Profile for Jumpin Salmon
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Displayed name | Jumpin Salmon |
| Member number | 5755 |
| Title | ? Man, ? Amazing |
| Postcount | 4114 |
| Homepage | |
| Registered | Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
Recent posts
Pages
| Author | Recent posts |
|---|---|
| Episode 4: Spiderweb Reloaded. Something like that anyway. in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Sunday, January 13 2008 13:14
Profile
quote:Now I really wish I had that jet pack... -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| What are you learning right now? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, January 12 2008 22:39
Profile
Back in my day... Geometry in 9th,Precalc was 10th, Trig 11th, and Calc in 12th. All that Algebra stuff was before high school. Excalibur, you must be really, really smart to not have to study. Good luck with that tactic. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| A Bile Crux in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, January 12 2008 20:21
Profile
quote:Pretty much any thread in which TM was an active participant. Sonny. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, January 12 2008 17:44
Profile
Stillness - Myself and others have clearly delineated how evolution is an excellent model of the progression of life from the formation of the planet to present. We have discussed how it can be used to predict future discoveries from within the fossil record, and how it has been used in the past for that purpose. Evolution is a descriptive term for a process that has been observed. It is not reliant on logic. It simply is. That may be the underlying problem with this discussion. You want to question it using logic. That is simply not possible, as it doesn't require logic. Does gravity require logic? Does the behavior of electromagnetic waves require logic? No. They simply are things that have been observed, time after time, to be how they are. So, having failed to provide you with the logic behind evolution, are you still interested in this discussion? -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| [censored]! in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 22:37
Profile
I no like tis thread animore. Make its top. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 22:18
Profile
quote:You must know I am easily pleased. :D Have you ever come across the Aplysia? I shared a house once with a gal that studied them, and they are fascinating creatures. They may be a demonstrative link between creatures with less systems and creatures with more systems. How about that as a definition for complexity? ;) ps, Alo — I've never known you to be anything else than what you are. This change from Winnemucca has precipitated in the past six months, which is why it is so fascinating to witness. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 20:17
Profile
quote:I have spoken with a statistically significant portion of the nation. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| [censored]! in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 20:12
Profile
Proposal... This is kind of like police being able to pull over a car with no light illuminating the license plate. They only do it to smell your breath. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 18:50
Profile
Excalibur, until you learn to use the simplest language possible, just don't post. It is wonderful that you are expanding your vocab, but quite honestly it is painful to read. No one talks that way. :) -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Why do javelins go away? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 18:21
Profile
quote:FYT. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 18:10
Profile
Is there some correlation between complexity and cellular combinations? If so, it would hardly be surprising that over time you would find that multicellular things developed where before they were just spatially juxtaposed. I guess, like some other folks, I'm just a bit stymied by this idea of complexity. It seems to be fashioned of gossamer. Edit - Excalibur, your mind seems made up, yet you are unwilling to proffer your opinions. Do you believe that the differences discussed here are based solely on acceptance of the Bible as absolute authority on all things? [ Friday, January 11, 2008 18:15: Message edited by: Jumpin' Salmon ] -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 10:49
Profile
quote:I find this objection to be without merit. Since you must, like Kel noted, take an active role in order to feel that angar, stop taking that role. If your objection is to the lack of other threads in which you would feel more competent to respond, feel free to start them yourself. In the meantime, understand that this thread is serving a purpose and has remained more or less congenial up to this point. Also, Stillness, did you really say that the earth is "prehistoric?" Please tell me that was a typo. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 10:04
Profile
Studying fossils is frustrating but rewarding. A three part harmony (with mind bullets) Science people change their story when confronted with facts! And, for the record, it seems msnbc is in the ID camp. I mean, the proof is in the URL for all this science stuff. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 09:43
Profile
Stillness, I am impressed by your word count so far. Irreducible complexity is something that you must have been studying for a while now in order to get such a firm grasp. And I grant you that the fossil record, for reasons I explained, is incomplete and doesn't show a whole picture. It is much like putting together a picture puzzle after a bunch of 5 year olds and a vacuum cleaner have been in the room. My point about predictability, is that scientists can predict, and do find, fossil records that are unknown at the time of prediction. But still, you may be right. But if you are, none of it makes any sense at all. You claim that a being, either of the Santa Claus variety or a troupe of aliens, monitors and visits the planet on a regular basis in order to guide it along on some path or direction. Since we have evolved from single celled organisms (only) into multicellular organisms capable of maintaining complex systems, I would have to ask a simple question. To what gain? Do you propose this planet is some giant science experiment for an ultracreature? Because honestly, there is absolutely no reason for what you are proposing to have ever happened. Absolutely none. Wait, actually there is one. Say if another earth-like habitat was populated with beings which questioned how exactly they formed from single celled creatures all the way to multicellular (and apparently multi-dimensional,) they seeded a newly formed planet 4 billion years ago with a few strands of DNA and some lakes of amino acids. Yeah, that would make sense. Ultra creatures, yeah, that's the ticket. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, January 11 2008 00:08
Profile
quote:Really? That is sad. Talk about the ultimate cop out. I mean, if you doubt the fossil record is an accurate representation, then why even acknowledge it at all? In my defense, about not seeing your answer, I wasn't even aware that this thing called "Progressive creationism" even existed. To actually provide some merit to this post, I'll talk a bit about your point on cyanobacteria and other millenia old things. The simple answer is that they are ultimately adapted to their surroundings. They don't change, as a whole, because the most beneficial form already exists. Every generation sees some changes, of course, as mutations, but these are not beneficial so they don't become retained. Now, you can call bull on that, but we are seeing a beneficial change take place in the medical environment right now. Bacteria are "becoming resistant" to (um) anti-bacteria. (That is a pretty stupid name for it, to be honest.) But it isn't that the bacteria named Steve has suddenly learned Chuck Norris style -fu and teaches all his buddies. It is that Steve wakes up one day and finds that it is just him. He doesn't even get that chick that swore she would never talk to him and that the bacterial race would die if they were ever the last two bacteria on earth because bacteria don't reproduce sexually. It is just him. (Hurgle) And suddenly there are millions of little Stevie's, all with that ability to not be affected by the anti-bacteria which killed all his friends. But otherwise, it is exactly the same thing. So, not only is mutation capable of changing the species, it tends to favor those things that allow survival at a higher rate than without the mutation. This is not a "deleterious" mutation. That is a loaded word, and really has no place here. Much better to say that it is a stabilizing mutation, as that is what is happening. But now I've gone and added more comments when I had none to give. Progressive? Really? Is that the best they could do to describe a retread on the tired idea of creationism? -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, January 10 2008 23:24
Profile
I'm not an expert in any field, but I have read liberally from within it. I can appreciate your skepticism, but each of those "things" has been answered many times to the satisfaction of the general scientific population. Once can't expect to find a fossilized record of the proportions you expect, but only because your expectations are vastly removed from reality. It took some pretty special events to make fossils at all, and there is no reason to expect them to be prevalent. There may be further fossil records still under the seabed which we haven't yet explored. I know that where I live there are fossilized clams and such, since it used to be 600 feet down. But such is the passage of time. You'll have to struggle on with your confusions over the origin of the species. It has been answered, and rigorously tested. It is a robust answer. I still don't see what your answer is, despite all the rhetoric. You claim it not to be design, yet you do mention it. I just don't know what you are bringing to the table, because, if it is a vastly superior and testable, and ultimately more robust theory, then the scientific community will welcome it with open arms and heap praise on you for your elucidation. So start sharpening your pen and explain your theory. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, January 10 2008 22:10
Profile
quote:Okay, then what about common descent do you find troubling? Because I'm a little confused. I'm pretty sure that consensus is that the common ancestor wasn't the equivalent of a bacterial Wilt Chamberlain. It was more of common gene pool. And how is that not appropriate, considering how much genetic material is shared amongst all living creatures. quote:They call him Superman. Or star-eye for short. *i for even shorter. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Thursday, January 10 2008 11:16
Profile
quote:Do you understand that evolution is a process which is used to explain; 1) How fossil record "A" beget living organisms i, ii, and ix, 2) Similarities between living organisms iv and xiii, 3) Presence or absence of living organisms that resemble fossilized organisms? Among other things, of course, but those are prevalent in my mind. It explains how, over hundreds of thousands of years, small changes can be made in the individual organism which produce changes in the population of organism. Over millions of years those changes can create whole different creatures. Now, I'm not sure there are any evolutionary scientists that are proposing that they have identified one particular cell which spawned the creatures of the entire planet. I mean, that's not even silly. It is far more likely that over the course of thousands of years there were multiple events across the planet where ultra violet radiation combined with various complex acids to form these cells, which then lived or died according to their ability. Eventually some of them, by accident, were able to split through mitosis, and suddenly all hell broke loose. Blue-green algae were eventually formed. Parameciums were eventually formed, and the rest is history. So yeah, I didn't take the time to read your links. In fact, I only read links about 1% of the time under any circumstances, so its nothing personal. The unfortunate thing about interweb conversations is that important starting points can be missed. This is clearly the case with the S-K-T discussion, along with the interjections by E and T, on page 5. And it appears to be that way on this level of the discussion as well. So I'll ask you to clarify. What do you understand to be the "theory of evolution" and to what do you object? -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 20:53
Profile
I missed season 1 of Survivor, for various and sundry reasons, but I was excited for season 2. Half way through I realized that the ensemble was coached by the production team to act in certain ways. To be more demonstrative and confrontational. To make it more "exciting." Well, that pretty much ended my interest. It would be one thing if people actually acted like *******s, but it is quite another when they are asked to act that way because the production team thinks it makes better television. And Jeff Probst is a wienie. Fo' sure. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 19:31
Profile
 *for after the bloodletting to cure your fever. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Why did Starman Get Banned? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 19:21
Profile
quote:Ahh, but since it is a constructed language, I can just construct that line. It would be akin to drawing a line between the rights of humans and the rights of robots. Sure, some robots are more intelligent and likable than some people, but you still have to put that line in place. And I am just the authority to do so. So, um, there. ;) -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Locking in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 18:26
Profile
quote:I wasn't eager to bring this up, but since you have broached the topic, you have a fantastic ability to position yourself as anti-"x" without ever coming forth with an accepted substitute. Why is that? The reason I earlier mentioned that I was a skeptic was to allow you the opportunity to disclose that you are a cynic. Because certainly that appears to be the case, both in this discussion and in others. You are certainly welcome to not interpret the fossil record as reputable archaeologists and anthropologists have done. That is certainly within your rights. But you lack credentials, you lack supporting documentation, you lack colleagues with documentation and credentials, and you lack any verifiable alternatives to the things you oppose. I mean it should be easy. All you need to do is say that you don't think evolution is the proper mechanism for explaining all the stuff that lives on this planet, and why that is so. And then propose a different mechanism, and show how it explains all the stuff that lives on the planet and also explain how I can use that mechanic to guess at things that should exist if I were to look for them. Because that is what evolution is currently able to do for scientists, and it is really neat to be able to predict things like that. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Why did Starman Get Banned? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 16:33
Profile
quote:Bah, no one would go fishing in this weather. 16 foot swells every 8 seconds is a bit too rough, not to mention dangerous, in a 26 foot boat. I was just having fun, since there seems to be so little good humor left on these forums anymore. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Why did Starman Get Banned? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 15:47
Profile
quote:Except that Esperanto isn't real. It has the same value to the world as, say, Nicothodes' made up language. Spanish has a rather well defined and elegant system of expression, ser aside, which is why it is one of the more prevalent languages in the world. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
| Why did Starman Get Banned? in General | |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Wednesday, January 9 2008 13:46
Profile
Oh wow. Never saw that poll in the A4 until it was mentioned here. How unfortunate. -------------------- Synergy, et al - "I don't get it." Argon - "I'm at a loss for words..." Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |