|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
 Posted - 10/24/2005 : 08:57:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
quote:
A sniper in New Orleans is damaging his soul. A sniper in Irag (either side) is strengthining his soul.
I doubt if any soldier feels his soul strengthened by killing people.
Fundamentalist terrorists do. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
 |
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 09:52:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by markie
That's the job of the government of course. They already legislate things all over the place (here in Canada and also in Sweden)...
...such as?
Well as I said, things like seatbelt legislation and also smoking legislation.
quote:
Post WW2 both the Swedish and the American government had programs involving forced sterilisation of what was referred to as sub-humans, mainly mentally handicapped like people with Downs syndrome, but also other kinds of (believed) genetic mental illnesses.
Finally it was decided that such forced sterilisation was immoral and violated the human rights of these people, and the programs were discontinued. Any legislation passed with the explicit purpose to weed out "lesser humans" (and who the f*ck gets to decide the standard?) will be unconstitutional, and violate basic human rights.
The fact is that we sacrifice some individual human liberty for the good of whole society much of the time. Science will have a lot to do with the standards which are set, because subnormal behaviour will be well correlated with genetic inheritance factors.
quote:
USA is more insidious, as the current government is working toward "let the rich take from the poor unpunished, and the poor might not be able to support its offspring".
I would hardly call it insidious, as if there was a conspiracy to kill off the "lower class." If policy makers were in it for the longterm benefits to society more than instant gratification - personal payoffs and playing the partisian political game, the US wouldn't be in such doodoo right now.
quote:
It is just a matter of time before democratic governments face the reality that they must legislate aspects of human reproduction for the long term welfare of the state and society.quote:
I can not imagine a democratic government pass such legislation. If I find myself living in a country, I'd do whatever I can to prevent such blatant violations of basic human rights.
Yeah, and people protested that their rights to smoke in a public places were about to be removed.
quote:
Some websites already speak to this issue very well. Its a matter of public awareness, first. quote:
Please post a link...
Try out http://www.eugenics.net for one. The first article may be a good place to start.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 09:59:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by markie
Hehe, I know a great deal about DNA and its properties. And it is mere conjecture that mitochondria are the result of bacteria invading eucaryotic cells. In my theory bacteria represent a (planned for) retrograde form of life. The original lifeform was more like eukaryotic seaweed.
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/E/Endosymbiosis.html
This is a theory: supported by evidence.
What evidence do you submit as support for your speculation/hypothesis?
The evidence no more points to the endosymbiosis theory than it does the opposite idea, that early eukaryotic cells lost some of their plastids (like mitochrondria and chloroplasts) to the environment, and these became bacteria.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 10:19:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.So, no observations at all. You don't have a theory or even a hypothesis. You've got unbridled speculation.
Hehe, as if much of evolutionary theory is not speculation, and the subsequent work an attempt to boslter personal speculation. I need research funds ;)
quote:
Do you deny that transitions in the fossil record occur abruptly?quote:
Define "abruptly." And then tell me why intelligently-programmed genetic code would take tens of millions of years to "unfold."
Abruptly could be one generation or it could be a few key genetic alterations over the span of a hundred generations. Why does it take millions of years? If the environmental conditions were optimal, evolution's progress from seaweed up to human might have taken merely ten million years and not a billion.
quote:
And, once again, tell me how to distinguish your speculation from evolutionary theory. What test could be performed to figure out which is correct?
Good question, I haven't given that particular issue enough thought to give a good answer yet.
quote:
Since, for the last four billion years, any not-yet-activated hidden programming in the human genome would have had zero effect upon selection, what would keep it from simply being riddled with mutations?
As we know most human genes are multi purpose. So existent working genes would be called upon for yet another purpose. So it's not as if there needs be a huge area of the genome that has been unused and preserved for millions of years, only a very small activation region from which their is a instructional cascade.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 10:24:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by markie
quote:
A sniper in New Orleans is damaging his soul. A sniper in Irag (either side) is strengthining his soul.
I doubt if any soldier feels his soul strengthened by killing people.
Fundamentalist terrorists do.
Yeah and some people get high on killing innocent animals for satanic ritual. There may be a heightened sense of power and control which appeals to a base element in our natures, but that should not be confused with the true satisfaction of soul growth.
|
|
|
|
Siberia
SFN Addict
Brazil
2322 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 10:33:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
quote:
Originally posted by Siberia
quote:
Originally posted by markie
quote:
A sniper in New Orleans is damaging his soul. A sniper in Irag (either side) is strengthining his soul.
I doubt if any soldier feels his soul strengthened by killing people.
Fundamentalist terrorists do.
Yeah and some people get high on killing innocent animals for satanic ritual. There may be a heightened sense of power and control which appeals to a base element in our natures, but that should not be confused with the true satisfaction of soul growth.
You forget their particular brand of religion, or at least the one they believe in, says killing the enemy makes their god happy. They aren't killing for pleasure; they're killing for salvation. |
"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa
"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 13:19:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
The fact is that we sacrifice some individual human liberty for the good of whole society much of the time.
Such things don't "scale up" well. What was it that Ben Franklin said? "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for security will have neither?" Driving without a seatbelt or smoking in public are not essential liberties. Reproduction is.quote:
Science will have a lot to do with the standards which are set, because subnormal behaviour will be well correlated with genetic inheritance factors.
So, the whole "nature vs. nuture" question is largely settled in your mind? Interesting.quote:
If policy makers were in it for the longterm benefits to society more than instant gratification - personal payoffs and playing the partisian political game, the US wouldn't be in such doodoo right now.
The current administration is under the impression that the Rapture is coming soon. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 13:30:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
Hehe, as if much of evolutionary theory is not speculation, and the subsequent work an attempt to boslter personal speculation. I need research funds ;)
Name a part of evolutionary theory which is unevidenced speculation.quote:
Abruptly could be one generation or it could be a few key genetic alterations over the span of a hundred generations. Why does it take millions of years? If the environmental conditions were optimal, evolution's progress from seaweed up to human might have taken merely ten million years and not a billion.
So, no possible evidence could disconfirm your speculation. No matter what we see, your "theory" has it covered.quote:
Good question, I haven't given that particular issue enough thought to give a good answer yet.
Indeed.quote:
As we know most human genes are multi purpose. So existent working genes would be called upon for yet another purpose. So it's not as if there needs be a huge area of the genome that has been unused and preserved for millions of years, only a very small activation region from which their is a instructional cascade.
You're not getting it. If a gene has a function which isn't being called on, then there's no reason to preserve that function. If a gene has a second function which is important, that functionality will be preserved (or even improved), without regard for the unused functionality.
Proteins don't function in a binary fashion (either they work or they don't), they function with varying amounts of success. A protein with a 90% affinity for binding with receptor X can undergo numerous mutations which might improve or worsen its affinity for receptor X. If the protein also had a 75% affinity for receptor Y, but this functionality was never used, then selection is going to favor improving the protein's affinity for receptor X, without regard for the affinity to Y (but if there's no selection pressure to maintain it, it'll probably vanish). |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 14:58:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by markie
That's the job of the government of course. They already legislate things all over the place (here in Canada and also in Sweden)...
...such as?
Well as I said, things like seatbelt legislation and also smoking legislation.
So, you're implying that not wearing seatbelts and smoking are sub-human character traits?
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 15:41:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by markie
I suppose little in the end, except that it *predicts* the evolution to 'higher' forms. Traditional evolutionary theory is good for explaining variation within a genus, say, but hardly good at explaining the evolutionary leaps to higher forms.
It's very easy to propose a "theory" to explain anything. Hey look, all life forms were programmed to evolve in a certain direction. Hey look, god created all life 6000 years ago. Hey look, aliens seeded life 60 billion years ago. Hey look, we're living in a Matrix(tm). Hey look...
These "theories" might indeed be compatible with what we observe. They are in fact compatible with anything we could observe. As far as scientific theories go, they are all useless. |
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 19:07:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by markie
The fact is that we sacrifice some individual human liberty for the good of whole society much of the time.
Such things don't "scale up" well. What was it that Ben Franklin said? "Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for security will have neither?" Driving without a seatbelt or smoking in public are not essential liberties. Reproduction is.
I don't think that's in the constitution ;)
quote:
Science will have a lot to do with the standards which are set, because subnormal behaviour will be well correlated with genetic inheritance factors.quote:
So, the whole "nature vs. nuture" question is largely settled in your mind? Interesting.
??? I state that subnormal behaviour and genetics are correlated, and you conclude that I think there is insignificant gains with proper nurturing. Interesting ;).
quote:
The current administration is under the impression that the Rapture is coming soon.
Maybe there will be an impeachment rapture instead.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 19:23:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W. Name a part of evolutionary theory which is unevidenced speculation.
Well I assume there is at least *some* evidence behind any speculation. Since the outworkings of my theory thus far seem indistinguishable from conventional theory, it stands to reason there is evidence behind my speculation as well.
quote:
So, no possible evidence could disconfirm your speculation. No matter what we see, your "theory" has it covered.
Wow, I must have a good theory. :)
quote:
You're not getting it. ....blah...
Oh I get it alright. My point remains that for a gene which is being used for multiple purposes, selection pressure will ensure that it is reasonably well preserved through time for other preplanned future uses, if there are any.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 19:30:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse So, you're implying that not wearing seatbelts and smoking are sub-human character traits?
Doc, I don't know where your 'sub-human' idea is coming from, sorry. Maybe I need some coffee or something. Now, if they started legislating a restriction in coffee intake even I would surely rise up in revolt.
|
|
|
|
markie
Skeptic Friend
Canada
356 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 19:45:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hawks It's very easy to propose a "theory" to explain anything. Hey look, all life forms were programmed to evolve in a certain direction. Hey look, god created all life 6000 years ago. Hey look, aliens seeded life 60 billion years ago. Hey look, we're living in a Matrix(tm). Hey look...
These "theories" might indeed be compatible with what we observe. They are in fact compatible with anything we could observe. As far as scientific theories go, they are all useless.
The same goes for evolutionary theory as well then I suppose. It's nice and relatively simple, but that is no guarantee of correctness, especially seeing that reality almost always turns out to be more complex than we realized.
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 10/24/2005 : 20:57:45 [Permalink]
|
The thing is that given that standard evoltionary theory and yours, Occam's Razor cut yours. Your idea incorporates so much more than evolution, things that there are no evidence for.
Then there's the phylogenic tree of mitochondria that suggests that you're wrong and evolution is right. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
