Discussion:
Jocko-Homo Heavenbound Pamphlet PDF
(too old to reply)
j***@jasonrocks.com
2005-06-04 23:16:00 UTC
Permalink
Head on over to: http://devo.jasonrocks.com

Duty now for the future Spuds!

Jason
Rich Anderson
2005-06-05 01:42:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by j***@jasonrocks.com
Head on over to: http://devo.jasonrocks.com
Duty now for the future Spuds!
Jason
Thanks for PDFing it, but pages 16 and 17 are from the wrong book. The
site links to the wrong file. The original is there, but I forget the file
name.
Boom
2005-06-05 04:53:30 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 01:42:47 GMT, Rich Anderson
Post by Rich Anderson
Post by j***@jasonrocks.com
Head on over to: http://devo.jasonrocks.com
Duty now for the future Spuds!
Jason
Thanks for PDFing it, but pages 16 and 17 are from the wrong book. The
site links to the wrong file. The original is there, but I forget the file
name.
http://fw_alden.tripod.com/index.html

You can get all of BF Shadduck's pamphlets online here. I've read a
couple of them. Some of what he says actually makes sense. Some
don't pay him any heed because he's religious, but some of his
anti-evolution arguments are fairly sound scientifically. He's right
that nobody has proven evolution well enough to state for certain that
it exists.
Rich Anderson
2005-06-06 03:21:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boom
http://fw_alden.tripod.com/index.html
You can get all of BF Shadduck's pamphlets online here. I've read a
couple of them. Some of what he says actually makes sense. Some
don't pay him any heed because he's religious, but some of his
anti-evolution arguments are fairly sound scientifically. He's right
that nobody has proven evolution well enough to state for certain that
it exists.
*twitch*

Oh, let's not start that thread again.

The reason why we've never SEEN speciation happen is that it takes very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY long periods of time,
and we haven't quite figured out temporal mechanics yet. However,
we do know that speciation is the result of many small changes over a very
long period of time. Guess what scientists have observed? SMALL CHANGES!
The cumulative effect of which is very likely... NEW SPECIES!

Also, Evolution does not specify where life came from, only what happens
to life. It may have came from a god, from self-replicating molecules,
alien intelligence, or out of "Bob"'s asshole. It doesn't matter to the
theory.

Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins. It explains the basics of
evolutionary theory quite beautifully.
Boom
2005-06-06 09:31:10 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 03:21:26 GMT, Rich Anderson
Post by Rich Anderson
Post by Boom
http://fw_alden.tripod.com/index.html
You can get all of BF Shadduck's pamphlets online here. I've read a
couple of them. Some of what he says actually makes sense. Some
don't pay him any heed because he's religious, but some of his
anti-evolution arguments are fairly sound scientifically. He's right
that nobody has proven evolution well enough to state for certain that
it exists.
*twitch*
Oh, let's not start that thread again.
Oh, why not? It's fun to argue about stuff that doesn't matter.
Post by Rich Anderson
The reason why we've never SEEN speciation happen is that it takes very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY long periods of time,
and we haven't quite figured out temporal mechanics yet. However,
we do know that speciation is the result of many small changes over a very
long period of time. Guess what scientists have observed? SMALL CHANGES!
The cumulative effect of which is very likely... NEW SPECIES!
You think? So what makes that very likely? Hell, I've made a few
small changes my own self during my life. Doesn't mean I'm evolving
into something else, except an old guy.
Post by Rich Anderson
Also, Evolution does not specify where life came from, only what happens
to life. It may have came from a god, from self-replicating molecules,
alien intelligence, or out of "Bob"'s asshole. It doesn't matter to the
theory.
Evolution can't specify anything because it's all conjecture.
Scientists would love to think that it's real but they can no more
explain it than they can the beginning of the universe.
Post by Rich Anderson
Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins. It explains the basics of
evolutionary theory quite beautifully.
Sounds like a good book of fiction ;)
Rich Anderson
2005-06-06 17:23:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boom
Post by Rich Anderson
Oh, let's not start that thread again.
Oh, why not? It's fun to argue about stuff that doesn't matter.
Post by Rich Anderson
The reason why we've never SEEN speciation happen is that it takes very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY long periods of time,
and we haven't quite figured out temporal mechanics yet. However,
we do know that speciation is the result of many small changes over a very
long period of time. Guess what scientists have observed? SMALL CHANGES!
The cumulative effect of which is very likely... NEW SPECIES!
You think? So what makes that very likely? Hell, I've made a few
small changes my own self during my life. Doesn't mean I'm evolving
into something else, except an old guy.
Sorry, doesn't work that way. The changes have to be in your offspring.
Let's say your prospective spawn has an increased ability to metabolize
protein, allowing it to use energy more efficiently and run faster. This
would enhance its survival against predators, assuming there are human
predators at this point.

You are not going to spontaneously become a new species of life form. Your
offspring might be slightly different. Your offspring's offspring might be
slightly different, and so on until enough differences add up and suddenly
we have a creature on our hands that might not necessarily be able to be
termed /homo sapiens sapiens/ anymore. That, however, will take a good
couple millions years, at least.
Post by Boom
Post by Rich Anderson
Also, Evolution does not specify where life came from, only what happens
to life. It may have came from a god, from self-replicating molecules,
alien intelligence, or out of "Bob"'s asshole. It doesn't matter to the
theory.
Evolution can't specify anything because it's all conjecture.
Scientists would love to think that it's real but they can no more
explain it than they can the beginning of the universe.
Buddy, do you know what else is "conjecture"? Gravity, particle physics,
magnetism, and electricity. Those theories work well enough that I'm able
to type this pointless message and send it across wires to be stored on
some remote hard drive.

You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference between the
scientific idea of a Theory and a Scientific Law. A theory is a hypothesis
(which is just an idea based on observation) that has been validated
through research and experimentation. A theory can hold up under intense
scrutiny, hold true in all experiments - yet can be proven wrong by just
one verified experiment. Meanwhile, a Scientific Law is usually a
mathematical conjecture that has been proven true repeatedly, and over and
over again to the point where it has been tested true in all theoretical
conditions. Unsurprisingly, there are very, very, very, very, very few
proper Scientific Laws. Newton's Laws of Motion come to mind, as do some
Gas Laws from my Chemistry 110 class.

(And don't try pulling the Second Law of Thermodynamics out here. It
doesn't work that way.)

As for the creation of the universe, well, there's several compelling
theories, each with their own supporting evidence. The "Big Bang" theory
is the most commonly accepted, but even that has some questions. What
leads up to the "Big Bang" we have little idea of (but plenty of theories)
as well. I'm sure we'll figure it out eventually. Science doesn't claim to
have all the answers. I'd rather know that we don't know (yet) than fill
in the blank with some sort of higher power that raises more questions
than it answers. ("Bob" asks no questions, he just wants your $30.)
Post by Boom
Post by Rich Anderson
Read "The Blind Watchmaker" by Richard Dawkins. It explains the basics of
evolutionary theory quite beautifully.
Sounds like a good book of fiction ;)
Actually, it's a very solidly written and researched book explaining how
gradual change over long periods of time CAN create speciation. Don't
scoff until you read it.
Ronald Cole
2005-06-27 07:37:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich Anderson
The reason why we've never SEEN speciation happen is that it takes very,
very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, VERY long periods of time,
and we haven't quite figured out temporal mechanics yet.
Actually, Einstein did in 1905. You just have to accelerate yourself
to a significant fraction of the speed of light to get your clock to
run slower than the rest of the planet's. You'd need a lot of energy,
though, but you might be in luck because I heard that the Saudi's have
recently found enough oil to screw us for the next 200 years.
--
Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
Ronald Cole <***@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142
President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B
ƒ®@nK panű©©I
2005-06-27 14:32:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ronald Cole
Actually, Einstein did in 1905. You just have to accelerate yourself
to a significant fraction of the speed of light to get your clock to
run slower than the rest of the planet's.
I read somewheres that airline pilots, after a lifetime of flying a
bunch of miles, eventually are a miniscule fraction of a second behind
the rest of us, time-wise. I guess that would sort of apply to
astronauts and race car drivers, too.

Doody now!
Post by Ronald Cole
The "American Heritage Dictionary," Third Edition (1992) gives
"miniscule" as a full-fledged variant of "minuscule," as does
"Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary," Tenth Edition (1993).
Merriam-Webster's has been listing "miniscule" in their dictionaries
since at least 1971.<<

Loading...