Magnificent Paradise Birds

[Madhijz]

I wish I could devide the world into 2 no wait 3 parts

1. non-religious people

2. religious people

3. everyone interested in war and willing to engage in war.

and let nature take it's course

[Janissary225]

Subhanallah wa alhamdulilah how beautiful is my Rabb -Our Lord- who created all this beauty - al-Khaliq, al-Bari, al-Musawwair

[BostonSportsGuy567]

Thats pretty cool

[FahadKhan1988]

Nononono

This must be an HUGE ACCIDENT during the Evolution!

LOL

[IslamBosnia1990]

I dont think it is a good idea to show movies from this idiot called David Attenbourough. He dont even believe in God and if you notices he used the word "evolution" in this clip.

He is an infidel, and is going to burn in Hell forever unless he repents.

[WOGI5M]

Yes, he is an evolutionist. But he is also a good narrator.

[allan3141]

Dude I too think the Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution is absolutely ridiculous and also believe in God. But Sir David Attenborough is God's concern not yours. Your comment is very bigoted and embarrasses me. Please seriously consider removing it.

[IslamBosnia1990]

He is acting like it is a fact, in this documentary. I hate him so much

[IslamBosnia1990]

And stop calling him "sir"

[allan3141]

Look I am not sure but I think your comments are a spoof, a parody. But if not you should know it is David Attenborough's work along with a number of other things that convinces me that the Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution is quite silly.

[HighFlyingDutchman]

guys please stop arguing about what the world view of the narrator is

and respect his work

and hope or even pray that he will be guided one day

think about Antony Flew

many theists may have cursed him in about 50 years

but now he thinks God exists although he was the guy who helped atheism improve this much

[allan3141]

i agree and i would hope my comments clearly express that. Islambosnia1990 "hates him", talks of him being an infidel and burning in hell. Is this an appropriate response to a natural history clip! He sounds more fanatical than kurtilein3.

[allan3141]

There is also a recent clip where David Attenborough is being interviewed and he admits that there are things natural selection does not explain. The penny had to drop for him sometime :-) Have you seen it? Also how do we really know what is going on in Attenborough's head. If he did not think or speak like he does he would not have got (been allowed to get) as far as he has.

[HighFlyingDutchman]

i know a video

he says his opinions in it about God

if it isnt the one you are mentioning

i dunno

any link?

peace

[allan3141]

David Attenborough on the Andrew Marr Show 1st Feb 2009

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 you idiot you have no idea how evolution works fucking moron. David Attenborough DOES AGREE WITH EVOLUTION AND HAS NEVER DENIED IT

[allan3141]

This is not a very intelligent response. Neither does it appear that you have even bothered to read the comments that I have made on this video. I initially commented in response to very unworthy and nasty comments made by IslamBosnia1990 and defended both David Attenborough and his great work. You do not know me but claim I am a idiot and a moron. Cont…

[allan3141]

(2) @123columbo123 You then strangely seek to point out to me the obvious; that David Attenborough agrees with evolution. Thanks, but I knew this already. I can assure you I know a great deal about the Theory of Evolution and its history. Enough to make a distinction between notions of Common Descent and any proposed candidates that drive them; and a great deal besides. Cont…

[dakodar]

@allan3141 "have answered all your questions": Sigh and funny: your 'factual' claim about evolution, your insistance on proof (don't even try to tell me you have a relativistic approach on truth cf. the quote "natural selection is a mechanism of evolution which is proven fact."), your lack of defining the scope of science, validating your arguments from authority (cf. 'you do not understand Godel, I do'), avoiding any postmodern criticism (have you ever in your live read any philosophy btw)...

[allan3141]

(3) @123columbo123 I sited a clip where Sir David Attenborough clearly says that the status and importance of Natural Selection is a valid question and he sees things that he feels NS does not explain. This is intriquing and important as that is really the central tenet of the neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution. But David was not so bold as to give further details. Rather than make an intelligent comment about that you chose to make insulting one liners.

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 so are you suggesting that david thinks evolution may not of even happened

[allan3141]

No. Of course not. But what is denoted by the word "Evolution" (radical biological change over time, theories of common descent, and the metaphysical notion that things proceed from the simple to the complex) where the emphasis is the course of history; and what is meant by the noun phrase neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution, which brought new to the table a mechanism; not a history, are not the same thing. Cont…

[allan3141]

(2) @123columbo123 David Attenborough no doubt believes in the whole package. But his admission that it is fair and reasonable to argue about neo-Darwinism is very significant.

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 you have no idea

[allan3141]

@123columbo123 Sorry? I have no idea about what?

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 natural selection is a mechanism of evolution which is proven fact. David is not denying natural selection just how much of a force it is in evolution there are many mechanisms in evolution. Even if all known evolutionary mechanisms are proven to have little or no known effect which will never happen by the way. This still does not disprove evolution by common decent. No competent biologist denies evolution, if they do, they are either ignorant or dishonest

[allan3141]

@123columbo123 This completely ignores everything I have said and goes around the same circle. Once again one is left wondering if you actually bother to read what I write. Or simply bypass that burdonsome formality, because you have already created a position for me; which is not going to change, no matter what I actually think or write! I know what Natural Selection is; but thanks.

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 you implied that David doubts evolution i am simply explain he does not

[allan3141]

@123columbo123 I neither stated nor even "implied" any such thing; but did explicitly state the opposite! But still you obstinately continue in this vein!

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 Ok then. Do you believe in evolution? 

[123columbo123]

@allan3141 *explaining

[dakodar]

@allan3141 "@123columbo123 This completely ignores everything I ": Do know that I have a similar issue with this guy. He/she does not provide any arguments and always claims that the one he/she is arguing with "does not understand what I'm talking about". I yet have to read his first argument in any of his posts. So don't worry about him. Though I disagree with various points you raised.

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 Aha, I see you have identical issues with others who disagree. Could you, if it's a 'proven fact', give me the actual reference to it and do incorporate the various philosophical questions raised upon the theory. As you should know, Darwin is a (strong) working hypothesis and indeed does not explain all the various jumps in the evolution. So, as in so many of our discussions: could you explain to me (and yourself) what you consider a proven fact and the difference with hypothesis

[123columbo123]

@dakodar I am sorry but i think you may be insane. I am using the term proven "fact" in the colloquial sense. For example lets say its almost certain that a book is a book in the colloquial sense that is a fact. as with evolution its is almost certain that it is true so ergo in the colloquial sense it is a fact. In its basic form say you see a chair you know by a matter of fact its a chair and as such evolution is treated with the same level of certainty. It is widely held as one of the most .

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 1. "I am sorry but i think you may be insane": could you please stop insulting people, truly. If you can't manage to show some respect, follow some anger therapy.

2. I understand your theory and your claim on truth. Yet, I presume you still have not looked into postmodernism where it is indeed stated that truth is a convention. In your view, your proclaimed colloquial truth claim, any theory that is dominant is 'true'. Until another shows up and provides evidence it's not.

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 In other words, you make it a bit simple: you assume that a model is true, and that truth claims for the model is therefore a solid basis to accept things as true. In my field, neuro, it long has been 'shown' and 'proven' over and over again that the brain is modular. Suddenly, we discovered that neurons were more than simple conductors. Thus, the entire theory was disproved. Hence, truth is a convention, truth is relative, you adhere dominant theories and then declare them true.

[123columbo123]

@dakodar proven theories

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 Or to give yet another example: not so long ago, the Western world thought that religion had sufficient 'proof' and even scientists accept that 'truth' value. Yet, at today's standards they were false. However, that also applies to your claims today, there's a possibility they are false tomorrow. Yet, your claim on truth nevertheless tries to shut people up since. If we would all adhere dominant theories, then progress would come to a halt.

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 So as said way too many times by now, instead of focusing on pure facts and your proclaimed degree in physics, do read some philosophy of science, read some postmodernism and then realize that your claims, though valid and supported by dominant theories are relative. Let alone that knowledge can be absolute in the first place. Let alone science and facts can explain everything. Let alone truth is a useful concept to start with. In other words: read some more philosophy.

[123columbo123]

@dakodar I am not saying anything is absolute. And yes things can change and things will change. I am using an analogy with concessions on both sides so i will say again i am not making the point you think i am making. Do you really think i'm that stupid and that i don't understand things change or that i'm arguing that they don't . This only goes to show how, give some guy a book recently and he think he will show you how to apply it to every thing. The irony here is boundlessly epic

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 Again, make your point, use arguments. You repeatedly made references to facts as opposed to. You again did not answer any remarks, so I salute you and you enjoy your attributed degree in physics. Next time though, do answer people's remarks.

[123columbo123]

@dakodar i have answered all your questions what answer don't you get

[dakodar]

@123columbo123 I accidentally replied to allan3141, check my message to him where I start with your quote.

[allan3141]

@dakodar "Darwin....indeed does not explain all the various jumps in the evolution." By "Darwin" I take you to mean neo-Darwinism (modern meaning) i.e. the modern theory of evolution -The Modern Synthsis or Synthetic Theory - as put forward by J Huxley, Fisher, Dobzhansky, Haldane, Mayr, Simpson et al. So is the "not" is your sentence a typo? Otherwise I fail to see why you say, "I disagree with various points you raised"

[allan3141]

@allan3141 Correction:  ..... IN your sentence.....

[dakodar]

@allan3141 First of: I don't know enough about Darwinisn, neo-Darwinism or any other evolutionary theory. I will not go into debate on the details and pros and cons of the theory, since that's not my field let alone expertise. I mainly wanted to mention that I have had identical non-nonsensical discussions with Columbo, where he/she fails to actually use an argument let alone show his knowledge about philosophy of science. All expert comments on evolutionary theory are left to you

[123columbo123]

@HighFlyingDutchman its not world view it scientific fact you donk

[theheat151]

The last bird is too awesome. Is this from the series "Planet Earth"?

[allan3141]

No it is from "The life of Birds" I agree if Natural Selection acting no mutations produced that then I will eat my hat.

[allan3141]

Sorry dude it is from Plant Earth the very first episode. And this clip is longer on that with other birds of paradise doing other mental stuff. Got to be be seen. As has the Life of birds DVD's