Top 15 Worst Miss USA Answers

Post Reply New Topic

Evidence America is going to hell with religious right wing ignorance.

http://restoring-sanity.org/2013/11/top ... a-answers/

Wow, those chicks are so dumb, you lose IQ points just listening to them.

"Should evolution be taught in schools?" was the question.
I say, maybe they should just plain start teaching in schools.

My guess is that they play stupid on purpose, like Paris Hilton and Jessica Simpson. After all, this gives them attention.

One thing I do agree with, people are too rigid about knowledge. I am not sure if I am convinced theory of evolution is correct as it is stated at this point because science has shown us time and time again it changes with each generation. However, evolution should taught in Biology because that's pretty much the foundation of that particular discipline.

I have yet to see any evidence theory of evolution is working in the human species because so many people are breeding. The only way the gene is eliminated as if the person dies in childhood but so many people are living into adulthood and breeding with medical advances. Their genes are being distributed to their offspring and plenty more are being born with various medical conditions due to genetic mutations science treats or cures after birth and even more anomalies in genes do not have any known causes, they are not passed from parent to offspring, they just happen, the unlucky recipient is treated, then later has kids, passes their genes on to the next generation only to have it happen all over again. So where does Darwinism fit into this and how does it fit into the world of domestic animals where humans control the breeding?

I can see it happening in the wild animal population. Humans and domestic animals seem to have a different rule book.

A sizeable proportion of the population does not reproduce.

The fittest animals are those that humans allow to reproduce.

Why refer to "Darwinism"? Natural selection has its roots in Darwin, but we've come a long way since him- he didn't know about genetics, for example.

Haha. Have you been around anyone who breeds animals? They let a lot of ones breed that have many genetic flaws especially if profit is involved. Of course the animal's basic organ systems are not compromised or it dies right off, mostly. Ideally, breeders are only supposed to breed the best stock but reality is a different matter entirely.

I cannot find theory of evolution where animals are bred for profit.

And another thing I seriously question. I picture Darwin sitting there observing wild animals searching for food, getting eaten by others or perhaps experiencing injury or accident. Maybe they cannot find food so they die from malnutrition and this, of course, as we all know, stops that animal's genetic contribution to his species right there. Darwin notes this and deducts: animal A didn't have the genes that made it as tough and strong as animal B so animal A has contributed less of it's weaker genes than animal B which lived longer thus contributing more.

He ignores the fact some animals. just like humans, are simply unlucky. They could be the superman of their species yet are not immune to the ravages of bad luck.

Now let's look at the human situation. Person A has a barn full of chickens that he shelters, feeds, coddles, basically, compared to what wild animals endure on their own, finding their own food, shelter, harsher elements, no help from anyone. Virtually all the chickens live, regardless of their genes. Sure some of them have a disorganized genetic structure, they die either before their egg hatches or shortly after but a great deal more would die in the first few years of life if they were strictly on their own. Because the human has met the daily needs of each individual bird. the majority will contribute their genes to the next generation. See how Darwin's theory no longer fits? You cannot fit it into this scenario. This scenario needs it's own theory imo.

Not true. There have been many experiments that have shown evolution happening both with humans and with domesticated animals.

Have you ever heard of the Lac1 gene? It's the gene that enables humans to digest milk. There have been studies done on it. In areas where cattle was domesticated the Lac1 gene is present; not so with communities where cattle hasn't historically been domesticated.

You'll also note that humans in Africa have a higher rate of sickle cell anemia. It turns out that the gene that controls cycle cell anemia is linked to the gene that gives resistance/immunity to malaria. Malaria is very common in Africa. The presence of Malaria in Africa is giving people who have that particular gene the advantage, making them more common than they would be otherwise.

As for domesticated animals: Why exactly do you think there are so many different breeds of dog and cat? It's evolution, but controlled by human breeders. They select the traits they desire and breed for those traits.

There was also an interesting experiment done when they took foxes and bred them continually for docility. Guess what? The foxes turned black and started to look like dogs.

Please do you research.

This is an experiment you've done, is it?

By the way, what you're saying makes no sense whatsoever. Believe me, I'd know.



Saying that evolution doesn't exist because some creatures are unlucky is crazy.

Oh please don't patronize me I have done my research and thought long and hard on this and I can tell you what humans do is so vastly different than animals, or even humans, living in the wild without technology, we pretty much need another theory just for the way we live. It is nothing like how wild animals live and pass their genes. Many more wild animals die in the first year of life.

Major in Biology and then tell me that. Your theories do not make any sense from a biological standpoint - or a psychological standpoint for that matter. And I majored in both. So I think I have a right to tell you that you obviously are not correct.

By the way: telling someone they are wrong, especially about something scientific in which there is a right answer, is not patronizing them.

I just don't think you really understand what I'm talking about. LOL. but that's okay.

Cheers People don't understand each other all the time. It's not the end of the world.

true story Paris and Jessica are actually stupid in real life.

I don't think Paris is stupid, its more a case of limited faculties. Shes what I class as 'low functioning neurotypical'.

I have two main problems with the evolution theory being taught in schools...

1) Its often presented as undeniable fact excluded from debate, instead of a theory still lacking conclusive proof beyond a reasonable doubt. When someone opposes the "molecules to man" concept, they're treated as idiots or hatemongers, especially by college professors.

2) They constantly use the "bait and switch" tactic to justify different parts of the theory, by citing one source as supposed "evidence". A classic example of this is showing how lions and tigers can interbreed, but then saying those changes can break through certain barriers over billions of years.

perhaps the onus should be on Christianity to amalgamate evolution into its doctrine, in much the same way they had to concede ground over the heliocentric model?

I really don't see how at this late stage Evolution can be denied any more than the round earth model. The evidence is visible through bacteria under a microscope.