meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Austin, TX | |
| age | 24 | |
| visits | member for | 1 year, 7 months |
| seen | Jan 31 at 17:51 | |
| stats | profile views | 15 |
☜(ﾟヮﾟ☜) - Orion Nebula (NASA)
|
Apr 8 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Mar 26 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Feb 26 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Feb 7 |
awarded | Good Question |
|
Dec 28 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Dec 20 |
awarded | Good Question |
|
Dec 5 |
awarded | Notable Question |
|
Oct 14 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Sep 25 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Sep 18 |
accepted | Why did Mongolia split in two when they declared independence? |
|
Sep 12 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Sep 11 |
comment |
Is the Bible considered a reliable historical resource? let us continue this discussion in chat |
|
Sep 11 |
comment |
Is the Bible considered a reliable historical resource? @DantheMan Natural selection can be observed every day. You don't need millions of years to see it. Bacteria developing resistance against antibiotics is one simple example of that. And please don't tell me it's "micro-evolution" vs "macro-evolution." And remember, there aren't "good" or "bad" mutations. Evolution isn't perfect, it's "just good enough to survive in a particular environment." |
|
Sep 10 |
comment |
Is the Bible considered a reliable historical resource? Also, it's easy to try and throw big numbers around, but in your lifetime you will undergo 10,000 trillion cell divisions. And just for fun, no - equipping monkeys with typewriters probably would never give you the works of Shakespeare. Someone's actually tried that and noticed that the monkeys for the most part just hit a few keys - notably, "S". |
|
Sep 10 |
comment |
Is the Bible considered a reliable historical resource? @DantheMan If you think evolution happens solely by random chance, you're very, very wrong. At least in the sense that the mutations are random, but the process of natural selection is not. Imagine you have 20 dice. If you were to try and get all sixes by rolling them all randomly, it'd take you millions of years to do that. But if you kept the sixes that you got with each roll, you'd quickly get to all sixes. That's kind of what evolution by natural selection is. |
|
May 6 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
May 4 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Jan 30 |
comment |
Why is Christopher Columbus credited for “discovering” America? Sorry, but I don't buy this. Is there any evidence that Columbus "published" his results more than the Vikings? The Vikings established a colony in the Americas, that should be as good as anything Columbus did. Columbus was also wrong in his theory. A huge fallacy in your argument is that you are applying modern scientific criteria to a time when most people thought the Earth was flat. |
|
Dec 1 |
asked | Why did Mongolia split in two when they declared independence? |
|
Nov 27 |
accepted | How did former Spanish colonies in the Americas become so fragmented? |
