Birthdate: February 26th
|
| |||
GenjiKilpatrick Member Profile  Member Since: 2009-03-14 Last Power Points used: 2011-05-23 • Available: now Max Power Points: 1 • Get More Power Points Now Comments | Achievements Navigation
Member Stats Rank: 266 Rating:  83 star points#1 Videos: 2 Top 15 Videos: 12 Votes Received: 2334 Average Votes Per Video: 25.37 Votes Cast: 6406 Comments Posted: 1940 • browse Comments Applauded: 25 Sifted Videos: 83 Sift Talk Posts: 2 Dead Pool Fixes: 2 Profile Views: 74332 Highest Ranked Comments Member's Highest Rated Videos | ||
Add comment
Videos Submitted by GenjiKilpatrick
View Mobile VideoSift
bookmarklet - page width: fixed - loose
Copyright © Sift Partners, Inc. 2006-2012
Terms and Conditions - Contact Us - VideoSift Staff
page generated on web1 in 0.8845 seconds
Powered by Varo CMS by Rommel Santor
bookmarklet - page width: fixed - loose
Copyright © Sift Partners, Inc. 2006-2012
Terms and Conditions - Contact Us - VideoSift Staff
page generated on web1 in 0.8845 seconds
Powered by Varo CMS by Rommel Santor
This also is not about drawing an imaginary line about how much change can occur; it has to do with the amount of information in the genome. For bacteria to man evolution, a significant amount of information has to be added to the genome. The information in the bacteria genome, no matter how you shuffle it around, will never produce anything more significantly complex than itself. So then the question is, how does this information get added to the genome? Many people at this point will say "mutations!", but the problem with that is, we have never seen a mutation give rise to an increase in functional complexity. If they do, they are so compartively rare as to completely invalidate evolution as a theory. There simply wouldn't be enough time to account for the millions of changes required.
As the main mechanism for adding information into the genome, you would think that there would be clear evidence to support its actually happening..but you would be wrong:
So these are a few reasons why I do not buy into the evolutionary paradigm. The way it is presented to the public is as a proven fact, but when you start analysing the data and not just listening to the conclusions, you find a giant mess with no clear answers. You also find a chorus of true believers who just know its true and interpret all of the data through the conclusion. They see everything through those glasses and thus that is the way everything looks to them.
In reply to this comment by GenjiKilpatrick:
How do you reconcile accepting the science that substantiates micro-evolution.. but disregarding the SAME SCIENCE that substantiates macro-evolution.
It's sorta like if I said: "I accept the evidence for the divinity of Jesus. But I refuse to accept that Yahweh exists"
If it follows that: Divinty of Jesus = Divinity of Yahweh.
Then it must follow that: Evidence of Micro-evolution = Evidence of Macro-evolution.
How do you reconcile this without talking in circles?
This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 2 Badge!
This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 7 Badge!
So what you're saying is.. you're a cowardly white privileged bigot who's too afraid to leave the safety of his software & champagne fortress and confront the real problems of the world?
Cause we all know that Silicon Valley has nothing to do with "societal decay".
I mean, sure companies like Apple deny hard-working Americans high-paying jobs/careers in the Technology Sector by exploiting cheap labor in Socialist countries like China. But that's just want any good cold and calculating capitalist would do.
OH OH! I got the perfect bumper sticker for you "I Hate Socialism.. but I Loove my Ipad. Vote Yes on Apples for Americans"
Then you could pass around a petition demanding that Apple build a new factory in Oakland.
You know, to stop all the societal decay and give those dirty niggers and spics something to do with their lives.
In reply to this comment by chilaxe:
>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
Why don't you fuckin' move then.
Oh wait, then you couldn't complain about how shitty your life is under this oppressive Marxist regime.
I live in Silicon Valley, so I'm insulated from the societal decay.
I hardly ever interact with people who aren't techies, so the only way I know that California's been turned into the dumbest state in the country is from the news.
So in his case, they weren't needed anymore. But in your case, it looked like you thought they were needed. This really has gone further than it needed. I just wanted to make sure you hadn't misunderstood him.
P.S. I know you're always vehement, but i think you're inappropriately vehement in this case. Look at it from my point of view, i'll try to parallel the situation as i see it;
You ask someone what time it is. He says 6 oclock. You think he said 7 oclock and go "It's clearly not 7 oclock cos it's broad daylight outside." I tell you that i think he actually said 6 oclock, at which point you turn to me and say "Umm well it's CLEARLY not 6 oclock either is it, einstein?"
Know what i mean? I didn't agree with his view or suggest a view at all, i just thought you misunderstood him, so a 3 point list with sarcasm on why it can't possibly be what i said either is inappropriate vehemence - it matters not to me what the answer is, merely that you understood the answer he gave you
I'm pretty hopeful this explains the situation clearly, because you're still trying to explain to me why he (and therefore myself by association) is wrong - i never expressed an opinion
In reply to this comment by GenjiKilpatrick:
You're pointing out that he didn't mean Iran assassinated its own scientist?
It doesn't matter the reason, it would still be dumb to murder the people that are leading their research.
If they were defectors, they could just hold them in prison indefinitely like they do journalist or spys or anyone else.
Anyway you slice it, the premise is lacking.
p.s. - I'm always vehement. It just comes up more on the sift.
In reply to this comment by dannym3141:
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/GenjiKilpatrick" title="member since March 14th, 2009" class="profilelink">GenjiKilpatrick
It seems to me you made a mistake in your understanding of his post, and now you're adhering to it vehemently
No.>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:
Man you guys are awesome, can I join your crew?
>> ^BoneRemake:
BONEREMAKE BITCH !
In reply to this comment by GenjiKilpatrick:
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/shinyblurry" title="member since January 21st, 2011" class="profilelink">shinyblurry
My point was: Why would Yahweh give his most perfect creations an imperfectly designed structure?
Especially when it's such an easy fix:
Membrane THEN photoreceptors = Perfect
Photoreceptors THEN membrane = dumb, more complicated solution.
Was the perfect eye still in research and development when Yahweh created Adam?
Just seems sorta silly that Yahweh would overlook such a simple mistake.
In reply to this comment by GenjiKilpatrick:
Coming from another sifter who frequently over-expresses himself, to the point of rudeness..
Yes, you most certainly are obligated to apologize.
Not just cause, @<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/berticus" title="member since April 18th, 2007" class="profilelink">berticus is an awesome guy with good taste in music..
Not just cause, [i'm pretty sure] you could and would agree on lots of other topics..
Not just cause, you wanna help maintain the community and civil discussion/disagreement..
Do it.. cause, you're dumb.. and have bad opinions about cool/interesting videos.
["duhduh, regular rules don't apply to me cause.. cause.. I'm a wizard. And we.. have special wizard hats that make all the rules.. uh.. bounce off our special wizard capes and stick, stick only to you!"
"i'm a psychopath" ass nigga. wtf is wrong with you..]
>> ^Yogi:
Psychopaths don't have to apologize.