What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
830 Comments
- presidentraygun, on 04/28/2009, -48/+770Swine Flu IS NOT evolving...it's being intelligently designed by an all loving God intent on killing.
- notzak, on 04/29/2009, -5/+198A lot of anti-evolutionists actually prefer to say that this kind of evolution, (microevolution) exists, whereas large scale evolution (macroevolution) doesn't.
Which makes very little sense, I know, but I'm just saying. - inactive, on 04/29/2009, -30/+204Usually the same idiots who fear vaccines deny evolution, so, um, WIN WIN!
- Diefree, on 04/29/2009, -12/+161Ok that beats any smart ass comment I would of had. I bow to your wit.
- stoanhart, on 04/29/2009, -6/+122would *have* had
- CasinoJack, on 04/29/2009, -1/+93The stupid is strong in this one.
- DryMaltExtract, on 04/29/2009, -1/+85If you walk an entire football field at once and I walk it 10 yards at a time, taking a break in between each part, do we not end up walking the same distance?
Macro vs Micro is stupid ***** that ID fundies made up.
There was an excellent animation on youtube at one point but I cannot find it right now. - Coven, on 04/29/2009, -7/+70A kid died in Houston on Friday. Granted the kid was visiting from Mexico City, but he received our 'top of the line' health care here.
- EarlOfLade, on 04/29/2009, -0/+58What you call "macro evolution" is nothing but a lot of "micro evolution" over a long period of time. If you accept what you call "micro evolution", you are also automatically accepting what you call "macro evolution"
- RadiatedAnt, on 04/29/2009, -3/+57probably all since we never get out of the house.
- Kryptenx, on 04/29/2009, -1/+54The author of this comment cleary shows his disrespect for intellect by pretending that micro-evolution does not help to illustrate macro-evolution. Let me guess, micro != macro, and you'll never see macro-evolution because it takes too long, therefore evolution is false? The author is illustrating how the swine flu is basically evolution on a scale that you can see. Quit coming up with petty excuses to dismiss everything you don't agree with.
- KevenM, on 04/29/2009, -0/+53That's offensive to jews pal. Please refer to it as "The Mexican Flu"
It's ok to be offensive to the Mexicans. - blix797, on 04/29/2009, -2/+51Well you're just a ray of sunshine, aren't you.
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -1/+50It's evolved into another flu, one capable of things the previous version wasn't.
YES, this is evolution, according to the scientific definition. - inactive, on 04/29/2009, -12/+59If a Jew gets the swine flu, is that pretty bad, you know, from a kosherness POV?
- Agentdvd, on 04/29/2009, -2/+48EVERYONE PANIC!!!11!!1oneone111!!
- dhoneywell, on 04/29/2009, -1/+46Why does nobody understand the definition of a scientific theory? To say "still a theory" is a pretty uninformed and baseless phrase. READ SOMETHING ABOUT SCIENCE! Just to put things in perspective, we still use the terms "Gravitational Theory" and "Germ Theory."
- ApokalypseNow, on 04/29/2009, -0/+45The micro/macro model of evolution was thrown out in the 1930's, as it was not supported by the evidence. If you're going to try to criticize evolutionary biology, please at least use some terms from the last half-century or so - you look slightly less like a moron that way.
- vbullinger, on 04/29/2009, -0/+45Ouch, yes they do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus
Basically, a virus is just DNA (or RNA) wrapped in a shell that replicates itself. Not a whole lot more complicated than that, really. - Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -2/+45I like the part where you're too damned retarded to know the difference between a layman's theory and a Scientific Theory.
Educate yourself, and you MIGHT just look like less of a fool, though I must admit I have my doubts. - Frankyfan3, on 04/29/2009, -1/+42Seriously! If we evolved from monkeys, why aren't babies monkeys?
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -1/+41"Evolution primarily involves the imagination."
Demonstrably false. We can repeat it in the lab, including speciation events. That you're too scientifically illiterate to understand that seems to be your own personal failing.
"No DNA is needed--or can be explained by any proposed evolutionary process."
DNA isn't explained by evolutionary theory because the origins of it aren't PART of evolutionary theory - that's in the realm of abiogenesis. Get your science straight (unlikely, given your predisposition against it) and get back to me when you're ready to sit at the big-boy's table. At nearly 50 years old, you should know better than this, but your utter lack of any critical thinking skills seems to have retarded your mental growth to that of a highschooler (coincidentally, the end of your formal education!) - Darth, on 04/29/2009, -5/+44http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=50303
Swine Flu - Disease
Infected by the Swine Flu. Attacking has a chance to trigger an outbreak.
30 seconds remaining
God didn't, but blizzard created it! - Klak, on 04/29/2009, -2/+38what happens when theres a whole bunch of micro-evolution takes place?
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -1/+36It's evolution, whether you want to admit it or not. Your ignorance on what evolution actually IS is showing.
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -1/+36Bingo: the cumulative effects of hundreds of thousands of years of so-called MICRO-evolution result in (equally so-called) MACRO-evolution. Anyone who thinks that there's a true difference between the two needs to quit watching X-Men. Evolutionary leaps *do* apparently happen, but they're only "leaps" on a geological scale - you don't wake up overnight and suddenly find that your baby has mutant superpowers. ;)
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -4/+38There's no faith involved. Please look up Dr. Ken Miller's talk on whale evolution - simply put, we've got 5 steps of evolution (in fossil form) between whale's land-based ancestors and their more modern water-based ancestors. It's all there, including every morphological change we'd expect to see in between.
- rjr5021, on 04/29/2009, -6/+40How many of the Duggars will make it through the swine flu?
- Harabeck, on 04/29/2009, -9/+41You can't separate evolution into micro and macro, they're the same thing.
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -2/+34knowitman - educate yourself. At some point there comes a "speciation event" where the offspring are unable to mate with the original (unchanged) population.
There are many documented cases where Species A gave birth to variant B, but A and B can mate normally. B gave birth to variant C, and B can mate with C. We go on like this down the line 'till we hit... say F. Now, we take F and try to mate it with A, and they CAN'T - they're genetically incompatible. They're different species. Its called a ring species. Look it up. - Brizzyce, on 04/29/2009, -2/+33I see you've already been dugg down 37 times at the time of this posting, but I just want to throw in my two cents anyways:
You're stupid. - jynweythek, on 04/29/2009, -6/+37sadly, this logic escapes a huge number of americans. have you heard the micro vs. macro evolution ***** they're spouting now? they're claiming that small mutations "don't change the species overall" or some *****. seriously!
sometimes on places like Digg with a relatively intelligent community it is easy to forget how stupid people can be, but yesterday at work, each of my three bosses claimed belief in intelligent design over evolution. - meyert11, on 04/29/2009, -2/+33evolution occurs via mutations of DNA that lead to a phenotype that increases the likelihood of survival.
- Harabeck, on 04/29/2009, -1/+32You are wrong about your "problem" with natural selection. More offspring is not always better. If a species reproduces too quickly it could consume all of the food supply and cause the entire the species to starve. Also, more intelligent species like monkeys and humans require more attention from their parents to properly develop, and so they have less children. Please do some research.
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -0/+30"Evolution is truth through repetition. Repetition is what's all around us. You're being taken for a ride. Bon Voyage. "
Demonstrably false. We can repeat it in the lab, including speciation events. We've done the work. Have you? No? Is there a SINGLE piece of evidence to contradict it? No? Then, you're just lying because you prefer your comfortable biblical lies to the harsh reality you see around you.
"(Luke 21:9-11)...blahblahblah"
Me 3:14159 "And I say unto thee, 'Get thee a life! Thy ridiculous passages matter not to those that do not already believe in thy myths!'"
"Swine flu, AIDS, Spanish flu, Bird flu, SARS, etc--all evidence that clearly supports the Bible."
Only if you already believe in it. That's also known as confirmation bias. - Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -1/+29Your premises is flawed - evolution is not a directed process. A species wouldn't evolve wings to get to safer land, as that implies an end goal with evolution directing the life towards that goal.
---
Consider a flightless species that evolves wings (for whatever reason). Each step along the path needs a distinct advantage.
First might come lighter bones, with which the species can climb out of harms way with more ease, or run faster or further to avoid predators.
Next might come slight membranes between the fingers, the better to grab hold of branches (increased friction).
Next we might see longer fingers, the better to reach branches or food.
Next, more complete membranes between the fingers, allowing gliding when one falls.
Take a few more steps in the obvious direction, and you've got wings. - skintigh, on 04/29/2009, -3/+30I worked with a woman who believes everything in the Bible literally, no matter what science/reality says. So I questioned her on everything I could think of:
She believes the Sun orbits the Earth (Joshua 10:12)
She believes the Sun is not a star and the moon emits light (Genesis)
She believes in giants (Goliath)
... but she is not sure if she believes in dinosaurs, she has "never thought about it" (she has two sons who probably love dinosaurs, but she has never thought about it?!? They aren't allowed to trick-or-treat, so maybe they never had a dinosaur, either)
She doesn't believe anything in the universe is older the 4000 years
Of course, she doesn't believe in evolution
She wants to pull her kids out of school before they have to take a science class, she says all archeologists want to do is prove the Bible wrong, she has no interest in learning about any other religion and thinks nobody should want to even know about other religions, over-all she is the most intellectually-incurious person I have ever met. The perfect product of the typical Southern church and public school system. - inactive, on 04/29/2009, -1/+28There *are* no proofs in science, Seditio. There is evidence backing a hypothesis which is tested, and tested again.
The only real proofs are in mathematics.
There's definitely no proof for the myth of creation. It's not backed up by anything, and if you go by Genesis, it contradicts itself. - Rain12913, on 04/29/2009, -3/+30***** you for talking trash about kittens.
- PhoenixAvatar2, on 04/29/2009, -1/+27You're either an idiot or a troll. And I'd put even money on either.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 04/29/2009, -0/+25The theory of gravity is not simply that "gravity exists". The theory of gravity has recently been surrounded by a lot of controversy, although it has not been as politicized as evolution and global warming.
Some of the important unanswered questions:
Do gravitons exist? (i.e. is Force of gravity analagous to electromagnetic, strong, and weak forces in that particles mediate these forces?) Most scientists think it exists, but it has still not yet been observed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graviton
Why do galaxies not follow our formula for gravity (F = GMm/r^2)?
Is it because dark matter exists?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
Or is it because our formula for gravity is wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dy ...
Or something else altogether?
Obviously it's dumb to say "evolution is still a theory", because it can never be elevated beyond that. However, theories ARE fallible. There have been theories that have been proven false in the history of science such as the Caloric Theory of heat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caloric_theory
We must be careful not to be lulled into the position that as soon as an idea has attained the label of "theory" it is definitely true. Many people believe treating scientific theories as "never finished" is an ideological formality. It isn't. They really are never finished. We are always learning new things that require existing ideas to be modified and sometimes discarded entirely. - ApokalypseNow, on 04/29/2009, -0/+25"The virus does not evolve anything, it steals it. "
Same thing - evolution is defined as the adaptation of a population to better fit and compete in an environment due to selection pressures acting upon heritable and imperfectly replicating traits. It doesn't matter how this heritable adaptation happens, whether it be from nucleotide "theft", mutation, gene shift, gene duplication, or some other mechanism, it is still evolution in action.
There's no reason to flame you, you are just misinformed. - dafragsta, on 04/29/2009, -1/+26... which takes a VERY long time. In a possibly infinite universe, rest assured that somewhere swine flu does evolve into some kind of manbirdpig with frickin' lazers.
- Harabeck, on 04/29/2009, -1/+26Wrong Seditio, you need to look up what a scientific theory is. Evolution is a theory in the same way Gravity is.
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -2/+27And yet, those of us who really do understand realize that there is no faith involved.
- AndrewMoyer, on 04/29/2009, -2/+27It very likely crosses the arbitrary, man-made distinction of micro- vs. macro-.
- Mnementh2230, on 04/29/2009, -0/+25Selective breeding isn't the same as the intelligent design espoused by creationists. Equating them as such is disingenuous.
What people can't stand is a non-falsifiable, non-helpful, non-science like ID being pushed to be taught in science classrooms.
Even ID's main proponent, Behe, admitted that if the definition of science were stretched enough to include ID as a science, it would allow idiocy like ASTROLOGY into the arena of science. Haven't we, as a society, come far enough to discard this lunacy yet? - inactive, on 04/29/2009, -0/+24There is no credible alternate theory to Evolution.
The idea of intelligent design is based on an ancient belief system, not backed up by any evidence, in a document that is replete with inconsistencies, errors historical and scientific, and contradictions.
No one has been able to come up with a workable alternative theory that can make any accurate predictions about the real world. Natural selection and evolution have done so. The evidence for evolution is everywhere. The evidence for creation by a god or intelligent design does not exist.
Your problem is one of credibility. The source document the creationists/ID people go by is full of errors. As long as you still base your wishful thinking on that error filled document, you will make no headway. - Harabeck, on 04/29/2009, -0/+22Actually, if you look at the fetuses they're not that different until a certain stage of development. Look up the scientific field of Evo Devo.
- Hetman, on 04/29/2009, -1/+23There is no difference between macro and micro evolution. That is just used by creationist to push there agenda.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 841 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is