Should evolution be taught in high school?

Judged:

1

1

1

Allen wrote:

<quoted text>
As usual you're premature in your statement as well as 'truncating' the definition of Ad Hominem to suit your argument, who'd a thunk it?
Websters New Collegiate Dictionary; p11-'Ad Hominem'[to the man]but here's the rest 'of the definition' that you conveniently left out:" appealing to a person's feelings or prejudices rather than his intellect."
You may be correct here as there appears to be little intellect in your case to appeal to, so my arguments are seen as simply grating upon your emotions and hence the underlying definition of the 'troll' emerges.
One is then a 'troll' by evolutionary definitions whenever facts or information are conveyed that either 'offend' the hearer or create an emotional response. But, as I've told you and others before, that's your problem.

Judged:

2

2

2

Darwins Stepchild wrote:

Allen...
Let me make a prediction - You STILL haven't contacted a local physics professor and asked him about your ideas on physics.
Truly sad. You KNOW you are wrong, but you are afraid of having it confirmed. Coward.
BTW, I am still willing to look up the phone number if you want me to.

Judged:

2

1

1

Feklahr wrote:

<quoted text>
Ooops!
"Nevertheless, the researchers point that other experiments have reported that “pleasant” images can affect pain threshold so this effect is not exclusive of religion."

Judged:

1

1

1

Allen wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, you're certainly an ..'oops'..if I've ever seen one. Why not offer your own picture here in a scientifically controlled experiment and let us know how well it works?

Judged:

2

1

1

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
BOOM!
Anybody know what that was?!?

Judged:

2

2

2

Allen wrote:

<quoted text>
All that matters is that the mechanical stess in lbs/sq-in for the wood beams, columns and hull at the calculated water-line for the design of the Arc are under the maximum loads stated for a given wood in the stress tables. Everything else is just 'BS', a specialty of starving artists.
There wouldn't have been any metal for fastening the Arc's structural members. And, its 'dowel pins', not pegs, which are more than adequate to carry the horizontal loads for all phases of fastening and joining of the Arc.
Now, find that dog.

Judged:

2

2

1

Rucin wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey, Allen's back...neat.
At least he's being very specific about his claims. That's better than nothing.

Judged:

2

1

1

The Dude wrote:

<quoted text>
BOOM!
Anybody know what that was?!?

Judged:

2

2

1

Allen wrote:

<quoted text>
As usual you're premature in your statement as well as 'truncating' the definition of Ad Hominem to suit your argument, who'd a thunk it?
Websters New Collegiate Dictionary; p11-'Ad Hominem'[to the man]but here's the rest 'of the definition' that you conveniently left out:" appealing to a person's feelings or prejudices rather than his intellect."
You may be correct here as there appears to be little intellect in your case to appeal to, so my arguments are seen as simply grating upon your emotions and hence the underlying definition of the 'troll' emerges.
One is then a 'troll' by evolutionary definitions whenever facts or information are conveyed that either 'offend' the hearer or create an emotional response. But, as I've told you and others before, that's your problem.

Judged:

1

1

1

Matt from Akron wrote:

<quoted text>
And what do your stress tables tell you about the wooden Ark's ability to withstand a titanic flood event that supposedly cracked the Earth's crust, created the continents and rose all the mountain ranges?
Uh huh. Didn't think so.

Judged:

1

1

1

Allen wrote:

<quoted text>
I'm registered by the state of Michigan to practice in any of 4 discplines. My registration mumber is #30236. The registration was obtained through written examination by the state which among other things, included the application of physics in structural applications.
Now, quit babbling to me and simply write the state of Michigan and tell them I have no understanding of physics.
In the meantime, your 'superior' qualifications,the ones that allow you to rewrite the 2nd law of thermodynamics, to suit your own purposes are..precisely what?

Judged:

2

2

1

Bluenose wrote:

<quoted text>
Quite.
Also, it seems that Allen is a bit light on in the ship wright area. A little reasearch on wooden vessels reveals some interesting tidbits germaine to this discussion.
First Allen needs to look up "hogging" and understand what the implications may be for a vessel of the size of tha ark. A keel helps mitigate against hogging to some extent, but in order to do this it needs to be fairly rigid, see the next item.
A vessel constructed of wood cannot maintain structural integrity at sea when the longest structural components are small relative to the overall vessell length. The problem is caused by movement of the components pieces as the vessel moves over swells etc, successivly being suspended by its beam ends and then amidships. The resultant flexing causes the timber components to move against each other, particulalry the hull planking, opening cracks to allow water ingress, and causing structural failure in major load bearing components. Problems begin as the longest components approach about 25% of overall length and become critical at around 10%. The bigger the vessell, the more pronounced the effect and the larger the percentage required to maintain structural integrity. Given the Ark was supposedly 450 ft long, it is apparent that this limitation was well exceeded.
A wooden vessel of this size would require a very large amount of ballast to maintain stability. This is not mentioned in the bible, leading one to conclude that the writers of the story knew very little about ship building. Ballast increases the problems of the first two items.
The Ark had no propulsion and thus no way of steering itself so, in any sort of sea, it would broach and founder, as has happenned to countless wooden vessels over the years when they lost their propulsion (mast/sails) in a storm and consequently sank.
There are more objections to the proposterous Ark idea, but this is enough for now.
Of course, no doubt Allen, with his entertaining laws of physics, will come up with some more ridiculous concepts in a vain attempt to prove me wrong. I await in eager anticipation to hear what nonsense you come up with this time.
----
BTW Allen, you don't design bridges, do you? If so, please let me know which ones, so I can avoid them.

Judged:

1

1

1

MUQ wrote:

I have a question for you intelligent guys. How come males and females of all species evolved together?

MUQ wrote:

Why this Random Mutations and Natural Selections did not take males and females into different directions?

MUQ wrote:

Has homosexulaity some thing to do with this ?
Rememeber I am a novice in these matters!!!

Judged:

1

1

1

Nuggin wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh look, MUQ is posting YET ANOTHER "stupid question" off the list of incredibly stupid questions that Creationists ask.
POPULATIONS EVOLVE AS A GROUP.
There are MALES AND FEMALES in the POPULATION. THEY ALL EVOLVE FORWARD A GENE AT A TIME.
<quoted text>
In the "real" world, men and women have sex. I know this doesn't jive with your "I've got 70 virgins waiting for me after I blow my ass up" philosophy, but that's how it ACTUALLY works.
<quoted text>
I SERIOUSLY doubt that you are a novice in homosexual matters. I've heard all about what you guys do over there in the desert. "Can't look at women, can't talk to women, can't touch women, can't be alone with women." Is there a single male child in your entire country who hasn't been rear ended?

Judged:

2

Nuggin wrote:

I SERIOUSLY doubt that you are a novice in homosexual matters. I've heard all about what you guys do over there in the desert. "Can't look at women, can't talk to women, can't touch women, can't be alone with women." Is there a single male child in your entire country who hasn't been rear ended?