The View Season 10- Joy on the Debate

[froggymicwop]

i agree with joy. universal healthcare, if it were to pass, would have to include womens' health issues like abortion. maybe i don't agree with some medical procedure, does that mean i get to opt out of funding it if everything else is funded?

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

I believe that's good insight on your behalf because there are several perhaps less obvious stages in life-form's development that cannot arise by chance. Yet, the process is clearly critical for survival. RNA would probably be the programmer in your thinking - but the question arises how and also why.

[BayRumCK]

@justthefacts1234

Try this - get some different color marbles and shake them up in a box. Take a picture of what you see. Repeat many times. Notice anything? Yep - they look different, but you still gotta box of the same color marbles. If the marbles are the "genes" ET requires you to believe that the "shake up" creates new color "marbles". Now break some marbles and see if things improve with the experiment? p.s. Don't lose your marbles ! (or your god - ET)

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

Fair enough, it's a good debate, appreciate your honesty.

Here's another puzzle for us - We know that survival of some creatures like butterflies involves going through 3 distinct stages - such as larva, pupa and final Imago (adult). How does one justify gradual evolution of this sequence? Clearly, the adult needs wings to fly away and start the cycle off again. But just being a larva or pupa doesn't help any. The sequence appears to be programmed - agree or disagree?

[1859Evolution]

@umborriquitocomotu

A scientist in a broad sense is one engaging in a systematic activity to acquire knowledge. In a more restricted sense, a scientist is an individual who uses the scientific method. (from Wikipedia: scientist)

You are a scientist if you fit this definition, and scientists vary in experience, intellect and even in the way they interpret the same facts. It's only bad when a theory is forced down your throat and any rebuttal is interpreted as heretical.

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

I guess that's your way of saying you don't have really good answers ... that's ok, I'm not sure there are any, but I hope you are not like Ms Behar and others who buy the "party line" and don't question the arguments. Best regards.

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

You keep making the same kind of assertions with no backing. "These things happen..." is not a very scientific statement. You also keep missing the point - that of course no creature is consciously trying to be another ... this is not even for debate. I am sure you actually have an explanation for mimicry - Please share it.

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

Of course animals don't try to be other creatures ... you missed the literary point. The main point is that NS by definition , if it is indeed occuring, is streamlining the species and eliminating "defects". Luck is not supposed to be a part of it as you suggested. The stronger lion/tiger defeats the weaker competitor and reproduces... As to creatures that do try to become like others .. How do you explain mimicry... say a non-poisonous snake looking like a lethal one?

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

Look at the conflict between Hyenas and Lions for example on the Serengeti for example. Weaknesses/defects in each species is rooted out by the other one - NS at work here. But, you mus realize that neither the lion nor the hyena is trying to become like the other one, nor trying to be another species... in fact they both benefit from this purifying NS process that keeps each species quite distinct and interestingly co-dependent and Neither species will wipe out the other.

[justthefacts1234]

@umborriquitocomotu

You said to BayRum that Farmer's understand Natural Selection (NS) and then replied to BR that they won't expect to see evolution? Which is it? I think you as an evolutionist don't even understand NS... the point BR seems to me making is that the gene pool hasn't been enlarged over generations, rather NS seems to constrain it and reject aberrations, such as manelessness in lions. But to win the argument you should tell us where the GP comes from in the first place.

[BayRumCK]

@umborriquitocomotu

The monk Mendel understood this too! And I used to work for Chicken breeders who breed for specific breast/protein ratios etc. All breeders know this, and we as well as they know It's still a chicken! or a pig or whatever - with narrower not greater characteristics .. G the pool has not got any bigger or better, in fact, my chicks would never survive in the real world ... so you need to ask where did the pool G for each species come from in the first place. :)

[BayRumCK]

@umborriquitocomotu

Perhaps like Behar you haven't thought about it very much.

If you have a Gene pool G say with a range of genes/chromosomes, call it G(g1,.. gN) where N is the number of these characeristics - then guess what!? A. you always have G(g1..gN) by Mendel's laws of inheritance. Thus no new creatures, only variations within G. So, you should be asking, how does G arise in the first place - due to A above, this would be very difficult without Mutations, which Ms.FruitFly contradicts.

[will2peter]

LOL "does he believe in evolution?"

[BayRumCK]

On the contrary Edster my friend!

The existence of species in itself defeats the idea of gradual variation/adaptation. i.e. Why change when you exist (happily) !!

Also why even have gender?? Why go from asexual to sexual which is more complex?

Thanks for reading.

[crabfishlion]

pro choice!!!! a right to choose how your life turns out! people should only have early term abortions, after that its wrong.

[1859Evolution]

DNA

Necessary to give meaning to the information stored in DNA, the genetic code supplies rules used by the cell's machinery to make proteins that also harbor information.

...these rules are optimally fine-tuned. Given the time scale for the origin of life, natural selection would have had to evaluate roughly 1055 codes per second to find the genetic code. On this basis alone, it couldn't have an evolutionary origin. There simply wasn't enough time for natural processes to stumble upon it.

[1859Evolution]

DNA:

The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++­+

As scientists explore a new universe the universe inside the cell they are making startling discoveries of information systems more complex than anything ever devised by humanity's best minds ..

(..that even includes Joy Behar's incredible mind)

It's time to get with the facts not fabrication.

[thisguysajerk]

too bad for you there's not actually a "Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution"....

Evolution is more a fact than our theory of gravity. evolution is what we base all modern medical around. are you truly this daft of actual facts? it would seem so and it would stand to reason from there, your just a hopeful idiot who needs there to be a "ruler".... sad, sad thing it is....

it's time for you to grow up and get with the facts, not a bronze age myth. seriously dude, grow up.

[nela04]

wow, mayor of the world!!! the most retarded thing i've ever heard

[dillon180]

that amy needs to replace elisabeth on the panel !!!

[SthDvs2012]

I liked Mike Huckabee and Hillary Clinton! HAHA Both Lost, and they are exact oppostites! lol, im an idiot!

[lo10188]

Shut up Joy!

[cvmarii]

wasn't he a paster no he was fat hahaha lol what a dumb ass what does being fat got to do with it?

[BayRumCK]

JB mentioned Darwin's theory...

from Darwin's Origin of Species -:

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances ... could have been formed by natural selection, seems I freely confess absurd in the highest degree ..." Charles Darwin (honest on his theories)

[BeveledSpilchOnion]

This is the classic example of 'quote mining' given by Richard Dawkins.

The lecture can easily be found on youtube by typing in 'quote mining'.

Darwin goes on to state that the evolution of the eye only appears to be absurd because of the limited scope of our imagination.

[1859Evolution]

++++++++++++++++++

Imagination or Absurdity?

++++++++++++++++++

"It is as though they Cambrian explosion fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history." (Dawkins.. The Blind Watchmaker).

Then defending his PROBLEMATIC position on abiogenesis - Interview with The Spectator:

" [I] agree this is a PROBLEMATIC position, I do believe the first particle arose spontaneously from nothing, - the alternative explanation God --is more incredible."

[lavinder11]

@BayRumCK

Yeah, a lot of people don't (or refuse to) know that Darwin was a big ole Christian. He was probably a progressive of the time, but he was still studying to be a clergyman.

There couldn't be one without the other. I'll all for the unification of science of spirituality.

[VeggieTrunks]

Macro Evolution is not true, regardless of your religious affiliation. It doesn't has to be God OR Evolution (because evolution does not equal science), I just don't believe Evolution is true.

[IntuitivelyObvious]

Hello.

If you disbelieve in evolution as a catalyst for biological diversity, what is your opinion?

[BayRumCK]

Natural selection is GREAT - It eliminates all extremes, whether they are produced by mutations or accidents. If a creature is born with abnormal features, it will not be fit, and dies!!!. Natural selection is a CONSERVING force, assuring the FIXITY of the species. In fact, IF EVOLUTION were true, There Would be NO DISTINCT SPECIES. There should be complete intergradation between all the forms of life. The very existence of species contradicts evolution and points to creation/design.

[chroniclerofthe70s]

@BayRumCK Natural selection eliminates individuals with traits which are less fit to a particular environment in competition with other individuals with more advantageous traits. Through successive adaptations within a population over many generations a single species can diverge into two separate species.

If species were designed every individual of the species would be a clone.

The very existence of variation within a species points to non-design and therefore no creator.

[caillou2000]

The theory of evolution has been proven scientifically time and time . Not believing in it does not make sense to me. Howvere, this theory does not exclude God.

[1859Evolution]

Information theorist Hubert Yockey

"... contrary to the established and current wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written"

(Information Theory and Molecular Biology. Cambridge University Press)

SECULAR scientist Pierre-Paul Grasse of the French Academy of Sciences writes, No matter how numerous ..., mutations do not produce any kind of evolution.

[thisguysajerk]

great so ONE scientist from decades ago know, who had no limited knowledge of DNA said something contrary to now known fact.... so fucking what...

[1859Evolution]

Francis Crick, (Atheist)

shared the Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA,

cautioned in What Mad Pursuit that "biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved."

By all appearances, life's chemistry looks like the product of a Creator.

[thisguysajerk]

"By all appearances, life's chemistry looks like the product of a Creator."

that's just your uneducated opinion, man.

you need to grow up.

[1859Evolution]

My grown up friend Richard Dawkins says:

"The Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups ... many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear."

Perhaps you just need to get with the facts.

[jworkerbee]

There are several lines of evidence for macroevolution. Aside from the more past organismal evidence, there is very strong recent molecular evidence. Some of the latter is a number of genomic things, such as chromosomes change (e.g. human chr18 from two ape ones), change in protein sequence, change in non-protein sequences,

This molecular evidence not only shows the predicted effects of both macroevolution and microevolutions, but also shows the predicted molecular mechanisms actually happen.

[ed4030]

This Amy is just another wannabe. During the election, on CNN, she spoke as "Republican consultant". Then, after the election, she suddenly becomes "Political consultant".

[Dtwaine]

wow, she sounds like a robot that was programmed by republicans to their bidding.

[maccamark01]

im glad elzabeth was off that day!

[jsms99]

If someone wants to have an abortion it shouldn't be up the the government. It's the woman's body. She should be able to choose what she wants to do with it. If she wants to have an abortion, then she should be aloud to have an abortion

[maccamark01]

well said

[boomdigga227]

Couldn't have put it better myself. It is not the governments choice or ANYONES choice other than the pregnant woman's. Who gives these people the right to put pressure on these issues?

[goldentomcat]

he was fat LOL!!!!!!! thank you rosie that tickled my lungs

[ghettolaquanda98]

Did y'all hear Joy snort at 7:16??

[TomConger]

Take out those that were responsible for the attack on the WTC, then be done with it. We had no need to go into Iraq.

OR! Don't spend millions of dollars on cluster bombs whose targets are most often civilians. The UN had a hearing recently about the use of cluster bombs. The US and Russia were the only two who refused to stop using them.

[ghettolaquanda98]

Wars are national security and abortion is a private choice. I personally dont think killing innocent children is ohkay but thats just me.

[TomConger]

But spending millions cluster bombing innocent civilians is perfectly fine?

[ghettolaquanda98]

What what you have suggested that we would have done instead?

[Jentany]

I don't agree with Amy's ideas at all, but she's easily better spoken than Elizabeth. At least she's calm when she's talking about the issues. Amy's not brilliant, but definitely better than Elizabeth.