Where is jonny apollo?

[Necrosis]

where is jonny, he use to post so much, and make such stupid remarks.

didnt he meltdown and had the board beleived he died.

if your reading jonny post again, you sack of shit

[NeoSeminole]

According to some members here, I'm suppose to be him. There was even a thread started about it.

[Camel Jockey]

johnnyapollo/tyrone power was awesome!

[Necrosis]

According to some members here, I'm suppose to be him. There was even a thread started about it.

hi jonny

[Necrosis]

you talk about evolution like him but he talked about alot of other stuff that you dont comment on. plus he seemed to have a hatred for religious people, you only comment on the intelligent design debate. plus you, like i are a ronnie guy.

i agree he was one of the better atheists, i loved watching him smash nimrods like mr intenseone among others. didnt he get into an argument with the luke, and that caused the meltdown. the luke is funny in himself since he hunts for yetis in the backyard

[ToxicAvenger]

jonny apolloy < death

dies in a car accident apparently..

RIP

[Butterbean]

Johnny Apollo = Tyrone Power = bjorn_fairhair = ***next mystery guest!!  ****

[OzmO]

It's not NEO. 

Follow his debate with smoke,  and compare some of Johnny's old debates.   different styles.

[Necrosis]

when i go back and read those threads i cant help but think how retarded some of the arguments were. After reading some molecular biology and genetics i somewhat except evolution, and i dont think divine creation is needed. i do however, think that mutations cannot be the driving force, the cambrian explosion is also a problem. i certainly agree with natural selection and microevolution. the debate lies in the mechanism and gradual evolution is wrong(punctuations).

however, not to offend NEO but some of his arguments were bannanas. like matter could be eternal. like the big bang doesnt mention light beams(electromagnetic radiation, or fundamentally photons) among some other funny ones. im not trying to start the debate agian, but i just think some of the stuff we argued about was pretty funny. when i brought up kent hovind was another good one.i guess depending on what kind of mood he's in he'll either rip me or joke around .

OZMO- you asked me about what the bleep. i read the book, physics of the soul, it was rather disappointing, mostly bullshit sanskrit and energy bodies with a little physics. however, ill give you a brief answer, if you want a more detailed one it would be no problem. from quantum eraser experiments and from the double slit experiment light or photons(quatisized light) showed that observation of photons caused them to act differently. the photoelectric effect shows that photons/electrons etc have a wave/particle duality. what does this implicate, well the double slit showed that without observation photons behaved as waves(waves of probability) causing a interference pattern similar to a wave(basically just markings on a screen like a wave). however, while the experiment was observed by detectors the photons acted as particles, as if it knew it was being observed(the detectors were retroactive). and the interference  pattern was that of particles(just two markings, not a barrage of markings like a wave). the quatum eraser experiment showed that light beams that were seperated(by calcite crystals) could communicate at superluminal(faster then light) speed and non-locally(instantaneously). thus it seems light can communicate, also, obervation  causes changes in the actions of the photons. this has come to be known as collasping the wave function. this has lead some to purport the question, if consciousnous collapses our reality, what collapses the universe. two theories have been put forth, GOD or multiverse.

it seems we have the king midas curse, he couldnt experience silk, human because it turned to gold, we cannot experience true reality because everything we touch turns to matter.

there are a couple of super interesting experiments i can outline regarding this topic if you want.  and schodengers cat is another interesting paradox that has not been solved.

[NeoSeminole]

when i go back and read those threads i cant help but think how retarded some of the arguments were. After reading some molecular biology and genetics i somewhat except evolution, and i dont think divine creation is needed. i do however, think that mutations cannot be the driving force, the cambrian explosion is also a problem. i certainly agree with natural selection and microevolution. the debate lies in the mechanism and gradual evolution is wrong(punctuations).

mutations aren't the driving force; they are simply the mechanism for evolution. The environment provides the driving force by influencing which mutations accumulate in a population (e.g. beneficial vs harmful). Beneficial mutations help organisms survive long enough to pass on their genes, thus adding to the gene pool while harmful mutations are quickly weeded out. If mutations were a car, then the environment would be the fuel. I don't know why you say gradual evolution is wrong. There is no set rate for how fast or slow evolution occurs.

however, not to offend NEO but some of his arguments were bannanas. like matter could be eternal. like the big bang doesnt mention light beams(electromagnetic radiation, or fundamentally photons) among some other funny ones. im not trying to start the debate agian, but i just think some of the stuff we argued about was pretty funny. when i brought up kent hovind was another good one.i guess depending on what kind of mood he's in he'll either rip me or joke around.

how is my comment about matter "bannanas?" We don't know if matter is eternal or not, as far as I know, hence why I suggested that it might have always been. Furthermore, I never said the Big Bang Theory doesn't mention light beams. I disagreed with your assertion that the big bang initially released only photons. I haven't been able to verify your claim from another source.

[Necrosis]

mutations aren't the driving force; they are simply the mechanism for evolution. The environment provides the driving force by influencing which mutations accumulate in a population (e.g. beneficial vs harmful). Beneficial mutations help organisms survive long enough to pass on their genes, thus adding to the gene pool while harmful mutations are quickly weeded out. If mutations were a car, then the environment would be the fuel. I don't know why you say gradual evolution is wrong. There is no set rate for how fast or slow evolution occurs.

how is my comment about matter "bannanas?" We don't know if matter is eternal or not, as far as I know, hence why I suggested that it might have always been. Furthermore, I never said the Big Bang Theory doesn't mention light beams. I disagreed with your assertion that the big bang initially released only photons. I haven't been able to verify your claim from another source.

matter is not eternal because of a little thing called heat death, and entropy. Big Crunch theory would also if true render the matter not eternal. mutations are the proposed mechanism yes, but it is wrong. ill find the drosophilia studies were the flys were subjected to more mutations then the entire human population twice over. none were beneficial. it was a study looking to support evolution. read about the grand unification epoch, not sure if your source will say exactly what i said, but the name gives it away.


ill comment on the gradual nature of evolution when i get to my job.

[Necrosis]

the basic neo darwinian formulae is that small changes in gradual succession result in major changes overtime, basically. your right there is no speed, but the steps must be gradual(in the book origin of the species darwin expouses this idea). however, this theory is but to bed by something called the cambrian explosion and many fossil findings over the years. this lead gould to propose punctuated equilibrium, stating that evolution happens in rapid bursts, basically a bird lays an egg and a reptile comes out. this is actually what the theory is stating, rapid bursts in homology and morphology. however, this is in direct conflict with gradual fundamental evolution, championed by people like dawkins and dennet.

however, we may not have all the facts, nor all the fossils(definite) so gradual may still be correct, but based on current studies it is not.

matter is not eternal, i went over this many times, a vaccum or quantum fluctuations were figured to create. the big bang was a point of infinite density called a singularity, at the planck density. also, i showed you a link describing radiation conversion to baryonic particles. matter is not eternal. it may be finite or infinite depending on the critical density as proposed by the relativity theory. were not really sure.

you even posted a link showing how electomagnetic radiation was converted to protons and electrons.

[gtbro1]

  I thought bjorn_fairhair was Alexx when he was in Time Out.

Johnny Apollo was probably Adonis.He always seemed to do the adonis google-fu style of debate.

[Necrosis]

adonis is too dumb.

[gtbro1]

adonis is too dumb.

I stand corrected.

[NeoSeminole]

matter is not eternal because of a little thing called heat death, and entropy. Big Crunch theory would also if true render the matter not eternal. mutations are the proposed mechanism yes, but it is wrong. ill find the drosophilia studies were the flys were subjected to more mutations then the entire human population twice over. none were beneficial. it was a study looking to support evolution. read about the grand unification epoch, not sure if your source will say exactly what i said, but the name gives it away.

how does heat death prove that matter is not eternal? All it says is that the fate of the universe will achieve a state of no free energy. The big crunch states that the universe will contract until it ends in an infinitely hot, infinitely dense point. Nowhere does either theory suggest that matter is not eternal. So I don't know where you got that from. Also, you say that mutations are wrong. What are they wrong about? It would help if you were more specific so I could know what you are talking about.

[NeoSeminole]

the basic neo darwinian formulae is that small changes in gradual succession result in major changes overtime, basically. your right there is no speed, but the steps must be gradual(in the book origin of the species darwin expouses this idea). however, this theory is but to bed by something called the cambrian explosion and many fossil findings over the years. this lead gould to propose punctuated equilibrium, stating that evolution happens in rapid bursts, basically a bird lays an egg and a reptile comes out. this is actually what the theory is stating, rapid bursts in homology and morphology. however, this is in direct conflict with gradual fundamental evolution, championed by people like dawkins and dennet.

I've already explained why you are misinformed.

[Necrosis]

heat death=proton decay=radiation=no baryonic material=no matter.

singularity equals no matter, it is intelligible for the moment until quantum gravity. there was a singularity. matter had a beginning if it was eternal it would not have a beginning hence the term eternal. yes, no one knows anything before the planck epoch.

short, concise.


your havent read any studies on mutation obviously. that is the proposed mechanism. i have articles showing it cannot be the sole mechanism. i also have  a computer program that shows the same thing.

not sure were im misinformed, only one theory can be right. unless evolution is a slow gradual process with rapid jumps for some unknown reason? which one is right, either there are differences or there are not. goulds book actually is against gradual evolution in most aspects, have you read his book surrounding his theory?

[Necrosis]

energy may be eternal unfortunately "no one really knows what energy truly is" fenymann