Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us. We ask ourself, who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous and talented? Who are you NOT to be?
To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
taken out of context i must seem so strange
~ ani di franco
Written by:
Creationism, which causes conflicts between scientists and believers in the US, is getting more popular in the UK, too. According to a survey, less than every 2nd Brit believes in evolution, more than 40 % want creationism in biology lessons.
In the US, the debate on Intelligent Design, the pseudo-scientific form of biblical creation theory, has been running hot for the last months: Parents go to court to fight if their children are supposed to learn the concept of a Creator in biology, along with Darwin's theory of evoluyion, while scientists and religious zealots have heavy verbal arguments.
The apparently higher-educated or more-enlightened Europeans felt more or less safe from this conflict. But now it proves that even in the UK the view of a higher being as the creator of earth and life a few thousand years before now is highly popular.
A BBC survey had interesting results: Asked how their view of the beginning and development of life could be best described, 48 % of the 2000 people questioned named evolution, 22 % creationism, and 17 % intelligent design. The rest was undecided.
In education, 41 % wished, that biology lessons should include Intelligent Design, 44 % supported including creationism in science lessons. 69 % said evolution theory should be taught to pupils.
Of course, there is hardly a difference between the concepts of creationism and ID. Creationism was turned into ID by its followers in the US mainly for legal reasons, since US courts had previously banned religious contents from state schools.
In addition to this, the supporters of ID try with considerable success to establish their concept as a competitive scientific theory to the public. Their main argument: Certain characteristics of life forms are so complex that evolution alone cannot explain them. The majority of reputable scientists however disagrees strongly.
A surprising detail of the survey: People over 55 years preferred evolution, whereas a majority of those under 25 supported ID. "This is telling us a lot about the role of scientific education in this country", said a BBC editor.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: onewheeldave
In particular, ID, and similar theories, fall heavily when it comes to testability- in science, a fundamental for a good theory is that there are possible observations that can disprove the theory.
Good scientific theories are those which have set put clearly,possible experiments that will disprove them; and then they go on to survive these attacks.
Written by:please?
"normal," practical science
Written by: Patriarch917
But by that argument, evolution should not be considered good science. Perhaps it would be better to classify evolution as a "historical theory" rather than a scientific one.
We can all agree that there is evidence. What we can't agree on is how to interpret the evidence, because we start with different assumptions (such as the rate at which salt flows into the sea).
Perhaps, as you seem to say, science classes should try to deal with observable phenomenom that can be tested with experiments. The theory of Evolution has made little contribution to what most would consider "normal," practical science. Perhaps we should let theories of history be taught in history class, and let theories of science be taught in science class.
According to Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Dynamics, we may already be making love right now...
Written by: Patriarch917
To dispose of this claim, one need merely assert the theory that either 1. the intelligent designer always existed and thus did not need to “arise,” or 2. the intelligent designer was created by a previous intelligent designer that had always existed.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: Molly
Er, I'm a microbiologist and I regularly observe evolution in action, use it to my benefit and take measures to avoid it when it would be to my (or rather my experiments') detriment.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: Molly
I'm a microbiologist and I regularly observe evolution in action, use it to my benefit
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Written by: onewheeldaveWritten by: Patriarch917
To dispose of this claim, one need merely assert the theory that either 1. the intelligent designer always existed and thus did not need to “arise,” or 2. the intelligent designer was created by a previous intelligent designer that had always existed.
Presumably then, if there can be an 'always existing' designer- one that is in no need of explanation because he/she/it never came into being but simply always existed; then we could also claim that the universe and life itself, similarly may happen to be things that always existed?
If that is the case, then it would eliminate the need for a designer.
That of course in no way disproves the designer, but it does indicate that the theory that the world is undesigned and always existing, is just as plausible as the theory that it was designed.
Written by: faithinfire
unless of course the intelligent designer is not a being of matter and therefor the basic principles we understand life by in no way have any bearing on the being
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: onewheeldave
I don't see how this diminishes the possibility that the matter itself could simply have existed forever.
(I'm not here claiming that matter has in fact existed forever, simply pointing out that if a 'designer' can evade explanation on Patriarchs grounds that he/she/it may have existed forever, then the same could be true of matter).
Written by: Patriarch917
I agree, which is why I used that argument.
If you choose to believe that matter and energy were not created by something (or someone) that is not matter and energy, then you must choose to believe that matter and energy have always existed.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: Patriarch917
Apparently, though, Molly has witnessed a random beneficial mutation that has added new genetic information that is succesfully being passed down to subsequent generations. This is huge news, and should be told to more people. I agree with the previous post, I would like to hear more about it.
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
taken out of context i must seem so strange
~ ani di franco
Written by: TheBovrilMonkeyWritten by: Patriarch917
Apparently, though, Molly has witnessed a random beneficial mutation that has added new genetic information that is succesfully being passed down to subsequent generations. This is huge news, and should be told to more people. I agree with the previous post, I would like to hear more about it.
It's not really huge news - as an example, people have been talking about bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics for some time now.
Of course, there are also people who dismiss that as part of ID, claiming that the bacteria were gifted with an immune system by the almighty benefactor that designed them.
Written by: Patriarch917
If they develop resistance by a random mutation that adds new genetic information, this would lend some strength to the theory that such mutations can explain the existence of species. If, however, this is merely an existing subsection of the species becoming more prevelant (like the old peppered moth example), then this would lend a little extra help to natural selection (but no one really disputes that element).
But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
Written by: Patriarch917
Onewheeldave,
The idea that something can spring from nothing is an interesting question. I have never heard anyone advocate that something can spring from nothing. Most people seem to believe that in order to exist, a thing must have either always existed (God, or the universe), or it must have been created by something else. If anyone would like to try to advocate it, I'd be really interested.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: onewheeldave
So, scientifically speaking, the view that matter (and everything else,including space-time) came into being uncaused, and from nothing, is perfectly acceptable.
Written by: Patriarch917
For something to have no cause really has an impact on your views of determinism. If matter can be created by nothing, without cause, can you then say that "nothing has free will."
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Written by: Patriarch917
If nothingness has no characteristics whatsoever, then it does not have creativity, thus it cannot create.
If it did create, then nothing is something.
In fact, nothing is like God.
And athiests worship nothing.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Written by: NYCWritten by: Patriarch917
If nothingness has no characteristics whatsoever, then it does not have creativity, thus it cannot create.
If it did create, then nothing is something.
In fact, nothing is like God.
And athiests worship nothing.
You surely know a lot about nothing.
If God tells you there's no evolution, you shouldn't believe in evolution.
Using the keywords [intelligent design v * evolution] we found the following existing topics.