Lumi's Batshit Insane Thread
- Thread starter Noodleface
- Start date
-
Guest, did you like the last podcast notification?? Well here's the second one, and for the third podcast! Yep. This Thursday 8-8-24 at 7pm Central
Go here to check out his podcast thread for info on topics and links!Go into the FoH discord and find the Happy Time Fun Hour channel and give it a listen!
- 8,106
- 28,609
I always wanted to ask this, if nothing can create itself how did the creator come to be created? If a Creator created the Creator, who created that Creator? Who created that Creator? Who created that Creator? Who created that Creator?
- 8,106
- 28,609
The human mind cannot conceive of infinity* in any case other than as an abstraction of a continuum, the enclosure of our system.
Noodleface
A Mod Real Quick
- 38,244
- 15,027
- 8,106
- 28,609
he is a potent content aggregator.
You should move this thread to the "grown up subforum" and than restrict access to it in the same capacity that access is restricted to screen shots, than just unflag anybody that violates your conditions.
Lumie is meant to be banned, but only in cycles, got to give him time, it fuels the engine.
You should move this thread to the "grown up subforum" and than restrict access to it in the same capacity that access is restricted to screen shots, than just unflag anybody that violates your conditions.
Lumie is meant to be banned, but only in cycles, got to give him time, it fuels the engine.
- 8,106
- 28,609
As I've said before no thread is beyond Trolling, regardless Lumie can't resist the temptation of that thread.
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 27,017
- 14,967
But I'm not playing that game. At no point did I say red and purple can't be really close to each other. Nor did i say a fish can't evolve into a mudskipper (lol). I just asked a question that 2 of you decided to baffle me with bullshit about instead of answering clearly. Which led to another question that you both decided to dance around instead of answering. Makes it look like you're hiding something.
My next question is, why did yall get so defensive? i would suggest if you're not capable of having a calm discussion about a topic, that maybe you shouldn't discuss that topic at all.
You said it, not me. But I won't disagree. Evolutionary Biology is better than a Liberal Arts degree.
I didn't ask for that. I wasn't going to ask for that. I don't know where you even got that. If you'd like to know, based on what I've heard so far, my next question probably would have been wondering what they think the closest living ancestor of the mudskipper was, and then I was going to go look up pictures of both of them and ponder it. But now I'm more curious about the reaction you 2 had.
Ambiguity is a gap in knowledge that needs to be filled. You don't have a very strong mind if you can just accept ambiguity so easily. I think I already mentioned I'm not reading the research papers you guys are linking, but I guess it bears repeating. That goes for youtube videos too. Aside from the fact that I physically can't watch youtube right now, I'm also not asking youtube these questions. I'm asking a couple of dudes on a forum who seem to be pretty interested in the subject.
And that doesn't matter. Because like I said, you can use a computer to read the exact color code on each letter to come up with a more precise answer. But my answers on which word it happened in were correct nonetheless.
Dude, take a step back and apply some intelligence. Language is entirely learned. 100%. If I steal a mexican newborn and raise it in my home, it will not grow up knowing mexican. It'll grow up sounding and acting just like any other black person in america. But it won't be as fast because language is learned while genetics are not.
Fuck, is that where he put the answer to my question about how to cure cancer for pennies? I'm not gunna read that thread, someone please repost the answer here.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
No one is baffling you with bullshit. Some answers are more complex than we would like, and I do my very best to make these issues as understandable and comprehensible to the people who are reading what I write as I can. I presume no education in the sciences from my audience, and do my best to demonstrate to them that the sciences do offer rational, sound, evidence based explanations for these perceived phenomena such as the diversity of life on Earth.
At no point do I try to make anything I say too complex for someone as simple as Lumie to understand. Its that simple. I realize, living in Kentucky, just how badly our education system is failing us, particularly when it comes to critical thinking skill and understanding of scientific methodology, and one of my hopes is to help in some small way off set that by being honest, up front, and comprehensible on a real, substantive level, to the layman reader.
Its that simple. If you think us trying to explain to you honestly how evolution works, while you pepper us with strawdogs and Creationist presuppositions, is somehow dissembling or being dishonest, I'd like you to demonstrate what it is about my statements that is intentionally constructed to "baffle you with bullshit" because I don't think I've done that. In fact I know I haven't. Because my goal is to fucking educate some people with some real science, not confuse them, lie to them, or mislead them. That would becounterproductiveto everything I'm attempting to do by wasting my time responding to Rerolled/FOH's retarded Ken Ham gets raped by David Icke offspring, Lumie.
Probably from your repeated requesting I, with a physical anthropology/biology and chemistry background, who does not specialize in mudskipper phylogeny, go out and google around until I find some article telling me the exact lineage of differentiation of mudskippers from previous ancestors. You know what they are, Gobiidae fish. They are a subset. Which means their ancestors are Gobiidae fish, and previous ancestor species to that form. There aren't very many extant, discovered, transitional fossils for mudskippers because their bones aren't all that dense, and they live in very wet areas prone to flooding and heavy sedimentation and being covered over by water. Now, my background in physical anthropology does make me credible to speak on what water logging does to bone, which ain't pretty, particularly in sandy or muddy soil, where the bone generally ends up taking on a consistency very near the consistenty of the soil itself, and needs to be dried out in the sun for awhile before excavation can be made once the skeletal material has been uncovered, in order for some of the moisture to evaporate and allow the remaining inorganic skeletal material to harden back up for excavation.
But again. We can take every single transitional fossil we have today, grind them up, and throw them into the Sun. It is irrelevant. Comparative whole genome and mitochondrial genome analysis is enough to both confirm common descent, and accurately define phylogenetic descent. That's just a fact. We can demonstrate speciation at the molecular genomic level. Fossils and morphologic data, when used as a corroboratory source placed against genome analysis tends to confirm, well over 80% accuracy, the genomic analysis, it just gets a little fishy when you are trying to discern if homologies are because of direct lineal common descent, or convergence events, and the genomic data resolves that issue completely. Hence why its MORE ACCURATE than simply morphological analysis and traditional taxonomic classification techniques.
No, its not. But you just literally confirmed what I said about you not having a sufficient capacity to process ambiguity. The fact that you think grey areas "must be filled" directly asserts that, for you, grey areas must not exist. They must be eradicated. So again, the issue here is that you were probably raised very religiously, or have a very sort of conservative mindset, and that leads to a lowered tolerance for ambiguity. That isn't some sort of insult, I promise. Its just an assessment of why you have issues comprehending this material. Its not that you're like too stupid to grasp it or something. Clearly you're smart enough to. So the issue must lie in the capacity for you to tolerate ambiguity, and clearly, you do have a limitation in that area. That's okay. But the thing you need to realize is that there areno viable alternative hypotheses or theoriesthat have remotely the degree of evidence supporting them that evolutionary theory as defined by the modern synthesis does. Its really just that simple.
This isn't about "weak minds" or "Strong minds" neither of which exist. If we had all examples of all remains of all individuals of all species from the beginning of history, we could very easily pinpoint the exact portions of the populations that eventually became another population. But fossil evidence is entirely a game of "Who won the random roll of dying in a spot that facilitated fossilization" and therefore cannot be relied upon to reconstruct the phylogenetic history of the entirety of Earth's biological diversity. Whole genome analysis, when available is the best we're going to get, morphologic analysis comes up in second place to the former.
And
Well, first of all, I don't get paid to do this. I'm doing this as a volunteer service because I love biology and evolution and human anatomy and archaeology and human history and chemistry and basically the sciences in general. While I've been having this debate today with you all, I've also gone to two different classes, been revising a resume and cover letter project for my final anthropology class for my first degree, and simultaneously been having to do research and type up fairly significant posts relating this information to you. I'm sorry that I'm not capable of serving every answer to you on a platter, but when we have research papers, and often very strong youtube links that do as good or better a job than we can ourselves explaining these things to you, or when our explanations seem to fail to be accepted (such as Lumie and his insistence that absolutely nothing is evidence unless it is 100% personally observed directly), offering up videos and citations that help buttress our case is perfectly fine, and if you ignore them, and then insist we constantly repeat ourselves over and over because "You're just not getting it" then you are being more than a bit intellectually dishonest here, and that's not fair to, for instance, myself, with all the hard work I've put into honestly engaging with you rationally and attempting to explain to you this material in ways that are comprehensible to someone who, I presume, probably hasn't had much biology since high school.
It very much so does matter, and what doesn't matter is "what you can do with a computer". In fact this entire computer thing you're pointing to is just a non sequitor tangent that demonstrates you have MISSED THE POINT COMPLETELY.
Further demonstration that the point is simply going right over your head. Languages are formed as a result of cultural interactions on the population level by individuals. This is directly analogous to evolution and the way that allele frequencies change over time in populations. We even classify languages and species in similar ways. Spanish, for instance, comes from Latin, and we classify both as Romantic Languages, and Roman descended from the Indo-Euro language sets, so all Romantic languages are of the subset Indo-European language groups. Humans descended from hominid populations that descended from primate populations, so we are from Order Primates, Family Hominidae, Tribe Hominini Genus Homo Species Homo sapiens.
You can sit here and nitpick this example till you're blue in the face, I really don't care if you don't like it, or think its not accurate. Its entirely analogous to what happens during a speciation event.
- 17,781
- 25,897
The absolute best answer to your question is not going to be found here or on Youtube. Several hundreds and thousands of people have answered this question in various ways but the one that clicked with me was the way it was presented by Richard Dawkins in his books The Greatest Show on Earth and The Magic of Reality. Other books of his get into more and more detail but Greatest Show is probably, for my money, the best 'translation' of Origin of Species into a language that a modern audience can jive with. It includes references to modern life and modern understanding and it includes evidences for evolution that Darwin wouldn't have even dreamed about (as hodj has said, it is literally true that evolution would still be a demonstrable fact even if we hadnever oncedug up a single fossil. Fossils are just icing at this point.)
One way to think about how species can differentiate from each other, even though it is always true that every organism ever born is the same species as its parents, is to look not just at immensities of time, but immensities of space.
Ants living in Europe may as well be aliens to ants living in China. The number of barriers they would have to cross to meet each other, the vast distance between the two, is so immense that the two populations cannot effect each other's gene-pools in any way. And yet it isstill truethat as these two totally different species propagated out of a central region in Africa and the Middle East millions of years ago, each individual ant was and still is to this day always the same species as its parents. And yet the ones that traveled slowly east have drifted, genetically, so far apart from the ones that traveled slowly west, that they are now both plainly obvious and totally separate species that everyone could agree are not the same. And at no point in the chain of ant births going both east and west from the central point, did any of the ants ever become born as a separate species as its parents.
This is true of every living organism that has ever existed.
If you took a photograph of your grandfather, and then took a photograph ofhisgrandfather, and then took a photograph ofhisgrandfather, and did this with a magical time-travelling camera going back hundreds of millions of years taking photograph after photograph of every successive grandfather.....you would eventually be looking at a photograph of a fish. Or at least a fish-like water dwelling water-breathing animal that is now very extinct. Not only that, but if we all did this experiment together we would all arrive at the same photograph of thesame exact fish! And that fish had absolutely no idea how special it was. It probably just lived a normal fish life and died a normal fish death. And it gave birth to a fish (or, it's fish-wife did anyway).
But here is the key point and the one stressed by the Youtube video I posted earlier today. Every single thing ever born ever, is *just barely* different from its parents. You are not a clone of your mom or your dad. Nor am I and nor is anyone. We are a unique mixture of the genes that came from inside them both. And that means that we are aslightvariation from them. We are not identical, we are just a little different.
And that's where the magic happens.
The entire magic of evolution can be boiled down to the plain and simple fact that you looksimilarto your parents, but you donotlook the same.
That is the variation. That is the only variation needed in order for natural selection to take root. You are certainly the same species as your parents...but you arenotidentical. This was true of them and their parents. It will be true of your kids and their kids. And these very slow differences, added up over immense amounts of time, and selected by natural survival pressures, slowly and gradually force the differentiation of species. As it happens, it is almost the definition of the word 'subtle'.
Like I said, you should read Dawkins's book The Greatest Show on Earth if you are truly interested in actually knowing wtf people are talking about when it comes to evolution. He speaks in very clear and modern English that is difficult to misunderstand. Unlike the various holy books, he has no need to obfuscate his message in what George Carlin called 'spooky language'. He speaks the same language all of us here do. You should check it out. Even if you hate it, you'll at least be better equipped once you truly know your enemy.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,672
- 18,377
Exactly. Every person who has ever seen a parent with a child and recognized that the child is not an identical clone of that parent, but rather shares strong similarities to the features of both parents, has witnessed evolution happening right in front of their eyes.
Every single living being on this planet, right now, is a transitionary fossil. Including all of us. Some of us may be evolutionary dead ends. Some of us may be evolutionary winners, and our grand children's grand children's grand child a hundred thousand times removed may still be kicking around on this rock when the Sun finally begins to die, expands, and burns this rock to a crisp.
- 17,781
- 25,897
Not in this thread.
It's like with the Westboro nuts.
Talk all the shit you want nut-bros, but leave thefuneralsout of it, you twisted fucks.