Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Roman Catholic Church and Evolution
jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 81 (100735)
04-18-2004 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by PaulK
04-18-2004 6:11 AM


Re: Read the Address First
Something I've observed in life is that nature has this way of balancing things out- which automatically suggests an underlying intelligence driving evolution. It seems to me that evolution is probably God's way of fixing mistakes as they occur, to allow the overall continuence of life on this planet.
For example, the human race is currently causing a mass extinction on this planet. I myself appear to be some sort of new species, since my nutritional needs, skelaton, social and sexual behavior, are all basically different than that of the human race. Because I use electrical activity ( components of the person's personality) as a basis to interpret body language and verbal signals, detecting the electrical activity that all living things produce is necessary for my emotional survival. Because of this in order to emotionally survive I need living things just for the sake of themselves.
It stands to reason that my decendants will result in a whole culture that will work to preserve the world, rather than destroy it. Something I've noticed is that the human race is so destructive because what drives it is a need to produce status symbols to get to the top of the food chain, and because the human race seems to feel that the true value of anything is only what the human race assigns to it, not what it assigns to itself. As things stand now, I can only forsee the conclusion of what the human race is doing to the world, will be a dark and squalid one and result in a dead world.
I've been persecuted my whole life because I'm different. I was just going to breed and not tell anyone about it, and let the human race figure it out on its own, after there is a whole army of me - in defense of those who cannot speak for themselves. I've thought of going to scientists but my experience has been scientists tend to only want to hear what fits into their little world views so will probably only lead to me being persecuted all over again. Religion, on the other hand, is more flexible regarding these things, so may give me the community I need to carry on.
I can't disregard that I was born in the middle of a mass extinction, and I require the survival of other species in order for me to emotionally survive. This seems to provide an evidence for an underlying intelligence driving evolution. I was wondering what all of you think the Church's stance will be on this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 04-18-2004 6:11 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 3:38 PM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 81 (100740)
04-18-2004 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashfrog
04-18-2004 3:38 PM


There are many theories and few laws, so who are you to judge me? Judging by your reaction, I take it you are a scientist. All I can do is tell you what I am, whether or not you are going to listen to me is strictly up to you, especially since your believeing me is not a requirement for evolution to occur. It will still occur, regardless. So get over yourself.
Better yet- you want to be top dog? Ok so you are now top dog. So now what?
Ok-
My pubic bone is perpendicular to the ground, like a man's, so I have a flat stomach like a man, and my vagina is oriented at @ 22.5 angle from my spine, rather than parallel to it. In women, the pubic bone is generally recessed and at an angle, which is why women don't have flat stomachs. Because of this, my normal copulation posture is either like a man, during copulation I can thrust my hips like a man, or with one leg down and one leg up and to the side, or one leg down and one leg up at the man's neck- or any number of combinations.
In human females, the vagina is oriented parallel to the spine, which is why females mainly are passive, sexually during copulation, and behaviorally in general. It's also why the best leveraging with females is from the back. After all, everything does come down to sex so male and female roles in the world mimic copulation. Hence male dominance. It's also why I've found most men are threatened by me, as men are threatened by a female who is as active and agressive as they are. After all, I'm just as active as a man during sex, so is my social behavior. It goes without saying that given my x-rated talent, it truly is their loss.
More on me later, as I have other things to do now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 3:38 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 4:29 PM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 50 of 81 (100827)
04-19-2004 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by crashfrog
04-18-2004 4:29 PM


Actually MRIs taken in a study corroborate what I am saying about humans:
http://www.studentbmj.com/back_issues/0100/papers/1596.html
Your wife can engage in pelvic thrusts like you? I sincerely doubt that. The SPINE PARALLEL position of her vagina will not permit that. After all the reason why women have to spread their legs is because that is the only way a vagina oriented in that way can be opened up.
So I take it rather than spreading her legs she has sex with you on her back, by putting one leg over your shoulder, and the other down by the side of your leg, in a split? Yeah right. And of course she can still engage in pelvic thrusts that way.
If that's true then why is it that women are always portrayed as speading their legs as a normal position, and why is it that in order for women to give birth and for gynecological exams they also spread their legs?
When I spread my legs, this causes my vagina to close up. That's why I'm unable to have sex like that, and for me to do so would be abnormal. So why is that I cannot assume the spread leg position during sex, since you seem to think that there is nothing unusual about my positions? And by the way, I have my gyn exams with one leg up and the other leg down and to the side, as the spread leg position is too painful for me to tolerate.
If you wife's vagina is forward oriented from her spine, then why is it that the best leveraging is acheived from rear entry positions, ie when her vagina is on the same plane as your penis?
ALl you have really managed to accomplish is to demonstrate that you don't want to listen to me. You do realize that your opinions have no bearing on reality, right? I can still assume the same copulation postures and behavior as men during sex, something your wife can't do because the angle of her vagina doesn't permit it, and your refusal to acknowledge that won't change it. Life is hard.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 4:29 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:16 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 81 (100833)
04-19-2004 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by crashfrog
04-18-2004 4:29 PM


Your wife has a flat stomach like a man? Yeah right.
All you are managing to do is to prove to me that you don't want to listen and now you are coming up with excuses (and not very good ones) that aren't even based in reality.
I have to presume that the reason why you are making such a weak argument is because you are under the mistaken and delusional impression that because I am a woman, you can win. You're not going to win because your arguments are weak and incorrect. Your wife doesn't have a flat stomach like a man, because the angle of her pubic bone doesn't permit it, and she certainly can't thrust her hips like a man during sex, because her vagina isn't angled in such a way as to permit that. Get a clue.
Better yet- post a picture of your wife from the side in a swimsuit to prove that she does have a pubic bone that is perpendicular to the ground, so has a flat stomach like a man, to substantiate your claims. You are claiming that she can engage in the same sexual behavior I can so prove it- being as I know for a fact that female humans lack this quality it seems you are up the creek. If you can do that, I will listen. Otherwise you're just wasting my time.
Regarding evidence, I've already provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that I'm put together differently than in humans. You just don't want to accept it- the proof of that being that your defense isn't even believable. The fact that you're stupid, and apparently uneducated is not my problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by crashfrog, posted 04-18-2004 4:29 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:22 AM jme4538 has replied
 Message 58 by Asgara, posted 04-19-2004 2:25 AM jme4538 has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 81 (100834)
04-19-2004 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:16 AM


regarding the link I posted, READ THE STUDY, MORON!
The reason why the best leveraging in sex is rear entry is because the vaginal angle is lined up with the axis along the length of the penis- so the two match. When a woman is in this position her spine is also along the same angle as the penis. Therefore the vaginal angle= spinal angle. Hence the vagina is parallel to the spine.DURRHH

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:16 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:24 AM jme4538 has replied
 Message 59 by AdminAsgara, posted 04-19-2004 2:27 AM jme4538 has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 81 (100836)
04-19-2004 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:16 AM


what gives me the right to make claims about people I haven't met is because the pelvic basket and vaginal angle , and sex positions it affords are commonalities to all female members of the human race, dimwit.
Oh so now we are changing the subject, are we? What's wrong, can't handle argueing with a woman?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:16 AM crashfrog has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 81 (100837)
04-19-2004 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:22 AM


There is no point to talking to someone who won't listen to you. Cats and dogs learn that the hard way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:22 AM crashfrog has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 81 (100842)
04-19-2004 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:22 AM


Regarding my attitude, what did you expect me to say? Your attitude is at best, judgemental, and at worst patronizing. Your arguments and defense are just plain wrong and not based in anything other than a desperate need to have things remain the way they have been. My behavior is simple self defense. I didn't post this information so you could jump down my throat to tell me I'm wrong. I posted it as an FYI. I'm not going to put up with being adressed in the manner you have chosen to adress me because I don't have to.
You don't have to like that I'm put together differently than other women but you do have to accept it. Because your refusal to accept it doesn't change it. Too bad!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:22 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:34 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 81 (100843)
04-19-2004 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:24 AM


yeah men's penises point up- especially in the ones whose erections point down.
Regarding c-sections- I'd say that has more to do with other things.
Sorry guys- in all women the best leveraging is from the back.
Regarding your comments about my sexual postures being normal, if that's true then why don't any sex manuals show those as normal postures? I've never seen any sex manuals that show this? Now why would that be?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:24 AM crashfrog has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 81 (100845)
04-19-2004 2:36 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:34 AM


just answer my other post and we can move on

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:34 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:44 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 81 (100850)
04-19-2004 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:34 AM


regarding your question, I sincerely doubt you will be willing to listen so what is the point of my bothering to explain. The only responses I've gotten regarding my anatomy have been at best, poor, and defensive. I don't have a problem with being shown by way of evidence that what I'm saying is incorrect- however what people have been stating to say that I am wrong only demonstrates that they don't know what they're talking about. Because if what they were saying were true, I'd have already found that out myself from my own investigations so would have no need to bring that forth here. You're making so very uneductaed assumptions about what I need to do to feel important so don't even go there. After all, I have two degrees, a long list of acheivments- I've invented a new branch of geometry, techniques to correct learning disabilities, I have a patent, I also revised clothing patterns so they share human skin's abilities to accomadate body movement while conforming neatly to the body. If I want to be important, I can do so based upon my own acheivements in the real world. On top of that, I got James Randi to admit to me in writing that his $1 million dollar paranormal challenge is a scam and in fact there is "no contest" at all. Getting James Randi to admit to me he is pulling a scam makes me feel important, yelling at a bunch of strangers in this forum for making uneducated comments about what is or is not normal- not particularly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:34 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:48 AM jme4538 has not replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 81 (100856)
04-19-2004 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 2:44 AM


I haven't read the book, but I doubt it. Look I understand what you are all saying. What I'm saying to you is that humans cannot assume the sexual posture I can because if they could, they'd all be doing it because it makes for much better leveraging from the front than other postures. The female pubic bone also can't support that kind of stress. IN addition there simply isn't enough space from front to back for the vagina to be oriented any other way than spine parallel. If you look at my pelvis from the side it looks like a triangle so it looks strangely wide.
To clarify, a correct posture for me is for my legs to be in a "L" position. That is with one leg down, as if I were just laying there, and one leg out to the side. Another position is again, with the one leg just extended down, but the other leg folded up against my chest-and my foot hooked over the man's shoulder, so it's like I'm performing a split. Although it's possible you could assume either of these positions, unless you're hiding something, I doubt it.
Now I'm tired of this argument since all I was expecting originally is for people to look at what I said and be like" Oh, OK"- and move on - not jump down my throat and make a bunch of uneducated comments to try to prove that I'm wrong- or that I think I'm special. I'm just trying to get rid of some demons here and I was actually just using this to test the waters.
Regarding evolution, I generally regard it as a product of random mutation, with the guiding rule being whatever lives to reproduce is how things go. Beyond that, apparently it occurs as a sort of balanceing act. The better question being, is how does nature know that there is a problem going on that needs to be adressed, to do this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 2:44 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 3:15 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 81 (100860)
04-19-2004 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 3:15 AM


Umm- again it seems to me if what you were saying were true this would be in sex manuals. It isn't. All sexual postures from the front require that the woman spread her legs. What I think is that what you think I'm talking about and what I'm talking about are two different things.
You are correct- women can assume the positions I'm referring to an extent. However they all require that the woman spread her legs.
I will try to explain this a different way then so I can see if we are talking about the same thing-
So you have the woman lying on her back, with the one leg simply down, and along the same axis as her torso, and the other folded up against her chest- with the other leg along the same axis as her torso so her legs are not spread at all- is this position featured in the sex manual you mention so I can look at it?
Just to be clear, I found the idea that I may be a separate species to be very upsetting, since I've struggled my whole life to be like other people so people would accept me, so finding out that that is apparently something I can't have is devastating to me. This is just getting in the way of me letting other people get close to me since I'm afraid of their reaction. Hence the usefullness of the anonymity if the internet.
The position looks in question looks like she is performing a split, except in this case she's performing the split while lying on her back. So her legs are not spread from side to side in any way. In fact a normal posture for me is to fold my one leg under me so that my knee is bent such that my foot is positioned where my other leg might be (to cause my pelvis to roll up away from the bed), so I can extend my other leg up over my head, while lying on my back.
Is this position featured in the sex manual you mentioned so I can look at it to see if we are talking about the same thing?
Regarding evolution, what you're saying is a little over my head but it sounds like we're probably in agreement( in some version or other), we just have a little different understanding of the underlying drive. I guess the question is how does the population know to do these things you are saying it does. That fact that it does know this by behavior seems to suggest an underlying intelligence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 3:15 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by jme4538, posted 04-19-2004 3:46 AM jme4538 has not replied
 Message 71 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 5:00 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 81 (100861)
04-19-2004 3:46 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by jme4538
04-19-2004 3:38 AM


reagrding your commments about me not being that different from other women, you are correct- I don't look that much different, physically I'm not that much different. What I look like and behave like is more like being "off". Thats why I refer to myself as "probably" being a new species. But my physical attributes are only one part of the picture. The rest of it isn't important, since I don't have the time, energy or interest to argue with you about that, as I am sure what claims I will make about the other things will only lead to more arguements with you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by jme4538, posted 04-19-2004 3:38 AM jme4538 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 5:04 AM jme4538 has replied

jme4538
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 81 (100936)
04-19-2004 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by crashfrog
04-19-2004 5:04 AM


actually spread, regarding what I'm referring to is from side to side. I am sure you have done a version of what I'm referring to but in your version it requires the legs be parted from side to side at least somewhat. In my version the legs aren't parted at all.
Regarding your comment that species do not breed together you are incorrect- two different species can be put together to mate- it is done with plants all the time to create hybrids. If the genes are right you can get it to work and still produce a fertile offspring. And two organisms can appear to be a part of the same species but closer examination reveals that they are not. Birds are a perfect example of this since there are many species of birds that, to a untrained eye, appear to be the same species and it takes an expert to be able to tell that they are not.
I didn't say I was so different that I couldn't breed with humans. The problem I run into is that courtship behavior is so incompatible that I find it hard to make it work. Humans don't suppress their impulses, so when a man is sexually attracted to me, it has a negative impact on my nervous system, and then its like a switch goes off in my head, and I'll automatically become agressive and start attacking them (usually by way of a murdurous glare is usually sufficient to get them to not become sexually excited). This agressive response is a reflex response. I've learned to suppress my agression and sex drives because I have to in order to function, and the reflex response has resulted in the other person becoming angry and taking it out of me, or running away. Humans don't have to suppress their sex and agression drives, because they're somehow able to control the resultant behavior so they can use these impulses as a way to respond to the environment. I'm not as able to do this routinely, but I have other things I can do instead, so that was something by way of evolution, that was lost, the best I can figure.
However I still have problems because I can tell when a male is sexually attracted to me because it produces a physically uncomfortable affect on my nervous system (feels a bit like being electrocuted) so am working on learning to ignore it, as the human race is not going to learn to suppress its sex drive on my behalf.
So the increases is electrical activity that result when a man gets sexually excited are an incompatibility. I can deal with the increases, if I've been properly primed- however what is required to prime me is not something that humans routinely do as a part of courtship. What is required to prime me is actually a lot of heavy eye contact so I can form a mild telapathic bond with them to test for compatibility of our personalities. This bond feels like my brain is touching the other person's brain and is a mutually felt by the other person. If our personalities are compatible enough for a long term relationship to work, the resultant link will be soft, if we are not compatible, the link will feel hard and/or I won't be able to form a bond with them at all.
This also has the effect of familiarizing me with the man enough so I can tolerate the increases in his electrical activity resulting from sexual excitement. Humans don't routinely engage in enough eye contact for me to get this to work in most instances so it is a problem. I also need heavy eye contact in general in order to feel connected, so because of that I have consistent trouble in developing and maintaining social bonds with humans. That's why I tend to prefer cats as friends, because they are very willing to participate in heavy eye contact as a normal part of social interaction.
One of the other incompatibilities is as a routine part of my evaluating a potential partner, I act in such a way as to test their impulse control abilities. Usually I can tell when a potential partner has an impulse control problem right off the bat, is becuse this has a characteristic affect on electrical activity. Poking them a little consistently reveals agressive highly emotional behavior such that they are not able to deal with the stresses that a long term relationship will entail. Most human males lack the impulse control needed to be able to sustain a long term relationship with me and tend to reacte either by becoming agressive or by running away.
The only reason why I would even consider breeding with a human, given these very basic problems, is because there aren't any of my kind around. And you'll see exactly the same sort of behavior out of different species of cats when confined- they will breed with one another. That is why someone was able to produce a new breed of domestic cat that was a cross between a wild cat and a domestic cat, and people also breed wolf- dog pets. So to say that two different species can't produce viable offspring is incorrect. I don't recall the exact requirements for to species to successfully create viable offspring but it has something to do with gene sequences or something.
However this is what artificial insemination is for. Given that I'm a first generation mutation, and that the human race apparently also started with a single female, I believe that I will be able to produce fertile offspring- and after several generations the offspring will be so genetically different that interbreeding will probably not be possible or if it is, it will be undesirable so will not occur anyway. By that time though, the gene pool will be large enough so that my kind can stick to its own kind. Given the basic behavioral incompatibilities, interbreeding is actually not desirable. The basic problem I have with humans is their lack of control over basic impulses like sex and agression- drives I routinely supress.
Your behavior is a perfect example- you argued with me at first loudly and rudely, and automatically jumped to the conclusion that I am a liar or something other to that effect- without having taking really any time to investigate further to find out if that reaction was warrented. This is a rather unfortunate impulse based response I tend to get from humans, and it's a result of that humans just aren't very good at controlling their impulses. Then I fight with them out of simple self defense and tire them out, and then they listen to me, and "Of course" I'm right, they'll agree. And by then its completely beside the point, because by then, from having to listen to them argue and fight with me, I've lost any interest I can possibly develop in forming a relationship with them. This is why I also tend to keep to myself, because at 30 years old, I'm tired of people fighting with me. I am a first of a kind, so my goal is strictly to survive to reproduce.
Regarding my diet, until recently I spend most of my life feeling sick, tired, torpid and having poor digestion. In addition, I looked sickly and it was as if my body was wasting away, because I developed poor muscle tone and became assymetrical. I found out by trial and error, what I require to be healthy is a diet that is primarily composed of animal protein. I'm probably the only person in the world who actually gained weight on an Atkins type diet. I wound up gaining 5 pnds at first because I was eating so much meat, once I figured out what the problem was. I lost the 5 pounds but my weight is otherwise stable. And I don't have cravings for carbohydrates. I do OK with fruits and vegatables but grain type foods (including corn) make me sick all over again, so I can only eat them in limited quantities.
[This message has been edited by jme4538, 04-19-2004]
[This message has been edited by jme4538, 04-19-2004]
[This message has been edited by jme4538, 04-19-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by crashfrog, posted 04-19-2004 5:04 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by crashfrog, posted 04-20-2004 2:01 AM jme4538 has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024