{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/9/2015 8:40:09 PM
1
You know nothing do you? Look up viruses. They constantly evolve to new viruses. Everytime you get the flu it's a new evolved form of an older flu. Please tell me you're not that dumb?
English
-
The flu virus doesn't evolve into a new species of flu virus .... It adapts to our medicine. You know scientists who have labeled everything as evolved are the ones that say the flu evolves. Newly emerging or “re-emerging” viral diseases continue to pose significant global public health threats. Prototypic are influenza viruses that are major causes of human respiratory infections and mortality. Influenza viruses can cause zoonotic infections and adapt to humans, leading to sustained transmission and emergence of novel viruses. Mechanisms by which viruses adapt in one host, cause zoonotic infection, and adapt to a new host species remain unelucidated. Here, we review the adaptation of influenza A viruses in their reservoir hosts and discuss genetic changes associated with introduction of novel viruses into humans, leading to pandemics and the establishment of seasonal viruses.
-
Adaptation is evolution...
-
What kind of logic is this? Adaptation is not evolution... At all...
-
[quote]The flu virus doesn't evolve into a new species of flu virus .... It adapts to our medicine. You know scientists who have labeled everything as evolved are the ones that say the flu evolves. Newly emerging or “re-emerging” viral diseases continue to pose significant global public health threats. Prototypic are influenza viruses that are major causes of human respiratory infections and mortality. Influenza viruses can cause zoonotic infections and adapt to humans, leading to sustained transmission and emergence of novel viruses. Mechanisms by which viruses adapt in one host, cause zoonotic infection, and adapt to a new host species remain unelucidated. Here, we review the adaptation of influenza A viruses in their reservoir hosts and discuss genetic changes associated with introduction of novel viruses into humans, leading to pandemics and the establishment of seasonal viruses.[/quote] Nice copy and paste Der.
-
Edited by BodybyEBT: 3/10/2015 2:19:46 AMYou said it yourself, "adapt to our medicine." Something changing to adapt to it's environment is evolution. Throw humans in water long enough and we'd grow gills.
-
Ok waterworld .... Grow gills .... HAHA
-
That was metaphoric. But that first take away from what I said
-
Or drown
-
That was metaphoric.
-
And my comment was euphoric Actually no, no it wasn't, I just felt like saying it
-
KEK you just copy and pasted something that [i]supports[/i] evolution. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/20542248/
-
Edited by Tempest26: 3/9/2015 10:26:48 PMMy paste and copy was an example of what U can find by just searching .... Just like wiki .... No credible information .... The bible is far more credible than anything you can find on the bible
-
Oh dear
-
Edited by Cameo Cream: 3/10/2015 1:20:43 AMUH OH!
-
Edited by The Cellar Door: 3/9/2015 10:36:04 PM[quote]My paste and copy was an example of what U can find by just searching .... Just like wiki .... No credible information .... The bible is far more credible than anything you can find on the bible[/quote] You might want to reword that... And no, there is an idea of credibility that we understand and has a logical contingency within a truth value, which would be scientific empiricism and not a famous piece of literature in this specific context. We [i]know[/i] things on a [i]scientific basis[/i] due to empiricism. We can observe things, we can test things, and we can derive the [i]actual falsity[/i] of a hypothesis from this. Based on [i]scientific empiricism[/i], evolution has been logically proven as true. If you are going to keep denying this scientific observation based on empiricism with religious sacraments, then you have no room to speak on the matter. If you can supply a negative claim with which it's premise is empirical evidence to deduce evolution as false, then I'll bite, but as far as that goes, I believe this conversation is over.
-
If scientists think humans have been on the earth roughly 10,000 years, how do they explain such a low population 10,000 years later?
-
*190,000 years. And many many factors play a roll in this, it's not like exponential population growth is exactly an easy task to perpetuate in a dispersedly populated desert land with a species that only lives for an average of 30-40 years which is so complex that without proper care, infertility, stillborns, and birth defect rates are very high.
-
So scientists are willing to consider variations in the growth rate of a population but not the variation of Carbon 14 in our atmosphere... They put their variables where they want to make their equations match what they expect
-
HOLY SHIT LOLOL
-
HAHAHAHAHA!!! That's amazing!
