1,250 Forum Posts by "Saen"
At 1/12/14 01:09 AM, i-am-ghey wrote: well, yes. that's what i was trying to say.
the reason why i don't want to describe science as some sort of obvious fact is because science changes over time. essentially, science is a model of the real world, and with each discovery, people make better models that replaces the old one.
newtonian mechanics is an approximation to a more general theory but at high speed, it is very flawed and should not be used.
whenever you say something is a fact, it means it must be correct and the conclusion will never be changed, like if i punch you in the face, then it is a fact.
also i am not a crackpot, although my username may suggest so.
Much like distinguishing scientific law and theory, which I did in a previous post. I also provided a reason for why evolution is regarded as scientific theory rather than law. Evolution would be obvious fact if it was taught as thoroughly in biology as relativity (which is also scientific theory) is in physics.
At 1/12/14 12:29 AM, i-am-ghey wrote:
or rather, current scientific theory can be considered a fact.
once upon a time, newton thought that there was no relationship between space and time and they were treated on the same footing. he thought infinite velocities were possible.
newton mechanics were developed which was sort of based on these assumptions. and people found his theory was a good description of the world.
You pretty much summed up Newtonian mechanics as assumptions. Assumptions, nonetheless still were still applicable mathematically in his time and his equations are still used today. Technology at the time prohibited him from testing for the speed limit of the universe so postulating was the best he could do.
many years later, einstein realised that newtonian mechanics was incompatible with electromagnetism. he developed a set of hypothesis (which is now known the the special theory of relativity) and a general theory of relativity, which states that space on time should be treated on the same footing and gravity is equivalent to a curature of space-time.
it was shown that einstein's theory made better predictions of the world than newtonian mechanics. so, a current scientific theory may be shown to be wrong in the future. you can't be sure your theory must be correct.
Scientific theory has the ability to be built upon and adjusted. Assumptions may be proven entirely false.
At 1/12/14 12:04 AM, leanlifter1 wrote:At 1/11/14 11:58 PM, Saen wrote:Evolution is scientific theory I explained this in an earlier post. The problem is most people do not understand what scientific theory actually is and misuse the term.If theory means fact then I guess you are correct.
Scientific theory is fact yes.
At 1/11/14 11:51 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:At 1/11/14 11:42 PM, i-am-ghey wrote: No one "believes" in evolution, or any other scientific theories. You either accept the evidence or you don't. Science is not religion.Religion is not Science nor is it even considered fact because religion is largely based on faith but Science is based on a hypothesis and then the hypothesis is proven wrong or quantified with replicable fact. No one believes in religion they just have faith that it is true. Evolution is not a theory it has been proven time and time again and is considered quantified fact.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth
Evolution is scientific theory I explained this in an earlier post. The problem is most people do not understand what scientific theory actually is and misuse the term.
And I hate nice girls because they're just trying to get in my pants. Maybe people are nice simply because they're kind people?
At 1/11/14 10:28 PM, Razefan wrote:
mu·ta·tion
myo͞oˈtāSHən/Submit
noun
1.
the action or process of mutating.
"the mutation of ethnic politics into nationalist politics"
synonyms: alteration, change, variation, modification, transformation, metamorphosis, transmutation; More
2.
the changing of the structure of a gene, resulting in a variant form that may be transmitted to subsequent generations, caused by the alteration of single base units in DNA, or the deletion, insertion, or rearrangement of larger sections of genes or chromosomes.
synonyms: alteration, change, variation, modification, transformation, metamorphosis, transmutation; More
As we have sex and offspring, they get random MUTATIONS from genetic code
the random mutations that help them survive longer
AKA natural selection get spread on
That's evolution. and that's exactly what I said in my previous post….
Mutation accounts for less than .1% of all evolution not only because mutation is highly infrequent, but also because when mutation does occur it is negated by redundancy in the genetic code. Mutation very very rarely results in a beneficial trait, but rather is largely results in death.
Mutations do not account for why our eye color varies, our height, skin color, etc. E.g. albinos are not caused by a mutation in a gene, but recombination of alleles which were already present.
You don't have any idea what you're talking about, you are not educating you are promoting misunderstanding. Either read up on genetics and evolution or keep your mouth shut.
At 1/11/14 09:56 PM, Razefan wrote: So many people in this thread "believe" in evolution but don't even realize it
Humans are not evolving anymore lol
No. Seriously we aren't.
Let me explain evolution really quick.
Whenever a new spawn is born he will have random mutations as a result of errors in the genetic code
these can be good, bad, or just do nothing
if its good the baby is more likely to survive and pass on the genes with the mutation. That's evolution, having random mutations that just randomly become beneficial.
This process started with wherever the first cells came from and randomly divided for millions of years until today.
The thing is that Humans aren't fighting for survival anymore. A baby can be born and be completely unfit for survival in the wild but since its a human can grow up to be a total whore and release its genes everywhere.
Human evolution isn't going to be improved because having kids is no longer based off of how well you'd survive.
Another huge misconception of evolution, mutation is not a driving or major factor of evolution. A perfect example of someone who "believes in" evolution and no clue about the actually process and driving forces of evolution.
Less than .1% of all evolution throughout all species has occurred due to mutation. Mutation is rarely responsible for the development of a new species. Evolution occurs primarily and most effectively through natural selection while smaller populations have a stronger influence from genetic drift.
Both natural selection and genetic drift occur through recombination of genes (sex) that are already present in all organisms. Recombination of genes produces the variety outside and within species we observe (i.e. humans) while natural selection determines which genes succeed to the next generation.
Humans all evolving, all species on this earth are evolving in some degree.
Also another point to further your understanding of evolution and science on the whole.
You often here evolution called the theory of evolution and it is immediately discredited by conservatives as just a theory. Evolution is scientific theory and scientific theory is a process of graduation within the scientific method. No scientist has ever proposed a scientific theory, but rather a hypothesis. E.g. Newton didn't propose the law of gravity but the hypothesis of gravity. When a hypothesis may be tested and proven accurate in all environments by various scientists around the world, after much time it graduates to scientific theory. In the case of Newtons, when a hypothesis results in definitive mathematical answers throughout any application, after many years it is accepted and graduates into scientific law.
Scientific theory is just as credible as scientific law the difference is that scientific law is more exact than theory. E.G. you may calculate the exact force of attraction between any two objects in the universe.
In the case of evolution in smaller populations there is a factor called genetic drift which plays a major role in small population sizes. This factor is entirely random and is perpetuated by random changes in allele frequencies through sexual reproduction. Tracking genetic alleles in small populations to calculate the rate and direction of evolution, genetic drift is one of the factors that inhibits an exact rate or conclusion. That is why evolution is distinguished as theory rather than law.
My point of explaining all of this is that scientific theory is entirely fact and evolution shouldn't be dismissed because it is a "theory" much like Einstein's theory of relativity shouldn't be deemed wrong.
At 1/11/14 02:34 PM, AJ wrote:
Ok OP. All this on one hand. Now on the other hand, women get paid less 80 cents on the dollar for every one a man makes.
Do men have the possibility of becoming pregnant and having to nurse children for several months? No, so naturally women are less able to be at work as often as men from the get go. Are women working in construction, garbage disposal, sewage, carpentry, as electricians, road work? No, because none desire to and few are able to. So when women aren't involved in jobs that require a higher degree of daily physical labor, they aren't including themselves in a huge part of the workforce. Naturally women will earn less as a whole.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States
You want to talk about subconscious shaming of men in the media. What about women? Women get raped or fight for birth control and are accused of being sluts by everyone in conservative media. Women on the internet receive threats to be murdered, raped, etc nonstop just for existing.
The conservative media doesn't exclude women. On top of this women constantly slut shame each other regardless of their political affiliation or how often they have sex. Some women get called a slut for their behavior or what type of clothing they wear in public, not for being raped. Men receive these same gender threats over the internet as well.
Being one of those people who worked for Planned Parenthood and still fights for birth control rights several years later, I hardly see your point. You're bringing up faults of a conservative ideology as a whole, rather than male gender issues that are independent from political influence.
http://www.psmag.com/navigation/health-and-behavior/women-arent-welcome-internet-72170/
While I see some of the issues you brought up myself, I just don't think that "What about all those poor white men" is a really high priority on my list of civil rights problems in America, and I say that as a white man.
We are all aware of the inequality victimizing of women, we are reminded every day by the media. We also very aware of how women love to talk about themselves and their problems, which is great for banding together and solving their social issues. Men don't do this, which is relieving, but this also works against us when we need to tackle some of our own social problems like lack of male birth control.
As for these being problems for white males only, lets look at all lower income people in the states and focus on the south where African Americans are the lowest earning race. Black women already have access to birth control in the south and yet the circle of poverty is still in full swing. Imagine just how thankful a lower class black man would be if he had access to hormonal birth control and didn't have to worry about having kids or any more kids.
The biology of male birth control makes so much sense in the first place. A woman becomes pregnant once at a time pregnant and stays pregnant for typically 9 months. Men on the other hand impregnate multiple women at a time and can further impregnate women throughout those 9 months. This is exactly the case in lower class societies which keeps them in the circle of poverty.
Women make stupid mistakes like choosing not to use birth control and praying not to become pregnant, forgetting to take their birth control, or having faith in methods (such as abstinence) that are not methods of birth control. Men make stupid mistakes when it comes to sex as well like not wearing a condom or cuming inside a woman, for guys who do this but choose to use male birth control these mistakes won't become babies and as a result lifelong poverty.
I come from a matriarchal household (my mom makes quadruple what my dad does and is the head of household) , I respect women and I understand their importance and potential in society. What I have overlooked for years is whether or not men themselves are currently facing injustices and that's what I'm trying to tackle here.
So let's talk about marriage and why it might not be a good idea for men to get married in the first place. For starters the divorce rate is the U.S. is greater than 50% and over 70% of those divorces are initiated by the woman, while suicide rates for divorced men are three times greater than non-divorces (unchanged for women by the way, in fact suicide rates for women are lower than men and have been declining in recent decades, on the other hand suicide rates for males globally are rising). What this means the odds are against you for having a successful, happy marriage and being able to cope after she decides to divorce you. This idea is even more prevalent when you see how many of your friends (along with yourself perhaps) grew up with divorced parents.
So most likely when you decide to marry, it isn't going to work out.
Now what are the legal consequences of divorce for men? Most likely your former spouse will deemed appropriate for custody of the children, you will spend time with your children less than half of what you were able to while married, your finances get split in half, you'll have to pay child support and alimony (if you don't you'll be thrown in jail and unable to see or take care of your kids). How many women are actually in jail for not paying child support and alimony? Next to none. The odds are all against you legally in all of these circumstances.
Financially, legally, and emotionally divorce is a bad deal for the vast majority of men.
Just because you don't "believe in" or understand evolution doesn't make it untrue of course holy shit. What is important is that you actually understand evolution itself. Modern medicine, ecology, conservation biology, and our efforts to classify every species on earth hinges on understanding evolution. So when you're voting on issues that concern these things, it would be in your own best interest and society's as a whole to understand evolution.
You can "believe in" evolution and still be completely misinformed when it comes to voting on issues pertaining to it.
It's perfectly acceptable to say you don't understand evolution and you don't want to. That's fine, just exclude yourself from all voting, conversations, and science that involve evolution as well.
At 1/9/14 03:33 PM, Camarohusky wrote:
Odd, as I seem to remember numerous shows about singel Dad who make the World go round, as well as family shows where the Dad may be a dope, but the family survives off of him. A peppering of a negative image is hardly a tidal wave of it.
The humiliation of father and male figures in t.v. and movies is borderline subconscious. I can't remember the last time I watched a R-drama where wife beating wasn't involved. Yes wife beating is a terrible and shameful act, but I know it isn't as frequent as portrayed in movies. Actually how many of your friends you've ever known have beaten their girlfriends or wives or might have even had the capacity to do so? None for me, my friends would never dream of hitting a woman and yet television and movies project it as regular natural instinct for men.
-How men are cheated in divorce and child custody/support courts and rulings.Two sides to this: First off, the vast majority of this is a flat out lie. When it comes to child custody, involved men get control just as much as women do. In the chld custody cases I worked with, that was very much the case.
Second, when women DO get an advantage it's largely men's fault. The perception that women get the kids more often is only there because a very high proportion fo the cases where a parent is not involved, it happens to be the father. Naturall yhere the mother gets the child. In things such as alimony the rule in some places is that only the husband can pay (that has largely changed, but a few relics remain), it was men and male dominance that created this rule, not feminism. Men assumed that the male of the house was the bread winner and that no male would be married to a woman wealtheir than him.
I've had numerous friends that come from a divorced household where the working mother was granted custody. Cases where I've seen the father granted custody, not even once. One top of this if the father wants custody of his kids, since it's generally granted to mom, he has to spend much time and money fighting for it.
-Why are men falling behind in education?Credit this to the "be a man" stereotype where grunting and fighting is more prized than mental prowess. Also, a large sense of complacency in that many men believe they have got the upper hand and therefore need not try as hard as women.
Or education might be more catered to women? An example of this is way back in 11th grade I remember being taught pre-calculus with rhymes and "creative" handout sheets. All of my math teachers up to 12th grade were actually women now that I come to think of it. Physics, chemistry, and marine biology teachers in high school were all men on the other hand and I learned quite a lot, but I do remember quite a lot of girls struggling.
As for grunting and fighting that stereotype rests with children coming from poor families, both girls and boys.
This is a sex dynamic, and a biological one. Women have what men want, men don't always have what women want. Therefore the women holds the natural power in a relationship.
If a relationship is only about sex sure all of that is true.
I would also note that this isn't always the case either, as there are so many different ways a relationship can form its dynamics.
Yup, like men not giving in to all of a woman's wants. Frankly it's just immature to do so and counterproductive in a relationship.
-What does a man risk when he marries?What does he risk?
If he ever decides to have kids, his children, his life (suicide rate for divorced males is 3x higher than non-divorces), his finances, his job (not showing up to work due to court hearings or stress), and his freedom (not paying child support or alimony will throw you in jail).
-How does modern feminism tie into all of this?Modern feminism only ties very loosley into the above issues. Much of them were created by men in a male dominated society (if they're even a real issue at all). The next three have had some influence by modern feminism.
There thbelow three are the real issues, though they may not actually be that big or bad of an issue.
-How men are painted as vicious instinctual rapists, abusers, and killers of both women and children.Killers and rapists come in all shapes and sizes. However it is a fact, a cold hard fact, that the vast majority of rapists and a smaller majority of murderers are male.
As far as murderers goes, men, are more often than not much physically stronger than women. Therefore they pose a threat of harm and being successful in that harm when compared to a woman.
You don't have to be physically strong at all to murder. What is dangerous though is for most instances women are encouraged to murder their men. Whether he cheated on her or upset her in some other way, murder is encouraged by the media and expresses that "you go girl!" attitude. Clearly murder isn't acceptable, but the media makes light of this when the perp is a woman, however this would not be the same if we flipped the scenarios.
This one's pretty easy. Whose body contains the dirty work of reproduction? Which person would need an invasive or surgical procedure regarding reproduction? The mother. That is why women get the control, because in order to get to the baby/fetus you have to go through a good amount of the mom's body to get there.
Not an excuse for lack of male birth control.
I consider this a counter movement. This is a counter to the pro-rape or the rape is nothing culture that has been so strong here. When the first response most women get when reporting a rape is "you must have invited it upon yourself" you can see where this backlash comes from. When false accusation is treated s alarger problem than the fr more common act of actual rape, you can see why this backlash would exist. When a song that repeats "you know you want it" and other commonly used rape phrases becomes a hit and it constantly blared on the radio you can easily see why this backlash exists.
Ironically enough it's women who mostly listen to that type of rap and hip hop lyrics. This is actually a great example for the only crime where women are actually forced to take some responsibility for. E.g. when a woman beats a man the general notion by the public is "he had it coming" the same cannot be said for the inverse. Now if rape occurred in a relationship that's an entirely different and twisted scenario. Just like everyone needs to have some kind of awareness, preparation, and protection against being robbed, carjacked, jumped, etc. when women go out they need to prepare for a rapist. Always go out with friends, having something to defend yourself with, have an emergency plan for you or your friends worked out, and pay attention to your surroundings, etc.
In financial terms, false accusations of rape are much more dire for the accused that for victims of rape itself. So yes false accusations do need to be taken seriously, but currently there isn't any punishment for lying about rape. Rape is a very serious crime itself, so why wouldn't be take lying about it just as serious?
At 1/9/14 02:55 PM, AxTekk wrote: This topic is ridiculous.
I would love a male pill though, I think women would love it too. As far as men are concerned, we can be 100% that we're not getting women pregnant without having to deal with that whole "but I don't like condoms" bullshit. As far as women are concerned, they won't have to put up with the side-effects the extra oestrogen from the pill puts them through. Seems like a win-win.
At first glance it is. Next time you watch a sitcom pay attention to how the father is portrayed in the family. Next time you hear how murder in the news pay attention towards how abuse committed by a man against a woman is covered versus a woman abusing a man. Usually the story is shame on the man for abusing her or he must have done something wrong like infidelity to deserve being beaten, mutilated, or murdered. Pay attention to high profile divorces and compare how men are affected financially versus women.
At 1/9/14 03:07 PM, Camarohusky wrote: From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/believe
Believe - Verb
"to accept or regard (something) as true"
I accept and regard elovution as true, therefore I believe it.
It doesn't matter what you believe, evolution is true. What is important is how you understand evolution, how it's calculated for every population of species on earth much like the force of gravity between two objects may be calculated anywhere in the universe.
To me it's just ridiculous that evolution is a controversial topic at all. The definition of evolution is changes in allele frequencies through each generation of a population of species. To not "believe in" evolution is to deny the existence of genetics and entire premise of biology.
I just don't want evolution being classified in the same context as religion, there is no faith involved in evolution so don't go boasting around saying you believe in it or not. Regardless of anyones faith concerning evolution it will still continue.
Whether you are in favor of the theory of evolution or not, people from both sides of this ridiculous argument claim that they "believe" or don't "believe in" evolution. Evolution isn't a deity and it's not something that involves faith in the slightest sense.
You either understand the process of evolution or you don't, no one, certainly not any scientist is interested in whether or not you "believe in" evolution. Commencing the release of rednecks.
At 1/9/14 01:21 PM, orangebomb wrote:
It's not propaganda, it's a bunch of Republican blowhards spewing out their rhetoric towards the people who agree with their political beliefs. In other words, they're simply preaching to the choir. Please don't give in to the bullshit that leanlifter1 is saying.
You're suppose to ignore that guy, the reason he's still posting is because you encourage him by acknowledging his presence. I'm still convinced that it's just Pox trolling. I'm sorry but coining and advertising terms like "Obamacare", constantly waving an American flag in the background of broadcast, and plastering words like socialism and fascism with random face pics of democrats is propaganda.
Americans are not as ignorant to the rest of the world anymore so than the rest of the world is towards Americans. Plus, Europe isn't as sustainable as you might think, especially since most of them are in even deeper debt than we are, and entire countries went defunct and had to be bailed out by the E.U. (Particularly Germany) How exactly is that considered sustainable when you have countries going bankrupt?
Yes they are completely ignorant. Sustainability does not equal economic well-being.
Are you stupid? America is the most influential and powerful country on Earth, and with that said, it is taken very seriously at what they do. Don't try and underestimate the amount of influence that we possess.
America is well known, but not taken seriously and hasn't been taken seriously since Vietnam.
Word of advise actually live a few weeks in Europe and you'll understand what all of this is about.
So I'll begin with a topic I'm quite familiar with, control over sexual reproduction men vs women.
When it comes to all variants of birth control women are well-equipped while men are very shortchanged. Women have pills, copper and hormonal iuds, condoms, spermicide, shots, rings, tubal ligation, and if all that fails or is neglected abortion. Men on the other hand have condoms and vasectomies. So the question must be asked, why don't men have their own hormonal birth control? Also why do men even need their own birth control?
Ultimately women have complete control of whether or not she wants a child with you. Male birth control would completely change this.
I personally don't know why men don't have their own birth control. In my opinion having my own birth control would give me so much peace of mind.
A common scenario:
Your girlfriend/wife claims she's on birth control and wants you to cum inside her you oblige and boom she's pregnant. Turn's out she lied to you and wanted to have a child without your agreement. If you were on your own birth control this would have been prevented.
This goes for all your hookups that claim they are on birth control and other countless scenarios. For now guys until we have our own birth control always wear a condom and never cum inside a woman if you don't want a child.
A few of you may know that I'm a strong liberal, so left in fact that I actually worked for Planned Parenthood. So it should be surprising to hear from me that there is a crisis of deteriorating manhood and the status of men perpetrated by the global media. This idea is new to me and I'd prefer to have a group of men discuss it with.
A few topics:
-How men are portrayed in television as disposable neanderthals that can't seem to do anything right in a family household.
-How men are painted as vicious instinctual rapists, abusers, and killers of both women and children.
-How men are cheated in divorce and child custody/support courts and rulings.
-Why are men falling behind in education?
-Men vs. women in the workplace and sports.
-Control over sexual reproduction, men vs. women.
-Men continuously giving into women's wants, what might be the consequences for your relationship, society, laws?
-What does a man risk when he marries?
-Rape and abuse propaganda, what are the consequences to all men?
-How does modern feminism tie into all of this?
And finally what are the solutions to all of these issues and then some? There's so much to discuss, hopefully we can cross political boundaries and resolve these issues as men.
Sure a fetus is human no one disputes that. However, for the vast majority of development you'd have a difficult time deciphering the human embryo between a rat, dog, whale, etc.
I do know that facts concerning embryonic development won't factor into your view on abortion, because you like the majority of conservatives are obsessed with why women have abortions, which is completely non-sequitor to the debate.
The same people are still tossing each other the same old red meat I see.
Yes Fox news is a great example of promoting "American Propaganda." However I think the main issue is that most americans are ignorant to what the rest of the world thinks of America and americans and how the rest of the world functions. E.G. what lengths Europe takes to recycle, how sustainable Europe is compared to America, what taxes europeans pay vs americans, etc.
We take a lot of things for granted in the states and as a result make a huge riot out of legislation like nationalized healthcare or reducing our carbon footprint. Just a few examples of why the rest of the world doesn't take the U.S.A. seriously.
At 5/5/13 11:05 AM, Scintillating wrote: saen, did you just post an omegle question ;
How are you going to spend Cinco de Mayo, which is coincidentally my birthday?
Probably throwing up as usual from acid reflux.
lol wut. If grabbing a girl's ass is such a taboo subject for yall then eating out her ass I assume is completely out of the question.
I've got that one spot on my ass that my razor never seems to reach, butt ponytail.
Mustache cash stash.
Wow you made me look awesome, saving all of these comics.
