• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The Human Race?

William Rea said:
So explain how interbreeding explains ERVs better than ToE?
Click to expand...

If a chimp interbreed with a human, you mean the ERVs won't be inherited from chimps?

Why don't you ask your scientists to see what happens to ERVs if chimps go interbreed with humans time and after at times when humans have a low population on earth? What happens to human genomes if humans ever interbred with all kinds of homo erectus back and forth?
 
Hawkins said:
If a chimp interbreed with a human, you mean the ERVs won't be inherited from chimps?

Why don't you ask your scientists to see what happens to ERVs if chimps go interbreed with humans time and after at times when humans have a low population on earth? What happens to human genomes if humans ever interbred with all kinds of homo erectus back and forth?
Click to expand...

You do know that hybridization is evolution, don't you? There also is the point that species do start to become mutually infertile with each other, and that is evolution too.

Do you know what the scientific definition of biological evolution is? The statements you are making indicate to me you do not.
 
Elvira said:
The fossil evidence is unreliable at best...
Click to expand...

Finally, Gee levels the ultimate gratuitous insult at science: he says that, in its dogmatism and refusal to accept criticism, science is like religion. And if you attack the received wisdom in science, you’re doing something analogous to blasphemy. The last paragraph boggles the mind:

And yet, as science journalists such as Simon Singh and Ben Goldacre have discovered, even those apparently easy targets whose scientific credentials are challenged resort very easily to legislation in the way that politicians never would.

Why is this? The answer, I think, is that those who are scientists, or who pretend to be scientists, cling to the mantle of a kind of religious authority. And as anyone who has tried to comment on religion has discovered, there is no such thing as criticism. There is only blasphemy.

This is pure nonsense. Show me a scientist who clings to the mantle of a religion-like authority, who makes pronouncements about what is true without trying to test them, and I’ll show you a bad scientist, one doomed to being discredited. The whole enterprise of science, as Gee should know very well, is based on argument and doubt and on scientists trying to show each other to be wrong. “No such thing as criticism”? How can an editor say this—an editor whose job is precisely to solicit such criticism from other scientists?

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/09/20/nature-editor-henry-gee-goes-all-anti-science/
 
Is murder or killing others just something the human race is just born with by nature. Not saying every person will kill someone but name a nation on this earth whom has no military. And if you have a military then you teach others how to kill... Rather it be in self-defense or not it is still taught. :peace
 
Jaygodmedia said:
IDK that's one of the reasons for the thread.

Today's question are we human? Or just a bunch of stardust?
View attachment 67225744
Click to expand...

You ask that as if you think those 2 choices are mutually exclusive.

Why would it be unusual for humans to be made mostly out of the same things that make up everything else in the universe?
 
Jaygodmedia said:
IDK that's one of the reasons for the thread.

Today's question are we human? Or just a bunch of stardust?
View attachment 67225744
Click to expand...

Erm. Both?

The various elements that make up our body mostly came from the fusion process in stars. Hydrogen came from the big bang. Helium came from both the big bang and stellar fusion, but is chemically inert so is not found in any biological process.

Toss in oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, and other*, and you get the ingredients for life. And here we are. Stardust thinking about how it is made of stardust.
 
Deuce said:
Erm. Both?

The various elements that make up our body mostly came from the fusion process in stars. Hydrogen came from the big bang. Helium came from both the big bang and stellar fusion, but is chemically inert so is not found in any biological process.

Toss in oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, and other*, and you get the ingredients for life. And here we are. Stardust thinking about how it is made of stardust.
Click to expand...

So are we also mud fashioned into a shape?
 
Critter7r said:
You ask that as if you think those 2 choices are mutually exclusive.

Why would it be unusual for humans to be made mostly out of the same things that make up everything else in the universe?
Click to expand...

IDK that's why I asked...
 
zyzygy said:
I'm not.
Click to expand...

When you die some religion services say we return you to the ground from which you came from.
Ashes to ashes dust to dust WTF does all this crap means?
And what are u a ghost? What are you made of besides water?
 
Jaygodmedia said:
When you die some religion services say we return you to the ground from which you came from.
Ashes to ashes dust to dust WTF does all this crap means?
And what are u a ghost? What are you made of besides water?
Click to expand...

I am made of quarks. All matter is composed of quarks. My funeral will be Humanist in nature. None of the ashes to ashes nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom