mrgoodbar's Comments
"Everything started with a protein? Where did we get this protein? If a cell can’t be created by a thunderbolt, how do you explain where this protein came from?"
^^^ By this line of reasoning, where did God come from, or rather, who or what created God? What existed before God? Did another, bigger, more powerful God created the current God which so many of us seem so familiar with?
Life origins is an area of science which is still undergoing much research and theorizing. What's increasingly clear is that the supernatural (magic, God, whatever) probably didn't play a role in the start of life on earth. The origin of life can probably be articulated using natural phenomenon, rather than relying upon Zeus, or God, or Allah, or the Tooth Fairy.
Everywhere we look in nature we don't find evidence of a creator, rather we find that natural processes, when allowed to run their course over billions of years can produce things (like us) which are capable of find other things (namely themselves) pretty amazing.
Few places is the lack of evidence for a creator more evident that in the science of microbiology. The interior of cells are really messy, obviously cobbled together in a hap hazard way which no omniscient engineer would be proud of. Mitochondrial DNA is perhaps the most glaring example I can think of.
As humans we often become entangled in language. We seem to divide the world into easily (to us) identifiable bits. Something is either alive or it is not. As intelligent beings we have a conscious notion of creating things (cars, computers, bad tv shows) from other components and for some reason we try to lay this human quality (of creation) on nature in the form of Gods or Devils. We have the feeling that because we are here, something must have placed us here. We feel self-important and the notion of life on our planet being caused by a series of chances seems insulting on a personal level.
"Life" is a messy word and it doesn't always apply across the board to everything we encounter. Are proteins alive? Would you say that a virus is living? Where do you want the cut off to be? Plutonium is a natural element which changes over time (it decays into uranium) - would you say that it is alive? Hobbs said that humans were "matter in motion" - perhaps we're too caught up on what possess these ill defined characters of "life" and what doesn't?
^^^ By this line of reasoning, where did God come from, or rather, who or what created God? What existed before God? Did another, bigger, more powerful God created the current God which so many of us seem so familiar with?
Life origins is an area of science which is still undergoing much research and theorizing. What's increasingly clear is that the supernatural (magic, God, whatever) probably didn't play a role in the start of life on earth. The origin of life can probably be articulated using natural phenomenon, rather than relying upon Zeus, or God, or Allah, or the Tooth Fairy.
Everywhere we look in nature we don't find evidence of a creator, rather we find that natural processes, when allowed to run their course over billions of years can produce things (like us) which are capable of find other things (namely themselves) pretty amazing.
Few places is the lack of evidence for a creator more evident that in the science of microbiology. The interior of cells are really messy, obviously cobbled together in a hap hazard way which no omniscient engineer would be proud of. Mitochondrial DNA is perhaps the most glaring example I can think of.
As humans we often become entangled in language. We seem to divide the world into easily (to us) identifiable bits. Something is either alive or it is not. As intelligent beings we have a conscious notion of creating things (cars, computers, bad tv shows) from other components and for some reason we try to lay this human quality (of creation) on nature in the form of Gods or Devils. We have the feeling that because we are here, something must have placed us here. We feel self-important and the notion of life on our planet being caused by a series of chances seems insulting on a personal level.
"Life" is a messy word and it doesn't always apply across the board to everything we encounter. Are proteins alive? Would you say that a virus is living? Where do you want the cut off to be? Plutonium is a natural element which changes over time (it decays into uranium) - would you say that it is alive? Hobbs said that humans were "matter in motion" - perhaps we're too caught up on what possess these ill defined characters of "life" and what doesn't?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
"If evolution is a process of natural selection and adaptation to ones environment, why did all the species, other than humans, that evolved from monkeys not make it? Wouldn’t they have been better suited for the environment than the monkeys? If everything started with a single cell organism, where did that single cell organism come from?"
^^^ If the person who asked this question is genuinely seeking answers then I invite them to take some college level biology classes.
Evolution and its underlying principles are hard to understand because like much of science they are counter intuitive to both human experience and the "just-so" stories that we pass down from one generation to the next in the form of creation myths.
In absence of detailed observation and experiment the earth seems uniquely tailored for human beings, the sky (or "heavens") seem focused on the earth (and by extension, man) as the sole supreme inhabitant of the universe. It would be extraordinary for humans not to have dreamed up their own human-specific creation myths over the previous thousands of years and even more amazing for those beliefs to be easily discarded within just a few generations after Darwin...
Understanding science (whether its biology, astronomy, geology, etc.) takes work in the form of lengthy study and its not always fun. The beauty of science though is that anyone, with enough study, can understand it all.
What I see above are comments from people (some well meaning, some not) who are technically ignorant (I'm not saying they are dumb) of the underlying principles involved in evolution.
Getting back to the poster who asked about monkeys and "single cell organisms" though... More than likely this person has already made up their mind about evolution and is using tired and uninformed arguments from religious creationists in an effort to shore up their own belief system. I challenge this person to put their money where their mouth is and enroll in college level biology classes... you'll be surprised just how much we know about biology and evolution.
^^^ If the person who asked this question is genuinely seeking answers then I invite them to take some college level biology classes.
Evolution and its underlying principles are hard to understand because like much of science they are counter intuitive to both human experience and the "just-so" stories that we pass down from one generation to the next in the form of creation myths.
In absence of detailed observation and experiment the earth seems uniquely tailored for human beings, the sky (or "heavens") seem focused on the earth (and by extension, man) as the sole supreme inhabitant of the universe. It would be extraordinary for humans not to have dreamed up their own human-specific creation myths over the previous thousands of years and even more amazing for those beliefs to be easily discarded within just a few generations after Darwin...
Understanding science (whether its biology, astronomy, geology, etc.) takes work in the form of lengthy study and its not always fun. The beauty of science though is that anyone, with enough study, can understand it all.
What I see above are comments from people (some well meaning, some not) who are technically ignorant (I'm not saying they are dumb) of the underlying principles involved in evolution.
Getting back to the poster who asked about monkeys and "single cell organisms" though... More than likely this person has already made up their mind about evolution and is using tired and uninformed arguments from religious creationists in an effort to shore up their own belief system. I challenge this person to put their money where their mouth is and enroll in college level biology classes... you'll be surprised just how much we know about biology and evolution.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
No one debates that evolution is provable (just radiate some fruit flies and you can see the results of genetic mutation in a few days) but to state parenthetically that it is "now proven" is just beyond snarky.
Neatorama works best when the posters stay away from their amateurish politicizing of topics.
The other posters here are also missing the point when they say its "debatable". No one is debating evolution, but the continued obsession by the mis-informed about the theory's "status" is laughable.
Neatorama works best when the posters stay away from their amateurish politicizing of topics.
The other posters here are also missing the point when they say its "debatable". No one is debating evolution, but the continued obsession by the mis-informed about the theory's "status" is laughable.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Americans will learn in the next generation or so that their lifestyle is unsustainable. There are suburbs and exurbs being built today which will resemble third world countries in 50 years because their location (far, far out and away from any work center) is unsustainable with rising gas prices. We're talking cooking over empty oil drums here.
Public transit, not fancy 100mpg one or two seaters (no one can afford anyway) and a life-style adjustment are what is needed, sadly we're behind the rest of the developed world in all these parts and this bodes badly for our future as a nation.
Instead of squandering $500 billion on the war (so far) we really could have used that money to replace (yes, get rid of, and build new) Amtrak and link America's cities by high speed rail, not unsustainable super highways.
Until the 49% of Americans who have never used public transit, think buses and bicycles are for poor people, and have the insane need to "feel safe" in their hulking SUVs get on board with the rest of us things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.
Public transit, not fancy 100mpg one or two seaters (no one can afford anyway) and a life-style adjustment are what is needed, sadly we're behind the rest of the developed world in all these parts and this bodes badly for our future as a nation.
Instead of squandering $500 billion on the war (so far) we really could have used that money to replace (yes, get rid of, and build new) Amtrak and link America's cities by high speed rail, not unsustainable super highways.
Until the 49% of Americans who have never used public transit, think buses and bicycles are for poor people, and have the insane need to "feel safe" in their hulking SUVs get on board with the rest of us things are going to get a lot worse before they get better.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I doubt it has anything to do with the winds and more to do with some sort of extreme magnetic interference at the pole. Also this isn't the fast swirling top clouds you're seeing but a deeper, denser (and perhaps more stable) layer.
Nothing weird here that science can't explain with some good theorizing and continued observations, but I bet the tin-foil and UFO kooks are having fun with it. Secret space base of the Third Reich, anyone?
Nothing weird here that science can't explain with some good theorizing and continued observations, but I bet the tin-foil and UFO kooks are having fun with it. Secret space base of the Third Reich, anyone?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I don't know if I believe this phone or not. Are you sure it's not a hoax? Still, I can't see any obvious signs of fakery so it's good enough for Neatorama I suppose.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Obviously the War on Drugs is working...
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
That's one rexy exhibit.
I'm pretty sure you won't see that at the Creation Museum.
I'm pretty sure you won't see that at the Creation Museum.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Abortion stops a... er... keychain?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Classic? No. Stupid? Yes.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This was featured on a episode of the The New Yankee Workshop several years ago. Norm Abram creamed his pants over it. Ewww...
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
lol nrds!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
wow that is hard. plus i'm fucking drunk
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
combine pictures of the sun taken every 10 days, from the same location and at the same time
You should point out that this is repeated over the course of a year to produce the figure-eight image. So the photograph itself is pretty amazing considering that they took one (presumably every 10 days) from the same spot at the same angle over the course of a year.
You should point out that this is repeated over the course of a year to produce the figure-eight image. So the photograph itself is pretty amazing considering that they took one (presumably every 10 days) from the same spot at the same angle over the course of a year.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
^^^^But science is accessible to anyone with access to a library, the internet, or a college campus. And anyone can contribute to the body of scientific knowledge. You don't have to be a high priest, a disciple, or chosen to transcribe mysterious golden plates (which are conveniently taken away) by an angel.
"Science constantly contradicts itself over and over."
^^^ Science has an error-correcting mechanism which is unique in all of human knowledge. It is under continual refinement, in a way that myth and superstition is not. Einstein's theories replaced Newtons. Newton corrected assumptions by Galileo. Brahe refined Copernicus' notion of the heliocentric solar system. Copernicus tossed out Ptolemy and Aristotle's model of the universe... and so on.
In so far as the concept of "truth" can be grasped by the human mind, science gets us much more closer to it than any system of knowledge which previously claimed to do so...
We know that the earth goes round the sun despite what the bible says because our perspective is fundamentally different than the earthly authors of the bible who lived thousands of years ago. This is perhaps the best example of science getting closer to the "truth" than myth that I can think of...
"It’s not a solid structure to base ones beliefs on."
^^^^ Indeed, I'm fond of saying that I don't have beliefs, I have well reasoned opinions.
Science does change (it is refined and corrected over time) and for some people (often religious-types who have a strange obsession with getting to some sort of universal "truth") this causes them to be uneasy.
It seems that some people need to grasp onto and support themselves with what they consider to be a fundamental "truth". Notions like "God is Good, he loves me and my family, he created everything" are very strong statements about the nature of reality. By comparison science never makes such black and white statements and I can understand why people are uneasy with a system which is so obviously open to revision by anyone willing to put in the time and research.
The irony is of course that in locking themselves into such a ridged interpretation of "truth" these people wind up ultimately believing in a form of reality which is very likely false.