Love me or hate me



  1. we all evolved creatures, homo sapiens, we followed the laws expressed by darwin and became the "top of the food chain". however, that instinct still lies within all of us. man and woman will always strive to be the "alpha" leader. we see it everyday. how many people do you know that are content to just exist? very few i would venture to say, most of us want to live comfortably and "increase our gene pool" and we are competitive by nature.



    now the majority of posters here are in a civilized country, with some countries more so than others. government philosophies vary and culture varies. but the "instinct" is still within us all. unfortunately there are individuals within the world (a very small percentage) that cannot contain the "instinct" and it drives them to perpetrate heinous acts upon other individuals. the global society has not found the balance between altruism and darwinism. but that balance my friends, when achieved, allows for a civilized people. how do you achieve the balance, i don't have that answer, but i do know that the darwinistic ideals tip the scale towards conflict because of the "instinct" and we must act to balance the scales.



    my posts may be taken the wrong way at times and whether or not you (collectively) admit it, you are thankful when a heinous act doesn't directly affect you. you feel terrible and sorrowful when it happens, but still you are thankful it didn't happen to you. i am thankful that 9/11 hasn't happened again in america, just as millions of americans are.



    love me or hate me, my intentions are always altruistic and transparent:



    1) i want to fulfill the purpose given to me by my god (that one i may never truly figure out j )

    2) i strive to be a good husband and father.

    3) i will protect my family, my friends, and my country no matter the personal costs.

    4) i want my children (and their children) to live better than i did in a peaceful world. i know that peace will not come in my lifetime.

    5) i want to rid the world of perpetrators of heinous acts, but as you all know that fight will live as long as the human race exists.





    respectfully,

    mike






    •  
  2. Poll: Snoopy or Underdog?

    • Snoopy

      66.67% 8
    • Underdog

      33.33% 4
    12 Votes
  3. 23 Comments

  4. by   Jessy_RN
    Many of us share you same thoughts. Have a wonderful day.
  5. by   Tweety
    You should always feel free to speak your opinions, thoughts and beliefs about the world. Always be prepared for disagreement, or people needing clarification.

    One friendly suggestion, don't try to force those beliefs on others or presume we have those beliefs by saying things like "whether or not you (collectively) admit it, you are thankful when a heinous act doesn't directly affect you. You feel terrible and sorrowful when it happens, but still you are thankful it didn't happen to you.......".

    That's not necessarily good example because it's common sense that people are thankful bad things haven't happened to them. An empathetic person can feel their pain. We had a hurricane last year coming directly at us and in the last hours swung south and devasted the area it hit. Our relief was someone elses misery.

    Anyway my point is don't use language like "you know you feel this way whether you admit it or not....". Better to say "this is how I feel.....how do you feel?...." Just a friendly suggestion, take it or leave it.

    (Many people believe that God created humans in God's image and there's no such thing as Darwinism and evolution.)

    I know it seems sometimes oddball opinions get a mob like mentality going on amongst us, but I'd like to think we're all being honest and not bullying.

    Best wishes and keep on posting!
  6. by   SmilingBluEyes
    i urge anyone participating in this thread to please remain respectful toward one another and take the op's opinions as just those: opinions. he has the right to them, as we ours. i thank you for being understanding.
  7. by   mercyteapot
    I realize I am ignoring the point of the message here, but I'd like to point out that some of us have old eyes and have trouble reading very small font. Kind regards to those that type bigger.
  8. by   H ynnoD
    Are you just commenting that bad things happen:wink2: or are you trying to connect this to Darwinism.I like the signature someone has here,That if we evolved from Apes,why are there still Apes.
    Last edit by H ynnoD on Oct 5, '05
  9. by   Roy Fokker
    Quote from H ynnoD
    That if we evolved from Apes,why are there still Apes.
    1. Because we didn't evolve from apes, we evolved from a common ancestor

    2. Because just because an organism evolved from a precursor species, doesn't mean the precursor species has to become extinct. If that were the case, then we wouldn't be seeing bacteria, algae, ferns etc.
  10. by   Jessy_RN
    Quote from H ynnoD
    Are you just commenting that bad things happen:wink2: or are you trying to connect this to Darwinism.I like the signature someone has here,That if we evolved from Apes,why are there still Apes.
    I agree with Roy. Actually I saw a news article where scientists are now saying we did not evolve from them etc. Will look for a link.
  11. by   H ynnoD
    Quote from Roy Fokker
    1. Because we didn't evolve from apes, we evolved from a common ancestor

    2. Because just because an organism evolved from a precursor species, doesn't mean the precursor species has to become extinct. If that were the case, then we wouldn't be seeing bacteria, algae, ferns etc.
    So who's our common Ancestor and why can't species breed outside their species if this were true
  12. by   Tweety
    Quote from H ynnoD
    So who's our common Ancestor and why can't species breed outside their species if this were true


    I don't think our common ancestor was an ape as we know apes today.

    We come from chemical reactions in the sea.
  13. by   H ynnoD
    Quote from Tweety
    I don't think our common ancestor was an ape as we know apes today.

    We come from chemical reactions in the sea.
    I've heard of the chemical reactions that elvolutionist believe started life.Seems to me that for this to have, to have worked there would have to be some cross breeding between the species to get all the species that we have now.I have never heard of any instance were this has happened
  14. by   Roy Fokker
    Quote from H ynnoD
    I've heard of the chemical reactions that elvolutionist believe started life.Seems to me that for this to have, to have worked there would have to be some cross breeding between the species to get all the species that we have now.
    a. Chemical molecules don't have a "species".

    b. Speciation arises primarily from mutations and less through cross breeding to produce new species.

    c. One must also take into account that when primordial species were formed there was very little genetic material to go around - things didn't look too different from each other. Thus 'cross breeding' was readily more possible. Overtime however, mutations to genetic code gave rise to newer species... and also made cross breeding between the new mutants and the original 'ancestor' material more unlikely

    Quote from H ynnoD
    I have never heard of any instance were this has happened
    Cross breeding is an act of everyday life. Just consider the plant kingdom. Or even that butt of all jokes - the mule - is a cross-breed between two different species (horse and donkey).

    I agree that different chromosomal (genetic) makeup make cross breeding across significantly divergent species improbable, but not impossible.

    I suggest that if we wish to discuss this topic further, we create our own thread. Mike brought up some nice points in his original post and I don't think we should continue this topic on this thread
    Last edit by Roy Fokker on Oct 5, '05
  15. by   H ynnoD
    Quote from Roy Fokker
    a. Chemical molecules don't have a "species".

    b. Speciation arises primarily from mutations and less through cross breeding to produce new species.

    c. One must also take into account that when primordial species were formed there was very little genetic material to go around - things didn't look too different from each other. Thus 'cross breeding' was readily more possible. Overtime however, mutations to genetic code gave rise to newer species... and also made cross breeding between the new mutants and the original 'ancestor' material more unlikely

    Cross breeding is an act of everyday life. Just consider the plant kingdom. Or even that butt of all jokes - the mule - is a cross-breed between two different species (horse and donkey).

    I agree that different chromosomal (genetic) makeup make cross breeding across significantly divergent species improbable, but not impossible.

    I suggest that if we wish to discuss this topic further, we create our own thread. Mike brought up some nice points in his original post and I don't think we should continue this topic on this thread
    No problem.But I believe that Horses and Donkeys are in the same species I am a creationist and was just getting some different views of why people believe evolution to be true.Sorry for high jacking the thread with questions of evolution.:wink2:

close