What is it with Catholic Priests?

[Al B. Sure!]

As an interesting aside, the Lautenberg Amendment prohibits the possession of firearms by those who have been convicted of MISDEMEANOR domestic abuse. Military personnel who are convicted of this misdemeanor are administratively separated because they are barred from possessing a weapon.

So apparently the Army allows convicted felons to serve but not misdemeanor domestic abusers. Kind of weird.

[Ben Kenobi]

Who's arguing the states can't deny felons the right to vote? The argument was that it's stupid to deny them the right to vote after their prison term ends.

Ben:

I think it's a good idea to deny convicted felons the vote.

Everybody else:

I think it's stupid to deny convicted felons the vote.

Wow, you have made me see the light. Calling an opinion 'stupid' is the height of rhetoric.

[giblets]

That's what statistical mechanics is all about. Right now, evolutionists cannot predict what happens at the macro level. This means that there are serious gaps in their understanding of evolution.

Selective pressures are going to vary greatly because of numerous factors. That doesn't mean the diversity of life is not a product of mutations and natural selection. Is that really your reasoning for being a "skeptic" of evolution? That we don't know everything about something as complicated as the history of Earth? You might as well claim that there are serious gaps in our understanding of physics because we can't fully predict the weather. Is that a good reason for being a "skeptic" of current knowledge of physics?

[Elok]

Right.

Let's see. I believe that homosexuality is wrong. I believe that abortion is wrong, and I'm the one who's casting down the reputation of Christians on this board?

Take the plank out of your own eye, Elok.

I'm pro-life. As for homosexuality, I acknowledge that church tradition is against it but see no reason for that to affect their rights in a secular context because I understand what separation of church and state means. I also don't like the way Teh Sodomites have become the official whipping boy of the Christian right. I don't shun straight people on this board for fooling around with their girlfriends, or harp at them constantly about how they should wait until marriage; why should I treat the gays like crap?

[MrFun]

Clearly people believe that the 14th is more important than the 2nd.

What is wrong with that?

[Ben Kenobi]

It means that you can't get angry at folks who think it should be the other way around.

I think they are both equally important.

[Ben Kenobi]

Is that really your reasoning for being a "skeptic" of evolution? That we don't know everything about something as complicated as the history of Earth?

Physics doesn't claim to predict the weather. Evolution makes claims about how species became what they are, claims that it cannot back up. That's the difference.

If evolution were to say that we simply don't know how man came into being, then they would be on par with physics and the weather.

[Nikolai]

If this thread is about a priest that turned out to be an adulterous thief, why then is most of the thread about American politics?

[giblets]

Physics doesn't claim to predict the weather. Evolution makes claims about how species became what they are, claims that it cannot back up. That's the difference.

If evolution were to say that we simply don't know how man came into being, then they would be on par with physics and the weather.

If you ignore nested hierarchies, transitional fossils, anatomical and molecular vestiges, biogeography, anatomical and molecular parahomology, etc., then evolution makes claims it can't back up. Evolution explains a lot, hasn't been proven wrong and hasn't had a competitor for 150 years.

[Ben Kenobi]

If you ignore nested hierarchies, transitional fossils, anatomical and molecular vestiges, biogeography, anatomical and molecular parahomology, etc., then evolution makes claims it can't back up. Evolution explains a lot, hasn't been proven wrong and hasn't had a competitor for 150 years.

Evolution cannot be proven wrong, ever. That's the point.

It's not falsifiable. It doesn't make predictions that can be proven wrong.

[Nikolai]

There is several forms of evolution, if you stretch it (big bang, atmospheric, geological, macro-evolution, micro-evolution). Of those, only the last one can be proven, and has been proven. Maco-evolution could in theory be proven over a long period of time of course. The first three can only be made a good case for. But not everything has to be proven beyond doubt. I could see God use evolution, I'm not entirely decided for or against it, but it sure is a good way to explain it. Other explanations is either quasi-scientific, like ID, and isn't a viable option IMHO, or religious, in case one cannot argue scientificly for or against it anyway.

[giblets]

Evolution cannot be proven wrong, ever. That's the point.

It's not falsifiable. It doesn't make predictions that can be proven wrong.

If all life on earth did not fit into a nested hierarchy, that would disprove evolution... for example Linnaeus tried to classify all rocks and minerals hierarchically, they way he had done with living things, and it eventually failed because it was too subjective.

But, feel free to offer your own alternative explanation for how humans got here, if you don't think they share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. Did God pop them into existence with DNA that is 98.7% the same as chimp DNA? Did aliens create them?

[Ben Kenobi]

Of those, only the last one can be proven, and has been proven.

Exactly, that's all I'm saying.

[Ben Kenobi]

If all life on earth did not fit into a nested hierarchy, that would disprove evolution... for example Linnaeus tried to classify all rocks and minerals hierarchically, they way he had done with living things, and it eventually failed because it was too subjective.

And many would say the same about his biological systems. We do not have an empirical definition of 'species'.

This whole 'great chain of being', that was a poet. Erasmus Darwin. Sure, it's an endearing picture, but like the geocentric universe, probably wrong as well.

But, feel free to offer your own alternative explanation for how humans got here, if you don't think they share a common ancestor with chimpanzees. Did God pop them into existence with DNA that is 98.7% the same as chimp DNA? Did aliens create them?

Why would we classify 'chimps', 'chimps' and 'people', 'people'?

Is there a cut off in terms of genetic similarity between the two?

People share the same chemical elements as many other organic things. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are related to one another.

DNA is a building block of life. You have similar arrangements, that doesn't meant that a is related to b.

[giblets]

And many would say the same about his biological systems. We do not have an empirical definition of 'species'.

This whole 'great chain of being', that was a poet. Erasmus Darwin. Sure, it's an endearing picture, but like the geocentric universe, probably wrong as well.

Are you putting evolution on the same level as geocentrism?

Why would we classify 'chimps', 'chimps' and 'people', 'people'?

Well for starters, they can't interbreed.

Is there a cut off in terms of genetic similarity between the two?

What do you mean? The human gene pool and chimpanzee gene pools don't overlap. They are distinct gene pools so it isn't arbitrary to say they are separate.

People share the same chemical elements as many other organic things. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are related to one another.

DNA is a building block of life. You have similar arrangements, that doesn't meant that a is related to b.

Wow, DNA is a building block of life? No ****. It's not logically impossible for very genetically similar organisms to not have a common ancestor but genetics does provide support for common ancestry.

Why proclaim yourself a "skeptic" of a scientific theory that explains numerous observations and has no competitors?