-in-hand basically proves astrology, however, one's teachings on astrology can vary, depending on their skill (just as one's teaching on how to raise your children, grow a plant, etc. can vary). A good astrological website I've seen (good scientific teachers) is astro.com, and it's a free website with comprehensive information and services.

 

Just as one may be a better psychologist than someone else (or, more skilled and accurate, more helpful), so astrology must be taken seriously if you want to understand it--don't just look at astrology as something like, "Oh, I'm a Virgo I am meant to be like this." Rather, astrology is a forecast, and the more it ties into science, the more people will be able to use it as a tool and not as leader (just as we look at the weatherman to know what to expect, although we do not simply agree he is always right or that the weather cannot take a change or that there are varying degrees of weather and we do not worship the weather forecast nor the weatherman).

 

Essentially, people can use astrology to "stay inside when it rains"--or to know when to "carry an umbrella". Time is relative, and time is actually like the wind...if you see the wind blowing on the trees, you can see the shapes and varying movements of the wind across those trees (or, for a better visual if you do not know what I mean, picture fields of wheat, barley, or corn stalks). You can see the wind blowing on these bodies, and they are affected by the wind. The stronger the tree, the less likely the wind (or, time) is to blow it around. The more evolved or mature the tree, the stronger it is and more resistant...or, the more elastic and flexible it is.

 

Surely time itself, being relative, is like the weather? However, I am not here to go into arguments about the relativity of time, I have better things to do than pretend to be up-to-date on what will make people happy and convinced in terms of arguing my case. However, I think people should truly understand that time is motion--time is movement. Time can be forecast, but this capability comes with study and learning. Primitively species can understand dark clouds forecast rain, it's only essential that we grow and begin to incorporate other observations to forecasting time (astrology)--such as psychology and whatnot.

 

Just as a tree growing in a specific area is likely to be relative to the tree in that area (and likewise weather can be forecast to it in that area), so our lives and whatnot can be forecast by time, because time itself is like a yard. Depending on the "yards" or "flower-beds" of time, this affects something. However, I guess this is dependent on whether or not you agree time is relative and if you believe Einstein's theories. If you do not, then oh well...but like I said, I am not here to debate Einstein's theories, so don't attempt to force me to "support" those claims. Likewise, babies born in the same place at the same time can be physical twins, so exist astrological twins. Do you think twins only exist in the physical sense? You're wrong, there's a big spectrum of everything...including twins.

 

It uses numerology and other sorts of things. However, it is hard for some people, obviously, to grasp the relevance and reality of time, since so many of you seem to be disagreeing.

[Hellbender]

Actually, you asserting a placebo-effect is very much in warrant of my support. And, it's ridiculous for anyone to assert that my reference to even the cultural significance of the stars and the profound effects of NASA on society are not shaping, and very much a part of, Evolution. Evolution is like God, it takes no break.

 

The placebo effect is very real an accounts for lots of stupid things "working". But it is an aspect of the human brain to delude itself, it in no way supports astrology. In fact, it makes it all the more silly.

 

So, if somebody wants to assert that I have provided no support, you are absolutely ignorant and in fact I question your motive and intent...malicious, ruthless attempts at winning arguments are very much poor and an aspect of the self and ego (or, "rich" in the sense that it is truly fueld by the ego).

 

You haven't provided any support, just long-rambling posts containing metaphysical nonsense and pseudoscience. It is hardly "ignorant" for members of a science forum to ask someone making wild claims to provide evidence for them.

 

Oh ruthless and lying generation, how long will I put up with your garbage that I am a nin-compoop without any fragment of logic, rationality, reason, or support to my claims? How long will I put up with your stubborn idiocy?

 

Then prove us all wrong by showing that your arguments and opinions are logical and reasonable. So far, you haven't given us any reason to really ascribe these qualities to you, so its hardly stubborn.

 

Word of (objective, so it may sound harsh) advice: It hasn't shown to be a good idea to go into a science forum and start talking about crazy stuff like astrology, and then complain when we ask that you provide evidence for your claims. We all are either scientists, or have an interest in science, so maybe taking these topics to a more like-minded audience is a good idea, you may have learned that we aren't going tell you what you want to hear from most of us.

[Christ slave]

NASA and the obvious cultural effects and their relevance into Evolution, earth, and life is irrefutable based on a field-view. If you can't accept it, leave. It is undeniable to assert the stars play a role in Evolution, using simple logic and reason. You obviously appear to disagree with me, and I cannot control your opinion, however, it would be stupid for me to have to defend the obvious. Are you a child?

[Hellbender]

NASA and the obvious cultural effects and their relevance into Evolution, earth, and life is irrefutable based on a field-view.

 

NASA has certainly contributed to our culture and our understanding of space, but I don't see how space exploration has or could directly affect evolution. I guess I should ask again HOW you propose that stars directly affect evolution....

 

If you can't accept it, leave. It is undeniable to assert the stars play a role in Evolution, using simple logic and reason.

 

Its not undeniable. You haven't showed any ways that stars *could* do what you say they do. So take your own advice, your position nay, fantasies, are hardly supported by logic and reason (or anything but belief for that matter).

 

You obviously appear to disagree with me, and I cannot control your opinion, however, it would be stupid for me to have to defend the obvious.

Are you a child?

 

you don't get it. i don't agree with you for more reasons that "just opinion". Opinions may carry weight in the politics forum, but there are little things called "facts" and "evidence". These two little words naturally should factor greatly in a scientific discussion, and in my disagreement with your pseudoscience as well.

 

Are you a child?

 

Are you? After all, I am the one being rational (rational being a quality generally thought of as mature) here, and you are the one who is choosing to keep this discussion in the realm of sheer fantasy.

[Christ slave]

Stop flattering yourself to appear right. The culture itself has such a profound relevance in modern-day life that it's undeniable to suggest the stars have an effect. In fact, every person on earth practically knows about the stars in one form or another, and we see them and they affect our consciousness and our lives...be it spending energy and time to look at them, to wonder at them, to learn about them, to become an astronomer, etc.

 

In fact, pyramids were built which take a role in shaping people's lives today as well as an echo/ripple effect of the entire civilization and their lives when they were building the pyramids up until this moment and forever forward in the future. Existence (or, Evolution) has been changed/shaped by it, and the stars hardly lose their relevance there.

 

People study the stars, teach about them, discuss them, paint pictures of them, refer to them and use them in analogies, some people are called "stars" if they're famous, the stars give us light as night and when a pretty sky is visible, people plan their lives and time around it to get some good views of them that night, their light shines on us and give us reference points in the sky, they teach us about the universe, and so much more.

 

In fact, if their light did not shine on us, our bodies would be much different, wouldn't they? Our night-time vision (and this is such a relevant aspect of life that you don't even have to consider a ripple or "Butterfly Effect", because it's obviously so well engraved in the bodies of many species), the events of the past, and much more. I only assume their light has in someway affected plant life and Evolution, as well. But at any rate, the changing of the seasons are now so obviously affecting Evolution in their effects on society. If the constellations weren't in different times because of the equinoxes, then astrology and likewise the culture, consciousness, observation, knowledge (the learning and understanding), etc. would not be so drastically altered by it. Our very communication, reference, etc. is absolutely evolving and changing over these past 2,000 years because 2,000 years ago we'd be seeing things in a "different light"--or, a different time sequence, angle, perspective, etc.

 

I just want to help to open your mind to realizing what I am saying here...there is no change that doesn't affect the future.

[Hellbender]

Stop flattering yourself to appear right. The culture itself has such a profound relevance in modern-day life that it's undeniable to suggest the stars have an effect.

 

I am not flattering myself! From what orifice are you pulling these assumptions from? Stars have an effect on culture I guess, but I fail to see any evidence that they so profoundly affect evolution as you say.

 

In fact, every person on earth practically knows about the stars in one form or another, and we see them and they affect our consciousness and our lives...be it spending energy and time to look at them, to wonder at them, to learn about them, to become an astronomer, etc.

 

So? See above point.

 

In fact, pyramids were built which take a role in shaping people's lives today as well as an echo/ripple effect of the entire civilization and their lives when they were building the pyramids up until this moment and forever forward in the future. Existence (or, Evolution) has been changed/shaped by it, and the stars hardly lose their relevance there.

 

Whaaa.....

 

People study the stars, teach about them, discuss them, paint pictures of them, refer to them and use them in analogies, some people are called "stars" if they're famous, the stars give us light as night and when a pretty sky is visible, people plan their lives and time around it to get some good views of them that night, their light shines on us and give us reference points in the sky, they teach us about the universe, and so much more.

 

They don't teach us that much about the universe. They exist, they are pretty on summer nights and thats mostly all they do. They don't even provide that much light at night. Don't get me wrong, stars are pretty and interesting, but the truth is that they don't really affect culture as much as you think, and they certainly don't move in astrological cycles that can directly shape evolution.

 

In fact, if their light did not shine on us, our bodies would be much different, wouldn't they? Our night-time vision

 

Our bodies would scarcely be different. They don't illuminate the night as much as you think.

 

maybe I will rebut the other points later, but I am getting bored with this conversation....

[Christ slave]

No, I think you fail to see the implications of their presence--the implications of their very appearance, even--and just how much they affect and have to do with life.

 

The question I propose, however, is, do you think the changes in the seasons of such affect life similar to the more obvious, short-term seasons?

[swansont]

Actually' date=' you asserting a placebo-effect is very much in warrant of my support. And, it's ridiculous for anyone to assert that my reference to even the cultural significance of the stars and the profound effects of NASA on society are not shaping, and very much a part of, Evolution. Evolution is like God, it takes no break.

 

So, if somebody wants to assert that I have provided no support, you are absolutely ignorant and in fact I question your motive and intent...malicious, ruthless attempts at winning arguments are very much poor and an aspect of the self and ego (or, "rich" in the sense that it is truly fueld by the ego).

 

Oh ruthless and lying generation, how long will I put up with your garbage that I am a nin-compoop without any fragment of logic, rationality, reason, or support to my claims? How long will I put up with your stubborn idiocy? Do you honestly assert NASA is somehow exempt from Evolution, life, death, and the like? Do you honestly assert that the stars, apart from the obvious effects it has on our consciousness (and likewise choices, our actions, our entire Evolution), only have an effect when a human-being notices them?

 

You are wrong. If there were no stars, then the behaviors of all of us would be so much more differently...vastly different, and perhaps there would be no human-beings. They affect the amount of light one sees, and with the considerable amount of less light in the event of no stars would truly affect Evolution...perhaps the eyesight, and over millions of years, these "tiny" facts echo an enormous effect (a ripple). Perhaps a dinosaur, blinded by no stars, would have been eaten by another dinosaur. We are on the grounds of the past. To allow a ditch to be created (an alteration the past) would mean that the entire village may in fact be utilizing this newly formed ditch and this echoes infinitely the effect it has on life simply because of its existence.

[/quote']

 

You seem to be arguiong two different points in two different lines of thought.

 

On the one hand, you speak of the effect of the stars on evolution of several billion years, and on the other, cultural evolution over a few thousand years (and in the case of NASA, about 50 years). Those are widely disparate arguments.

 

Also, you speak of the presence or absence of starlight affecting evolution, but this is a very different argument that the specific positions of stars have some effect, i.e. astrology.

 

To make one argument and then whine about how people can possibly deny any truth to some different argument is intellectually dishonest.

[swansont]

... astrology is a forecast' date=' and the more it ties into science, the more people will be able to use it as a tool and not as leader (just as we look at the weatherman to know what to expect, although we do not simply agree he is always right or that the weather cannot take a change or that there are varying degrees of weather and we do not worship the weather forecast nor the weatherman).

 

Essentially, people can use astrology to "stay inside when it rains"--or to know when to "carry an umbrella". [/quote']

 

Can you present any valid data at all that supports astrology's predictive power?

[Christ slave]

You seem to be arguiong two different points in two different lines of thought.

They go hand-in-hand.

On the one hand, you speak of the effect of the stars on evolution of several billion years, and on the other, cultural evolution over a few thousand years (and in the case of NASA, about 50 years). Those are widely disparate arguments.

No, I said they are present day proof of the stars' relevancy. I firmly doubt that the stars had went unnoticed since the beginning of time until recent times when humans took more considerable notice in them.

 

Any event affected by any star, be it a dinosaur noticing it, the light eminated at night, and so on is absolutely relevant.

Also, you speak of the presence or absence of starlight affecting evolution, but this is a very different argument that the specific positions of stars have some effect, i.e. astrology.

No, I think it's just ignorant that you constantly argue against astrology as a means of refuting me, when in reailty astrology is only a fraction of my point. I never used astrology to back myself up entirely, but I have the right to include it. Where do you think creativity comes from? Most/all of it is from analogies--which I believe goes to the root of the soul, in terms of the expression, but let's not go there right now. The conditions of life at specific times are absolutely affected by the stars.

 

You can keep rambling on about how miniscule the light is, but that doesn't change the fact that it's there and it's been there for, assumed, billions of years. Without, life would notice it's missing something. A different environment denotes different paths. Astrology and the human activity is not the only time it began, I've even been saying this, although you seem to have argued it anyhow as if I made no attempt to prevent you from doing so. So, let me argue it again anyhow: The stars' reality does not only begin with recent astrology, astronomy, and sofourth.

To make one argument and then whine about how people can possibly deny any truth to some different argument is intellectually dishonest.

You can be quite clever in your attempts at getting your way, however, you are still wrong, and don't call my posting whining, I am simply tired of your poor, malicious half-truths as arguments. You even went ahead and argued what I attempted to stop you from arguing, and I assume you do this a lot, which is one reason why you probably claim I am "whining", because instead of respecting me, you went ahead and rebelliously (and dishonestly, by the way) decided to argue some points I had already attempted to prevent you from bringing up by clarifying my point and view. Yet, it appears you ignored them...but I am not too surprised.

[swansont]

You can be quite clever in your attempts at getting your way, however, you are still wrong, and don't call my posting whining, I am simply tired of your poor, malicious half-truths as arguments. You even went ahead and argued what I attempted to stop you from arguing, and I assume you do this a lot, which is one reason why you probably claim I am "whining", because instead of respecting me, you went ahead and rebelliously (and dishonestly, by the way) decided to argue some points I had already attempted to prevent you from bringing up by clarifying my point and view. Yet, it appears you ignored them...but I am not too surprised.

 

Respect is earned.

 

I was attempting to discuss actual science, but apparently you don't want to go there - as you've pointed out a few times, you attempted to stop me from arguing those points. Oh well.

[Coral Rhedd]

Christ slave,

 

I am curious. Just what type of astrology to you believe in. I understand that there are several astrological traditions. Don't they differ and maybe even contradict each other?

[Mokele]

Ok, serious question: Would it be possible to simply have a poll, open to everyone, on whether CS should be banned? To "vote him off SFN", in essence?

 

Seriously, the relevant threads were proceding much more smoothly during CS's breif and unfortunately temporary absence. The only difference between him and a common troll is that trolls act on malice, while CS acts on sheer stupidity and delusion. However, regardless of motives, he's a disruption who contributes nothing of worth. I'm sick of him. I know damn sure that a lot of others are sick of him. I'd hazard a guess that *everyone* is sick of him.

 

So why do we still deal with his bullshit?

 

Mokele

[swansont]

Ok' date=' serious question: Would it be possible to simply have a poll, open to everyone, on whether CS should be banned? To "vote him off SFN", in essence?

[/quote']

 

I think that would set a really bad precedent. You ban someone for violating specific rules, not because he's full of crap. And that's not the call of "the masses."

 

Besides, most fundie-poster-with-a-persecution-complex people that show up already think they get banned from science boards because of their views, and not because of their behavior. It would be a shame to deviate from that and ban someone because of their views, as clueless as they may be.

 

If you're sick of him, my advice is to ignore him.

[Hellbender]

He'll eventually go away, just like others have done in the past. But swansont is right, banning him probably wouldn't be a good idea. I am annoyed with him too. Asking him to support his arguments gets under his skin becuase I guess he doesn't realize that is was the rest of the world does when they make a claim.

[Christ slave]

He'll eventually go away, just like others have done in the past. But swansont is right, banning him probably wouldn't be a good idea. I am annoyed with him too. Asking him to support his arguments gets under his skin becuase I guess he doesn't realize that is was the rest of the world does when they make a claim.

No, I got annoyed at people who sit on the computer asking people for support to a specific claim when they can go use google or something if they're honestly interested in learning--rather than being grumblers and faultfinders with unhealthy interests in disputes. I find it absolutely selfish for people to constantly hound someone for support when,

• support has already been given, regardless if their warrants are in conflict
  
• they can very easily find the support their self
  and/or
  
• they ignore the support given anyway as a means of avoiding departure--such as people overstaying their welcomes in threads and discussions and/or nosing in under the disguise of "publicity"

 

So, what is it? You enjoy playing the rich man ordering people to serve you, or I am simply just one of a brute disease who should see no issue with those who refuse to help their selves? And, didn't I go ahead and give you the support for that claim anyhow, hellbender? So what are you annoyed at now? The fact that I pointed out I don't appreciate your refusal to seek the truth and verification yourself?

 

Do you honestly believe the world should be a place where people go skeptically lingering around an individual and their claims, demanding them to give them proof, when all the time spent doing so could have been reduced and also spent strengthening the challenger's curious inquiry by simply seeking education their self from a readily-available source such as a search engine?

 

Perhaps you hate me because I dream of a better world, where the incredibly pampered quit their shenanigans and start working together in honest, fair love and game.

[Christ slave]

Respect is earned.

 

I was attempting to discuss actual science' date=' but apparently you don't want to go there - as you've pointed out a few times, you attempted to stop me from arguing those points. Oh well.[/quote']Absolutely I attempted to prevent you from doing so by clarifying my counter-arguments, and yet you went and brought them up anyhow. Respect is indeed earned, stop playing the victim, everybody should elaborate on warrants when it is not necessarily clear, and as I said, I warranted my support to prevent you from posing your conflicting warrants and to stop you from wasting forum space and time, and yet you apparently see no problem with subjecting everyone to your presence anyhow.

[Christ slave]

Make a list of areas where you have concerns or questions about and perhaps I can answer and comment on them.

[Hellbender]

Look CS, I certainly don't hate you, but you need to realize a few things;

 

1) When you bring up topics such as astrology in a science forum, expect that, given the nature of this site and its members, pseudoscientific ideas will be strongly challenged

 

2) You need to realize that this is a discussion and debate forum, and we try to do precisely that. Yes we can google the claims you make, but the rules of honest debate dictate that the person making the claim is naturally the one who should provide support for it.

 

3) If an idea or argument is challenged, don't get all mad about it. Again, that is what we do here. Criticism of claims is a healthy aspect of science and debating. If you make a claim, we aren't simply going to all say "interesting" and thats it. We are going to naturally discuss it and find faults in it. If your claim cannot stand up to this, it wasn't a very good claim in the first place.

 

4) Stop accusing members of qualities or behaviors you imagine them to have. No one is playing the victim, I am not a child and we are not all close-minded. We are science-oriented individuals, and members such as Swansont and Mokele are the real deal. We ask that you support your claims and at least know the scientific method and apply it to your arguments. If you do not, then it makes sense that you may not fit in with us.

[Christ slave]

Well, I am glad you pointed out this is a debate forum, I suppose I hadn't realized the entire forums were centered around only debate...which explains why I do not appreciate the constant chain-arguing which is less constructive than actually learning. Perhaps I can work on this new found realization or perhaps I will leave.

4) Stop accusing members of qualities or behaviors you imagine them to have.

This applies to all people, then, or else I will notice an imbalance.

 

 

 

The forums say, "Science Forums and Debate", I guess I interpreted "and" to mean "and" and not "only". Perhaps they should be renamed to "Science Debate Forums", then, because I am presently justified, otherwise, in saying that I did not want to pursue all chain-arguments.