-->
@ethang5
It never occurs to you dolts that me not knowing evolution doesn't make you right.
Of course, that is obvious, but you not knowing evolution makes your denial of it irrelevant and dishonest, and hat's all that really matters.
chicken or egg- i argue egg came first
Posts
Total:
138
It never occurs to you dolts that me not knowing evolution doesn't make you right.
Of course, that is obvious,...
That is why you appear as dolts. If it is obvious that me not knowing evolution doesn't make you right, you should focus on showing yourselves right instead of throwing ad Homs at me.
You agree that its obvious, but yet It never occurs to you dolts that me not knowing evolution doesn't make you right.
Lol. Can the class say, "logic challenged"? I thought it could.
Look back through your post history, genius, you are the one tossing ad homs constantly, you did it in this thread many times already with no provocation. It's your problem, not ours.throwing ad Homs at me
Here's proof in your last post:
you dolts you dolts
That isn't the only problem you have, here's another one...
me not knowing evolution
That problem, of course, makes anything you say about evolution irrelevant and dishonest.
So, go back to school, learn something about evolution and then come back when you understand it.
-->
@ethang5
My post was not addressed to you. I've found you to be the type of evolutionist that will attack the man when you cannot attack his message. So rather than address the question at hand, you will gurgle nonsense about how much I don't know evolution.
The question at hand was how a single mutation can spread through a population. That is the question I addressed, and keep addressing, because you keep getting it wrong.
Your contention that a mutation in a single parent is inherited by only 25% of offspring is factually, demonstrably untrue. The simplest of Punnet squares shows the true proportion to be 50%. Whether or not the mutation results in a recessive trait is irrelevant.
Your entire argument that mutations cannot spread through a population is based on getting this fact wrong. The fact that you namecall and accuse anyone who calls you out for getting it wrong of "prancing and preening about how much they know science" and dishonesty says much about your own intellectual honesty.
-->
@Stronn
Ok, thanks and buh-bye.
If you still have a life, I suggest you dust it off and get back to it.
-->
@Goldtop
Talk about anything but the point.
Your posts are vacuous.
-->
@ethang5
Where did the first beagle come from?This post highlights my claim.Evolutionists soar when they speak only in generalities. Tie them down to specifics and they immediately start to doublespeak.You went to reproductive compatibility. Of course you did. The point was that a single individual with a genetic mutation would not be able to spread that mutation throughout the gene pool if all potential mates did not have that mutation.You dodged that point and filled your post with evo-fluff.
Were there were no beagles for the first beagle to breed with?
How was a beagle born from a non-beagle/proto-beagle????????????????????????????????????????????????
This is a purely ontological problem.
-->
@3RU7AL
Cross breeding dogs in not speciation. A beagle is always a dog.
-->
@ethang5
Nobody is proposing that proto-chicken and chicken could not interbreed.
They are the same questions.
With the same answers.
This is an ontological problem.
If nobody was proposing it, why was it brought up?Nobody is proposing that proto-chicken and chicken could not interbreed.
Cross breeding dogs in not speciation. A beagle is always a dog.
-->
@ethang5
But there was a point where a non-beagle gave birth to a beagle.
-->
@3RU7AL
Then explain it to us. Show us the mechanism. How did that single beagle give rise to all beagles? How did its offspring keep its parent's beagle qualities if it could only mate with non-beagles? Do you know?But there was a point where a non-beagle gave birth to a beagle.
And no generalities please, details.
What thang means:
My ignorance is impenetrable. I refuse to accept any reality that exists outside my brain.
SPACE > Time > black holes of extreme pressures { cosmic egg? } > SPACE-Time patterns escape event horizon { evaporation black hole } > aggregate complex molecules in galaxys.
-->
@disgusted
What thang means:My ignorance is impenetrable. I refuse to accept any reality that exists outside my brain.
ikr, lol.
-->
@3RU7AL
Metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concept via consciousness, is resultant of brain, not the other way. Brain accesses metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.
Brain is wired to access metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concepts.
Who designed the wiring for such a brain? No body. The wiring may exist eternally as SPACE-Time codeing in cosmic egs ex black holes may contain on their event horizon, such coding.
Black holes { as cosmic eggs } evaporate. Naught is loss, even with black holes tha like Universe have an entropy.
Their entropy{ S } is related to there surface area of event horizon. S = A/4.
The spherical cubo{6}-octa{8}hedron is defined by four great{ bisection } hexagonal planes and the area of those four curved planes are equal the surface area of the spherical cubo-octahedron.
Thank you Archimedes.
See this link to better understand what can exist on surface of black hole, and keep in mind that the graphic only shows the primary set of 83 great circles. The limit 2ndary, trianary, quadra-nary etc that is possible to exist on surface of black hole is unknown.
So what we see is subdivision of the event horizon of the black hole and those patterns are specific and vary more and more and become more complex.
A lady scientist did lab experiment to reproduce compressive forces associated with meteor impact of earlier Earth and to see those effects on some simple molecules. To her surprise, what she got was more complex molecules as a result of those higher forces.
Whatever emergies synergetically in Universe, is allowed. No cosmic laws/principles can be violated. There is no infinite set of cosmic laws/principles.
Ex there can never exist more than 5, and only five regular/symmetrical convex polyhedra of Universe.
Integrity = finite limits.
Infinite = lack of integrity.
So we have only two kinds of infinite;
1} metaphysical-1, mind/intellect/concept of infinite this or that ex infinite set of numbers,
2} macro-infinite, non-occupied space that embraces/surrounds our finite occupied space Universe.
383 days later
The egg comes first because the chicken develops inside the egg itself and the egg is the shell of the chicken