I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Australopithecus Sediba: A New Species Of Human

Hits: 10349 | Rating: (2.8) | Category: Science | Added by: piperfawn
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
Nickel2
Male, 50-59, Europe
 4547 Posts
Tuesday, December 18, 2012 3:01:24 AM
Wow! looks like a big row going on here! May as well throw more fuel on this fire:
Piltdown Man

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12074 Posts
Sunday, September 18, 2011 9:02:16 PM
You know what's moonbatpoo crazy davymid? That you put yourself in the neutral.

Dude, is that a bad thing? I'm pretty sure that what you described is the very definition of "Moderator". Anyways, old thread is old, peace out.

madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 6458 Posts
Friday, September 16, 2011 3:55:31 PM
You know what's moonbatpoo crazy davymid? That you put yourself in the neutral. I've seen you go at it with CJ. You're no different than any sane person whose skin he's gotten under. Another crazy thing is, you equate a belief in aliens with a belief in God. Touting yourself as antithiest. Well how about this? I'm so anti-religion that I have no clue as to what thiest means nor am I interested enough to Google it. So I see your antithiety and raise you an I don't give a crap.

Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
 10246 Posts
Thursday, September 15, 2011 7:52:01 AM
Forgive me if I don't care to ride the merry-go-round every time this subject comes up.



Say laddy why don't ya waste your time elsewhere then? (Hint: you're riding it right now!)
Seriously Crakr your first was two days ago, you NEVER win these arguments on evolution, NEVER. So why do you even bother typing when you know your comment from two days ago is NOT going to be ignored? We ask you to back up your assertions, yet, in a way, you ask us to do it for you. Then when those arguments get refuted, you ad hominem the other side accusing us of narrow mindedness only to demonstrate such behavoir yourself. If you don't care to ride this "merry-go-round" then just stop typing.

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:33:43 AM
now, again, PROOF or GTFO, crakrjak. You want to claim it as science but then refuse to link to proof so it can be verified? Then it is not science. Science is nothing without evidence, and your precious book is NOT evidence.
YOU are not a scientist by any definition, if that's how you think science works.
In science - we don't have things we take on faith. We have actual knowledge, and just because you don't understand it doesn't make it wrong.

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Thursday, September 15, 2011 1:30:23 AM
I researched it before. And I was NEVER taught by my science teachers to not question. I was taught to question things, and understand them myself.
YOU were taught by your church to not question things, which is why you assume the same thing of others. It's not true.
All the data that I've EVER seen IDers like yourself using is so utterly wrong, based on scientific experiments and data, that of course I don't believe it.
Again, in the SCIENTIFIC field, the one that makes the claim must back it up. If I claim there is a purple pokadotted unicorn in my livingroom, I have to prove it, not ask YOU to prove me wrong.
I actually UNDERSTAND Darwin's theory. YOU obviously don't, but I do. I don't have to question it anymore because I know enough to have a very firm grasp of the concept, and know it to be correct.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17035 Posts
Thursday, September 15, 2011 12:27:56 AM
Serpentchick: As I predicted, any effort to inform you would be a failure due to your predispositions.

You believe darwinism is sacrosanct and irrefutable, that's what your professors taught you to believe and you've never questioned that belief.

I wonder what you would do if your own research were to result in the data not following 'accepted theory', I'm betting you would discard the original data and start over, possibly finding a way to manipulate the new data fit the model.

Before you say, that wouldn't happen, let me assure that it has happened, in every scientific field, it's a historical fact.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:00:52 PM
Serpentchick, the problem is with many Christians like CrakrJak who is so adamantly against the evolutionary theory (which is also the same problem with many atheists like Madest), is they tend to think that evolution has some basis to confirm or deny the existence of God.

Now, I don't want to get off on some wild religious debate here, but whether a supreme being exists or not, has nothing to do with evolution. However, I tend to believe that supreme being utilized evolution to create life. I don't see why that couldn't have happened (not claiming that I have evidence, rather that I have faith).

Many want to use evolutionary theories to make statements like, "See, Evolution is a real observable thing, God doesn't exist!" or alternatively, "Evolution has no scientific basis, God exists!" I simply don't understand these thought patterns at all.

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:51:54 PM
I've seen crakr, he annoys me. And since I graduated with a bio major, and evolution, one of the most beautifully simple processes on earth, is both super awesome and one of my favorite subjects, I get annoyed with people that say ID is science. It sends us backwards, when evolution helps us with so much. It's so, ridiculously easy to understand that I can't understand the people that don't get it.
I understood evolution when I was a child. It's that simple.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:30:06 PM
"Incidentally, is this the basis of your later comment that I insult Christians? That would be...interesting. Is it the change in gods in the different oaths that you claim are the same oath that you want to cover up?"

Actually, I would like to retract that statement, I posted a retraction on the other forum. Please go and read it at your leisure.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:27:58 PM
Davy, I just hope that you don't associate his rantings and ravings with the other 99.999999999999% of Christians.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:26:04 PM
Hippocratic Oath

I am not quite sure what you call the "modern" version of the Hippocratic oath, but for what it is worth, here it is.

When people use and call it the Hippocratic oath, I don't quite see how there is confusion in my original statement that we still swear the Hippocratic oath -- whether the original or modern version, we still swear what is called the Hippocratic Oath. Sure, we don't swear the 5th century version, but we do swear a Hippocratic Oath.

So... I don't quite understand how you think I am being dishonest.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12074 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:23:37 PM
Serpentchick, Elkingo and others. You're only starting to experience the Crakrjak. Just wait till he gets on to climate change. You know the schtick he pulls about ID scientists being ostracised from the scientific community in favour of evolutionists in order to keep up their paychecks? You've only seen the tip of the iceberg. Crakrjak is an authority on matters of science, dontchaknow.

Sad thing is, he rails against conspiracy theorists, while being one himself.

Two of the moonbattiest people I have met on this site are Madest and Crakrjak. And yet they diametrically oppose each other. Who woulda figured?

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:18:32 PM
You are wrong. Every time that irreducible complexity comes up, some scientist is able to figure out at least one way that it could evolve.

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:12:18 PM
Irreducible complexity only makes sense if you think that things cannot change uses. It's like saying hands, which started out for locomotion, couldn't then be used to manipulate tools. I've learned a lot about irreducible complexity, and how wrong it is. If you have a case that can only make sense through irreducible complexity, please enlighten me.
However, irreducible complexity was the argument used in the trial, and it failed, miserably. They said that the evolution of the flagellum could not happen, because if you remove parts it doesn't work for movement. HOWEVER, if you remove parts, guess what! it's an immune system piece, instead of for movement.
Eyes have also been talked about as irreducibly complex, which is also laughable. For one thing, they are HORRIBLY designed, so I wouldn't call whoever made them "intelligent", same with teeth.
There are millions of papers on the evolution of some of the most complicated structures. Your argument is wrong. You

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:01:02 PM
Crakrjak -- I may have missed it earlier, but I think within this: "look up the terms 'intelligent design' or 'irreducible complexity'", this is the first time I have heard you mention search criteria. I think before the argument was more on the terms of: " I can present a counter argument, but you wouldn't read it."

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12074 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 8:28:49 PM
...to look up the terms 'intelligent design' or 'irreducible complexity' on her own.

Both debunked countless times, not just scientifically, but even legally. It's complete bunk. It's not science. It's religious creationism. Its results are neither provable, repeatable, nor do they provide predictions, some of the key aspects, nay, the very definition, of the scientific method.

I could go to google now and hit up "fake moon landings" or "911 conspiracy theory" and get millions of hits. Does that make it scientific proof?

Come come now CJ, you're smarter than this.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17035 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 8:22:25 PM
Serpentchick: the job of proving an idea falls to the one that says it.


I have provided links to quite a bit of proof, in the past, here on IAB, Forgive me if I don't care to ride the merry-go-round every time this subject comes up.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 17035 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 8:19:31 PM
elkingo: How can she go look for it herself?


She has a brain, she has the internet, her fingers aren't broken, She can figure it out for herself without my help, unless you're saying she's not intelligent to look up the terms 'intelligent design' or 'irreducible complexity' on her own.

Angilion
Male, 40-49, Europe
 11420 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:44:41 PM
I think it is absolutely absurd to argue over the semantics of this. I think the truth is simple: you are just pulling your thoughts straight out of your bum.


You might not have noticed, but people who are just pulling their thoughts out of their bum can rarely explain them.

You think a different oath written more than two millenia later, with some stuff removed and some stuff added, is the same oath.

I don't.

Incidentally, is this the basis of your later comment that I insult Christians? That would be...interesting. Is it the change in gods in the different oaths that you claim are the same oath that you want to cover up?

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 1:17:48 PM
I guess after this forum hit page 2, the response stops. Ha.

Serpentchick
Female, 18-29, Western US
 379 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 9:26:50 AM
crakrjak, again, the job of proving an idea falls to the one that says it. I said I could show you millions of pieces of proof on evolution, the theory that I understand VERY well, and have seen proof with my own eyes that it is correct.
You are the one claiming you know something different. In science, that means you need to show YOUR proof. It's not up to me to validate your theory, the theory that has been laughed out of science by utter lack of proof. It's up to you, the person that believes it. I *could* look up millions of ID sites, but as I've looked at some before, and laughed at how BAD their argument was, I'm waiting to see how super awesome your proof is. Either you show proof, or you are WRONG. That's what science is. PROOF or GTFO.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:34:14 AM
CrakrJak: How can she go look for it herself? I mean.. what would be the search terms: "CrakrJak's ultimate evidence against the current biological models"? That is simply absurd.

elkingo
Male, 30-39, Eastern US
 3377 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 7:23:07 AM
Angilion -- I am not sure if you are trolling, or just very stupid.

Your analogy of a chariot and a car is off base. You are comparing apples to oranges.

A 1965 Ford Mustang and a 2010 Ford Mustang are still Ford Mustangs.. just different versions. The original Hippocratic Oath and the current Hippocratic Oath are still Hippocratic Oaths.

But, you made the claim that doctors didn't take the oath; which is untrue. They swear a modern version of the oath.


I think it is absolutely absurd to argue over the semantics of this. I think the truth is simple: you are just pulling your thoughts straight out of your bum.

robosnitz
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
 2752 Posts
Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:57:49 AM
Hog wash.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.