Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11Didn't you say that you were a scientist??? 😖 So because you are studying how to put some pills into a bottle that makes you qualified to calculate the velocity of Earth 100,000 years ago? As for your extensive classes in biology that is not required for becoming a pharmacist, chemistry a bit more but even then it is limited and physics are only required for your pre-med classes which is the basic physics that everyone takes.
No, but am currently a college student studying for a degree in pharmacy, which requires extensive classes in biology, chemistry, some physics, etc. Now, your degree, if you please.
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11No it would have not as you seem to like to ignore the facts in my post. 😉
no, you said that you had a degree and that you had taken classes so you could see that I had a hole in my picture. it was about you.I said that 100,000 years ago it would be to hot for life. "my wild ass guess" was gotten by calculations and it was 100,000 years ago. . I want you to **** off now.
Also, i'm not bashing you. When was I bashing you? saying you are unqualified to be a scientific authority on these forums is WRONG.
sci⋅en⋅tist
   /ˈsaɪəntɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sahy-uhn-tist] Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
an expert in science, esp. one of the physical or natural sciences.I don't see anything about a degree. I'm reporting you for bashing me now.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
So lets go back to your "perfect math" which if you are using this as your basis I can see why you are off.So let us look as some known facts.
Mercury
Min/Max Distance from the Sun: 28.6/69.8 million miles
Temperature Range: -300º F to 800º F
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/mercury/statistics.html&edu=highEarth
Min/Max Distance from the Sun: 91/94.5 million miles
Temperature Range: -128º F to 136º F
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/statistics.html&edu=highSo if your figures are correct then that would have to make Earth pass closer to the Sun then Mercury by nearly twice the distance to reach a surface temperature of 2000º. Then you would have to factor in the Mercury doesn’t have any atmosphere which helps the Earth so that would have to be burned off which at 800 o it is already gone for Mercury. So are you sure your math is even close to being right?
Originally posted by Placidity
Mutation and selective pressure. Though the thing is, we have so far not observed any sort of "evolution" that goes beyond the microbial level.
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
what do you expect to see.. ape miracules give birth to a human or a lizard be born with feathers within our generation instead of the long process that science says it takes.
If you have a point to make regarding my post, please do so. As for your irrelevant response, I have made no claim as to what I expect or not expect to see.
Alright then.
Evolution is the gradual change of a species over time/generations. They arise due to mutations or recombination in their genetic code.
The example of a moth changing into a butterfly is not due to a mutation because the trigger for predetermined transformation is already stored in their genes since birth, and has been so for many generations.
Originally posted by Placidity
Alright then.Evolution is the gradual change of a species over time/generations. They arise due to mutations or recombination in their genetic code.
The example of a moth changing into a butterfly is not due to a mutation because the trigger for predetermined transformation is already stored in their genes since birth, and has been so for many generations.
Moths don't change into butterflies do they?
I thought a butterfly was a new form of moth which had evolved on the back of normal moths...improving upon the deficiencies in a moths design.
Moths evolved into butterflies, they do not turn into butterflies in their lifetimes in the way a caterpillar turns into a butterfly.
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Moths don't change into butterflies do they?I thought a butterfly was a new form of moth which had evolved on the back of normal moths...improving upon the deficiencies in a moths design.
Moths evolved into butterflies, they do not turn into butterflies in their lifetimes in the way a caterpillar turns into a butterfly.
😂 You are certainly right. In my mind, I was thinking you were talking about the caterpillar to butterfly transition.
Well, I have no comment regarding the "moth" to butterfly transformation because I don't know anything about it!
Let us take another look at the 2000º F day
So at the current perihelion point of Earth there is a 6% increases in solar radiation which would put the surface temperature at around 136º F. So with the Milankovitch Cycles it states that there would be about a 30% increase in solar radiation (at maxium) at perihelion for the Earth. So let us increase the surface temp by 30% and you get 176º F, this still seems a far off number to your 2000º F day. Now I know I'm not factoring in many of the variables like Earth's atmosphere but even then I can't even see a 2000º day.
Originally posted by OrdoWell Lord Knightfa11 swears that his "math" about the Milankovitch Cycles proves that Earth can not be older than 100,000 years because the surface temp of the Earth would be at 2000º. 😄 He keeps swearing up and down that because he is studying to become a pharmacist that his math about this is flawless and that we haven't disproved it. 😖
Pitt, you're arguing a retarded hypothetical lol.
Originally posted by Da Pittman
Well Lord Knightfa11 swears that his "math" about the Milankovitch Cycles proves that Earth can not be older than 100,000 years because the surface temp of the Earth would be at 2000º. 😄 He keeps swearing up and down that because he is studying to become a pharmacist that his math about this is flawless and that we haven't disproved it. 😖
You disproved it more then once. What got me was how much of an attack dog he became when confronted.
Good Christian I guess. 😆
He wants his retarded theories checked on the internets? lol. Just because he's in Pharmacy...lol...would you go ask your Walgreen's Pharmacist about Milankovitch Cycles? The only math he needs to know is addition.
The funny part about his argument...all the debate over Milankovitch Cycles is that they're unproven in the fossil record..that geological climate data doesn't confirm the cycle's predictions. While the cycle logically exists, there are a plethora of inconsistencies going back millions of years. So, what he's doing is taking a model, a cyclical model (whose' effects have inconsistencies with the geological record) and claiming that this cycle has only happened once (its a cycle goddamit)...
besides...even Mercury's surface temp doesn't reach 2000 deg F....
bleh. He should go back to counting Celbrex capsules. I'll trust his math on that!
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonAnd I'm just a lowly web programmer, all that advanced math stuff is just too much for me. 😆
You disproved it more then once. What got me was how much of an attack dog he became when confronted.Good Christian I guess. 😆
Originally posted by OrdoHe is not a pharmacist but a scientist 😄 Them Walgreen guys are uber smart 😖
He wants his retarded theories checked on the internets? lol. Just because he's in Pharmacy...lol...would you go ask your Walgreen's Pharmacist about Milankovitch Cycles? The only math he needs to know is addition.The funny part about his argument...all the debate over Milankovitch Cycles is that they're unproven in the fossil record..that geological climate data doesn't confirm the cycle's predictions. While the cycle logically exists, there are a plethora of inconsistencies going back millions of years. So, what he's doing is taking a model, a cyclical model (whose' effects have inconsistencies with the geological record) and claiming that this cycle has only happened once (its a cycle goddamit)...
besides...even Mercury's surface temp doesn't reach 2000 deg F....
bleh. He should go back to counting Celbrex capsules. I'll trust his math on that!
Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I think it could be argued the Moth-Butterfly transition gives an example of a very recent notable evolutionary change.
Are you referring to the peppered moth? That is not evolution in action. The moth remains the same species. That is not even an example of microevolution.