Why this blog?
Until this moment I have been forced to listen while media and politicians alike have told me "what Canadians think". In all that time they never once asked.
This is just the voice of an ordinary Canadian yelling back at the radio -
"You don't speak for me."
email Kate
Goes to a private
mailserver in Europe.
I can't answer or use every tip, but all are appreciated!
Katewerk Art
Support SDA
Paypal:
Etransfers:
katewerk(at)sasktel.net
Not a registered charity.
I cannot issue tax receipts
Favourites/Resources
Instapundit
The Federalist
Powerline Blog
Babylon Bee
American Thinker
Legal Insurrection
Mark Steyn
American Greatness
Google Newspaper Archive
Pipeline Online
David Thompson
Podcasts
Steve Bannon's War Room
Scott Adams
Dark Horse
Michael Malice
Timcast
@Social
@Andy Ngo
@Cernovich
@Jack Posobeic
@IanMilesCheong
@AlinaChan
@YuriDeigin
@GlenGreenwald
@MattTaibbi
Support Our Advertisers
Sweetwater
Polar Bear Evolution
Email the Author
Pilgrim's Progress
How Not To Become A Millenial
Trump The Establishment
Wind Rain Temp
Seismic Map
What They Say About SDA
"Smalldeadanimals doesn't speak for the people of Saskatchewan" - Former Sask Premier Lorne Calvert
"I got so much traffic after your post my web host asked me to buy a larger traffic allowance." - Dr.Ross McKitrick
Holy hell, woman. When you send someone traffic, you send someone TRAFFIC.My hosting provider thought I was being DDoSed. - Sean McCormick
"The New York Times link to me yesterday [...] generated one-fifth of the traffic I normally get from a link from Small Dead Animals." - Kathy Shaidle
"You may be a nasty right winger, but you're not nasty all the time!" - Warren Kinsella
"Go back to collecting your welfare livelihood. - "Michael E. Zilkowsky
So Dr. Long is an expert on M. Dickie. You can’t make it up I guess.
385 million year old fish were doing it, but teenagers still think they invented it.
The reason why I don’t drink water (unless distilled or fermented) is because of what fish and beach frontage yuppies do in it.
That has led researchers to assume that copulation, in which a male’s sperm are inserted into a female’s reproductive tract, and fertilisation takes place therein, is a derivative rather than an original characteristic of the vertebrate line that leads from the first jawed, bony fish to mankind.
Heh, the theory of evilution needs to be overhauled once again.
I wonder how many times this monstrosity needs to be broken before this mishmash of subjective interpretation, each subjective interpretation supposedly proving the other, is discarded?
“I wonder how many times this monstrosity needs to be broken before this mishmash of subjective interpretation, each subjective interpretation supposedly proving the other, is discarded?”
That’s because you don’t understand what the word “theory” means. Otherwise you’d know the answer is “as often as possible”. Science isn’t about proving theories are true, its about proving they are -not- true.
It is important to note that disapproval of a theory generally does not count as disproof.
Science isn’t about proving theories are true, its about proving they are -not- true.
Ah, no wonder it progresses one step forward, and two steps back, lately. Constantly trying to prove a negative…you call that ‘science’, eh? lol
You may as well just admit the theory of evilution is a disease of the mind, like AGW. Totally created within the minds of men, and doesn’t exist in the real world.
This article is just another example of the real world intruding on something that only exists in the diseased minds of it’s believers.
When a scientific theory is proven wrong by the discovery of new facts, it can be amended to account for the new facts, or replaced by a better theory that accounts for all the known facts. When “revealed wisdom” is wrong, it’s wrong forever.
Gee, I guess your ‘received wisdom’, in the form of many subjective interpretations, is wrong forever.
You see, evilution stopped. There isn’t an unbroken living line of creatures climbing out of the ooze, sprouting legs and, eventually, spouting complicated subjective interpretations.
Wrong forever. Just like AGW.
You and NME666 need to get a room.
Looks like a few people here think the fossil record is Satan’s work.
Maybe the subjective interpretation thereof…
Darwinian evolution is a science, in that it adheres to the scientific method, whereas creationism is not.
You’re the only one going on about creationism. lol
And, no, darwinism doesn’t adhere to the scientific method. It’s been falsified by the fact it stopped. There is not a living stream climbing from the ooze, with all the stages leading to the higher organisms, alive today.
The believers need to explain why it stopped.
Stopped?
It is a process that takes hundreds of thousands of years.
The theory has been around for 150 years. Speciation takes even longer.
You need to explain why there still aren’t creatures climbing out of the ooze, and an unbroken, living, line of stages of evolution of organisms.
You need to explain why it stopped.
It hasn’t stopped.
http://www.livescience.com/16714-oxygen-breathing-life-chromium.html
http://scienceline.org/2011/02/native-plants-evolve-to-fight-off-invading-species/
At this point in history, there are few niches available for a new species, so, what we have now is species changing into other species, as opposed to climbing out of the bacterial mud. The time scales involved are huge.
Much like a mayfly cannot see the passing of seasons, a human cannot see evolution, unless we look at fossil records.
…there are few niches available for a new species…
All it would take is one to prove your theory. But there isn’t even one. All you have is subjective interpretations of fossils.
…so, what we have now is species changing into other species, as opposed to climbing out of the bacterial mud.
What’s to prevent the same species from continuing to evolve from the ooze? You need to explain why they stopped?
The theory of evilution only exists within the minds of men, nowhere else. Just like the subjective interpretations used to ‘prove’ AGW.
“The theory of evilution only exists within the minds of men, nowhere else.”
Like quantum mechanics, and relativity. Tautologies are not arguments.
Evolution has made predictions, and observation has born them out. That makes it a science.
There is no other theory that even comes close to explaining the fossil record or the changes we see in front of us.
Cherry-picking things that don’t fit the theory does not equal invalidating the theory.
There are things that are not explained adequately in every branch of science, that does not invalidate science.
There are also things that lie outside of the scope of science.
Evolution has made predictions, and observation has born them out.
Bah, fanciful tales used to explain observations prove nothing. Real science is repeatable.
Which brings us back to the question, why did it stop?
It didn’t stop.
Evolution is still happening, as you can see by the links I posted.
Many of the experiments used to validate evolution have been repeated.
It seems explaining evolution to you is like explaining ice ages to a mayfly.
Heh, your first link is an explanation of how something happened based on how it happens now. So, how has anything changed?
Your second link is an example of, so-called, micro-evolution. Still the same plant, just has longer roots. Plant breeders have been doing the same thing for years, but there’s always a limit to removing undesirable characteristics.
Hence the advent of genetic modification in the lab to add information. Something that doesn’t happen in nature.
“Hence the advent of genetic modification in the lab to add information. Something that doesn’t happen in nature.”
Then how do you explain the fact that life has become more complex since it started a few billion years ago?