Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_932

Quote:

I'm not impressed with octopuses. But feel free to marvel at their abilities.

I'd be impressed with some evidence that actually supports your claims, since you've failed so far. Got any?

I don't know, what claim you having a problem with in particular?

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

I'm not impressed with octopuses. But feel free to marvel at their abilities.

I didn't ask if you were impressed.
The reality is that they refute your hypothesis, whether they impress you or not.

For you not for me. The octopus is simple animal with a simple nervous system. Effective but simple... don't think it even has any long term memory.

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 05:45 PM

I should've added that while studies show some ability to regenerate neurons in SOME areas of the brain, that this also decreases with age as neuronal stems cells age. My previous post should say "loss of ability" to regenerate neurons.

Sauron · 07-08-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron

But there's no evidence that we ever lived prolonged lifetimes, and without that evidence your hypothesis is dead on arrival.

Did you get it that time, bong boy?

You seem to think we are missing the point of your argument. We are not. Everyone understands your point. It's just that your point is bullshit.

Edited the insults out.

Plenty of people believe that long life's can be had in the future through science there is no reason to believe that it couldn't have happened in the past by nature.

1. What people believe about future enhancements to lifespans is bounded by scientific advancements; it isn't just going to fall out of the sky as a gift from the space aliens of Galaxy 9. The problem for your hypothesis about human evolution is that you don't have any such scientific advancements in the past to rely upon.

2. There is no evidence that they ever happened in nature. Waving your hands and saying, "well, it could have happened" is simply wrong. It could not have happened. Of course, if you think otherwise, then by all means show us how. Don't just take a bong hit and say, "anything's possible"; get off your lazy ass and do the homework to demonstrate that your idea is workable.

Quote:

Now this isn't evidence it's an explanation for the separation between us and the animals. An explanation that is possible.

Sorry; it isn't possible. Of course, you're free to prove me wrong.

Sauron · 07-08-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron

I didn't ask if you were impressed.
The reality is that they refute your hypothesis, whether they impress you or not.

For you not for me.

No, it refutes your hypothesis, whether you or I approve of that fact or not.

Quote:

The octopus is simple animal with a simple nervous system.

No, it is neither a simple animal, nor is its nervous system simple. Do you plan to redefine "simple" now, like you redefined tube worms to be plants?

Quote:

Effective but simple... don't think it even has any long term memory.

Also wrong.

Keep guessing, poptart.

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 05:47 PM

Quote:

I don't know, what claim you having a problem with in particular?

The same one that I've been talking about throughout this -- or did you already forget, bongster?

Elijah · 07-08-2007, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deadman_932

The same one that I've been talking about throughout this -- or did you already forget, bongster?

I'm not sure who I'm even talking to most of the time on this board. You guys all sound like the same dude to me, same opinions. I don't really bother looking at the names.

The older you get the smarter you get bit? That's your problem?

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 05:58 PM

The bottom line is that available evidence shows the exact opposite of your claims about two things, Bongster:

1. There's no evidence that people have ever lived beyond 130 years
2. There's no evidence that, statistically, people GAIN in cognitive abilities as they age beyond the age of 35. The opposite is what the evidence gives us, even leaving aside known disease.

You need to realize that while you may impress your bong-buddies with what you imagine is witty repartee -- that doesn't matter a damn bit. What counts here is your ability to support your claims with actual evidence. Saying things like "well, it MIGHT be so" when your claim goes against what we DO know...is not good enough. It may be good enough for your bong-buddies, but that's neither here nor there.

deadman_932 · 07-08-2007, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Teh Bongster slurs:
I'm not sure who I'm even talking to most of the time on this board. You guys all sound like the same dude to me, same opinions. I don't really bother looking at the names.

Brilliant. You are dismissed.

Vicious Love · 07-08-2007, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

The octopus is simple animal with a simple nervous system. Effective but simple... don't think it even has any long term memory.

"I haven't actually studied genetics or marine biology, I'm just a 'use it or lose it', simple-mollusc kinda guy."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-08-2007, 05:45 PM	#63
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	I should've added that while studies show some ability to regenerate neurons in SOME areas of the brain, that this also decreases with age as neuronal stems cells age. My previous post should say "loss of ability" to regenerate neurons.

07-08-2007, 05:58 PM	#68
deadman_932 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Altadena, California Posts: 3,271	The bottom line is that available evidence shows the exact opposite of your claims about two things, Bongster: 1. There's no evidence that people have ever lived beyond 130 years 2. There's no evidence that, statistically, people GAIN in cognitive abilities as they age beyond the age of 35. The opposite is what the evidence gives us, even leaving aside known disease. You need to realize that while you may impress your bong-buddies with what you imagine is witty repartee -- that doesn't matter a damn bit. What counts here is your ability to support your claims with actual evidence. Saying things like "well, it MIGHT be so" when your claim goes against what we DO know...is not good enough. It may be good enough for your bong-buddies, but that's neither here nor there.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.