Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Let's All Get Naked And Hate Bush

Featured Replies

Really?  what about the nickname "Hanoi Jane"?  What about Susan Sarandon .... is she "over-the-hill and bitter" too?  Women who are political and old are not necessarily "bitter".  No more so than the legions of conservative, right-wing males that are pissed off because they can't get laid.

And no more so than the right-wing morons who want to replace scietific evolutionary theory with Pro-creationism.  :D

Susan Sarandon - dunno her bug eyes always bothered me. :D

:D

Damnit, Janet. Put those things back in!

As I said, the problem very often doesn't originate with the woman, unless you consider growing old a problem. I hate to see what most of you will/do look like at 50. And if you want to understand bitter, over-the-hill people, just talk to most of the expat men on this site.

What are you on about now, Kat? I did say she was ugly, old, or worthless. So, where does this statement come from?

:D Well, it comes as a response to you. You make a sexually derogatory innuendo about a woman's body, and then post somewhere else about how you "respect" women. That's what I was on about, since you asked.

Kat, I was talking about her eyes. The poster said before me that she had bug eyes. I have always like her and have always found her attractive, but her eyes do kinda' pop out at ya. There was nothing sexual about what I was saying.

Oh, sorry, then Bebop. I misinterpreted your comment.

No problem! All is good! :o

  • Replies 63
  • Views 676
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Intelligent Design is a long way away from Creationism. The latter says that the world was created by God, the former says that Neo-Darwinism cannot account for the complexity of cells.

Many, many scientists have cast doubt on Neo-Darwinism, and are not Creationists. Neo-Darwinist evolution has not been proved - far from it in fact. The recent 'punctuated equilibrium' theory shows that even some of the most ardent evolutionists feel that the mechanism of evolution, and the fossil record, has not been explained.

It is unfortunate for scienc that this arguement has been so radically split - i.e. if you don't believe (and it is a belief) in Neo-Darwinist evolution then you are a creationist.

Evolution:

Micro evolution within a species - PROVEN

Macro evolution - e.g. from a dog (like animal) to a whale

Natural selection - proven in micro evolution. Proven not the cause of Macro evolution

Neo-Darwinist theory - GENETIC MUTATION + Natural Selection - proposed cause of macro-evolution, not proven

Noe-Darwinist punctuated equilibrium - the fossil record does NOT account or prove evolution, just the opposite. This theory tries to account for that disrcepancy (that neo darwinists deny is there; they say the fossil record is their proof)

Mutant Monster theory - not proven; one theory of large genetic jumps

Lamarkianism - Evolution through passing on of acquired characteristics; extensively studied especially in Russia.

Morphic Resonance - evolution through patterns of form; similar to, and a modern extension of lamarkianism

Intelligent Design - Evolution through intelligent design - that intelligence is not limited to God, but can be a 'natural' intelligence.

Typical Neo-Darwinist 'proof' goes like this.

The Giraffe has a long neck - proof of evolution as a long neck enables it to reach leaves high up on trees that other animals cannot reach.

FACT: that proves nothing. In fact, the opposite has now been proven - the neck is not an advantage for foraging. Current theory - that giraffes fight with their necks, so that a long neck makes for a better fighter.

Point: simply finding an advantage of a particular feature does not prove evolution.

Personally, I see that evolution has been proven, but the mechanism of it has not (whick explains why there is still so much research going into it)

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.