Comments by "Ungoogleable o_O" (@oO_ox_O) on "Vox" channel.

  1. kevin gushlaw What is a fact to you? Is germ theory a fact to you?
    1
  2. +Rubytuby A lazy one who reuses stuff? Is that what you are trying to imply?! :O
    1
  3. Mia Hansen > Not to mention that Erasmus Darwin was a 33rd degree Mason. And if you don't recognize the significance in that, you have some research to do. In the "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" conspiracy sense? :->
    1
  4. George Weaver What god? The one according to the Mormons or Allah?
    1
  5. Tim TLS Coach Would you say that you have a "confirmation bias" against solipsism?
    1
  6. Wa Ol > and evolution is supposed to find the perfect form for sustaining life Not the perfect, just one good enough. A local maximum point. Every species has found its "place" (environment etc.) and it's more like to improve inside its place or adapt to changes there than to move another one (not impossible though).
    1
  7. St3a1thsniper32 Kindly awaiting your answer.
    1
  8. St3a1thsniper32 > DNA can't change unless a mutation happens There is also recombination but I will ignore that for now. What's your point with that? > but we have no proof of these so called missing links Of course we do have lots of evidence, e.g. fossils: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx Also, we have evidence directly in the DNA, in humans e.g. with fused chromosome 2. > Mutation are 97% of the time harmful to the thing it happens to. Most BS stat if I have ever seen one, and I have seen 23.54% of all stats. :P Truth is, most simple mutations are actually neutral. > Look at Down Syndrome in humans for example. That's caused by chromosome 21 being there thrice, but again, I don't want to be to nit-picky. Just let me tell you that it's a different kind of error compared to certain base pairs simply changing (what people normally think of), but since such chances also play a role (even more so in plants) I am going to let it slide. > These creatures would have to live long enough to reproduce and pass on this so called advantage to their offspring and that offspring reproduces and so on. Yes, so? If there is a selection advantage (can be quite small BTW) then that feature or variation is going to take over the gene pool in the long run, it becomes the new norm. > Your argument is that these changes add up over time and millions of years later that animal becomes an entirely new animal. Not necessary millions of years BTW, just enough for speciation to happen (new species is one that can't reliably create viable offspring with another in a very simplified definition for animals). We can observe it with flies in a lab: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation#Artificial_speciation
    1
  9. St3a1thsniper32 > Your "sources" are from wikipedia, which is one of the most unreliable sources you could have chose. Ah, I see, you're an academic and a connoisseur of good sources. Great, I love like-minded people, so then I am going to give you some in your prefered format: • Holtz, Thomas, Jr. (1995). "Archaeopteryxs Relationship With Modern Birds". Journal of Dinosaur Paleontology. Archived from the original on 2007-02-09. Retrieved 2007-03-01. • Erickson, Gregory M.; Rauhut, Oliver W. M.; Zhou, Zhonghe; Turner, Alan H.; Inouye, Brian D.; Hu, Dongyu; Norell, Mark A. (2009). Desalle, Robert, ed. "Was Dinosaurian Physiology Inherited by Birds? Reconciling Slow Growth in Archaeopteryx". PLoS ONE 4 (10): e7390. Bibcode:2009PLoSO...4.7390E. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007390. PMC 2756958. PMID 19816582 • Feo, Teresa J.; Field, Daniel J.; Prum, Richard O. (2015-03-22). "Barb geometry of asymmetrical feathers reveals a transitional morphology in the evolution of avian flight". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 282 (1803): 20142864. doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2864. ISSN 0962-8452. PMC 4345455. PMID 25673687. • L. M. Chiappe; L. M. Witme, eds. (2002). Mesozoic birds: above the heads of dinosaurs. Berkeley and Los Angeles, California: University of California Press. p. 151. ISBN 0-520-20094-2 • A. Feduccia (1996). The Origin and Evolution of Birds. Yale University Press, New Haven. ISBN 0-300-06460-8 These papers/books should be easily accessible from your university LAN/VPN. What do you think of them? > You've seen 23.54% of all stats XD I'm glad you like it. I came up with that number through pretty much the same means as you.
    1
  10. +Ryan Hamachi We do't have them because evolution led to the gene being deactivated. So yes, those people have an abnormality, but is the basis for a tail just like in tailed mammals.
    1
  11. Jahmali Kenway What drugs do new-age people take?
    1
  12. Random Balkan Guy Why? Sunni or Shia?
    1
  13. +Liberty .Stacker Evolution is possible through mutations (+ selection and sometimes mixing).
    1
  14. cara walker Do you think germ theory is BS? In the end you might find out that Islam or Mormonism was the right answer? https://youtu.be/KYAhlz7rnPU
    1
  15. cara walker > But do they have proof? The same amount as your religion has.
    1
  16. cara walker And Muslims will cite their Quran as proof. > more people believe in the proof that my religion has than Islam's So you are judging a religion by the amount of followers it has? So once Islam gets to first place you are going to convert to Islam or what? Come on, you have to see that argumentum ad populum is faulty.
    1
  17. cara walker > As I have said before, we all have own beliefs and we can do nothing to change it. And some beliefs are more irrational than others…
    1
  18. Exodus II Not the Quran or the Book of Mormon?
    1
  19. Exodus II What do you consider the best argument from there?
    1
  20. northmeister  How is the US not a similarly disabled democracy when nothing gets done because things get blocked through vetoes and fillibusters?
    1
  21. Todd Bollinger  > an extreme, rightwing candidate like those in Europe None with an absolute majority, so they can't do that much harm. > The only reform I would make would be to have all party primaries open to the general public. Funnily enough the federal constitution does not even acknowledge political parties.
    1
  22. 0011peace  > the US was meant to bunch like the EU each so the states had to agree. Much less so than in the Articles of Confederation.
    1
  23. ***** It is according to common definitions of "democracy". Only in the US some people use the word "democracy" to only refer to more direct democratic systems.
    1
  24. ***** Are you sure you know what the definition of a republic is?
    1
  25. Andrew Graves > but ya know the current 2 encompass so many issues Well, not really, they might claim to put this and that in the platform but in the end nearly nothing of it gets done or only "mild" versions of it. This only fuels frustration. > that most do not bother with 3rd parties People don't bother because votes for 3rd parties are lost votes which might help the major party more in opposition to one's views.
    1
  26. 99batran ?
    1
  27. 0011peace It does not mean that it never happens, it's just much less likely and the overall trend is always towards fewer parties and against independents even if political parties are nowhere mentioned in the US constitution. Take Ventura for example, what came after him, a Republican and then a Democrat. Also, you have to keep in mind that the governors and the presidents are first and foremost just people of the executive branch but what matters a lot if not most is actually the legislative branch if you want change.
    1
  28. +hemper79 They point to similarities.
    1
  29. PerceptionVsReality If Americans came from Europe, how comes there are still Europeans?
    1
  30. PerceptionVsReality They have their environment where they are doing fine.
    1
  31. PerceptionVsReality What do you think of germ theory? Or in other words, do you consider all theories equal?
    1
  32. PerceptionVsReality I can see certain regularities in the imagery you are using. Probably points towards certain maybe unconscious desires of yours.
    1
  33. Ben G > i'am very scared of evolutionary worldview, walk around and tell people that we have leftover parst Wat?!
    1
  34. Ben G > evolutionists believe that black people are like the neanderthal compared to white man No, that's like a theist saying that god punished people by turning them black.
    1
  35. Ben G That's all?
    1
  36. Sophia Ruach Are you asking about how species come to be?
    1
  37. Sophia Ruach So now you are talking about abiogenesis instead of speciation? Don't take it too personally but you come across as having ADHS right now. Evolution is already proven to you so you switched to abiogenesis?
    1
  38. Sophia Ruach Did you look at my link?
    1
  39. Sophia Ruach I see none concerning evolution and not abiogenesis.
    1
  40. Bruce Garcia You mean Allah?
    1
  41. Darth BlessYouAll What do you personally consider the best argument form these pages? > Like I said, I believe in evolution. Just NOT Darwin's theory. So you are more a follower of Lamarckism? ;D SNCR
    1
  42. shalacy manderson > you don't go to hell just for not believing in him Who said the following? "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." > But it's OK because one of these days your going to wish you did. What if Islam or Mormonism was right? Wouldn't you wish the same?
    1
  43. shalacy manderson You sound like 12. In that case you shouldn't be on the internet.
    1
  44. ForumLight Are you Muslim?
    1
  45. +S Johnson ALIENS!
    1
  46. affect
    1
  47. *****  > Just do a simple search along the lines of "evidence the bible is true" and keep an open mind. Just the other day a Muslim said to me the same just with the Quran, what would you tell him?
    1
  48. +Liam Karl Agius Only if they should have been under less pressure to loose them or if it's for some reason not vestigial to them.
    1
  49. +† Freedom By Faith Ministry † Book of Mormon also real Bible?
    1
  50. +Bryan Crowers That's basically what literalists say. If the Bible told them that Pi = 3 then they would believe that.
    1