K-97

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

xAsunaWolfx said
@Brand- Agreed. Asking why there is still dirt doesn't make sense since the earth is really composed of it and without dirt... Well, there would be little to no life. While monkeys are.... Monkeys

I'm going to elaborate on my first point, the others have covered my second point in more detail:

Here is what the Bible says when it talks about the creation of Man:

And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

So as I doubt the validity of the statement I asked a question: If God made Man out of dirt (or dust to be specific), then why is there still dirt?

However as you pointed out, any smart person would consider this a stupid question. The statement never said God used all the dirt in the world and why would God use all the dirt in the Earth, there wouldn't be much of an Earth left. Anyone in God's position would only use some of the dirt.

Just because Man was made out of dirt, doesn't mean God has to have used all of the dirt in our creation.

In a similar way if I doubted the Theory of Evolution I could ask as you have: If we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?

Well the Theory of Evolution doesn't say all the monkeys evolved into humans, what it actually says is only some evolved into humans. The evolution of an animal is influenced by their environment, only some monkeys were in an environment which led to them evolving into humans whereas others were in an environment which led to them staying as monkeys.

Just because humans evolved from monkeys, doesn't mean all monkeys evolved into humans.

Both these questions make the same mistake and show a misunderstanding of the theory in question, once you understand the theory in question then it becomes clear that the questions asked are pointless.

So are we done makeing me a scapepony for spams

There must always be a Lich King scapegoat.

♘Evolution vs. Creationism☼

Alex said
if we evolved from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?checkmate athiests

xAsunaWolfx said
This question has me curious. Any evolutionist want to take that one? it was rather...overlooked, or it was server lag.

My response to this is a counter question based on Genesis/the creation of Man:

If God made Man out of dirt, then why is there still dirt?

If someone was asked the question above, the most logical answer would be to say God only used some of the dirt. Similarly only some of the ancient monkeys evolved into humans.

Also keep in mind that we didn't evolve from the monkeys you see today but an ancestor we happen to share with them. How a species evolves depends on conditions, one set of conditions led to humans while another led to modern monkeys.

YGO!

I still occasionally play a Skull Servant or Wicked Gods Deck

Writer of the Month #2: Guidelines

Jorick said
As I did for the WOTM #1 entries, I shall also be posting reviews for this round of entries after the voting period closes. I don't know if that's any good as an incentive for people to enter this month, but hey, it's worth a shot.

OMG I have a chance of receiving Jorick's minimal but divine attention, now I have to enter this!!! /s

Last Person on Earth

Brovo said
All mammals do actually.

My two reactions:
1) How do you know this fact?
2) This is a fact I wish I never learned. There are certain animals which I just never want to imagine jacking off (e.g. a Hedgehog)

Cognitive Enhancement

Dervish said
I'm all for pursuing means to heal damaged brains and mental health, I'd much rather not mess with what makes people people. I mean, put it this way; what if the wrong person gets a massive leg up over the rest of humanity? History is full of extraordinary people who use their talents for decidely malignant means. Let's not turn that up to 11.

An interesting point, although I'd assume if that situation ever occurred hopefully there would be many others in a similar position who would oppose them. I think the key with cognitive enhancement is to ensure it's for the benefit of everyone rather than a select few as otherwise problems like the one you brought up could occur.

As for healing versus enhancement, when it comes to enhancement as Magic Magnum said I think it's up to the individual to decide the level of risk they are willing to take, they should be aware they could potentially change themselves for better or worse and if they take that risk they need to be ready for the consequences good or bad. As for healing it's a similar situation except I suppose an individual has less to lose and more to gain compared to someone using those drugs for enhancement.

Magic Magnum said
Can't watch the trailer now. On my phone so doing so would murder my data plan.As for the general topic?I see no issue with enhancing our minds. We aim for this all the time with therapy and education anyways. I'd draw the line though where it starts to become a kind of addiction or something with side effects may it be medical ones or more stuff like loss of empathy.Then again, each adult should be able to make said choice for themself. While at the same time make sure those who choose not to for one reason or another such as bad side effects are not unable to get employed or something cause of itm

More or less agree with your points. Hopefully side effects and addiction are considered when developing these drugs, I doubt anyone would release an enhancement drug with serious risk of either of these eventualities. As for treatment of diseases however that might be harder to avoid, especially if a potentially dangerous drug is the only chance to cure or alleviate a disease. Either way like you said it's up to the individual to decide what level of risk to their bodies they can tolerate.

Cognitive Enhancement

So there is a new movie coming out called Lucy which concerns the effects of an extremely powerful cognitive enhancing drug (kinda like Limitless but taken to an extreme) The trailer is here if you're interested:

Lucy Trailer

Anyway it got me thinking about cognitive enhancement, nootropics (smart drugs) and its potential applications, while nothing like what is portrayed in these films could ever occur it still has huge amounts of potential to improve lives. At the same time messing around with the brain can lead to horrific consequences, drug addicts brains are a good example so who knows what could happen if it turns out popping cognitive enhancement drugs daily has some long term negative effect. And then there is the ethics of it, is it fair to allow people to use drugs in order to perform better when there are others who haven't used them? And could you maintain the successes achieve while on these drugs if you ever went off them?

I was wondering what OT thought about the matter, is cognitive enhancement something worth pursuing or should we leave it alone?

Nat's spam intervention

[Double Post, so that you didn't waste your life looking at this post here is a gif]

Nat's spam intervention

Drakel said
Ouch but I don't even do much... So I'm unsure how I'm horrible in comparison to some others. Care to explain?

An example would be the Mahz thread. No offense but the bitching about Nat and the cat fight with Larfreeze was a bit much.

Jorick said
He's the figurehead for this shitty new era of Spam, that's all. There are many others who contribute to the awfulness (not just new people either, also old awful people who have become more active like Broby and Drakel), but Nat is the most obvious and prevalent one because of his penchant for making tons of nonsense threads. Honestly, Nat isn't even that bad since you can just not click on his threads and avoid most of his shit, he just happens to be the person it's easiest to point a finger at.

Shoo. Get out of Spam and post those reviews on the WOTM entries. Your deadline approaches.