Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biological instinct in female to seek out a mate outside of the group.
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 32 of 61 (636241)
10-04-2011 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 7:47 PM


Why do you keep interjecting the Hebrew bible into science threads?
(See signature.)

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 7:47 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 9:35 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 35 of 61 (636244)
10-04-2011 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 9:35 PM


Because the applicable laws emenate from there. I pointed out the understanding of that law is faulty. Why should I not quote it - is a scientific law.
Sorry, no.
Scientific laws, and theories, emanate from peer-reviewed scientific journals.
Ancient tribal myths and beliefs emanate from religious writings.
Any correlation with scientific writings is just coincidental.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 9:35 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:00 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 36 of 61 (636245)
10-04-2011 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 9:39 PM


Re: assert, assert, assert wrongly
1M+1F gives 1 offspring.
2M + 2F gives 2 offsrpings.
3M + 1F gives 1 offsrping
It gives those results approximately every two-three years during child-bearing years; you seem to have forgotten this.
(Remember, "Roll me over in the clover, roll me over lay me down and do it again..."?)
negative growth.
Negative growth X time = no growth.
No Growth = no humanity.
All of these flow from a faulty premise.
Sorry, do not pass Go, do not collect $200.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 9:39 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:01 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 39 of 61 (636249)
10-04-2011 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 10:01 PM


Re: assert, assert, assert wrongly
The math is correct, but you do not want to accept it. The time factor rules negative growth.
Show your work.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:01 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:13 PM Coyote has not replied
 Message 41 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:24 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 42 of 61 (636252)
10-04-2011 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 10:24 PM


Re: Some rocket science.
You are running away from the facts. What happens when negative growth continues in direct proportion of the impacting continuing time factor? Why is there an involuntary discordance with the reaction to negative growth setting alarm bells in metabolistic reactions? Need a calculator or a science manual?
Sorry, you have not established negative growth.
That ruins your whole argument.
Your original case was totally flawed.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:24 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:44 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 44 of 61 (636255)
10-04-2011 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 10:44 PM


Re: Some rocket science.
Your original claim:
1M+1F gives 1 offspring.
2M + 2F gives 2 offsrpings.
3M + 1F gives 1 offsrping negative growth.
Your figures suggest this is a lifetime's reproduction, whereas these figures should be possible every two to three years during childbearing years, up to 20 or 25 years in many cultures. They needed those birth rates as the infant death rates were much higher back then.
Look up numbers of children in the past and see what you get. Ten children was common, while twenty was not unheard of.
Your figures are totally unrealistic. (Are these figures from your Hebrew bible or something that you can't see anything else?)

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 10:44 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 11:25 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 46 of 61 (636258)
10-04-2011 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 11:25 PM


Gibberish
Try again, with more content and less gibberish.
You really should try and address the point I brought up in two posts now. It renders your figures absolutely incorrect.
Unless you can actually address that point there is no use in continuing.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 11:25 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 11:38 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2127 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(2)
Message 48 of 61 (636260)
10-05-2011 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by IamJoseph
10-04-2011 11:38 PM


Re: Gibberish
Its been addressed and I'm not budging from that point. I suspect that even if I laid down a 75% swing to gay you would still reject the math as gibberish. There is a point of no return - face upto it.
You have presented no math beyond that one simple three-line post.
I demolished it easily, as the way you posted it did not include multiple births.
Either come up with something new or give it up. You're only digging the hole deeper.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by IamJoseph, posted 10-04-2011 11:38 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by IamJoseph, posted 10-05-2011 1:00 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024