| Digital Art / Paintings & Airbrushing / Animals | ©2006-2012 ~nihlton |
The Journal Portal
Browse Journals |
Polls |
deviantART [dee·vee·un'nt·ART]
Keep in Touch!
|
Deviousness |





I only have one little negative comment to make: portraying the origins debate as "Darwin vs. Jesus" tends to alienate a lot of people, namely moderate Christians. They don't know much about Darwin, but they do know about Jesus, so the false dichotomy lumps them in with the fundies. I know this wasn't your intent, but you need to be careful this area to avoid such happening. Of course, Tiktaalik climbing out of a pond to bite Adam's leg would be good without this problem.... All in all, you done a good job, especially with the actual drawing part. Just be careful to keep the fundies with the darks and the moderates with the lights, and keep them away from each other when washing
--
kenzen naru tamashii wa,
kenzen naru seishin to,
kenzen naru nikutai ni yadoru
--
The only exciting way to do it is really blow it loud! The teacher is going, Piano! Piano! You go, Its not a fucking piano! Its a clarinet... you weird-talking person.
--Eddie Izzard
--
scientia est potentia and deus est mortuus.
Think I'm wrong? Fruit flies. We've been subjecting them to all sorts of experiments for right around 150 years now. They have a 9 day life cycle, resulting in over 6000 generations of flies. Yet...we've not produced a single housefly (higher up the "evolutionary" scale) in the lab. That's because fruit flies, surprisingly enough, only have FRUIT FLY dna. They can't "evolve" into a housefly, because they don't have the DNA to do it.
I'll "believe" in evolution, when I can reproduce it in the lab.
-EBK
"Logic! What do they teach them in these schools?" Prof Digory Kirke from "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe"
--
Shhhhh.... Listen..... Do you smell that?
(SPOILER), "It's in the bible" does not count as the scientific method.
"Think I'm wrong? Fruit flies. We've been subjecting them to all sorts of experiments for right around 150 years now. They have a 9 day life cycle, resulting in over 6000 generations of flies. Yet...we've not produced a single housefly (higher up the "evolutionary" scale) in the lab."
1. You're saying that because we haven't turned one species of fly into a species THAT ALREADY EXISTS, evolution is wrong. That's a completely failed argument. Evolution, even with man directing it, won't make an exact copy of an already existing species.
2. We have observed speciation: [link]
3. There's no "higher up in the evolutionary scale". Evolution isn't some ladder with man on top, it's more of a branching tree and on each tip, there's the species living today. As long as a species can survive in an environment, it's just as any other species.
4. I'll "believe" in evolution, when I can reproduce it in the lab.
Because if you can't do it in your garage, then it's not science! Might as well say the human genome project is complete bunk because you can't do it in your mom's basement either.
Here's a website with a list of references to scientific papers on speciation: [link]
Now go learn what evolution is and how it works before acting like a complete dumbass.
""Logic! What do they teach them in these schools?" Prof Digory Kirke from "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe""
"A lot of ID advocates repeat the same arguments over and over, apparently lifting them from ID websites, as if they had not been pretty well exhausted in the preceding comments, which total more words than A Tale of Two Cities, a reading experience you will find much more enjoyable."
Roger Ebert (see, I can quote non-scientists talking about evolution too!)
--
scientia est potentia and deus est mortuus.
Dumbass.
--
Do you like biology/worldbuilding? [link]
Help save rhinos: [link]