Miss USA Contestants discuss evolution

[Travis Munroe]

go to the 5:50 point and watch for 8 seconds. As I was fast forwarding i stopped at that point and had a laugh!

[photon]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Out of order fossils show up on a reasonably regular basis, and the explanation is always the same, that they evolved earlier than previously thought.

There's a difference between changing the earliest time a certain kind of animal is found and finding a mammal in among the trilobites.

[TheyCallMeBruce]

They need to find an astrobiology student or graduate. Then we can make panspermia jokes all night long.

[photon]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Why would that disprove evolution? I'm not sure I understand why the explanation that rabbits evolved earlier than otherwise thought wouldn't still work...

It's not the idea that rabbits or some specific species evolved earlier than previously thought, it would be finding a species completely outside the tree of common descent.

Rabbits are a mammal, and all mammals have a common ancestor, but if you found a specific species of mammal before or concurrent with that common ancestor, or if you find a bird fossil before there were dinosaurs, or a reptile fossil when there was there was only fish, etc..

Multicellular life didn't evolve until maybe 600 million years ago, so if you found a rabbit fossil before that when only single cellular life had existed, that'd disprove evolution (or prove rabbits have time travel).

Barring complete falsification due to something like that, evolution is a given. In a similar way, you could walk out your door tomorrow and fall up, falsifying the theory of gravity. It's possible, but not likely.

So barring a falsification like that, any theory that replaces evolution must do a better job of explaining all the observed phenomenon than evolution does, so it's not good enough to just sit back and try and poke holes, one has to come up with something better.

Creationism isn't better, it's avoiding the question by invoking an external agent, and leaves all the observations unexplained and explainable (the answer to any question of why ultimately is "it's a mystery"), and there's no way to tell the difference between Young Earth Creationism and Last Thursdayism (the universe was created last Thursday with the appearance of age and everyone's memories already created).

[Philly06Cup]

Miss USA is a beauty contest -- hence the evening gown and swimsuit portions. I'm not too concerned with what they have to say on 'controversial' topics.

[Reggie Dunlop]

How do you explain the Rabbit of Caerbannog? Evolutional abberation, or Arthurian myth?

[GreatWhiteEbola]

I read this title: Miss USA Contestants discuss evolution.

I had no idea there were so many Miss USA contestants on CP.

[Shades]

Originally Posted by photon

Multicellular life didn't evolve until maybe 600 million years ago, so if you found a rabbit fossil before that when only single cellular life had existed, that'd disprove evolution.

How convenient. To disprove something, you set parameters that would never be met.

[simonsays]

Originally Posted by PIMking

well I see it like this, if she is a Canucks fans I just hope she likes to go down as fast as they do.

So after 25 dates? You must have incredible patience.

Originally Posted by Shades

How convenient. To disprove something, you set parameters that would never be met.

Why, because the earth is only 4000 years old?

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by GreatWhiteEbola

I read this title: Miss USA Contestants discuss evolution.

I had no idea there were so many Miss USA contestants on CP.

I look hot in a two piece, and let me tell you I look damn fine in an evening gown!

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by troutman

Bachmann Promotes Creationism
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/i...s-creationism/

Now, following a speech to Republicans in New Orleans, she said to reporters:

“I support intelligent design. What I support is putting all science on the table and then letting students decide. I don’t think it’s a good idea for government to come down on one side of scientific issue or another, when there is reasonable doubt on both sides.”

She is dead wrong, of course. There is no scientific controversy about the fact of evolution. The overwhelming majority of scientists support evolution – because the evidence for it is overwhelming. The controversy is entirely a political/religious one. This is embarrassing for Bachmann. I don’t expect every presidential candidate to be a scientist, or have any level of expertise in science. But I think in the 21st century we should expect a basic level of scientific literacy from our leaders. There are simply too many issues that require an understanding of science.

Creationist Politicians
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/i...ans/#more-3317

"The overwhelming majority of scientists support evolution,"

I would have a hard time calling someone who did not believe in evolution a 'scientist'.

[RockOnRoberts]

I came into a thread with Miss USA contestants in the title and I leave disappointed.

[Yasa]

Yeah well if evolution is true and we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys? Answer that, science freaks.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

"The overwhelming majority of scientists support evolution,"

I would have a hard time calling someone who did not believe in evolution a 'scientist'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_o..._for_evolution

The vast majority of the scientific community and academia supports evolutionary theory as the only explanation that can fully account for observations in the fields of biology, paleontology, anthropology, and others.[16][17][18][19][20] One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".[21] An expert in the evolution-creationism controversy, professor and author Brian Alters states that "99.9 percent of scientists accept evolution".[22] A 1991 Gallup poll of Americans found that about 5% of scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.[23][24]

There is a notable difference between the opinion of scientists and that of the general public in the United States. A 2009 poll by Pew Research Center found that "Nearly all scientists (97%) say humans and other living things have evolved over time – 87% say evolution is due to natural processes, such as natural selection. The dominant position among scientists – that living things have evolved due to natural processes – is shared by only about third (32%) of the public."[39]

[Traditional_Ale]

Miss Kentucky is a complete and utter moron.

[Thor]