We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4188
Latest Activity: 7 hours ago

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Cancer Now Detectable from One Drop of Blood

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Loren Miller Nov 14. 4 Replies

Happy birthday Carl Sagan

Started by Gerald Payne. Last reply by Dr. Terence Meaden Nov 9. 2 Replies

Vatican Arrests 2 for Leaking Documents

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Wayne Davison Nov 2. 1 Reply

Did dark matter kill the dinosaurs.

Started by Gerald Payne. Last reply by Wayne Davison Nov 2. 6 Replies

Antibiotic-Resistant Genes Found in Mummy

Started by Steph S.. Last reply by John Jubinsky Oct 20. 2 Replies

Part Ape Part Human

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Gerald Payne Oct 8. 4 Replies

Researchers May Have Detected More to Stonehenge

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Madhukar Kulkarni Oct 7. 6 Replies

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Marc Draco on October 20, 2009 at 5:58am
Hey all, do we have a "movies" group anywhere here? I don't want to start one if there's already one here but seems like there should be. I ask only because someone pointed out there was an Asperger's support group and I hadn't even considered that!

Some movies can be really thought-provoking. Funny Games (German version) comes to mind... it's a very hard movie to watch and the US version is somehow even more uncomfortable - perhaps for me because I know what's coming.
Comment by D.O.S on October 13, 2009 at 2:32pm
I just started reading What's Next?: Dispatches on the Future of Science. It's pretty interesting. Of the first six essays, what I've read so far, I particularly like Sean Carroll's Our Place in an Unnatural Universe.

"Beyond that observable horizon, the universe might well stretch out indefinitely and might not be uniform at all. In fact, the local laws of physics and constants of nature might change from place to place. Imagine a patchy universe -one in which conditions and parameters are uniform within individual patches but the patches themselves are all completely different."

Something to think about.
Comment by John Secular Smith on October 13, 2009 at 1:47am
Sexual selection has its place, but neither the sexual selection nor the environmental selection has much of a place when talking about Ardi.

We don't know what drove the decrease in canine size at this point. We have no behavioral information, little environmental data, no genetic data and only one fossil to build a hypothesis. In that case, both ideas are equally speculation.

But I agree on the general concept: I hate it when people do this and call it science. It is speculation, speculation made apparently necessary because of the stupid "you don't know how it happened" arguments from creationists.
Comment by Jared Lardo on October 13, 2009 at 1:12am
On the History Channel, on the presentation thing about Ardipithecus, a man was shown at a table quote-unquote "explaining" the reason behind the reduction of the size of the canines in the to-human lineage according to rationale that would indicate that "provider" men are fundamentally more attractive than men who get into a lot of fights.

He stated that the less-fang-ification was due to sexual selection, meanwhile it's actually likely that it was due to the decrease in perceivable aggression from a fang-showing event, which lead to a decrease in the detraction from group cohesion due to each event, which fostered the growth of the esoteric kind of sociality now found exclusively in the modern human species--full of personal histories and details.

It gets ALL my goats whenever some pseudoscientific assclown--however well paid or educated (and the more easily it gets them when the latter is the case) the moron is--argues that an evolutionary change happened because of sexual selection rather than environmental selection--in a worthless sorta god-of-a-gap filler way--presumably because of his or her not understanding that mild, vague advantages that could only barely qualify as an advantage are the ONLY advantages that matter in evolutionary history, e.g. infinitesimal increases in the height of the nasal holes of early whale species on their heads. (Sorry, I can't find the video that was on Youtube a few months ago that argued for a sexual selection for higher-on-the-head noses on whales, instead of the ease-in-breathing-air reason, and which thoroughly pissed me off.)

Sexual selection is the god of the gaps in amateur study of evolution.
Comment by Marc Draco on October 5, 2009 at 6:09am
Odd name, great podcast. The Colorado School of Mines (yeah, MINES) has been ranked as one of the best science institutes in the US and listening to their Earth podcast it's easy to see why.

The parts surrounding life and evolution (19 - 22) are particularly of interest to the folks here, but I'm having a dab at all of them since the host is easy to listen to without being overly smart-assed and has given me some more ammunition to fire at the stoopid.

See if you agree:
Comment by Marc Draco on October 3, 2009 at 6:37am
This might become my catchphrase and at the risk of sounding cliched: when the deluded lead the ignorant, we've got real problems.
Comment by Jared Lardo on October 2, 2009 at 8:56pm
Wacko creationist site full of nude assertions:

Knowing where these crazies get their bullshit information is useful. This is just one of those unformatted sites that retards don't notice are unprofessional as fuck.

Lacking any quality or illusion thereof, this is easily absorbed by similarly quality-less creationists.
Comment by Marc Draco on September 30, 2009 at 3:31am
Thanks Louis, interesting list that.
Comment by Louis Davout on September 30, 2009 at 2:13am
Comment by Marc Draco on September 29, 2009 at 1:08pm
In my travels, I've come across a few people who were both devout Christians and accepted Darwinian evolution as a fact. Most science (all probably) is easier to follow if you jettison the supernatural.

However, your point is well taken, and this is something that I think we should address at every possible opportunity - that the one does not follow the other. The balance has shifted fairly heavily due to the work of Richard Dawkins: who for all his brilliance seems to have become the poster child for Evolution=Atheism.

I'd really appreciate if some of you could take a look at Davison's blog and see what he's on about and if it's worth us debunking.

Davison and Marshall appear to be suffering from a delusion that they're right (albeit with conflicting ideas) and that our Darwinian ideas are wrong. The trouble with their blogs is that many people come and support their ideas - presumably adding to the delusion.

Members (4188)


© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service