Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Book banning in Alabama

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 151617
Author
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:42pm

Originally posted by Darur Darur wrote:

As much as I dissagree with usfa on what he said, in all fairness GS cited his beloved book a hundread times without sharing a tidbit of info from it

lol - because there is no info in that book.  I'm almost done with it now...    Very lightweight.  Long on random musings, very short on actual information.

:)

Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:43pm
thank you clark, in a twisted sort of way, you've also proved taht homosexuality while it may last for a long time, does not become fully integrated into a species

and dbib, just because someone is from a past time, doesnt make them an idiot, himself and (i can't remember the other two scientists) used the same tests that we would(or at least, quite similar) to disprove spontaneous generation
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:43pm

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:

thank you clark, in a twisted sort of way, you've also proved taht homosexuality while it may last for a long time, does not become fully integrated into a species

Huh?

Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:47pm
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by DBibeau855 DBibeau855 wrote:

I know this better than anyone. Dont lecture me on it. How can a trait like homosexuality be pased on for the good of a species?

No lecture intended...  

But I will answer your question, by easier parallel:  Altruism.

Let's say an animal species has this feature:  Whenever danger threatens, all the young males encircle the tribe and engage in suicidal attacks on the enemy.  This leads to very high death rate among young males - in fact, those males with lots of this trait are more likely to die.  How can evolution create or permit a trait that INCREASES early deaths?

Simple - evolution isn't about the survival of one entity.  Evolution is about the survival of the gene pool.  If the death of the individual is good for the tribe (aka gene pool), then that trait is an evolutionary positive, even though the trait increases the likelihood of death of the individual.

Similarly, even though homosexuality decreases effective fertility of the individual, if homosexuality has other benefits for the gene pool that increases OVERALL fertility and survival, it ends up being an evolutionary positive.  What are these other benefits for the gene pool?  I have no idea.  But just because homosexuals don't have (a lot of) children, doesn't mean that they are an evolutionary negative.

Evolutionary value of traits cannot be evaluated in terms of effects on the individual.  Evolution is not an individual concept.



^^^thats what i was talking about
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
DBibeau855 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
IIIIIMMMMM BAAACCCKKK

Joined: 26 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11662
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DBibeau855 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:52pm
Evolution works because positive traights are passed on. How is a homosexual going pass on his or her genes? I dont mean that homosexuals are incapabable of pasing this gene on. But on the whole, a gene that passes off homosexuality, will not flourish, to flourish, you need babies, no babies from homosexuals.

Edited by DBibeau855
Back to Top
usafpilot07 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
FreeEnterprise's #1 Fan & Potty Mouth

Joined: 31 August 2004
Location: Tokelau
Status: Offline
Points: 4447
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote usafpilot07 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 5:53pm
Originally posted by DBibeau855 DBibeau855 wrote:

Evolution works because positive traights are passed on. How is a homosexual going pass on his or her genes?

she's saying that if homosexuality somehow...say...increases brain capacity for idk, math...then it wil be passed on because it is beneficial to the human race
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Back to Top
DBibeau855 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
IIIIIMMMMM BAAACCCKKK

Joined: 26 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11662
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DBibeau855 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 6:01pm
K it will increase a persons ability to calculate, woopty doo, its not going to be pased on because they are homosexual!
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 6:33pm

Nono.

There almost certainly isn't a "g.ay gene".  Genetics generally aren't that simple (some exceptions, like eye color and gender.  Assuming genetic homosexuality, it would be made up of a complex of gene sequences that resulted in a higher likelihood of homosexuality.  Just like you can have identical twins with different personalities.  Or, if there is an actual "g.ay gene", it would consist of a combination of recessive genes (like blue eyes), which would only show up occasionally, even though many people can be carriers - you can get a blue-eyed child from two brown-eyed parents.  Either way, we'll call it the "gene complex".  The basics are the same, however - you can carry the gene without having the trait.

So you have this gene complex that is part of the gene pool.  The frequency of this gene complex regulates the overall level of homosexuality in the population.  Not everybody with the complex is homosexual, but there is a higher proportion of homosexuals in groups with lots of this gene complex.

Now, let's again assume that it is good for the survival of the group to have a certain percentage of homosexuals - we'll use 10% for an example.

Now, we take two populations, which are identical in all respects except that one group has 10% homosexuals and the other has 1% homosexuals.  The difference in homo levels is due to the different frequency of the g.ay gene complex.  Remember, not everybody in the group has this complex, and not everybody with the complex is homosexual.

Because 10% homosexuality is good for the survival of the group, that group will do "better" than the 1% group as a whole.  Even though the homosexuals won't be having children, other latent carriers in the group will pass on their valuable gene, just like the suicidal animal protectors have their genes passed on by the surviving relatives.

An individual does not have to breed in order for the successful gene to be passed on.  Genes are almost always shared, to some extent, within the group, and genes can often be carried without showing the behavior.

In this case, the 10% group will have a higher survival rate because of the homosexuals, even though the homos will not pass on the genes themselves.  Because of the higher survival rate, the homosexual genes carried by the latent carriers will be carried on to the next generation for future homosexuals.

The animal kingdom is full of examples of breeding dead ends.  Look at insects - without latent genes (or similar mechanism), how could sterile worker ants and worker bees evolve and continue to exist?  Taking too linear or individual of a view of evolution will lead to this problem.  But one must focus on the group, and on the gene pool.

 

EDIT - Another short note on this subject:  http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB403.html



Edited by Clark Kent
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 May 2005 at 6:35pm

Originally posted by usafpilot07 usafpilot07 wrote:



yes it has...because for biogenesis(evolution) to occur, life HAS TO come from life...therefore, the six original elements in the atmosphere could not have formed into bacteria.  Redi proved this in the 1700's.

A quick article about biogenesis:  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/spontaneous-generat ion.html

 

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 151617
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.