Episode 230 and soon 231In Bleach who Zanpakuto true form look the best?
I liked Shunsui's, Ukitake's and Hinamori's the most. Toshiro's Hyorinmaru was pretty awesome as well.
Shunsui's ---%26gt; http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Katen_Ky%C5…
Ukitake's ---%26gt; http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/S%C5%8Dgyo_…
Hinamori's ---%26gt; http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Tobiume_(sp…
Toshiro's ---%26gt; http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Hy%C5%8Drin…In Bleach who Zanpakuto true form look the best?
byakuya's samurai and hyōrinmaru look the coolest
http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Senbonzakur…
http://bleach.wikia.com/wiki/Hyōrinmaru_…
I like Hitsugaya's ice dragon. ^__^
but, Renji's isn't bad looking either. =P
Byakuyas because it looks beautiful but is deadly.
Dude Tōshirō Hitsugaya's sword Hyōrinmaru
Hyorinmaru hands down... He looks wicked... Just the right type for Hitsugaya....
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
True or False?..... A base forms hydrogen ions when it dissolves in water?
Replace the word base if it is false but if its just true then just write trueTrue or False?..... A base forms hydrogen ions when it dissolves in water?
False, a base forms hydroxide (OH-) ions when it dissolves in water.
Or, an acid forms hydrogen (H+) ions when it dissolves in water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HydroxideTrue or False?..... A base forms hydrogen ions when it dissolves in water?
An ACID forms H+ ions when dissolved. A Base forms OH- ions!
False
False. That describes an acid.
False. A base forms hydoxide (OH) negative ions in water. An acid forms hydrogen posiive ions.
False, a base forms hydroxide (OH-) ions when it dissolves in water.
Or, an acid forms hydrogen (H+) ions when it dissolves in water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HydroxideTrue or False?..... A base forms hydrogen ions when it dissolves in water?
An ACID forms H+ ions when dissolved. A Base forms OH- ions!
False
False. That describes an acid.
False. A base forms hydoxide (OH) negative ions in water. An acid forms hydrogen posiive ions.
Is it true that you have to be over 16 years old to fill out the tax forms?
Nope. You have to file a tax return at any age if you have income to report. If if you have little income, and end up paying no tax it will add to your RRSP contribution room.
once you turn 16 you should file an income tax return, even if your income is zero so you can claim the GST credit. Make sure your parents are not claiming it on your behalf first - family is better off if the eligible parent makes the claim.
If your parents make too much income so they are not eligible to claim the GST rebate then you can claim your own amount.Is it true that you have to be over 16 years old to fill out the tax forms?
I would have to say yes, sonce I don't think you are legally allowed to work if you're 15.cash advance
once you turn 16 you should file an income tax return, even if your income is zero so you can claim the GST credit. Make sure your parents are not claiming it on your behalf first - family is better off if the eligible parent makes the claim.
If your parents make too much income so they are not eligible to claim the GST rebate then you can claim your own amount.Is it true that you have to be over 16 years old to fill out the tax forms?
I would have to say yes, sonce I don't think you are legally allowed to work if you're 15.
Is it true natural selection and selective breeding are both forms of how evolution happens?
I heard Darwin came accross his theory of natural selection by studying domestacated animals. That he realized that human beings have selectivly breed the ancestors so today they look different. Then he realized this process could be happening naturaly--calling it natural selection.Is it true natural selection and selective breeding are both forms of how evolution happens?
I think you answered your own question.
Selective breeding, as used on domesticated animals by humans, could be seen as following the model of natural selection, where only the healthiest/strongest/intelligent individuals survive to pass on their genes.
Nowadays humans do not follow natural selection; we breed with people we love, often ignoring hereditary disabilities, and even infertile individuals can conceive due to modern medicineIs it true natural selection and selective breeding are both forms of how evolution happens?
That was the premise that Darwin established his theory on. Because of a perceived self-righteousness of the Christian Church, right or wrong, in the late 1800's and early 1900's, there was a mass acceptance of the theory of evolution because if there is no God who creates, then there is no God who judges and can tell us what to do; that is, the church can't tell us what to do. You have to remember that up to this time the main text books in school were the King James Bible and the New England Primer. Interestingly, the Supreme Court upheld the use of the Bible as a text book even until the early 1900's. Around the 1940's the Supreme Court took the Bible out of the public schools. Prayer was not taken out of public schools until the 1960's. So the Christian influence was the foundation of the philosophy of this nation and it took many generations to make inroads against it. And the inroads are still struggling against what is left of that paradigm.
When Einstein set forth his theory of relativity, the influential applied that relativity principal to morals. So now evolution, moral relativity and rationalism became the accepted rule of law, or lawlessness. Around that time ';God is dead'; slogans started appearing. It can be easily seen that the easy acceptance of evolution, moral relativity, rationalism, humanism and materialism are truly a rebellion against the concept of God and His accountability. We want to be free. We want the Hercules of modern philosophy to break the chains of the god(s)from off our necks. However, in getting rid of God [today they are still peeling the ten commandments from the courthouses in America] they created a vacuum. Eastern philosophy and spiritism have made inroads and is the next philosophy de jour coming on strong. Science Fiction is very popular. Star Trek, Star Wars, Sci Fi channel, Harry Potter, etc are very exciting and enjoyable, but they have more to do with forming our philosophies today than any other influence. It is subtle but in the aggregate the message is very strong. Witchcraft and the occult are making real inroads in our thinking. Darwin, who started it all, admitted at the end of his life that evolution could not be true because it could not be proved. So it is. The in-between animals so necessary to evolution are missing from the fossil record. That would indicate it never happened. Yet, Christians today jump on the band wagon of a 24 hour six day creation to counter the evolution theory that required millions and billions of years. Christians say the creation was done in 6 days of 24 hours each. In other words, instantaneously. Well, that is definitely not supported in Genesis. The creation was a process. Day in Genesis is not calibrated. So there is no telling how long the day was. In fact the herbs and grass and trees sprouted, and we know that is a process of time. To sprout you have to have seeds. It is high time Christians used some logic too.
No matter how civilized we may claim to be, our animal instincts will conquer us at the end.
Darwin was only one of many who believed that selective breeding showed that something in nature made it possible for species to evolve. It was only after visiting the Galapagos Islands on the HMS Beagle that he realized that the isolation of the islands led to the unique specimens of species that he found. There was no one to direct the speciation, so there had to be something in the environment that was responsible. He and a few others realized that the only element in the environment was the environment itself. Mutations arise spontaneously, but only the nonlethal ones survive, and only the ones that provide an advantage of some kind in the environment go on to reproduce over time.
I don't know but I do know that evolution cannot be shown to be happening today.
Just look at plants. Look at our vegetables. We have selectively bred most of them and look how huge we can make them. We screwed around and got wheat. Those giant pumpkins and stuff those crazies make and show off at fairs. Man made domesticated dogs, just invented them. When plants breed you get all kinds of crazy stuff happen with the chromosomes, even some animals. Research polyploidy.
Natural Selection is evolution in progress, it's the natural weeding out of the gene pool inferior genes or traits that don't benefit the species. It occurs naturally without intervention by man. Selective breeding is done by man to tweak a species. For instance, you want a smaller dog, so you keep breeding the smallest of your dogs until most of your dogs are the size you want. Those are designer dogs, not created by man, but modified by man.
Yes that is true. Selective breeding is called artificial selection, whereas what happens in nature without human interference is called natural selection. Both result in a species evolving.
those are terms used in the theory. I heard he got his idea while studying birds and wildlife on those islands somewhere in the ocean. Although the specific selection idea could come later and be inspired from this other source you mention. The actual evolution comes from random mutation, natural selection makes it so the strong survive and selective breeding helps by promoting the stronger and most successful genes to spread more often. But these two alone give no reason for why things change.
Yes that's true. Have a look on the breeding of dogs, the variation is enormous.
Look on man is the same the variation is great. We call man's races, natives are races the mix between these races are not natural selections, but are selective breeding's.
';The Evolution Deceit';: A wonderfull book to read.
(freely downloadable).
Read also the customer reviews from amazon.com (second link)
There is more to the story than that. For instance, Darwin identified one 'natural selector' as terrain. If you have a population that is separated from another group by terrain so that interbreeding is unlikely (just as a human breeder would separate one stock of animals from another and not allow them to breed) you have a natural selection at work.
Since Darwin, other selection types have been identified. Weather changes is a big one as well as a neat sort of 'self selection'. That happens when the girls prefer one sort of male over another, could be as simple a thing as coat color or breath smell. Pretty much how female humans do it. You can see how dwarfism would increase in a population if women suddenly decided that dwarfs were the cutest thing going and wanted to have kids by them.
Do a search on 'ring species' for a modern example of how this works out.
Those that cannot not marry and propagate outside of heir own religion... is that not selective breeding and a form of evolution?
Yes... If you control the possable outcomes of any gentic excersize then you control how something is changed....
Since you asked this question in Religion %26amp;Spirituality Section, the reply should be spiritual.
The only reason for creation of universe and evolution from ameoba to human is the dissatisfication of Mother Nature and her quest to carve out a perfect being out of inert matter. Rest all are theories, presumptions, and half-understood ideas
And this evolution is still continuing... it is at mental level now for humans
Yes, since in both cases the living organisms evolves to suit it's living conditions.
No, no,no-we need to get passed organic evolution first. True, nat selection and selective breeding can have an effect, we can see that right now. But you still have to get there first. There are just too many unsolved problems in getting ';nothing'; to come alive! We are still stuck in 450 billion B.C.
Evolution is a myth.
Evolution is an unproven theory. If you want to believe that you're descended from a monkey it's a personal choice, but I know that I'm not.
Try listening to ';The Monkey'; by Doctor John on ';N'awlinz: Dis, Dat or D'udda'; for a different take on evolution.
I think you answered your own question.
Selective breeding, as used on domesticated animals by humans, could be seen as following the model of natural selection, where only the healthiest/strongest/intelligent individuals survive to pass on their genes.
Nowadays humans do not follow natural selection; we breed with people we love, often ignoring hereditary disabilities, and even infertile individuals can conceive due to modern medicineIs it true natural selection and selective breeding are both forms of how evolution happens?
That was the premise that Darwin established his theory on. Because of a perceived self-righteousness of the Christian Church, right or wrong, in the late 1800's and early 1900's, there was a mass acceptance of the theory of evolution because if there is no God who creates, then there is no God who judges and can tell us what to do; that is, the church can't tell us what to do. You have to remember that up to this time the main text books in school were the King James Bible and the New England Primer. Interestingly, the Supreme Court upheld the use of the Bible as a text book even until the early 1900's. Around the 1940's the Supreme Court took the Bible out of the public schools. Prayer was not taken out of public schools until the 1960's. So the Christian influence was the foundation of the philosophy of this nation and it took many generations to make inroads against it. And the inroads are still struggling against what is left of that paradigm.
When Einstein set forth his theory of relativity, the influential applied that relativity principal to morals. So now evolution, moral relativity and rationalism became the accepted rule of law, or lawlessness. Around that time ';God is dead'; slogans started appearing. It can be easily seen that the easy acceptance of evolution, moral relativity, rationalism, humanism and materialism are truly a rebellion against the concept of God and His accountability. We want to be free. We want the Hercules of modern philosophy to break the chains of the god(s)from off our necks. However, in getting rid of God [today they are still peeling the ten commandments from the courthouses in America] they created a vacuum. Eastern philosophy and spiritism have made inroads and is the next philosophy de jour coming on strong. Science Fiction is very popular. Star Trek, Star Wars, Sci Fi channel, Harry Potter, etc are very exciting and enjoyable, but they have more to do with forming our philosophies today than any other influence. It is subtle but in the aggregate the message is very strong. Witchcraft and the occult are making real inroads in our thinking. Darwin, who started it all, admitted at the end of his life that evolution could not be true because it could not be proved. So it is. The in-between animals so necessary to evolution are missing from the fossil record. That would indicate it never happened. Yet, Christians today jump on the band wagon of a 24 hour six day creation to counter the evolution theory that required millions and billions of years. Christians say the creation was done in 6 days of 24 hours each. In other words, instantaneously. Well, that is definitely not supported in Genesis. The creation was a process. Day in Genesis is not calibrated. So there is no telling how long the day was. In fact the herbs and grass and trees sprouted, and we know that is a process of time. To sprout you have to have seeds. It is high time Christians used some logic too.
No matter how civilized we may claim to be, our animal instincts will conquer us at the end.
Darwin was only one of many who believed that selective breeding showed that something in nature made it possible for species to evolve. It was only after visiting the Galapagos Islands on the HMS Beagle that he realized that the isolation of the islands led to the unique specimens of species that he found. There was no one to direct the speciation, so there had to be something in the environment that was responsible. He and a few others realized that the only element in the environment was the environment itself. Mutations arise spontaneously, but only the nonlethal ones survive, and only the ones that provide an advantage of some kind in the environment go on to reproduce over time.
I don't know but I do know that evolution cannot be shown to be happening today.
Just look at plants. Look at our vegetables. We have selectively bred most of them and look how huge we can make them. We screwed around and got wheat. Those giant pumpkins and stuff those crazies make and show off at fairs. Man made domesticated dogs, just invented them. When plants breed you get all kinds of crazy stuff happen with the chromosomes, even some animals. Research polyploidy.
Natural Selection is evolution in progress, it's the natural weeding out of the gene pool inferior genes or traits that don't benefit the species. It occurs naturally without intervention by man. Selective breeding is done by man to tweak a species. For instance, you want a smaller dog, so you keep breeding the smallest of your dogs until most of your dogs are the size you want. Those are designer dogs, not created by man, but modified by man.
Yes that is true. Selective breeding is called artificial selection, whereas what happens in nature without human interference is called natural selection. Both result in a species evolving.
those are terms used in the theory. I heard he got his idea while studying birds and wildlife on those islands somewhere in the ocean. Although the specific selection idea could come later and be inspired from this other source you mention. The actual evolution comes from random mutation, natural selection makes it so the strong survive and selective breeding helps by promoting the stronger and most successful genes to spread more often. But these two alone give no reason for why things change.
Yes that's true. Have a look on the breeding of dogs, the variation is enormous.
Look on man is the same the variation is great. We call man's races, natives are races the mix between these races are not natural selections, but are selective breeding's.
';The Evolution Deceit';: A wonderfull book to read.
(freely downloadable).
Read also the customer reviews from amazon.com (second link)
There is more to the story than that. For instance, Darwin identified one 'natural selector' as terrain. If you have a population that is separated from another group by terrain so that interbreeding is unlikely (just as a human breeder would separate one stock of animals from another and not allow them to breed) you have a natural selection at work.
Since Darwin, other selection types have been identified. Weather changes is a big one as well as a neat sort of 'self selection'. That happens when the girls prefer one sort of male over another, could be as simple a thing as coat color or breath smell. Pretty much how female humans do it. You can see how dwarfism would increase in a population if women suddenly decided that dwarfs were the cutest thing going and wanted to have kids by them.
Do a search on 'ring species' for a modern example of how this works out.
Those that cannot not marry and propagate outside of heir own religion... is that not selective breeding and a form of evolution?
Yes... If you control the possable outcomes of any gentic excersize then you control how something is changed....
Since you asked this question in Religion %26amp;Spirituality Section, the reply should be spiritual.
The only reason for creation of universe and evolution from ameoba to human is the dissatisfication of Mother Nature and her quest to carve out a perfect being out of inert matter. Rest all are theories, presumptions, and half-understood ideas
And this evolution is still continuing... it is at mental level now for humans
Yes, since in both cases the living organisms evolves to suit it's living conditions.
No, no,no-we need to get passed organic evolution first. True, nat selection and selective breeding can have an effect, we can see that right now. But you still have to get there first. There are just too many unsolved problems in getting ';nothing'; to come alive! We are still stuck in 450 billion B.C.
Evolution is a myth.
Evolution is an unproven theory. If you want to believe that you're descended from a monkey it's a personal choice, but I know that I'm not.
Try listening to ';The Monkey'; by Doctor John on ';N'awlinz: Dis, Dat or D'udda'; for a different take on evolution.
If evolution is true, then how come a box of computer parts never forms into a computer?
Because a box of computer parts does not conceive offspring, into which it would pass genetic material. With no offspring, you have no ';fittest'; to survive and propogate useful genetic characteristics.
Evolution is as true as gravity. If you don't believe in it either, don't walk out any third-floor windows any time soon!If evolution is true, then how come a box of computer parts never forms into a computer?
Because neither computer parts nor computers are alive.If evolution is true, then how come a box of computer parts never forms into a computer?
In order to answer your question seriously, you would have to have a basic understanding of biology, chemistry, and physics. And, judging by the question you're asking, I'm assuming you don't have that understanding quite yet.
Computer parts are non-organic, non-living, and composed largely of man-made or man-altered materials.
Evolution is a complicated thing to explain, but sometimes I like to think of populations of living things as marbles, and their environment as a maze. It's a very loose analogy, but it's fun to think about I suppose. The walls of the maze (which represent the environment, including living and non-living objects and data-- rocks, weather patterns, other animals, food, water, population density, stimuli) cause the path marble (the marble has no ';purpose'; , but the walls of the maze nudge it this way and that).
Maybe if you held a hot burner under the box containing the computer parts, it would be pressured by its environment to develop leg-like structures and run away, or melt. :)
Furthermore, individuals (box of components of one individual) never evolve, populations evolve. Perhaps if you placed many completely-assembled computers together in one place, and left them there for thousands of years, the end result would be a new species.
If you want to think of it in terms of hardware, a processor and a motherboard are reproductively isolated, they're different species, so they diverged long ago, perhaps their most recent common ancestor is silicone.
You're basically asking why a box of body parts don't assemble into one complete human. Evolution isn't about putting together pieces to assemble one whole unit of animal, it's about the survival of the species through time, and the eventual divergence of other species from the original (assuming the original survives long enough for that to happen).
After the big bang there were only a few elements in the universe. Later new ones evolved and soon they started to combine in different groups...
When you mix two substances they usually react with each other. If they don't you need to increase temperature or add a third substance...
And that's exactly what happened when life started.
There are trillions fantasilions shmillions of stars. There are guibillions derillions gubbilions of planets around them. But only idontknowhowmanyillions of them have the right conditions for life. Earth is fortunately one of them.
When a proper combination of elements joined in the right conditions amino acids appeared and later formed proteins.
The rest is history...
That's something we know. What we don't know is whether this was a coincidence or a higher being's (God, Allah, aliens) action.
And that's where faith starts.
I personally thing it was a coincidence, but you never know...
P.S. Is your question a joke about creationists' lack of proper arguments against evolution.
I mean... Computer parts... Come on!
Bible cannot be proved, evolution can.
Why don't you people ever call bible a theory. I'm not saying it's not true but it most likely isn't.
the same reason that even though your brain is full of nerve endings, they never seem to fire together to make a cohesive thought.
Because they aren't smart enough yet. Give it time.
For now anyways, the evolution of computers is dependant on us
hey! have you never carefully put away a bunch of computer parts in a box and stored them away for a month, but yet when you come back and open the box find they've managed to get themselves all tangled up together? ho! they're trying man! they're trying!
The basic component for evolution to take place has to be ';self replicating';. During that replication process changes occur and evolution selects for the ones that work better then the original.
Computer parts do not have any way of mutating, so they never change.
Are you for real? Evolution applies to living organisms. Computer parts have no DNA. Using your logic, I should just buy a doorknob and wait for it to evolve into a house.
This question is analagous to the much older question of why doesn't a chimpanzee banging on a typwriter at random ever write a perfect Shakesperean sonnet? The answer to this question is that there is no natural selection. However, if the chimp keeps banging enough copies over and over and there is something like the natural environment deciding which letters are correct or not correct, then eventually he WILL type a Shakesperean sonnet!! This has been proven by direct experimentation. The same might apply to computer parts. You just need enough assembly attempts plus some kind of natural selection to govern what is a successful assembly and what is not, and Voila, you will have your fully assembled computer! I think you are now learning something about how the natural world functions.
Computer parts do not have life within them
I can't believe I answered this stupid question
I'll try to be more understanding ... but you really don't understand what the theory of evolution says.
First, evolution does not answer the question of how life *started* from something not alive. Only how the current diversity of life arose once life did start.
Second, all theories about how life *did* start (and there are many ... this is a very difficult question), emphasize a *huge* amount of time.
Third, the first life forms were far less complex than a computer (althought the very question of defining what ';complex'; means, is a problem in itself).
So really, you need to study evolution a bit more before you can ridicule it properly.
You wasted 5 points asking this? Guess no one ever explained to you what inanimate means, did they?
The theory of evolution covers the change in LIVING things over time.
Hence, it has very little to say about non-living computer parts.
If you actually want to learn something sensible about evolution check out talkorigins. I recommend ';29+ evidences of macroevolution';, though I warn you it will take a long time to read, because there is so much evidence.
the tiny welding tool was not included in the box.
You gotta give it a few million years! :)
Because they do not have any mechanism which moves the individual parts around in different combinations, that means no appropriate energy source. The computer parts are way to large to undergo random movements due to thermal energy (as molecules do). So you could have the computer parts sitting for centuries on a shelf and unless there is something like an earthquake they won't move a bit. So how do you think they can assemble in any combination? It's a matter of size and physics. I don't think it is by chance that life started small and on a molecular level.
If you take a lot of people though who don't know the least thing about computers, give each of them a box of computer parts, I bet somebody will manage to stick the parts together correctly, even if they have absolutely no clue about what they are doing. The people would provide the source of energy for evolution. I don't think you can get evolution without an energy source. And of course you also would need something like quality control if you want to get correctly built computers with increasing frequency...
The reason the universe was able to form from 'inanimate' materials is because organic compounds are the essential building blocks of life. Stanley Miller performed an experiment that included all the conditions of earth before life began and even before organic compounds existed. The temperature and electricity applied to the elements, such as carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen, caused the formation of amino acids, which form proteins. Those who do not believe in devine intervention would say that this was the beginning of life. Therefore, without devine intervention, a computer could never 'evolve' from a box of parts, and if it did, then that would not be considered evolution but would be considered a miracle.
The question is not stupid atall..
the scientists from Michigan state university are working on the evolution of the systems and the project is called 'avida'...
lets see if this is going to work in some billion yrs or before that!!!!
Cheers.....
evolution deel with matter not inanimate objects
Humans created computers. It is foolish to think that a computer can put itself together.
It is an oversimplification then to conclude that living organisms which are vastly more complex than computers should also have a creator.
....therefore...
God created the universe. It is foolish to think that the universe put itself together.
Evolution then comes into question depending on which account of genisis (cosmic origin) you believe. I mean, would the creator of the universe be smart enough to create living organisms that ';evolve';?
This is your hand .But it is not you.
This is your leg. But it is not you .
This is your brain. But it is not you .
This is your heart. But it is not you .
Where are you?
==================
The most simple design, which was created
by the God / Nature , is atom of hydrogen.
The most complex design, which was created
by the God / Nature , is the Man.
The Man is alive essence.
Animals, bird, fish are alive essences.
And an atom?
And atom is also alive design.
The atom of hydrogen lives 12 minutes.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if
to give suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he will turn into Man.
Therefore, the one, who creates a general picture of Life,
must consider development of evolution of Life from atom up to the Man.
* * *
Once upon a time, in the beginning, there was one ';single point '; accidentally.
Then it has caught a cold accidentally and has blown up: Big Bang '; has taken place.
It was the reason of accidental creation of some hundreds
(thousands) kinds of elementary particles and their girlfriends - antiparticles.
Then stars were formed accidentally.
Then the Planet the Earth was formed accidentally.
Then atom of hydrogen was accidentally formed.
Then complex atom was accidentally formed.
Then was accidentally formed vegetative and fauna.
Then the man was created accidentally.
And this man can accidentally think logically.
But of course, unfortunately, not always.
===================
http://www.socratus.com
Wouldn't your question be a bit like asking why if God created the Earth he hasn't created anything lately?
To our knowledge the only self replicating biology is carbon based and cellular. Computers are neither.
that's the worst analogy i've ever heard. you're stupid. if god existed why didn't he give you a brain?
Evolution is not a theory which explains how a computer is built. It explains how life evolves and continues to evolve on this planet. The primordial soup theory is one which explains the origin of the first living cell, and it has much little support for it than does the theory of evolution which is concerned with how the diversity of life came to be from one single living cell.
The first living cell is thought to have arisen from the formation of organic molecules and their subsequent formation of genetic material under the harsh conditions of prehistoric earth. This theory is suspect. There are other theories, that organic molecules and genetic material landed on earth via a comet from another system. This would make sense especially if there are signs of microbes and bacteria that exist on other planets in our solar system, and they think that they may have found fossilized microbes in rocks from Mars.
There are a number of theories for this. And even the theory that a higher being placed these molecules on Earth, is plausible as well, since there's no real way to explain it, but the origin of the first microbe has little to do with the theory of evolution and does not negate the strong evidence supporting the diversification of species on this planet via the evolutionary/survival of the fittest mechanism.
Evolution is as true as gravity. If you don't believe in it either, don't walk out any third-floor windows any time soon!If evolution is true, then how come a box of computer parts never forms into a computer?
Because neither computer parts nor computers are alive.If evolution is true, then how come a box of computer parts never forms into a computer?
In order to answer your question seriously, you would have to have a basic understanding of biology, chemistry, and physics. And, judging by the question you're asking, I'm assuming you don't have that understanding quite yet.
Computer parts are non-organic, non-living, and composed largely of man-made or man-altered materials.
Evolution is a complicated thing to explain, but sometimes I like to think of populations of living things as marbles, and their environment as a maze. It's a very loose analogy, but it's fun to think about I suppose. The walls of the maze (which represent the environment, including living and non-living objects and data-- rocks, weather patterns, other animals, food, water, population density, stimuli) cause the path marble (the marble has no ';purpose'; , but the walls of the maze nudge it this way and that).
Maybe if you held a hot burner under the box containing the computer parts, it would be pressured by its environment to develop leg-like structures and run away, or melt. :)
Furthermore, individuals (box of components of one individual) never evolve, populations evolve. Perhaps if you placed many completely-assembled computers together in one place, and left them there for thousands of years, the end result would be a new species.
If you want to think of it in terms of hardware, a processor and a motherboard are reproductively isolated, they're different species, so they diverged long ago, perhaps their most recent common ancestor is silicone.
You're basically asking why a box of body parts don't assemble into one complete human. Evolution isn't about putting together pieces to assemble one whole unit of animal, it's about the survival of the species through time, and the eventual divergence of other species from the original (assuming the original survives long enough for that to happen).
After the big bang there were only a few elements in the universe. Later new ones evolved and soon they started to combine in different groups...
When you mix two substances they usually react with each other. If they don't you need to increase temperature or add a third substance...
And that's exactly what happened when life started.
There are trillions fantasilions shmillions of stars. There are guibillions derillions gubbilions of planets around them. But only idontknowhowmanyillions of them have the right conditions for life. Earth is fortunately one of them.
When a proper combination of elements joined in the right conditions amino acids appeared and later formed proteins.
The rest is history...
That's something we know. What we don't know is whether this was a coincidence or a higher being's (God, Allah, aliens) action.
And that's where faith starts.
I personally thing it was a coincidence, but you never know...
P.S. Is your question a joke about creationists' lack of proper arguments against evolution.
I mean... Computer parts... Come on!
Bible cannot be proved, evolution can.
Why don't you people ever call bible a theory. I'm not saying it's not true but it most likely isn't.
the same reason that even though your brain is full of nerve endings, they never seem to fire together to make a cohesive thought.
Because they aren't smart enough yet. Give it time.
For now anyways, the evolution of computers is dependant on us
hey! have you never carefully put away a bunch of computer parts in a box and stored them away for a month, but yet when you come back and open the box find they've managed to get themselves all tangled up together? ho! they're trying man! they're trying!
The basic component for evolution to take place has to be ';self replicating';. During that replication process changes occur and evolution selects for the ones that work better then the original.
Computer parts do not have any way of mutating, so they never change.
Are you for real? Evolution applies to living organisms. Computer parts have no DNA. Using your logic, I should just buy a doorknob and wait for it to evolve into a house.
This question is analagous to the much older question of why doesn't a chimpanzee banging on a typwriter at random ever write a perfect Shakesperean sonnet? The answer to this question is that there is no natural selection. However, if the chimp keeps banging enough copies over and over and there is something like the natural environment deciding which letters are correct or not correct, then eventually he WILL type a Shakesperean sonnet!! This has been proven by direct experimentation. The same might apply to computer parts. You just need enough assembly attempts plus some kind of natural selection to govern what is a successful assembly and what is not, and Voila, you will have your fully assembled computer! I think you are now learning something about how the natural world functions.
Computer parts do not have life within them
I can't believe I answered this stupid question
I'll try to be more understanding ... but you really don't understand what the theory of evolution says.
First, evolution does not answer the question of how life *started* from something not alive. Only how the current diversity of life arose once life did start.
Second, all theories about how life *did* start (and there are many ... this is a very difficult question), emphasize a *huge* amount of time.
Third, the first life forms were far less complex than a computer (althought the very question of defining what ';complex'; means, is a problem in itself).
So really, you need to study evolution a bit more before you can ridicule it properly.
You wasted 5 points asking this? Guess no one ever explained to you what inanimate means, did they?
The theory of evolution covers the change in LIVING things over time.
Hence, it has very little to say about non-living computer parts.
If you actually want to learn something sensible about evolution check out talkorigins. I recommend ';29+ evidences of macroevolution';, though I warn you it will take a long time to read, because there is so much evidence.
the tiny welding tool was not included in the box.
You gotta give it a few million years! :)
Because they do not have any mechanism which moves the individual parts around in different combinations, that means no appropriate energy source. The computer parts are way to large to undergo random movements due to thermal energy (as molecules do). So you could have the computer parts sitting for centuries on a shelf and unless there is something like an earthquake they won't move a bit. So how do you think they can assemble in any combination? It's a matter of size and physics. I don't think it is by chance that life started small and on a molecular level.
If you take a lot of people though who don't know the least thing about computers, give each of them a box of computer parts, I bet somebody will manage to stick the parts together correctly, even if they have absolutely no clue about what they are doing. The people would provide the source of energy for evolution. I don't think you can get evolution without an energy source. And of course you also would need something like quality control if you want to get correctly built computers with increasing frequency...
The reason the universe was able to form from 'inanimate' materials is because organic compounds are the essential building blocks of life. Stanley Miller performed an experiment that included all the conditions of earth before life began and even before organic compounds existed. The temperature and electricity applied to the elements, such as carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen, caused the formation of amino acids, which form proteins. Those who do not believe in devine intervention would say that this was the beginning of life. Therefore, without devine intervention, a computer could never 'evolve' from a box of parts, and if it did, then that would not be considered evolution but would be considered a miracle.
The question is not stupid atall..
the scientists from Michigan state university are working on the evolution of the systems and the project is called 'avida'...
lets see if this is going to work in some billion yrs or before that!!!!
Cheers.....
evolution deel with matter not inanimate objects
Humans created computers. It is foolish to think that a computer can put itself together.
It is an oversimplification then to conclude that living organisms which are vastly more complex than computers should also have a creator.
....therefore...
God created the universe. It is foolish to think that the universe put itself together.
Evolution then comes into question depending on which account of genisis (cosmic origin) you believe. I mean, would the creator of the universe be smart enough to create living organisms that ';evolve';?
This is your hand .But it is not you.
This is your leg. But it is not you .
This is your brain. But it is not you .
This is your heart. But it is not you .
Where are you?
==================
The most simple design, which was created
by the God / Nature , is atom of hydrogen.
The most complex design, which was created
by the God / Nature , is the Man.
The Man is alive essence.
Animals, bird, fish are alive essences.
And an atom?
And atom is also alive design.
The atom of hydrogen lives 12 minutes.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if
to give suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he will turn into Man.
Therefore, the one, who creates a general picture of Life,
must consider development of evolution of Life from atom up to the Man.
* * *
Once upon a time, in the beginning, there was one ';single point '; accidentally.
Then it has caught a cold accidentally and has blown up: Big Bang '; has taken place.
It was the reason of accidental creation of some hundreds
(thousands) kinds of elementary particles and their girlfriends - antiparticles.
Then stars were formed accidentally.
Then the Planet the Earth was formed accidentally.
Then atom of hydrogen was accidentally formed.
Then complex atom was accidentally formed.
Then was accidentally formed vegetative and fauna.
Then the man was created accidentally.
And this man can accidentally think logically.
But of course, unfortunately, not always.
===================
http://www.socratus.com
Wouldn't your question be a bit like asking why if God created the Earth he hasn't created anything lately?
To our knowledge the only self replicating biology is carbon based and cellular. Computers are neither.
that's the worst analogy i've ever heard. you're stupid. if god existed why didn't he give you a brain?
Evolution is not a theory which explains how a computer is built. It explains how life evolves and continues to evolve on this planet. The primordial soup theory is one which explains the origin of the first living cell, and it has much little support for it than does the theory of evolution which is concerned with how the diversity of life came to be from one single living cell.
The first living cell is thought to have arisen from the formation of organic molecules and their subsequent formation of genetic material under the harsh conditions of prehistoric earth. This theory is suspect. There are other theories, that organic molecules and genetic material landed on earth via a comet from another system. This would make sense especially if there are signs of microbes and bacteria that exist on other planets in our solar system, and they think that they may have found fossilized microbes in rocks from Mars.
There are a number of theories for this. And even the theory that a higher being placed these molecules on Earth, is plausible as well, since there's no real way to explain it, but the origin of the first microbe has little to do with the theory of evolution and does not negate the strong evidence supporting the diversification of species on this planet via the evolutionary/survival of the fittest mechanism.
Where can i find pichtures of kyo in his like what should i call it true form?
towards the end of fruits basket the show kyo turns in to this strange creature and i want to make a slide show that about 3 minutes and 40 seconds long about kyo i got this pateren going like normal kyo then the weird think kyo and im gonna need a lot of pics of kyo like that but i can only find 3 help!!!!!!!!!!!Where can i find pichtures of kyo in his like what should i call it true form?
yay an AMV?
here's a few i found (sorry if it doesn't help that much)
http://media.photobucket.com/image/kyo%2鈥?/a>
http://media.photobucket.com/image/kyo%2鈥?/a>
yay an AMV?
here's a few i found (sorry if it doesn't help that much)
http://media.photobucket.com/image/kyo%2鈥?/a>
http://media.photobucket.com/image/kyo%2鈥?/a>
Certain imams consider praying in Islam as a good form of exercise, Is this true?
If it is true, then in what way does it benefit the doer.Certain imams consider praying in Islam as a good form of exercise, Is this true?
Performing prayer you are in standing, bending and prostrating positions several times and then again several times a day. It strengthens upper and lower arms, back and thighs that's for sure. I never had forearm strength until i became a muslim. If prayer takes 5 minutes and you are doing that 5 times a day give or take a few minutes that is 20 - 25 minutes of exercises so how can it not be beneficial? Certain imams consider praying in Islam as a good form of exercise, Is this true?
r u She'e??
Pardon me, but I have to know if u r a Sunni and use the word Imam???
However, the aim of prayer is not exercises, plus do not load sth more than it can carry...
as u know, our prayer has single and simple movements.. not fitness or physical exercises....
so it is not true...
Yes, exercise is exercise. http://www.armannd.com/prayers-and-healt鈥?/a>
u stand, u bow, u prostrate
repeatedly in a calm manners
Performing prayer you are in standing, bending and prostrating positions several times and then again several times a day. It strengthens upper and lower arms, back and thighs that's for sure. I never had forearm strength until i became a muslim. If prayer takes 5 minutes and you are doing that 5 times a day give or take a few minutes that is 20 - 25 minutes of exercises so how can it not be beneficial? Certain imams consider praying in Islam as a good form of exercise, Is this true?
r u She'e??
Pardon me, but I have to know if u r a Sunni and use the word Imam???
However, the aim of prayer is not exercises, plus do not load sth more than it can carry...
as u know, our prayer has single and simple movements.. not fitness or physical exercises....
so it is not true...
Yes, exercise is exercise. http://www.armannd.com/prayers-and-healt鈥?/a>
u stand, u bow, u prostrate
repeatedly in a calm manners
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)