The best Alleged Alien Autopsy post I have ever seen.

[PlunkettsGhost]

Adaption within a species has become the poor man's evolution, due to there having been no evolution and consequently no empirical evidence of evolution. But the desire for it to be real, remains

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

As we're working through this subject.
Some organisms have stayed static evolutionary wise for millions of years.
Other's have evolved at ferocious rates to take over whatever niches.

All stories I'm afraid, no actual physical data

 

[jpc]

All stories I'm afraid, no actual physical data

What do you propose then?

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

What do you propose then?

Creation, Special Creation, is the obvious conclusion. People have been scratching way at the earth and peering into petri dishes for a least 100 years, and no empirical evidence for evolution exists that would fill a child's lunchbox . And I believe I posted video detailing the Kabbalistic ideals underpinning the promotion of evolution, in another thread , a while back. Darwin's father was involved

 

[Fishalt]

No, you seem to be confusing adaption with speciation

I'm really not. Bacteria evolves to be resistant. Small evolutionary changes lead to species divergence more or less because at a certain stage, the points of difference become marked to the point that the two groups can no longer breed. Or they won't. The driver of this is usually enviornmental. This has been observed in the last 100 years with crabs, for example. It's really not hard to follow.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

I'm really not. Bacteria evolves to be resistant.

Look, this is boring. Show me the transitional fossils for the land mammal turning into a whale. Not interested in petri dish adaption stories.

I evolved the other week, when I realized one brand of beer was giving me very bad wind. I moved on to another

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

A tad rich coming from a bloke who believes that Genesis is LITERALLY true don't you think?

I'm open to seeing the physical data and evidence for evolution. Got any? No?

 

[Fishalt]

As we're working through this subject.
Some organisms have stayed static evolutionary wise for millions of years.
Other's have evolved at ferocious rates to take over whatever niches.
Some very simple organisms have excessively large DNA in comparison to their complexity compared to more advanced organisms.
What's going on?
Why do organisms organise to greater complexity?
Other's stayed put.
Riddle me that.

The answer to this is that it's blind design. There's no sentient engineering behind evolution, and actually nature produces some designs that are completely retarded from an engineering perspective. Even looking at our own biology, we literally eat through the same primary orifice we breathe through. No engineer would willingly incorporate such an idiotic, flawed feature when creating something.

Whatever works is good enough for mother nature. The reason some species haven't changed for millions of years is because nothing really happened to force change, or the design is more or less perfect for the host environment. Crocodiles are an example.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

This is astounding -

Post in thread 'The Flat Earth Thread' https://www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.com/threads/the-flat-earth-thread.242/post-63758

Can you imagine a flerf accusing a "globetard" of Dunning-Kruger when we've literally had twenty posts of it in a row now in this thread?

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

A tad rich coming from a bloke who believes that Genesis is LITERALLY true don't you think?

It is very possible that there is a gap between what is described in Genesis 1 and what is in Genesis 2 of a very large space of time. There could easily have been other cycles of life on this planet before our own.

 

[jpc]

All stories I'm afraid, no actual physical data

So the bible and creationism.
Divine spark.
Which might be plausible.
Atoms and molecules coming together in the cosmos.
Because they can chemically.
Using your argument.
Where is the actual data?
Dogmas don't cut it either as an answer.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

It's a miracle we have the fossils that we do.

Not really, there's loads of 'em. People are digging them up all day every day . But not a single transitionary form tho, not a one

 

[Fishalt]

There's no better example of evolutionary stupidity than the Babirusa. This is a type of wild asian pig. The tusks never stop growing, and because they grow upwards, not downwards, they end up self-terminating the pig quite agonizingly in the process.

Now, this doesn't especially matter because by this point the animal has likely passed on its genes, and that is the entire goal of evolution. But I ask; is this design 'Intelligent'?

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Using your argument.
Where is the actual data?

I would point you toward Aquinas and his proofs.

This book also discusses the data:

Amazon product ASIN 0801072603View: https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-God-Arguments-History-Philosophy/dp/0801072603/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3D92NBM4KVCUI&keywords=Dembski+proofs&qid=1700688360&sprefix=dembski+proo%2Caps%2C646&sr=8-3

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

There's no better example of evolutionary stupidity than the Babirusa. This is a type of wild asian pig.

So, it's a mutated pig then . Not unlike the mutated fruit fly experiment really. They tried to turn the fly into something other, but just got messed up fruit flies.

 

[jpc]

It is very possible that there is a gap between what is described in Genesis 1 and what is in Genesis 2 of a very large space of time. There could easily have been other cycles of life on this planet before our own.

That's what's missing.
Aeons of time is involved in these events unfolding beyond our understanding or comprehension.
We can see land erode in a lifetime.
In the space of eons what's possible.

 

[Fishalt]

I would point you toward Aquinas and his proofs.

This book also discusses the data:

Amazon product ASIN 0801072603View: https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-God-Arguments-History-Philosophy/dp/0801072603/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3D92NBM4KVCUI&keywords=Dembski+proofs&qid=1700688360&sprefix=dembski+proo%2Caps%2C646&sr=8-3

Aquinas was a very good philosopher but not even he could prove the existence of God.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Aquinas was a very good philosopher but not even he could prove the existence of God.

He did a pretty good job by most people's estimation.

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

It's mythology.

Genesis 2 and 3 I think if looked at in various ways and from various angles have a lot to say about actual human existence in this life (the Church has always believed that the texts of the Bible are multivalent).

 

[jpc]

I would point you toward Aquinas and his proofs.

This book also discusses the data:

Amazon product ASIN 0801072603View: https://www.amazon.com/Evidence-God-Arguments-History-Philosophy/dp/0801072603/ref=sr_1_3?crid=3D92NBM4KVCUI&keywords=Dembski+proofs&qid=1700688360&sprefix=dembski+proo%2Caps%2C646&sr=8-3

Tomas Acquinas was an excellent and learned scholar and philosopher.
Do you ever consider how his view's would evolve if he was given the knowledge that's been gathered in the centuries since?

 

[Fishalt]

Microwave reheated Aristotle.

Disagree. Though I wouldn't describe myself as an Aquinist.

 

[Fishalt]

He did a pretty good job by most people's estimation.

Honestly Plunkett I'm fairly pragamatic when it comes to Religion. I'm not a militant Atheist who will demand you or anyone else dispense with faith. And truth be told, some--indeed most--of the best human beings I have ever known have been Christian. That, and I'm high confident they're generally far happier than I am. Many's the time I've wished to have faith, and many's the time I'll wish it again.

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

In fact, Darwin himself was quite agnostic on the subject of mutations and what was driving them.

Are you sure about that? I thought he was convinced that it was survival of fittest natural selection?

 

[A Man Called Charolais]

Yes, another stumbling block to evolutionary theory based on mutation, as epigenetics proves the stability of heritable traits, even while genes might be mutating

Perhaps, my understanding of it is that different genes are turned on and off in response to environmental conditions. It's the nurture arm of the nature/nurture debate.

Given that we only use a very small proportion of our chromosomes, it could be that significant changes in environment and opportunity cause large shifts in morphology due to options available throughout the unused portion of the genome.

That we possess so much "junk DNA" was mentioned in the alien autopsy reddit post which asserted that the shortness of the chromosomes were a feature of "its" genetic engineering.

There was a similar pseudo-science in the USSR promoted by Lysenko, that caused the famine death of millions with the gist of this - planting wheat in tundra etc. This was a variety of Lamarckism - which was an enlightenment theory. Bizarrely, it has some grounds to it although nobody knows how it works - they just have instances of it.

So, somehow there is some consciousness directing evolution - a feedback mechanism that we have no idea of - directing responses in biota at all levels.

The theory of evolution as popularly advertised is a blind theory - it relies wholly on mutation and attrition. The theory as presently defined is thoroughly inadequate, and that's why it is being reworked.

Whatever conclusion they come to, the brutishness of the original theory is false - and its uses in moral justification is therefore unsound.

Ideologies that dispatched the ethical question through the use of evolutionary theory are thus demonstrated as spurious.

 

[jpc]

Eh, you do realise that accepting evolution is entirely compatible with a belief in a higher power of some description?

Yeah
Who's to say that an omnipotent being doesn't do something in a blink of its eyelid that takes an eternity in our time frame.
Or throws the creation dice and watches what springs up this time around.
Why not?

 

[jpc]

One good thing that can be said about Christianity is that it made Europeans far more dynamic than neighbouring societies by prohibiting cousin marriages.

https://www.science.org/content/article/how-early-christian-church-gave-birth-today-s-weird-europeans

They should have talked to the Spanish Habsbergs royal line a bit more robustly on that subject.
Most European royal lines for that matter.

 

[jpc]

Or perhaps the higher being and the universe are one and the same and what we observe as evolution is its development towards some end goal-- of which we're, obviously, a part of.

Essentially, the universe could be a sort of super organism.

Great thought.
If you look around there's a electron microscope image of brain neural networks linking to each other.
Then there's a photo of galaxy clusters spread through the universe as we can see it linking imperceptibly until you see the bigger picture.
Interesting similarities. On that note.
Ti's time to crash out and contemplate some thought provoking idea's from this evening.

 

[Fishalt]

WTF does that mean


As as are the vast majority of atheists (not capitalised)


Sort of like most human beings you've ever known are Christian?


Everyone is, obsequious toads don't tend to be really happy


What's holding you back?

A) I aceept that it will probably always exist, and there's little point in trying to dissuade people out of it. Oftentimes this is an immoral thing to do. Would you berate a dying old woman, with nobody left to care about her in the world, over having faith in Christ and belief in a happy ever-after? Because I wouldn't. That would be sadism of the most perverse and highest order.

B)I disagree. Most are militant and use their atheism as a a platform to announce tgheir alleged intellectual superiority.

C) Fair enough, though I'd toss you into that same pile Jimbo. I can't remember the last time you appeared happy about anything.

D) It would be disingenous. I can't force myself to believe in something that is so implausable.

 

[A Man Called Charolais]

It's mythology.

Did you know that there was a Great Flood? As far as we know it only happened once.

The Carnian Pluvial Event: When It Rained For 2 Million Years On Earth - IFL Science

Apparently, massive eruptions injected enormous quantities of CO2 into the atmosphere and raised global temperature to a point where vast quantities of water vapour circulated through the water cycle and it rained for two million years.

Isn't that extraordinary? I mean the Black Sea deluge and all that but there was actually a direct parallel in geological history. Maybe we are told in ways we can understand - let Jimbo be a caution to our presumptions.


It was generally agreed that Chesterton's book on Aquinas was excellent and the best synopsis of his life and work. There's a link to it below - reheated Aristotelianism is a bit rich.

https://archive.org/details/saint-thomas-aquinas-by-g-k-chesterton/page/n19/mode/2up

 

[A Man Called Charolais]

Fascinating that we're having such an interesting discussion about something posted on reddit.

 

[Fishalt]

And don't call me "Jimbo"

Or I will come over there to your tropical hick town and kick the shit out of your dumb, hick Aussie ass

Why are you so sensitive about this?

And change the fucking record, sunshine. You're a talker. When it comes down to brass tacks you don't have the sack to show against an old man. And besides that, I have no interest in wailing on someone who has no idea what they're doing. It's just not going to happen. But if I might offer some advice, maybe don't go spouting off like that in RL. You never know what you're in until you're in it.

 

[A Man Called Charolais]

Much more fascinating than having a conversation with you

I used an AI image generator. What do you think?

 

[Fishalt]

Why do you call me Jimbo?

Because you don't like it and it makes you lose the rag.

FYI if your name is James, and you cam to Australia, you would probably wind up being called Jimbo whether you liked it or not. It's a curious Australianism. We create Monikers but simply tacking an O on to the end of virtually any first name, after abbreviating it.

 

[Fishalt]

You wouldn't me dickhead in real life, you anonymous internet coward, tuff guy..

lol mate I'm not the one talking about flying overseas for a bustup. That's all you.

 

[Fishalt]

I'll tell you why you call me "Jimbo" shall I, you call me "Jimbo" in the same way I would call you "dickhead"

Nah. Not really.

You're OK Jimbo. I actually don't mind you on balance. If I had to guess what your problem is, I'd say it's because you never had a father figure, or strong male role model around during your developmental years, and likely a vindictive woman of some description had to fill the role. This is why you fly off the handle over trivialities and hold petty grudges. That's what women do, and that's been your instruction. It's also why you threaten violence so freely, and how I know you're not familair with it. Because nobody who is throws the possibility of it so freely and over so little. In RL, violence can end lives, change people forever, or ruin them forever.

You've seen too many movies.

 

[Fishalt]

If you call me "Jimbo" again, you will suffer.

You will be sorely tempted to do that again when I make you suffer, it's a vicious circle (you're in).

This is what I mean. You shouldn't even give a shit.

Who cares?

You can call me Dorothy pindick McFaggot if you like.

*shrugs*

 

[Fishalt]

You've never experienced any violence - I'd bet my bottom dollar on it

Depends what you mean by 'Real', I suppose. I've never seen anybody killed (At least, I don't think I have) and I've never been a soldier, never had to kill anybody.

 

[Fishalt]

I mean that you've never been in so much as a real physical confrontation in which you could get seriously hurt or killed. Sorry, but your little punch bag (that can't fight back) doesn't count

Incorrecto. In fact, I will go as far to admit that I actually lost the last 'streetfight' I was in. Wound up getting a rib cartlidge injury after getting kicked on the ground like a mutt.

Could have been worse.

 

[Fishalt]

How humble of you to admit that you lost your last "streetfight". Okay, go on, tell us what happened, how did it start? Did you fall over?

More or less the same way all these things start when you're young and silly: Alcohol, ego, and a girl.

 

[Fishalt]

You're literally talking about a scuffle when you were a kid. When I was a kid I was charged with inciting a riot (got the probation act )

That was, sadly, well out of my kid stage. It wasn't the first time I'd been beaten up. My dad did it too.