LOGIN | REGISTER

Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 211
  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Jesus. It's all about Jesus. Don't you know that? Shark-hunter needs jesus. It could help his anger and hate issues.
    Thanks...i couldn't remember when sifting through the pages of surf-related crap on this particular thread...HOw can I help with the cause? How about John 3:16...or Genesis 1:1...those proof texts should work for the topics on this thread! Wait...I like wolves...there done!


  2. #102
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hilton Head Island - OB, SD
    Posts
    3,781
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Yes, and this was all explained in the articles I posted, but they don't want to read it. There is no missing link, and evolution is not a chain. It is a tree with many many branches.
    I read that whole link you posted, which had me thinking about it. I got the thing, about a tree or a bush. I get that, I just don't like the comparison. We all started from ONE thing. Period. And while I understand the ORIGINAL humans to be the tree trunk and the branches start to move out, but where this comparison stops working for me is the fact that these branches came back together and reconnected. It is more like a twisted vine if you want to think of it that way. But it all came from ONE thing, and from migration etc, and then reintroduction to each other, things cross bred, so it's not like one branch goes out and continues growing leaves and growing outward...

    There were numerous occasions where neanderthals had been re-introduced to new-guinea people, who were supposedly more developed as well as the re-introduction of neanderthals to groups they encountered that still had traits left over from their past...

    So this doesn't work for me.

    If you read articles about where everyone went from "Africa" and how humans migrates, use Wiki or whatever other of the hundred sources that have the same info and cite the times when they explain the re-intigration of almost separate species that all evolved from an original "human" as it were. As certain more developed groups of humans encountered basically living groups that were of their ancestry basically, they start breeding and that is where all this evolution stuff gets grey. As time has gone on, over thousands of years, we are ALL more similar than every as far as different races and ethnicity, but all of our ancestors came from the same original HUMAN and they developed in many different ways, and as the world got small and populations grew, the re-integration and cross breeding of almost separate species at that point created a lot of the stranger looking fossils of earlier humans.

    I agree with a lot of the article you posted, but the "tree" thing doesn't quite add up to me. There are too many missing pieces of that structure.

    If the tree trunk is supposed to represent "matter" and display how EVERYTHING came from matter, okay, but that leaves out the entire history of human evolution and just puts us at the top of developed life... Which, I agree with, but that theory really has nothing to do with human development.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Hilton Head Island - OB, SD
    Posts
    3,781
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Peajay4060 View Post
    kind of a silly bet to take as the number of american adults who consider themselves vegan is 1 million
    (Source: Vegetarian Research Group, Vegetarian Times, Harris Interactive Service Bureau
    Research Date: 6.18.2013), and the us population is 317 million.
    Yes, this is correct and another example of skewed, biased statistics. Very similar to the disturbing paper I linked to about bias US statistics about race and violent crime. It is very disturbing how easily the truth of reality can be hidden behind a false statistics. And it is EVERYWHERE in this country. Especially in our political system.

    If you were to present that crazy, scientific paper about the violence stats in the USA to the head of the NAACP and say, "Please Explain", I think they would simultaneously combust and be speechless.

    Very similar to the 1,000 threads on this site about lightening, plane crashing and shark attacks statistics. They are ALL so very, very wrong.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Out on the island
    Posts
    364
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Studies show just eating fish as your "meat" is just as healthy to the heart as vegetarianism anyways. I consider myself an occasional meat eater. I would say my diet is 30% fruit/vegetable, 30% animal protein, 20% fish, and 20% everything else. I think most humans would be in a lot better shape if they had similar diets. What we don't see in the statistics, is how much of the meat eater population regularly overindulges. We also don't see what meats they commonly eat. I bet you will find that occasional meat eaters and vegetarians are generally more health conscious overall, which makes up the biggest difference.
    there are social and economical aspects that have to be considered as well. not everybody has the same food choices.

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Turtle Island
    Posts
    3,651
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by live4truth View Post
    Thanks...i couldn't remember when sifting through the pages of surf-related crap on this particular thread...HOw can I help with the cause? How about John 3:16...or Genesis 1:1...those proof texts should work for the topics on this thread! Wait...I like wolves...there done!

    Hahahahaha good one!

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,375
    Quote Originally Posted by zach619 View Post
    I read that whole link you posted, which had me thinking about it. I got the thing, about a tree or a bush. I get that, I just don't like the comparison. We all started from ONE thing. Period. And while I understand the ORIGINAL humans to be the tree trunk and the branches start to move out, but where this comparison stops working for me is the fact that these branches came back together and reconnected. It is more like a twisted vine if you want to think of it that way. But it all came from ONE thing, and from migration etc, and then reintroduction to each other, things cross bred, so it's not like one branch goes out and continues growing leaves and growing outward...

    There were numerous occasions where neanderthals had been re-introduced to new-guinea people, who were supposedly more developed as well as the re-introduction of neanderthals to groups they encountered that still had traits left over from their past...

    So this doesn't work for me.

    If you read articles about where everyone went from "Africa" and how humans migrates, use Wiki or whatever other of the hundred sources that have the same info and cite the times when they explain the re-intigration of almost separate species that all evolved from an original "human" as it were. As certain more developed groups of humans encountered basically living groups that were of their ancestry basically, they start breeding and that is where all this evolution stuff gets grey. As time has gone on, over thousands of years, we are ALL more similar than every as far as different races and ethnicity, but all of our ancestors came from the same original HUMAN and they developed in many different ways, and as the world got small and populations grew, the re-integration and cross breeding of almost separate species at that point created a lot of the stranger looking fossils of earlier humans.

    I agree with a lot of the article you posted, but the "tree" thing doesn't quite add up to me. There are too many missing pieces of that structure.

    If the tree trunk is supposed to represent "matter" and display how EVERYTHING came from matter, okay, but that leaves out the entire history of human evolution and just puts us at the top of developed life... Which, I agree with, but that theory really has nothing to do with human development.
    I wasn't so much talking about you, but you should look at my last post. Everyone didn't come from Africa. There is supposedly a starting point in Asia as well. There could be more.
    I don't think any research paper would say there was an original human. The oldest version of what is considered modern man (Homo sapiens) was dated to be only 200k years old. There were also Homo neanderthalensis and Homo floresiensis, among others, living during the same period as early man. We have evidence that sapien and neanderthalensis interbred on top of all that. The early homo species were located all over the world, and thus homo sapiens appear all over the world in fossil evidence.
    Here is a nice table linking the fossils to locations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Homo

    I do like that you are thinking deeply about this and putting up some real questions straight from your own thoughts. I hate seeing the same old questions in regards to evolution, and what you posted made me have to go back through some articles.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    561
    Quote Originally Posted by Peajay4060 View Post
    there are social and economical aspects that have to be considered as well. not everybody has the same food choices.
    True not everyone has the same food choices.

    An epidimiolical study known ad The China Study covers this and shows a significant difference in disease rates and diet.
    Also there are study's that show people in less developed countries like Kenya where people diets are mainly high carb plant based diet. Diseases such as cancer and heArt disease are significantly lower than westernized countries.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Out on the island
    Posts
    364
    Quote Originally Posted by archy View Post
    Also there are study's that show people in less developed countries like Kenya where people diets are mainly high carb plant based diet. Diseases such as cancer and heArt disease are significantly lower than westernized countries.
    What's their quality of life like?

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,375
    Quote Originally Posted by archy View Post
    True not everyone has the same food choices.

    An epidimiolical study known ad The China Study covers this and shows a significant difference in disease rates and diet.
    Also there are study's that show people in less developed countries like Kenya where people diets are mainly high carb plant based diet. Diseases such as cancer and heArt disease are significantly lower than westernized countries.
    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/385/
    http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the...act-or-fallac/
    Again, it is best to do some fact checking. Many have found issues with the China Study, even those who usually push vegetarianism.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    2,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Peajay4060 View Post
    What's their quality of life like?
    Yeah, I am guessing they are way more active than your typical American.