Evolution of the perfect mouth for crushing watermelons.

Part 1 Casually Explained: Evolution

Your video, You Can Find Proof of Evolution On Your Own Body, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 43 Badge!

Your video, Proof of evolution, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

you are once again mistaken. only approximately 10% of non-human animals are obligate carnivores. common sense tells you that it cannot be a high number as it would not be sustainable otherwise.

factory farmed or not, other sentient beings suffer and die for no other reason than a momentary taste sensation. unlike the Masai (of whom i have never heard of but am taking your word) all you have to do to greatly lessen the harm you do to others is to buy different products in the grocery store.

speaking of science, here is what a very wise man had to say on this subject:

“It is my view that the vegetarian manner of living by its purely physical effect on the human temperament would most beneficially influence the lot of mankind.”—Albert Einstein

“Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.”—Albert Einstein

“Vegetarian food leaves a deep impression on our nature. If the whole world adopts vegetarianism, it can change the destiny of mankind.”—Albert Einstein

“If a man aspires towards a righteous life, his first act of abstinence is from injury to animals.” -Albert Einstein

When, oh when will Satan stop putting these strange organisms on earth to confuse and tempt us into believing the even of evolution?

Since you apparently refuse to listen to people who disagree with your position, how do you even know what their positions are to contradict them?

Bill is NONE of these things you list, he doesn't deny evolution, he's not a flat earther, he's not even an anti-vaxer...he's just not a proponent of FLU vaccines, but I've never heard him speak against vaccines for specific virulent diseases. (FLU is not a single disease, BTW, in case you don't know).

Yeah, how is not listening to different points of view working for you?

Yes, let's hear the anti-vaxer, evolution-denying, flat-Earther perspective to be "fair and balanced".

Good plan. How's that working out for America?

My 2 cents....

1) Don't EVER get your science just from the internet. ALWAYS verify anything you think you've learned with published peer reviewed science publications/articles.
Veganism does NOT cure or inoculate against cancer (which I'm assuming is what you mean by the #1 killer in the western world). If it did, that would be headline news and easy to prove, since vegans would all be cancer free, they're not. That's some serious BS right there. It may be HELPFUL against heart disease, I'll grant you that much. If that's what you meant, ignore the above.
If the point is eating healthier, excluding processed foods is exponentially better than excluding meats, and should be the first step people take when changing their diet, long before excluding meats all together.

2)So now Vegans are just like anti-choice people who think their choice should be the only choice for everyone!? I hate to tell you, but that position will make your movement lose, no question. Your position leads to only one logical conclusion, attempting to force people to stop eating meat. You don't change minds by force. I suggest you try a seriously different tact, or I fear you're methods may destroy your movement.

3)There is NO "better" alternative to meat. There may be alternatives, but they are not "better" nutritionally. The energy humans gain from eating meat is why we have the brain that allows you to take those positions, plants simply don't offer than dense nutritional value. True enough, evolution is barely still in effect for humans, but that's no reason to stop feeding your body/brain.

Personally, I can see no rational reason to stop eating meat except for moral or health reasons, and if you eat meat raised properly and morally, those moral reasons no longer exist. As we've discussed before, meat from small, local farms rather than large factory farms is often raised with love and care, so there's no abuse, only a scheduled end to life. I have no moral objection to that (and have a hard time seeing how others might have a reasonable objection to it) so I'll continue to eat meat, but I do make an effort to eat only morally raised meats. When the odd occasion happens when I can't choose the meats I prefer, I do feel somewhat guilty, but not enough to go pure vegetarian, certainly not vegan. (which reminds me, all dairy is not produced immorally either. Some smaller farms still exist that treat their cattle with care, but they are sadly disappearing as people usually only buy factory farmed dairy as well, it's far cheaper).
For those who eat so much meat that it's a health issue (yes, I do agree that it causes many health issues if you eat too much), I'm right there with you saying they should eat way less, or none, until they get their health under control.

Yeah, I don't know who to blame for this.

Anti-information became a strategy during the early years of the global warming "debate, " which I believe also coincided with "debate" about teaching evolution in public schools in the early 2000s. In both "debates" you had groups of people (climate change deniers/intelligent design) spouting off supposed "facts" that supported their positions, some of which were made up bullshit and others which actual facts but used to draw the wrong conclusions (i.e. logical fallacies). These guys, I'm pretty sure, were drawing their cues from the 9/11 truther conspiracy theory movement, which used similar tactics to try to convince people 9/11 was an inside job.

The Internet DID in fact allow these groups a higher level of coordination in distributing misinformation than previous times. But at the end of the day, we can only blame the uneducated people who read this stuff and accepted it as fact rather than actually try to fact-check anything. They helped create the climate that allows politicians now to blatantly lie and either hope they get away with it or shrug it off when they're called on it.

The do kill mentally challenged humans in Texas! ;-)

I don't want to be 'above' evolution (although I'm out of the loop, with no kids)...I would hope that the current model is not the pinnacle of human evolution, but it may be the way things are going.

nice chat

I think we've just about reached the "agree to disagree" point. Perhaps the best we can hope for is that the other person keeps any of the truth the other said in their mind and mull it over. Thanks for the chat.

I agree that inhumane is a silly word. "Inhumane" acts are often acts only perpetrated by humans.

I dislike the argument about the fact that farm animals would go extinct if we didn't keep systematically breeding and killing them. So what? Then let them go extinct. I personally think it's morally accetable to let an animal go extinct naturally -- especially if the alternative is to perpetually keep them un-extinct just to, essentially, torture them for our pleasure. I do, however, agree with your later comment that it would be a clusterfuck to figure out what to do with the ones that do currently exist. Easiest solution: keep eating them but don't breed them. Unfortunate human consequence: meat would become expensive. Also, during the time that we eat off the rest of them, those workers could train for another (hopefully) less miserable job. I can't believe many, regardless of how they rationalize it, can enjoy killing something before its time.

I'm fully aware of how the slave comparison is a bit off the edge (I even said so), but it's a hyperbole for the purpose of making a point: it is immoral to treat any animal to pain and suffering -- regardless of how you treat any other one of them. One mercy killing does not absolve you of another horrific one.

I am not saying that animals are not always treated poorly and without thought for their comfort. I am just saying that they are not allowed into the safe moral haven that handicapped humans are let into. If we mercy killed even one handicapped person, there would be an uproar that deafened the world. A mercy killing. Imagine if they did any of the (even "humane") things they do to animals to a handicapped person. It would be morally disallowed to an extreme degree. I don't know why animals don't get the same treatment.

Again, when you bring anything up about "evolution", I roll my eyes. We're humans with supposed free will. We're supposed to be above that, right?

If every vegan food you ate was inedible and made you sick than either your cook does not know how to cook, it was gluten-free, or there was something horribly wrong with the food. Fresh fruit? Beans? Peanut butter? Nuts? Berries? Greens? Carrots? B12 supplements? They made you sick? Something you ate was horribly wrong.

Your Olympic athlete statement is just factually incorrect. I would think you'd google that before stating something as fact.

And agaiun. "Evolution". Yeah, that happened already. Let's move on.

Stop making me feel bad about my cats! I already confessed guilt! :-P I actually do spend a ridiculous amount of money so that the food is better than just crap. I'm lucky enough to be wealthy enough to do it and I am extremely thankful for that. And! The amount of wealth that cat videos have garnered for advertisers is hardly unproductive.

And my partner and I are also on board about not having kids. She and I both think they're the worst thing you could ever do to the planet, animals, or people. Utopia got it right.

On a related note - an interesting article from Slate written by a University of Kentucky professor who teaches biology (and evolution) to non-biology majors:
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/03/teaching_human_evolution_at_the_university_of_kentucky_there_are_some_students.2.html

I can think of one prominent neurosurgeon running for office that doesn't understand evolution...

Anyway. Seems mean to judge her. Perhaps she comes from a religious background and never had the benefit of a good science education earlier in her life. What better way to challenge our own understanding by attending a lecture and asking questions? If America has enough people brave enough to ask the questions and with enough humility to listen to the answers they are given then perhaps you can hold off on moving to NZ for the moment.