Water burns!
 

Cecil Moore wrote in news:ZIXbi.29511$JZ3.3334
@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net:

Jim Higgins wrote:
Do you understand Darwin's Theory of Evolution?

In a nutshell, random mutations followed by survival
of the fittest. But now man can cause non-random
mutations followed by guaranteed survival of whatever
species we create no matter how unfit they might be.
Man has evolved to the point of being able to violate
the theory of evolution.

Just applying a different sort of evolution. If the pressure comes from
humans, it is the same as pressure from radiation, environmental
pressure, or simple random mutation. If man keeps life forms around that
have genetic traits that would prove fatal in another environment, it
just means that those traits are not fatal at this point. If things
change, they could become a detriment, and the more red in tooth and claw
version of evolution would take over.


What exactly is your apparent issue with this?

All N versions of string theory cannot be correct.
Yet someone implied that "scientific theories"
wrap aroung subsets of theories that essentially
are so scientifically well designed that they cannot
be wrong.

Wow, who said that, Cecil?. They would be quite wrong.

Now if you were referring to my "evolution and all the other things
we observe correlation that I mentioned a little while back, then that
would be bit of a disservice on your part. A whole lot of observations do
a fine job of propping up evolution.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Water burns!
 

Mike Kaliski wrote:
"Tom Ring" wrote in message
. ..
snip
Tom,

These experiments are time consuming, tricky (very sensitive to external
influences) and expensive to conduct, yielding results close to the
limits
of what is measurable. Unfortunately this isn't the sort of research
that
can be conducted by an amateur in a shed in the back yard. Unless
commercial
applications for experimental findings are found, funds are rapidly
switched
to other areas of research looking for a new discovery that might make a
profit.

It's just the way that capitalism works.

Mike G0ULI


And yet they are done all the time by Universities and commercial labs.
Sorry, I don't buy your excuse. If you were a slashdot.org regular,
you would have noticed that reports on exactly this subject come through
every 2 weeks to a month. And many other science news sources report
the same events.

Again, I don't buy your excuse.

tom
K0TAR

Tom,

University research is largely financed by commercial interests. A
university project uncovers some new phenomena or result. The financiers ask
what use can be made of the result in producing something that can be sold
at a profit. If the discovery has no immediate application, the funding
dries up. There are many areas of research that are currently languishing
for lack of funds even though they are important for the advancement of
scientific knowledge.

Discoveries with military or national security implications are moved to
secure research establishments and the results are withheld from general
circulation. This is just common sense, you don't need every tin pot
dictator with an oil well setting up their own starwars type missle defence
program. I am NOT talking about the conspiracy theorist ideas of flying
saucers actually existing, and similar fictions.

If some research team announce that the have detected/measured/discovered
some phenomena and the explanation is credible. Once the results have been
independently confirmed by a second source, is there really any need to keep
reinventing the wheel. If there's no profit in it, that's where the research
stops.

Perhaps I am becoming just too jaded and cynical as I get older...

Mike G0ULI




Ah, now the conspiracy theories pop out.

B as in B, S as in S.

tom
K0TAR

Water burns!
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
Get real ... fairy tales are best used to amuse children ...

Consider that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old
while the Milky Way galaxy may be about 12 billion years
old, not much younger than the universe itself. Some early
evolved intelligent life forms could possibly have been
seeding our galaxy for billions of years.

We are also discovering "nanobes" so small (20 nm) that
we never realized that they were alive before now. These
critters contain only about 10 DNA molecules.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/natio...e-nanobes.html


Impossible in the first generation if they are carbon based, since you
need a generation of supernovas followed by star forming for that.
There would be a significant delay, very likely about as long as it took
to make us. Of course all bets are off if they are based on some other
chemical starting point.

tom
K0TAR

Water burns!
 

Mike Coslo wrote:
Wow, who said that, Cecil?. They would be quite wrong.

Don't remember who said that a scientific theory
is not discarded but simply becomes a subset of
some new theory.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Water burns!
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
Get real ... fairy tales are best used to amuse children ...

Consider that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old
while the Milky Way galaxy may be about 12 billion years
old, not much younger than the universe itself. Some early
evolved intelligent life forms could possibly have been
seeding our galaxy for billions of years.

We are also discovering "nanobes" so small (20 nm) that
we never realized that they were alive before now. These
critters contain only about 10 DNA molecules.

http://www.nytimes.com/library/natio...e-nanobes.html

Cecil:

There are many possibilities ...

I am just awestruck (think shock and awe here!) that so many jump on the
"evolution bandwagon"--apparently tossing logic out the window with the
bath water and the baby--even occams' razor is missing. DNA and its'
complexity, yet simplicity, is amazing, (some search this DNA for "Gods
Signature") logic leads me away from viewing it as "just happened."
Mankind appears to serve nature in no meaningful way, yet some maintain
that nature went to extraordinary means to create/evolve us ... and,
claiming that the similarity of DNA between all species "proves"
evolution. Heck, if that argument holds water, then all structures
which man has ever lived in show signs of evolution--only a handful of
materials have ever been used in the construction of buildings, notably
stone, dirt, plant material, metal and most recently plastic--DNA and
its' span across all life here only demonstrates that the same "building
materials" were used in lifes' creation(s).

One haunting phrase found in the bible, and dealing with God, and
paraphrased he "... is and always has been ..." This deals with
Gods' apparent explanation of his own beginning/existence, obviously,
one could guess, he doesn't know his creator either!

Indeed, logic would lead me to think the necessary
microbe(s)/cell(s)/virus-thingy(s) "came through" with the big bang,
perhaps an intended "life seeding" (experiment?) of this universe--maybe
that is where "heaven" is--outside this universe.

However, count on new theories/discoveries coming on down the road ...
that is something we CAN have faith in. I don't find any of the current
explanations to our existence acceptable--proof of one will correct that.

Regards,
JS

Water burns!
 

Tom Ring wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/natio...e-nanobes.html

Impossible in the first generation if they are carbon based, since you
need a generation of supernovas followed by star forming for that.

Of course, impossible in the first generation. But we
can observe the remains of supernovas that are 8 billion
years old. Supernovas probably occurred a couple of billion
years after the Big Bang. That means some other life forms
may have a 4 billion year head start on us.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Water burns!
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
Wow, who said that, Cecil?. They would be quite wrong.

Don't remember who said that a scientific theory
is not discarded but simply becomes a subset of
some new theory.

Hmmm ...

So, Abiogenesis/"spontaneous generation"/autogenesis have just become
incorporated into "evolution theory", yanno what, I can believe that!

Frankly, I subscribe to a belief in Biogenesis ... and wonder where
"first life" (or God, or his predecessors) did "happen?"

See: http://www.answers.com/topic/abiogenesis

Regards,
JS

Water burns!
 

John Smith I wrote:
One haunting phrase found in the bible, and dealing with God, and
paraphrased he "... is and always has been ..." This deals with
Gods' apparent explanation of his own beginning/existence, obviously,
one could guess, he doesn't know his creator either!

People who believe in "first cause" have to grapple with
the question of "What caused God?" If God doesn't have to
have a cause, why does the universe have to have a cause? :-)

The Bible proves that God understood relativity. A day for
God (in his fast starship) is like 1000 years for man on
earth. :-) We can calculate the speed of God's starship
from that information.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Water burns!
 

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith I wrote:
One haunting phrase found in the bible, and dealing with God, and
paraphrased he "... is and always has been ..." This deals with
Gods' apparent explanation of his own beginning/existence, obviously,
one could guess, he doesn't know his creator either!

People who believe in "first cause" have to grapple with
the question of "What caused God?" If God doesn't have to
have a cause, why does the universe have to have a cause? :-)

The Bible proves that God understood relativity. A day for
God (in his fast starship) is like 1000 years for man on
earth. :-) We can calculate the speed of God's starship
from that information.

Its' all how 'ya look at it ...

Could be that God is living in the entangled particle universe (just
down the block a spell.) Could explain why his vision/expectation of
time seems a tad bit faster ...

I heard a rumor that the color of God is grey; and, he is alive and well
and living in Roswell, NM ... :-)

But then, another guy told me the military captured him and got him out
a Groom Lake ... ya never know, ya just never know ...

Regards,
JS

Water burns!
 

Indeed, logic would lead me to think the necessary
microbe(s)/cell(s)/virus-thingy(s) "came through" with the big bang,
perhaps an intended "life seeding" (experiment?) of this universe--maybe
that is where "heaven" is--outside this universe.

Have we considered that viruses need complex cells in order to
procreate and survive... Perhaps animals were created simply to
provide that service...
It may be that the prodrome of a viral infection, such as the common
cold with its aches, pains and sniffles, is merely a byproduct of
billions of tiny, viral orgasms...

So, who is the higher order of evolution here?

Might I recommend that you all read Richard Dawkin's, THE SELFISH
GENE..
It will give you a new perspective...


denny