Unpopular Opinions V3

Author Topic: Unpopular Opinions V3  (Read 6597 times)

no but you mention your loveual experiences and remind us that you prefer men whenever girls are relevant so still evokes the same reaction to me anyway.
This is weird because I'm panloveual?
If it evokes such a negative reaction badly enough for you to reply to me about it, you ought to at least remember it.
I maybe talk about this in a handful of posts out of my 700 already anyways. So if it bothers you, I'm not to blame.

This is weird because I'm panloveual?
If it evokes such a negative reaction badly enough for you to reply to me about it, you ought to at least remember it.
I maybe talk about this in a handful of posts out of my 700 already anyways. So if it bothers you, I'm not to blame.

mate ive already-
do people not know i like boys and that im femboy af
i should
maybe

stop by one of those
I like boys do I have much choice?
Needs more guys
That didn't stop plenty of other guys irl
ok tmi tmi tmi

all recently

No, it is fact. Genetic mutations occur. And when they occur, not "if" they do, if they benefit the organism with the mutation, it will be better at surviving and reproducing than its fellow organisms. This isn't just an idea, it's a fact. New species don't just magically appear.
Yes, genetic mutations occur, and adaptation occurs.  It's why I said that most of evolutionary theory is garbage, but not all.  For instance, if a species' diet change causes a certain tooth to be useless and change, then that is possible.

However, what I find ludicrous is people considering an assumption that concerns eons of time to be fact.  The fact is that it isn't fact.  It is speculation.  We can't even portray our modern history as fact–historians make attempts to connect dots and tell a story of what happens in the midst of historical events.  The role of "scientists" in the evolutionary field is closer to that of a historian.

No, it is fact. Genetic mutations occur. And when they occur, not "if" they do, if they benefit the organism with the mutation, it will be better at surviving and reproducing than its fellow organisms. This isn't just an idea, it's a fact. New species don't just magically appear.
Let me inform you. Not all positive mutations result in an increasing genetic line from the benefiting individual.

On a related note, it is important to realize where scientific fact turns into speculation and when something is supported by current evidence, but is not, by any means, the only possibility.

Mutations can occur. They can be passed on. A new species can be eventually created. Evolution is real. These things have been observed. It is reasonable to conclude, only from this evidence, that evolution occurred in the past. There is also a lot more evidence to support evolution in the past. Is evolution the origin of the species? Likely most species come from evolution. Is evolution the origin of life? It is certainly possible, but there are many other possible sources.

Evolution: Certain (Observed)
Evolution in the past: Nearly certain (The evidence is here and also, why would the past be different with something so fundamental?)
Origin of the species: Nearly certain that most of them came as a direct product of evolution (It seems unlikely that a myriad of creation events occurred throughout the history of Earth)
Origin of life: It is possible (Evolution, in theory, would have no trouble creating life)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 02:58:07 PM by Doomonkey »

all recently

Are you trying to prove anything other than you not having an eye for jokes? If so you can PM me because I'm going to just disregard everything you say from now on.

Also I said proudly talking, not jokingly. Really dude.

Yes, genetic mutations occur, and adaptation occurs.  It's why I said that most of evolutionary theory is garbage, but not all.  For instance, if a species' diet change causes a certain tooth to be useless and change, then that is possible.

However, what I find ludicrous is people considering an assumption that concerns eons of time to be fact.  The fact is that it isn't fact.  It is speculation.  We can't even portray our modern history as fact–historians make attempts to connect dots and tell a story of what happens in the midst of historical events.  The role of "scientists" in the evolutionary field is closer to that of a historian.

So you believe in creationism?

So you believe in creationism?
Why not? The idea that intelligent entities put life on Earth is equally supported by science at this point.

So you believe in creationism?
Yes.  But it is my firm belief that nothing that seeks to answer questions tending towards a philosophical nature belongs in the realm of science.

Science, as I proposed in its ideal form, is as it is supposed to be.


pink floyd, the beatles, etc aren't even that good and shouldn't be glorified like they are now

Why not? The idea that intelligent entities put life on Earth is equally supported by science at this point.


Marriage should be abolished.


For instance:  As a scientist, to use the method of radiocarbon dating to assume the date of a fossil is foolish.  Humanity is foolish to claim to know what happens in millions of years, when our recorded history is but a speck in comparison.
The reason why we can determine the half-life period of carbon-14 is because we have sensitive instruments which can measure the amounts of the material to a high degree of accuracy. Since we know that the half-life of an isotope is always constant, we can observe the change in measurements over a period of time to determine the rate of decay for the isotope in question. The longer we study an isotope, the more accurate our readings can get. There is fair reason why this method is used and taught in biology and chemistry books alike. Carbon dating is not useful past a certain point, of course, when traces become small. This point is at ~50,000 years. More information can be found here and here.

As for natural selection, it's a means to an end which isn't necessarily the true answer, but the evidence is fairly convincing. It is, however, fairly ludicrous to deny the existence of evolution, in short, the idea that life changes overtime. The shortest and most compelling evidence is simply the pattern of fossilised life we can find in different layers of the Earth's crust.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2015, 04:11:33 PM by otto-san »