 |
Hello:
Evolution is the bedrock of biology. Biology is the bedrock of medicine. If you don't believe in evolution, why do you take medicine? And, if you DO take medicine, and expect it to WORK, whether you like it or not, you're a BELIEVER in evolution..
Chew on that.
excon
It is not necessary to believe in every aspect of evolution to understand biology. One can, for instance,
Believe in microevolution without believing in macroevolution. The evidence for the former is abundant,
While the evidence for the latter is not nearly so clear.
I do not accept macroevolution. I do take medicine. There is no contradiction there.
Politicians do tend pick and choose among what science has to say to suit their political leanings - conservatives and liberals alike. But I reject your premise - there are plenty of us conservatives who believe in what science has to say, when properly vetted - including evolution. We also believe in what science has to say about other topics, such as the safety of GMOs, and fracking, and that the Keystone pipeline would have had essentially zero impact on carbon dioxide in the air. Do you?
The problem is Liberals think facts are like rubber or smoke... completely subjective to what they want them to be at any moment and always changing. The rest of us believe facts simply are... they are not subject to political correctness or someone's whim of the day. And if they don't stand up to independent unbiased review...they aren't facts...but someones unproven theory.
Most of the lefties know nothing about evolution except that science tells them to believe it's true. They are as ignorant about it as they claim the creationists are ."Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.” (Pope Francis)
"This antithesis is absurd because, on the one hand, there are so many scientific proofs in favor of evolution which appears to be a reality we can see and which enriches our knowledge of life and being as such. But on the other, the doctrine of evolution does not answer every query, especially the great philosophical question: where does everything come from And how did everything start which ultimately led to man I believe this is of the utmost importance. "(Pope Benedict XVI)
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
It's true... But, gravity doesn't either. Therefore, gravity is bunk.
excon
Hello smoothy:Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
The problem with right wingers is they DENY science.. But, when they're sick, they go to a doctor whose education IS science...
Go figger.
excon
Hello e:Quote:
Originally Posted by ebaines
I dunno HOW you missed it, but the problem with Keystone is NOT the air, but the Ogallala Aquifer which lies beneath it. About 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States overlies the aquifer, which yields about 30 percent of the ground water used for irrigation in the United States. We wouldn't want the pipe to rupture over it.
What??? Pipelines DON'T rupture???
Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
haven't heard any 'right wingers' call gravity bunk. But you make an interesting point . For 300 years gravity being real was "consensus science" .Anyone who thought otherwise must be a denier. Now comes a string theory dude (Eric Verlinde) who blows the whole theory on it's head .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...001.0785v1.pdf
How dare he challenge the dogma of scientific theory !
And if the gravity theory is wrong then our understanding of the universe is indeed bunk.
I thought Hippocrates' "First do no harm" was the bedrock of medicine.
http://peacefulwarriors.net/nothing-...antum-physics/Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Hello C:Quote:
Originally Posted by Catsmine
I'm sure you said something important.. I just can't tell what it was.
excon
PS> (edited) Oh, I see. I said biology is the BEDROCK of medicine and you're arguing with me. Apparently, the premise is fine, but it's the semantics that you object to. Ok. Would the word CORNERSTONE be better? I'm fine with Hippocrates getting bedrock.
Like most things science and the way it's used is subject to the amount of profit it presents therefore corrupted by self serving interests.
Keystone is a good example of that fact, as well as the BP and Exxon disasters. Humans never learn from the past and keep repeating the same mistakes chasing PROFITS. Evolution is learning from those failed experiments and improving the application safely not moving to another spot and doing the same thing again.
Profits over people is NOT science. Nor is it evolution.
Hello again,
Apparently, my right wing friends don't understand my question. It's either that, or they don't LIKE the answer. So, lemme try it another way..
You DON'T believe in evolution, yet you expect medicine BASED on evolution to be effective. How does that work?
excon
What the left calls science usually requires a bigger leap of faith than any religion out there. Because its rarely subjected to or survived peer review or any proof that the concept is flawed.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Science is about facts... not propaganda. When those "facts" are cherry picked and proof that those "facts" are not in fact "facts" or even repeatable, and worse... proven inaccurate are ignored... it ceases to be "Science". And becomes political propaganda. Like "Global Warming.
The truth is that evolution is not taught in medical school for a good reason ;because it has no relevance to the medical practice . The students have no time to study it ,and studying it would not make them better physicians. Doctors do need to know the human body. It is irrelevant to their practice if the human body ,or any human part evolved randomly or were created .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
excon, please explain how evolution is the bedrock of biology. Please explain how medicine is based on evolution.
Sorry Tal , can't let you get away with that rant. Apparently the emperor didn't consider safety when making his decision about Keystone ,because Alberta oil will still be transported through the country . Now, however, it will continue to require tens of thousands of railroad tank cars travelling through densely populated areas rather than through a buried pipeline.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
It's all about the emperor's political legacy and has nothing to do with jobs, national security, or any other rational factor. He wants to tout this "achievement " to the United Nations climate talks, which begin in Paris at the end of the month. He made this decision 7 years ago and delayed and delayed it because he needed big labor support. Now he is throwing them under the bus.
I thought Canada had decided to ship the oil west through its own country.
Nobody asks why Canada doesn't refine its own tar sand crude. Wonder why?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/05...n_1539701.html
Good question. Or Energy East that will pipe the crude to St. John, New Brunswick refineries and then off to India.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I modified my original post.
Hello Carol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Good question.. Of course, I'm NOT a biologist but this is what a biologist said about the question..
The change in allele frequency over time in a population of organisms, is a fact. The theory of evolution by natural selection is the theory. Scientific theory, ISN'T the same thing as you theorizing over who will win the ballgame.. Scientific theories are not only the highest concept in science, but encompass laws. Biology as it is today would fall apart without the underpinning of evolution and the theory that explains much about evolution. Without evolution and evolutionary theory biology would be a disparate collection of stamp collectors.
Without biology, the study of life, there wouldn't be medicine.
excon
because the refineries are here already . Don't worry about the Canadians . They dug their own grave electing in the Trudeau government . He ran in favor of Keystone ,even though he privately opposed it. ...The emperor did him a favor by making this decision 3 days after he was installed . He will probably now move to destroy the Alberta oil industry .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Ex every now and then you come up with absolute crap and this it it, Biology is a study of what is, something that is physically right in front of you, and medicine is about bringing a change in something that is right in front of you. It has nothing to do with evolution or creationism.I don't need to believe in every aspect of science to consult a doctor, even though I know that the science employed here may not be settled but the best knowledge we might have at the momentQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
excon, makes me think of bacteria that mutate (EVOLVE into "superbugs") so that medical science has to come up with better antibiotics.
They have refineries on their East Coast.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
One can only hope. That tar-sand oil is nasty stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yes they do and I haven't heard an explanation of why they would not build their pipeline across their own lands, perhaps it is a greater distance but it would make sense to use their own refining capacity but this is the oil business and what make sense on a national scale doesn't make sense to a multinational........Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Now if Canada were to subsidise a pipeline..
Yes and more and more of it will be refinedQuote:
One can only hope. That tar-sand oil is nasty stuff.
Read up on Energy East.
Ok so common sense did take over for a while, shipping oil to the US for refining is a "beggar my neighbour" policy in emission reduction terms but you can always expect the "aboriginal" population to be against something, those guys just want things to go back to the way they were. With change in Canada will come different environmental responses. So crunch time for Canada you either want an oil industry or you do not. This is where this environmental debate is carried on by wack jobs who have no regard for the economic life of the nation. The US doesn't need Canadian oil so it doesn't need the pipeline. Why should they allow it in environmentally sensitive areas, there is another route approved by Bush anyway
The US won't get the oil, just temporary jobs.
Yes there is no gain for the US in the pipeline, excepting perhaps reduction of risk on rail transport. These debates are an exercise in foolishness because they are about preserving the status quo, whether it be in oil refining, or oil supply
The US gets jobs building the pipeline . The US gets jobs refining the oil. The US gets jobs shipping the oil . All told ,an estimated 42,000 jobs lost because of this decision. Jobs Americans will do. Jobs that Democrat supporting unions wanted .Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
How does knowing evolution change that ? For the purpose of medical care ,they have to deal with the bacteria that is here and now.Antibiotic resistance involves the genetic shuffling of genes that bacteria already possess. Not only that ;any mutation will result in a loss of information due to the change in genetic material. Knowing it's evolution does not help treat the patient infected . Doctors don’t need to believe in evolution to understand shuffling of genetic material in microbes can create antibiotic resistance bacteria . They don't need to understand how it evolved .Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Evolutionary claims are neither relevant nor useful to their profession. In fact ,belief in evolution has at times made the medical profession make bad decisions. Remember when appendectomies were done often based on the belief that we had evolved to a point where it had no value ,and they were a left over from our ape days ? Well we now know that it is far from useless. Instead ,it is an important part of the development of the immune system .It also serves as a reservoir of good flora .
Now think about it . The evolution theory proposed that our ancestors crawled out of the primordial ooze ;and then through the process of natural selection we evolved to where we are today. That meant that the weak died off and the strong survived ,passing along the gene pool to the next generations. According to that theory we should do away with the medical profession altogether . By treating illness we are keeping the weak alive. Medicine is anti-evolutionary .
(Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man, 1887)Quote:
With savages, the weak in body and mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of everyone to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands who, from a weak constitution, would formerly have succumbed to smallpox. Thus the weak members of civilised society propagate their kind.
No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but, excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered in the manner previously indicated more tender and more widely diffused. Nor can we check our sympathy, even without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature … We must, therefore, bear the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind.
Eugenics was the evolutionists response to human health care .
Those are temp jobs. Only about 50 would be permanent.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
One could argue that any infrastructure job is temporary . Yet the emperor and the Dems are always saying we need to spend more for those "temporary " jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
But gas prices are very low, the environment doesn't need to suffer from the nastily produced oil from Canada, and if we brought back all those jobs shipped overseas and give them back to people in this country who speak English, all would be well.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
How do you know any job done is done by someoone who speaks english? You bring back the factory jobs and they will be done by hispanics migrating to get employment. You cannot sign free trade agreements and be protectionist, wanting the trade agreements to benefit only yourselves. I would like to see those auto industry jobs which your multinational auto companies have taken from this country returned so we don't have to buy US produced SUV instead of real cars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
I call the help lines for American companies (my health insurance, my computer, my credit cards -- all with US corporate locations) and get connected to people named Jim Howard or Cathy Jones in India or Central and South America. I ask them where they are sitting, and invariably they say (in poor English) Mumbai or Colombia or the Philippines. We often talk about the joys of samosas or empanadas or fried rice. I've even been given recipes. Sometimes they have even answered my question correctly. But why don't US people have these jobs?Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
Because US corporations can hire workers overseas at enormously lower costs than would be the case in the US. Minimum wage, for example, is about $0.30 per hour in India compared to about $7.50 in the US. And - the US minimum wage is trending upwards to $15 an hour.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
The great disparity in income would also apply to workers in India doing telephone service work for US corporations. In both countries these kinds of workers would be paid more than mininum wage, but the much lower comparative costs would still apply.
There is a simple solution to all this we go back to being protectionist, protecting our local jobs and driving up costs until the poor who have benefited from these lower prices are driven into extinction. When will you realise this one world capitalist system doesn't work it, just brings misery while advantaging a few. The ills we have in the world today are an outworking of that system, exploitation of ME oil, exploitation of low cost labour. We were much better off when patents were exploited by royalies for local manufacture, than to have this centralised system we have today were everything ultimately comes from one place
The indians are an industrious people given half the chance but what you complain about is a very small percentage of the population exploited by your multinationals. I too want to talk to someone who speaks english and understands the issues not a parrot with a funny voice. Outsourcing is multinational crap and disrespect of their customers
My question is, of course, rhetorical. Another one is, Why does greed drive the marketplace?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:04 AM. |