Sentences with phrase «how about some evolution»

And how about evolution?

Not exact matches

However, for any of this to take place, we need to see an evolution in the way we think about and approach education, and how we expect the young people of this country to pay for it.

Scientists hope that learning more about Jupiter's evolution will illuminate how Earth — and possibly other planets — were supplied with the ingredients for life.

DiscoverOrg's content strategist, Charity Heller, sat down with Schuck to ask about how he has handled DiscoverOrg's evolution in the marketing and sales intelligence industry, from a scrappy startup to the industry heavyweight.

The evolution of the trade surplus will tell us something about how successful China has been in bringing down the savings rate.

Evolution says NOTHING about the origin of life, simply how it has changed over time.

How about teaching different theories on our creation beside the unproven theory of evolution?

If you bother to learn about the mechanics of evolution you would know that random mutations and natural selection are a more appropriate way to explain how it works.

Evolution is not a theory about the how the universe was created.

you sir are practicing a religion one that means so much to you that you use it as your online name also please show me where I call you a fool or is telling someone not to make a fool of themself the same as calling them a fool which would mean you are very religious as far as Colin he said nothing that related to the debate I was in with you... we are talking about Atheism as a religious view not debating the existence of God now look over the definitions I have shown you and please explain how Atheism does not fit into the said definitions And you claim that evolution is true so the burden of proof falls in your lap as it is the base of your religion.

I also appreciate your recommendations about what and how to read as I explore the evolution / creation debate further.

I think my question to those of you who couple atheism with evolution and climate change is: how can we as scientists even start trying to inform you about the details of what you are arguing against if you automatically presume everything we say is a blasphemous lie?

I think my question to those of you who couple evil atheism with evolution, the big bang, and climate change is: how can we as scientists even start trying to inform you about the details of what you are arguing against if you automatically presume everything we say is a blasphemous lie?

Evolution is about speciation, how life diverged.

How do Adam and Eve relate to what we have learned about the evolution of modern humans from Australopithecus afarensis and Homo habilis?

With all the emphasis on creation or evolution coming out of the first few chapters of Genesis, we often miss some of the most important ideas about our humanity and how God created us (not physically, but spiritually and psychologically).

Man - made hypothesis of where we came from, such as from evolution (saying that proteins formed in a «prebiotic soup» and then «joining hands» with DNA, so that eventually a living cell is born), is not satisfying nor does it provide logical answers as to how the quality of love came about nor a conscience, that literally means «co-knowledge» in Greek.

The work he was describing in the seminar was, as the Institute's on - line notice said, an attempt to «cut through both sides of the increasingly polarised debate about how the universe was created, with atheistic Darwinians declaring the death of God, whilst anti-Darwinian creationists denounce evolution as fraud.»

Some poor girl... or sheep... has to listen to him rant and spew, eyes bulging, talking non-stop, adamantly raging on about how Russian miners have heard the screams of hell and how some ancient vanished superrace made the pyramids and modern man couldn't which means evolution is wrong... she'd be wondering if she should just run for it, or does he have a big kitchen knife on him ready to use if she does... there she sits, with that «please - don «t - stab - me - repeatedly smile on he fear - petrified face...

The Guardian: Muslims engage in quest to understand evolution British Muslims acknowledge a common misunderstanding of evolution but still differ about how to reconcile faith with science

Or am I contributing to the problem by helping support this institution - one that has some amazing people but are dedicated to teaching students more about how evolution is wrong than in following the call of Jesus to love your enemies.

Ok, to go along with this incredibly fallacious line of thinking, how come, as the rest of the world embraces evolution, they have also surpassed us education of just about every discipline.

Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred.

David Brooks has a column in today's NYT about how some evolutionary theorists try to force random evolution into a form that can explain human moral agency.

There is NO serious debate within the scientific community about whether or not evolution is real, just differing opinions on how it works.

What ever your beliefs in a God or your religion, it really has nothing to do with Evolution being the correct answer to how all of this came about.

Here is a hint, whoever has been teaching you this about evolution has no idea how it works either.

If you understood a thing about evolution and how it works, you'd understand how wrong you truly are.

They have a false concept of evolution and know very little about how it truly works.

First, you sound a little unsure about how a computer works, and secondly nuclear energy has nothing to do with evolution, unless you are looking into creating mutant humans and animals.

As I have contemplated a response, I came to realize that your question about hell is really no different than the question of how things began: Which is right, creationism, evolution, or intelligent design?

How about some discussion about Intelligent Design, or anyone not believe in evolution?

Many or all of these hypnosis / problems that you mentioned here and in other posts as objections to flood and / or evolutionism (such as Coconino Sandstone) are not new and are addressed in sites like creation.com Finally, because you mentioned Christians who accepted evolution, how about some atheists who oppose Darwin's evolutionism such as Nietzsche or, more recently, Jerry Fodor and Piattelli - Palmarini

@Gezellig, I was trying to demonstrate how scientists feel when people talk about things like evolution or the age of the earth.

But please do go on tell me more about how evolution is in fact «false», disprove genetic evidence, paleontological evidence, anatomical evidence, evidence from cell biology, virology, zoology, mycology, should I keep going?

For Bergson, like many process thinkers (Peirce, James and Dewey come particularly to mind), the entire concept of «necessity» only makes sense when applied internally to abstractions the intellect has already devised.11 Of course, one can tell an evolutionary story about how the human intellect came to be a separable function of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270).

You should read the explanations Chard makes about how «theistic evolution» differs from plain old evolution.

to J.W. and fred — i think its rather silly to argue anything as fact if its cleary thought based (i.e. lacking proof / evidence) when asked about the where did we come from or how the universe (whatever) i always answer with i don't know, but then i pose an idea — i state openly thats its only an idea... if any one of you religions folks would simple agree to the FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most def.

How scientists ultimately handle the evolution controversy in all its aspects may provide a clue as to whether they are authentically concerned about scientific integrity or whether they merely wish to advance their respective philosophical agendas, be they naturalistic or theistic.

I always wondered how people who know nothing about evolution, geology, or science in general can be so sure it's all a fraud.

I don't think anyone is saying not to teach them about creationism, but teach them about evolution as fact so they understand how we actually came to be.

Mary, you obviously don't have a clue about how evolution works, do you?

I think Carl Jung came up with some good ways of thinking about our cultural images and how they come about — that scientists many hundreds or thousands of years later might have the same sorts of cultural images informing their intuitions, and thus using those images as the basis for a theory of evolution is not so much extraordinary than it is to be expected.

Related to the litmus test comments — How about this litmus test: if you don't accept evolution as the only rational explanation for the diversity of life on Earth you can not run for office.

This abrupt turn from a causal theory of consciousness to talk about emergent properties not only leaves the puzzle about causality dangling, it compounds the mystery by evoking still more elementary puzzles about the meaning of emergence and evolution, as well as about how and where to locate sentience in an evolving «physical world.»

Quantum Mechanics is WAY weirder and more complex than, say, evolution (though I like how you threw the big bang in there — separate theories, dude), but you won't really hear any religious nuts complaining about the exact same process that gives us QM because it doesn't conflict with their ancient mythology.

The Theory of Evolution does NOT have ANYTHING to say about how life got started.

Funny how you religious types never have a problem with the people who invent bombs, but as soon as us biologists start talking about evolution, then we've crossed a line.

I am a passionate Darwinian in explaining why we exist,... but if we lived our lives in a Darwinian way, that would be a very unpleasant society in which to live... One of the reasons for learning about Darwinian evolution is as an object lesson in how not to set up our values and our social lives».

Evolution is simply a theory explaining what we have observed about how life changes on this planet.