Theory of Evolution.

[Timsup2nothin]

As you yourself already mention, that's not belief, but faith. You see, semantics sometimes really do matter. If you believe something, that's not necessary belief, as the two are not synonymous.




Considering the huge (and still mounting) evidence for evolution, I'd say neither luck or belief have anything to do with it.

In short, there's'no such thing as a 'scientific belief' - let alone religion. It would greatly help if you would not use creationist's 'arguments' - especially if you're not one.

I thought we already determined that I don't consider you a source of quality advice.

 

[Agent327]

That's neither here nor there as I'm not a source of anything. But I gather you don't actually have a response, and this is telling enough in itself.

Cheers.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Few people would call rebuffing your advice a failure to respond, but whatever makes you feel better about recognizing the conversation was over.

 

[Agent327]

No, you pretended I provided no information. Or no valid information. Other than than you didn't answer a single thing said.

Oh, and one usually ends a conversation by stopping to talk. Try it. It works.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

No, you pretended I provided no information. Or no valid information. Other than than you didn't answer a single thing said.

Oh, and one usually ends a conversation by stopping to talk. Try it. It works.

Yet more advice you would be better off to follow than to give.

You did provide no information, that wasn't a pretense.

 

[Plotinus]

Moderator Action: Guys, come on. This stopped being constructive a long time ago.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[BettyC]

If the idea of alien exists, it will be possible.

 

[sophie]

If the idea of alien exists, it will be possible.

What will be possible?

 

[timtofly]

What is it in the human condition that demands a creation myth?

The sub species known as homoevolutionedumethodicatedscientificus needed a straw man.

 

[Agent327]

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a 'sub species'. There are species and genera.

 

[Flying Pig]

Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a 'sub species'. There are species and genera.

The biologists would disagree.

 

[Agent327]

Unfortunately we're not discussing bacteria.

 

[El_Machinae]

'Tis the risk when you use absolute language

 

[Agent327]

Excuse me for not being a bacteriologist.

 

[Flying Pig]

Hang on, that's actually two links. The first uses a butterfly as its example. Look on Wikipedia and you have the example of the Siberian tiger - panthera tigris altaica - which is a subspecies of tiger - panthera tigris - and distinct from the Bengal tiger, panthera tigris tigris. Unfortunately, your claim doesn't hold true for animals of any size: as for plants, it starts to look a bit ridiculous - and that's before we get into bacteria, whose subspecies can be divided even further into serovars (different strains) and other kinds of biovars (different biological variants).

 

[Agent327]

And where does

The sub species known as homoevolutionedumethodicatedscientificus

fit in, pray tell?

 

[timtofly]

And where does

fit in, pray tell?

This thread.

 

[El_Machinae]

Excuse me for not being a bacteriologist.

It's the risk you run when using absolutist language.

 

[Agent327]

I don't even know what that means. Timtofly's response seemed more to the point, by the way.

 

[Flying Pig]

It means that talking as if you're laying down universal truths often makes you look silly, particularly when you don't actually know a lot about what you're talking about. It's usually much better to turn down the bluster, and say something like 'I didn't think subspecies were recognised in biology', which at least admits the possibility that you might be - as you were here - totally wrong.