What's the best SALT?

Discussion in 'Reef Fishes' started by Peter Pan, Jan 21, 2006.

  1. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "David Zopf" <davidxzopf@snetx.net> wrote in message news:1EQDf.4493$tb3.1163@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
    >>> A mis-type, which my spell-checker oddly didn't catch ;-) Sorry.

    >>
    >> Time to update your spellchecker dictionary ;-)
    >>

    > You'll have to help me out... what do I put in the "definition" field?


    :)) You'r funny! Here is a definition for your dictionary:

    Pszemol - difficult to deal with, stubborn guy from rec.aquaria.marine.reefs ;-)

    How do you like it ?
     
    Pszemol, Jan 31, 2006
    #81
    1. Advertisements

  2. Peter Pan

    Jaime R-S Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    I was being sarcastic!

    "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote in message
    news:drm1bs.35o.1@poczta.onet.pl...
    > "Jaime R-S" <jaime_rs@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > news:aPzDf.6670$fZ2.2403@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
    >> Strange, very close to what is in every cytoplasm of everyone of your
    >> cells...

    >
    > I would not consider it strange at all.
    > The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...
    >
     
    Jaime R-S, Feb 1, 2006
    #82
    1. Advertisements

  3. Peter Pan

    Jaime R-S Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Wao, here we go with religion!
    Kid, let it go, there are more and better things to talk about.
    If there was a creator...
    Who created you? wasn't it your parents? and them?
    Then, if all the people we know or have heard of had parents, Who did God
    create? Adam and Eve? well, there is not one piece of evidence other than
    faith that can place such humans on this earth!

    Stop please, lets leave faith and fairy tales out of this forum...

    jrs
    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    news:43DF9AEF.20405@WayneSallee.com...
    > Pszemol wrote on 1/30/2006 10:44 PM:
    >> I would not consider it strange at all.
    >> The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...

    >
    > Evolution is a great for people that don't want to
    > acknowledge the reality of the Creator.
    >
    > My computer evolved from a toaster oven.
    >
    > I tried to make some toast the other day, but even though the slots are of
    > different sizes, I could not get a slice of bread in there. Obviously, an
    > inferior evolutionary process. I'm sure it will become extinct soon.
    >
    > Get a chain, and cut every other link. Throw out all of the cut links.
    > Take all of the intact links and arrange them so that they look pretty.
    > You will then have a good working model of the theory of evolution.
    >
    > Actually, evolution is easy to prove. Simply gather some old bones from a
    > variety of animals (your choice), and some human bones, and put them
    > together so that they look half human, and then give it a name like Suzie.
    >
    > Scientist have recently discovered a new class of creatures down deep in
    > the sea. They have classified them in the zoowacko group. They have 2
    > heads and 3 eyes on each head :)
    >
    > Zigg and Zagg, Martians from Venus (they were born on Mars, but now live
    > on Venus), did a study of the evolutionary order on earth. They decided to
    > first doccument the order of evolvement of machines, since it was what
    > most interested them. It was quite interesting reading, and learning how
    > the different machines evolved from each other, like cars, trucks,
    > microwaves, television sets, laptops, PDA's, watches, cranes, excetera. If
    > you do a search on the internet you might be able to find their report :)
    > They still have a few missing links to figure out. After they get that
    > study completely finished, they are going to do their next study on
    > animals and it's evolvement on the great planet Earth. After both of those
    > studies are completed and proven, they are to decide "which came first,
    > the animals, or the machines?" Zigg and Zagg have pritty-much decided that
    > the machines came first since they are more basic in construction than the
    > animals, but that has yet to be proven.
    >
    >
    > Wayne Sallee
    > Wayne's Pets
    > Wayne@WaynesPets.com
     
    Jaime R-S, Feb 1, 2006
    #83
  4. Peter Pan

    Jaime R-S Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    What is wrong with this picture? I was being sarcastic, off course any lab
    is going to claim that its product has those types of readings...

    jrs
    "Pszemol" <Pszemol@PolBox.com> wrote in message
    news:drnhpj.98.0@poczta.onet.pl...
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43DF9AEF.20405@WayneSallee.com...
    >> Pszemol wrote on 1/30/2006 10:44 PM:
    >>> I would not consider it strange at all.
    >>> The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...

    >>
    >> Evolution is a great for people that don't want to
    >> acknowledge the reality of the Creator.

    >
    > USA is still a free country...
    > You are free to believe in any kind of Creator you like.
    > It also means, I am free to not believe in any kind of Creator :)
    >
    > And let it be this way - no point going into heated debate.
    > Evolutionism or creationism is not the subject of this newsgroup.
    > You do not believe evolutionists are right? It is fine with me.
    >
    > Note: My previous remark was addressed to Jaime R-S, person who
    > claims to be marine biologist and he finds it strange that living
    > cell's protoplasm mineral content reflects the mineral content
    > of natural sea water... What is wrong with this picture ? ;-)
     
    Jaime R-S, Feb 1, 2006
    #84
  5. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved
    from simple matter than it does to believe that it was
    created. Anyone here done a lot of breeding of something
    like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far you can
    breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast,
    generation after generation, but who has breed a guppy
    into a platty? You can only breed a fish or anything so
    far to what you want it to be, and you hit a brick wall.

    Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that
    Musiums put documents up on the wall that they know are
    not true, just to help make it look like they have proof.
    "Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not one bit of
    proof to the *theory* of evolution.


    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com




    Jaime R-S wrote on 1/31/2006 7:33 PM:
    > Wao, here we go with religion!
    > Kid, let it go, there are more and better things to talk about.
    > If there was a creator...
    > Who created you? wasn't it your parents? and them?
    > Then, if all the people we know or have heard of had parents, Who did God
    > create? Adam and Eve? well, there is not one piece of evidence other than
    > faith that can place such humans on this earth!
    >
    > Stop please, lets leave faith and fairy tales out of this forum...
    >
    > jrs
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43DF9AEF.20405@WayneSallee.com...
    >
    >>Pszemol wrote on 1/30/2006 10:44 PM:
    >>
    >>>I would not consider it strange at all.
    >>>The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...

    >>
    >> Evolution is a great for people that don't want to
    >>acknowledge the reality of the Creator.
    >>
    >>My computer evolved from a toaster oven.
    >>
    >>I tried to make some toast the other day, but even though the slots are of
    >>different sizes, I could not get a slice of bread in there. Obviously, an
    >>inferior evolutionary process. I'm sure it will become extinct soon.
    >>
    >>Get a chain, and cut every other link. Throw out all of the cut links.
    >>Take all of the intact links and arrange them so that they look pretty.
    >>You will then have a good working model of the theory of evolution.
    >>
    >>Actually, evolution is easy to prove. Simply gather some old bones from a
    >>variety of animals (your choice), and some human bones, and put them
    >>together so that they look half human, and then give it a name like Suzie.
    >>
    >>Scientist have recently discovered a new class of creatures down deep in
    >>the sea. They have classified them in the zoowacko group. They have 2
    >>heads and 3 eyes on each head :)
    >>
    >>Zigg and Zagg, Martians from Venus (they were born on Mars, but now live
    >>on Venus), did a study of the evolutionary order on earth. They decided to
    >>first doccument the order of evolvement of machines, since it was what
    >>most interested them. It was quite interesting reading, and learning how
    >>the different machines evolved from each other, like cars, trucks,
    >>microwaves, television sets, laptops, PDA's, watches, cranes, excetera. If
    >>you do a search on the internet you might be able to find their report :)
    >>They still have a few missing links to figure out. After they get that
    >>study completely finished, they are going to do their next study on
    >>animals and it's evolvement on the great planet Earth. After both of those
    >>studies are completed and proven, they are to decide "which came first,
    >>the animals, or the machines?" Zigg and Zagg have pritty-much decided that
    >>the machines came first since they are more basic in construction than the
    >>animals, but that has yet to be proven.
    >>
    >>
    >>Wayne Sallee
    >>Wayne's Pets
    >>Wayne@WaynesPets.com

    >
    >
    >
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 1, 2006
    #85
  6. Peter Pan

    David Zopf Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    news:43E00531.6030005@WayneSallee.com...

    I asked once, and politely, Wayne. You and Jamie are OT for r.a.m.reefs.

    > It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved from simple matter
    > than it does to believe that it was created. Anyone here done a lot of
    > breeding of something like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far you
    > can breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast, generation after
    > generation, but who has breed a guppy into a platty?


    Breeding a "guppy into a platy" is not prediced by evolution, even on a
    "thousands of generations" scale. Creative non-sequiturs are a mark of
    fundamental misunderstanding. If you choose to continue (in an appropriate
    forum), I'd suggest you study the topic of your discourse further. At this
    point, you fail to understand its basic tenets.

    >You can only breed a fish or anything so far to what you want it to be, and
    >you hit a brick wall.
    >

    This is somwhat on-topic. That "brick wall" is likely more to do with
    limits on variety of the breeder's genetic stock (true natural selction
    requires mutation, a multitude of generations, and a wide variety of genetic
    stock to act upon), limits on what pressures you can put on the population
    (most breeder pressure is a sole function of culling adolescents, any traits
    that develop closer to breeding age aren't accounted or selected for),
    limits on the scope of experiment (even commercial breeders are dwafed by
    the abilities of nature to act on a population of fish), and limits on your
    understanding of what evolution predicts (guppies won't evolve into
    platies).

    > Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that Musiums (sic) put
    > documents up on the wall that they know are not true, just to help make it
    > look like they have proof.


    In that other forum where you should continue this, you will be expected to
    provide contemporary evidence of such claims, and demonstrate that deception
    was the actual intent. Science is hardly flawless (no one disputes this),
    but unlike other principles of thought, science will correct itself, when it
    is found to be in error. And not suprisingly, those errors and the rare
    hoax are discovered by other scientists, far more often than not.

    > "Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not one bit of proof to the
    > *theory* of evolution.
    >

    One aspect of your fundamental misunderstanding is that scientific theories
    are ever "proven". They are not. Newton's theory of gravity has never been
    "proven", yet the behavior it predicts happens reliably enough that we all
    leave our homes each morning with a fair bit of confidence that we won't
    float away into outer space. And yet still, Newton's theory doesn't hold
    for objects extremely small (atomic and subatomic structures), nor for
    objects moving extremely fast (approaching the speed of light). Key to
    understanding any theory is understanding the limits of its application.
    A hypothesis is proposed that can be used to make certain predictions, those
    predictions are tested, and evidence is gathered. When the data disproves
    the hypothesis, the hypothesis is modified to accomodate the data (as per
    Newtonian Gravitation Theory progressing into General Relativity Thoery), or
    the hypothesis is rejected, based on the volume of evidence. Testing begins
    anew on the revised hypothesis.
    The result of this iterative process is a model for how the natural world
    behaves, with a means of predicting future behavior. In the case of the
    particular model you take issue with, the accumulated evidence is vast and
    broad, and the model is used for a variety of purposes to direct benefit to
    mankind (flu vaccinations, and the elimination of smallpox, to name two).
    As with any scientific theory, "proof" is not required or expected (by
    scientists, anyways), successful predictions and the accumulated evidence
    from past testing are. "Proofs" are the realm of pure mathematics, not
    science.

    Regards,
    DaveZ
    Atom Weaver
     
    David Zopf, Feb 1, 2006
    #86
  7. Peter Pan

    Jaime R-S Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Not faith Wayne, we can see it every day, happening right now,
    http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/phil/fetal.htm

    Checkout that site, we come from a single cell, we even have tails and
    branchia in our development...

    There is no God involved in any living thing's development

    jrs
    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    news:43E00531.6030005@WayneSallee.com...
    > It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved from simple matter
    > than it does to believe that it was created. Anyone here done a lot of
    > breeding of something like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far you
    > can breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast, generation after
    > generation, but who has breed a guppy into a platty? You can only breed a
    > fish or anything so far to what you want it to be, and you hit a brick
    > wall.
    >
    > Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that Musiums put
    > documents up on the wall that they know are not true, just to help make it
    > look like they have proof. "Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not
    > one bit of proof to the *theory* of evolution.
    >
    >
    > Wayne Sallee
    > Wayne's Pets
    > Wayne@WaynesPets.com
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > Jaime R-S wrote on 1/31/2006 7:33 PM:
    >> Wao, here we go with religion!
    >> Kid, let it go, there are more and better things to talk about.
    >> If there was a creator...
    >> Who created you? wasn't it your parents? and them?
    >> Then, if all the people we know or have heard of had parents, Who did God
    >> create? Adam and Eve? well, there is not one piece of evidence other
    >> than faith that can place such humans on this earth!
    >>
    >> Stop please, lets leave faith and fairy tales out of this forum...
    >>
    >> jrs
    >> "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    >> news:43DF9AEF.20405@WayneSallee.com...
    >>
    >>>Pszemol wrote on 1/30/2006 10:44 PM:
    >>>
    >>>>I would not consider it strange at all.
    >>>>The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...
    >>>
    >>> Evolution is a great for people that don't want to
    >>>acknowledge the reality of the Creator.
    >>>
    >>>My computer evolved from a toaster oven.
    >>>
    >>>I tried to make some toast the other day, but even though the slots are
    >>>of different sizes, I could not get a slice of bread in there. Obviously,
    >>>an inferior evolutionary process. I'm sure it will become extinct soon.
    >>>
    >>>Get a chain, and cut every other link. Throw out all of the cut links.
    >>>Take all of the intact links and arrange them so that they look pretty.
    >>>You will then have a good working model of the theory of evolution.
    >>>
    >>>Actually, evolution is easy to prove. Simply gather some old bones from a
    >>>variety of animals (your choice), and some human bones, and put them
    >>>together so that they look half human, and then give it a name like
    >>>Suzie.
    >>>
    >>>Scientist have recently discovered a new class of creatures down deep in
    >>>the sea. They have classified them in the zoowacko group. They have 2
    >>>heads and 3 eyes on each head :)
    >>>
    >>>Zigg and Zagg, Martians from Venus (they were born on Mars, but now live
    >>>on Venus), did a study of the evolutionary order on earth. They decided
    >>>to first doccument the order of evolvement of machines, since it was what
    >>>most interested them. It was quite interesting reading, and learning how
    >>>the different machines evolved from each other, like cars, trucks,
    >>>microwaves, television sets, laptops, PDA's, watches, cranes, excetera.
    >>>If you do a search on the internet you might be able to find their report
    >>>:)
    >>>They still have a few missing links to figure out. After they get that
    >>>study completely finished, they are going to do their next study on
    >>>animals and it's evolvement on the great planet Earth. After both of
    >>>those studies are completed and proven, they are to decide "which came
    >>>first, the animals, or the machines?" Zigg and Zagg have pritty-much
    >>>decided that the machines came first since they are more basic in
    >>>construction than the animals, but that has yet to be proven.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Wayne Sallee
    >>>Wayne's Pets
    >>>Wayne@WaynesPets.com

    >>
    >>
     
    Jaime R-S, Feb 2, 2006
    #87
  8. Peter Pan

    Jaime R-S Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    I totally agree with you, but in my last post I did mention a link to fish
    in human development, let it pass, I won't continue...

    jrs
    "David Zopf" <davidxzopf@snetx.net> wrote in message
    news:GZ6Ef.10297$NS6.7132@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43E00531.6030005@WayneSallee.com...
    >
    > I asked once, and politely, Wayne. You and Jamie are OT for r.a.m.reefs.
    >
    >> It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved from simple matter
    >> than it does to believe that it was created. Anyone here done a lot of
    >> breeding of something like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far
    >> you can breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast, generation
    >> after generation, but who has breed a guppy into a platty?

    >
    > Breeding a "guppy into a platy" is not prediced by evolution, even on a
    > "thousands of generations" scale. Creative non-sequiturs are a mark of
    > fundamental misunderstanding. If you choose to continue (in an
    > appropriate forum), I'd suggest you study the topic of your discourse
    > further. At this point, you fail to understand its basic tenets.
    >
    >>You can only breed a fish or anything so far to what you want it to be,
    >>and you hit a brick wall.
    >>

    > This is somwhat on-topic. That "brick wall" is likely more to do with
    > limits on variety of the breeder's genetic stock (true natural selction
    > requires mutation, a multitude of generations, and a wide variety of
    > genetic stock to act upon), limits on what pressures you can put on the
    > population (most breeder pressure is a sole function of culling
    > adolescents, any traits that develop closer to breeding age aren't
    > accounted or selected for), limits on the scope of experiment (even
    > commercial breeders are dwafed by the abilities of nature to act on a
    > population of fish), and limits on your understanding of what evolution
    > predicts (guppies won't evolve into platies).
    >
    >> Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that Musiums (sic) put
    >> documents up on the wall that they know are not true, just to help make
    >> it look like they have proof.

    >
    > In that other forum where you should continue this, you will be expected
    > to provide contemporary evidence of such claims, and demonstrate that
    > deception was the actual intent. Science is hardly flawless (no one
    > disputes this), but unlike other principles of thought, science will
    > correct itself, when it is found to be in error. And not suprisingly,
    > those errors and the rare hoax are discovered by other scientists, far
    > more often than not.
    >
    >> "Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not one bit of proof to the
    >> *theory* of evolution.
    >>

    > One aspect of your fundamental misunderstanding is that scientific
    > theories are ever "proven". They are not. Newton's theory of gravity has
    > never been "proven", yet the behavior it predicts happens reliably enough
    > that we all leave our homes each morning with a fair bit of confidence
    > that we won't float away into outer space. And yet still, Newton's theory
    > doesn't hold for objects extremely small (atomic and subatomic
    > structures), nor for objects moving extremely fast (approaching the speed
    > of light). Key to understanding any theory is understanding the limits of
    > its application.
    > A hypothesis is proposed that can be used to make certain predictions,
    > those predictions are tested, and evidence is gathered. When the data
    > disproves the hypothesis, the hypothesis is modified to accomodate the
    > data (as per Newtonian Gravitation Theory progressing into General
    > Relativity Thoery), or the hypothesis is rejected, based on the volume of
    > evidence. Testing begins anew on the revised hypothesis.
    > The result of this iterative process is a model for how the natural world
    > behaves, with a means of predicting future behavior. In the case of the
    > particular model you take issue with, the accumulated evidence is vast and
    > broad, and the model is used for a variety of purposes to direct benefit
    > to mankind (flu vaccinations, and the elimination of smallpox, to name
    > two). As with any scientific theory, "proof" is not required or expected
    > (by scientists, anyways), successful predictions and the accumulated
    > evidence from past testing are. "Proofs" are the realm of pure
    > mathematics, not science.
    >
    > Regards,
    > DaveZ
    > Atom Weaver
    >
    >
     
    Jaime R-S, Feb 2, 2006
    #88
  9. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "David Zopf" <davidxzopf@snetx.net> wrote in message news:GZ6Ef.10297$NS6.7132@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
    > I asked once, and politely, Wayne. You and Jamie are OT for r.a.m.reefs.


    Then why do you take part in this OT discussion yourself ?
    You are only adding oil to the fire already burning...
     
    Pszemol, Feb 2, 2006
    #89
  10. Peter Pan

    unclenorm Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Hi, Pszemol
    By stating you use tap water to make your salt mix
    you've made the rest of your posts on this subject totally erelavent.
    regards,
    uncle norm
     
    unclenorm, Feb 2, 2006
    #90
  11. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "unclenorm" <normnam2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1138887311.304688.31380@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
    > By stating you use tap water to make your salt mix
    > you've made the rest of your posts on this subject totally erelavent.


    Yes, I use *treated* tap water.
    What do you use ? Rainwater ? Melted glacier ? Natural Sea Water ?

    I use RO/DI filters, but I am sure they leave more than micro-grams
    of many listed elements here... and you cannot do anything about it!
    If you think the water coming out of your RO filter is pure H2O you
    are simply cheating yourself.
     
    Pszemol, Feb 2, 2006
    #91
  12. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    It's really not OT.

    The more we understand the origin of what we keep, and the
    more we understand why they act the way they do, the
    better we can take care of them.

    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com


    David Zopf wrote on 2/1/2006 1:20 PM:
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43E00531.6030005@WayneSallee.com...
    >
    > I asked once, and politely, Wayne. You and Jamie are OT for r.a.m.reefs.
    >
    >
    >>It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved from simple matter
    >>than it does to believe that it was created. Anyone here done a lot of
    >>breeding of something like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far you
    >>can breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast, generation after
    >>generation, but who has breed a guppy into a platty?

    >
    >
    > Breeding a "guppy into a platy" is not prediced by evolution, even on a
    > "thousands of generations" scale. Creative non-sequiturs are a mark of
    > fundamental misunderstanding. If you choose to continue (in an appropriate
    > forum), I'd suggest you study the topic of your discourse further. At this
    > point, you fail to understand its basic tenets.
    >
    >
    >>You can only breed a fish or anything so far to what you want it to be, and
    >>you hit a brick wall.
    >>

    >
    > This is somwhat on-topic. That "brick wall" is likely more to do with
    > limits on variety of the breeder's genetic stock (true natural selction
    > requires mutation, a multitude of generations, and a wide variety of genetic
    > stock to act upon), limits on what pressures you can put on the population
    > (most breeder pressure is a sole function of culling adolescents, any traits
    > that develop closer to breeding age aren't accounted or selected for),
    > limits on the scope of experiment (even commercial breeders are dwafed by
    > the abilities of nature to act on a population of fish), and limits on your
    > understanding of what evolution predicts (guppies won't evolve into
    > platies).
    >
    >
    >>Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that Musiums (sic) put
    >>documents up on the wall that they know are not true, just to help make it
    >>look like they have proof.

    >
    >
    > In that other forum where you should continue this, you will be expected to
    > provide contemporary evidence of such claims, and demonstrate that deception
    > was the actual intent. Science is hardly flawless (no one disputes this),
    > but unlike other principles of thought, science will correct itself, when it
    > is found to be in error. And not suprisingly, those errors and the rare
    > hoax are discovered by other scientists, far more often than not.
    >
    >
    >>"Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not one bit of proof to the
    >>*theory* of evolution.
    >>

    >
    > One aspect of your fundamental misunderstanding is that scientific theories
    > are ever "proven". They are not. Newton's theory of gravity has never been
    > "proven", yet the behavior it predicts happens reliably enough that we all
    > leave our homes each morning with a fair bit of confidence that we won't
    > float away into outer space. And yet still, Newton's theory doesn't hold
    > for objects extremely small (atomic and subatomic structures), nor for
    > objects moving extremely fast (approaching the speed of light). Key to
    > understanding any theory is understanding the limits of its application.
    > A hypothesis is proposed that can be used to make certain predictions, those
    > predictions are tested, and evidence is gathered. When the data disproves
    > the hypothesis, the hypothesis is modified to accomodate the data (as per
    > Newtonian Gravitation Theory progressing into General Relativity Thoery), or
    > the hypothesis is rejected, based on the volume of evidence. Testing begins
    > anew on the revised hypothesis.
    > The result of this iterative process is a model for how the natural world
    > behaves, with a means of predicting future behavior. In the case of the
    > particular model you take issue with, the accumulated evidence is vast and
    > broad, and the model is used for a variety of purposes to direct benefit to
    > mankind (flu vaccinations, and the elimination of smallpox, to name two).
    > As with any scientific theory, "proof" is not required or expected (by
    > scientists, anyways), successful predictions and the accumulated evidence
    > from past testing are. "Proofs" are the realm of pure mathematics, not
    > science.
    >
    > Regards,
    > DaveZ
    > Atom Weaver
    >
    >
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 2, 2006
    #92
  13. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Yes, I'm aware of the tail thing, but that still does not
    proove that we evolved from animals any more than my
    computer evolved from a toaster oven.

    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com


    Jaime R-S wrote on 2/1/2006 7:22 PM:
    > Not faith Wayne, we can see it every day, happening right now,
    > http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/phil/fetal.htm
    >
    > Checkout that site, we come from a single cell, we even have tails and
    > branchia in our development...
    >
    > There is no God involved in any living thing's development
    >
    > jrs
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43E00531.6030005@WayneSallee.com...
    >
    >>It takes more faith to believe that everything evolved from simple matter
    >>than it does to believe that it was created. Anyone here done a lot of
    >>breeding of something like guppies? There is a genetic wall of how far you
    >>can breed them or anything els. Guppies reproduce fast, generation after
    >>generation, but who has breed a guppy into a platty? You can only breed a
    >>fish or anything so far to what you want it to be, and you hit a brick
    >>wall.
    >>
    >>Evolution is the Fary tail. Evolution is so faulty that Musiums put
    >>documents up on the wall that they know are not true, just to help make it
    >>look like they have proof. "Suzy" is a prime example of that. There is not
    >>one bit of proof to the *theory* of evolution.
    >>
    >>
    >>Wayne Sallee
    >>Wayne's Pets
    >>Wayne@WaynesPets.com
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>Jaime R-S wrote on 1/31/2006 7:33 PM:
    >>
    >>>Wao, here we go with religion!
    >>>Kid, let it go, there are more and better things to talk about.
    >>>If there was a creator...
    >>>Who created you? wasn't it your parents? and them?
    >>>Then, if all the people we know or have heard of had parents, Who did God
    >>>create? Adam and Eve? well, there is not one piece of evidence other
    >>>than faith that can place such humans on this earth!
    >>>
    >>>Stop please, lets leave faith and fairy tales out of this forum...
    >>>
    >>>jrs
    >>>"Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    >>>news:43DF9AEF.20405@WayneSallee.com...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Pszemol wrote on 1/30/2006 10:44 PM:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I would not consider it strange at all.
    >>>>>The Life on Earth originated from the ocean...
    >>>>
    >>>>Evolution is a great for people that don't want to
    >>>>acknowledge the reality of the Creator.
    >>>>
    >>>>My computer evolved from a toaster oven.
    >>>>
    >>>>I tried to make some toast the other day, but even though the slots are
    >>>>of different sizes, I could not get a slice of bread in there. Obviously,
    >>>>an inferior evolutionary process. I'm sure it will become extinct soon.
    >>>>
    >>>>Get a chain, and cut every other link. Throw out all of the cut links.
    >>>>Take all of the intact links and arrange them so that they look pretty.
    >>>>You will then have a good working model of the theory of evolution.
    >>>>
    >>>>Actually, evolution is easy to prove. Simply gather some old bones from a
    >>>>variety of animals (your choice), and some human bones, and put them
    >>>>together so that they look half human, and then give it a name like
    >>>>Suzie.
    >>>>
    >>>>Scientist have recently discovered a new class of creatures down deep in
    >>>>the sea. They have classified them in the zoowacko group. They have 2
    >>>>heads and 3 eyes on each head :)
    >>>>
    >>>>Zigg and Zagg, Martians from Venus (they were born on Mars, but now live
    >>>>on Venus), did a study of the evolutionary order on earth. They decided
    >>>>to first doccument the order of evolvement of machines, since it was what
    >>>>most interested them. It was quite interesting reading, and learning how
    >>>>the different machines evolved from each other, like cars, trucks,
    >>>>microwaves, television sets, laptops, PDA's, watches, cranes, excetera.
    >>>>If you do a search on the internet you might be able to find their report
    >>>>:)
    >>>>They still have a few missing links to figure out. After they get that
    >>>>study completely finished, they are going to do their next study on
    >>>>animals and it's evolvement on the great planet Earth. After both of
    >>>>those studies are completed and proven, they are to decide "which came
    >>>>first, the animals, or the machines?" Zigg and Zagg have pritty-much
    >>>>decided that the machines came first since they are more basic in
    >>>>construction than the animals, but that has yet to be proven.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Wayne Sallee
    >>>>Wayne's Pets
    >>>>Wayne@WaynesPets.com
    >>>
    >>>

    >
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 2, 2006
    #93
  14. Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Wayne Sallee wrote:
    > It's really not OT.
    >
    > The more we understand the origin of what we keep, and the more we
    > understand why they act the way they do, the better we can take care of
    > them.


    Okay, I'll bite - You haven't said what origin story you believe vs.
    evolution, but since you don't buy evolution, how does your origin
    explanation help you to "understand why [fish] act the way they do"?

    It's not like the Bible has any fish husbandry instructions for the
    strict creationists, and "Intelligent Design" doesn't attempt to
    identify the Designer, let alone tell us the rationale for
    his/her/it/their/??? design, so I'm at a loss to figure out how
    believing in that helps you in understanding animals.

    Not that I care all that much what your personal beliefs are, it's just
    that I'm at a loss at how a non-evolutionary explanation of origin can
    have much of a practical bearing on how we keep fish tanks.
     
    Rocco Moretti, Feb 2, 2006
    #94
  15. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Moon Snails:

    An evolution viewpoint-
    They develped a way to eat nails in such a way that other
    creatures could not.

    A creation viewpoint-
    They were created to eat snails thus keeping the snail
    poplulation in check.

    Coral Reef Death:

    An evolution viewpoint-
    The corals have addapted to the environmental conditions
    that they live in, and can't take the sudden increas in
    temperature, or other environmental factors.

    A creation viewpoint-
    Some dyoff is part of the created plan to keep things in
    proper ballance.

    Parot Fish:

    An evolution viewpoit-
    They have evolved a way to get nutrition out of coral by
    eating flesh and coral skeleton.

    A creation viewpoint-
    They were created to trim the coral, and help in the cycle
    of calcim by dropping large amounts of calcium carbonate sand.

    Cleaner Shrimp:

    An evolution viewpoint-
    They have learned over milions of years to eat parisites
    off of fish. And have marked themselves, and changed their
    body to be seen by fish wanting to be cleaned. And fish
    have learned over milions of years to go to the shrimp to
    be cleande.

    A creation viewpoint-
    They were created to clean fish, and Fish were given the
    instinct to go to them to be cleaned.


    Whether you belive in creation, or evolution, affects the
    way you look at, and deal with the life in your reef tank,
    and the life around you.

    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com



    Rocco Moretti wrote on 2/2/2006 10:26 AM:
    > Wayne Sallee wrote:
    >
    >> It's really not OT.
    >>
    >> The more we understand the origin of what we keep, and the more we
    >> understand why they act the way they do, the better we can take care
    >> of them.

    >
    >
    > Okay, I'll bite - You haven't said what origin story you believe vs.
    > evolution, but since you don't buy evolution, how does your origin
    > explanation help you to "understand why [fish] act the way they do"?
    >
    > It's not like the Bible has any fish husbandry instructions for the
    > strict creationists, and "Intelligent Design" doesn't attempt to
    > identify the Designer, let alone tell us the rationale for
    > his/her/it/their/??? design, so I'm at a loss to figure out how
    > believing in that helps you in understanding animals.
    >
    > Not that I care all that much what your personal beliefs are, it's just
    > that I'm at a loss at how a non-evolutionary explanation of origin can
    > have much of a practical bearing on how we keep fish tanks.
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 2, 2006
    #95
  16. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message news:43E23FC5.9090007@WayneSallee.com...
    > Whether you belive in creation, or evolution, affects the
    > way you look at, and deal with the life in your reef tank,
    > and the life around you.


    Humans:

    An evolutionism viewpoint-
    They have tail and branchia in prenatal development because
    they are related to other vertebrates...

    A creationism viewpoint-
    They have tail and branchia in prenatal development beacuse
    [...]

    You fill the blank! :)
     
    Pszemol, Feb 2, 2006
    #96
  17. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    I don't know. I'm not a medical doctor. :)
    I have not done any research on fetal developement. But
    even if you and I had a 6 foot long tail, it still would
    not prove that we evolved from animals.

    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com


    Pszemol wrote on 2/2/2006 2:37 PM:
    > "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message
    > news:43E23FC5.9090007@WayneSallee.com...
    >
    >> Whether you belive in creation, or evolution, affects the way you look
    >> at, and deal with the life in your reef tank, and the life around you.

    >
    >
    > Humans:
    >
    > An evolutionism viewpoint-
    > They have tail and branchia in prenatal development because
    > they are related to other vertebrates...
    >
    > A creationism viewpoint-
    > They have tail and branchia in prenatal development beacuse
    > [...]
    >
    > You fill the blank! :)
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 2, 2006
    #97
  18. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message news:43E26901.4090004@WayneSallee.com...
    > I don't know. I'm not a medical doctor. :)


    Nice excuse Wayne... but you were so sure God created
    those previously listed animals for the purpose you named...
    Are you a marine zoology Ph.D. ? Ichtiologist ? Oceanographer ?

    So if you do not need to have PhD in marine zoology to know
    the purpose of the parrot fish peculiar behaviour take the guess
    on what is the purpose of branchia in human development...
    You are a human being... Do you need branchia ? Tail ?
    Why develop something just to remove it before human is born ?
    Can we say "God made a mistake"? :)))))

    > I have not done any research on fetal developement. But
    > even if you and I had a 6 foot long tail, it still would
    > not prove that we evolved from animals.


    Unfortunatelly...
    What you just said negates ANY reasoning whatsoever in this subject.
    And this is not a big surprise, since religion or faith have nothing in
    common with scientific reasoning. For me, it makes an end of discussion.

    And please, do not tempt us to continue this debate and do not reply.
    Thanks!
     
    Pszemol, Feb 2, 2006
    #98
  19. Peter Pan

    Wayne Sallee Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    Pszemol wrote on 2/2/2006 4:21 PM:
    > Nice excuse Wayne... but you were so sure God created
    > those previously listed animals for the purpose you named...
    > Are you a marine zoology Ph.D. ? Ichtiologist ? Oceanographer ?
    >
    > So if you do not need to have PhD in marine zoology to know
    > the purpose of the parrot fish peculiar behaviour take the guess
    > on what is the purpose of branchia in human development...
    > You are a human being... Do you need branchia ? Tail ?
    > Why develop something just to remove it before human is born ?
    > Can we say "God made a mistake"? :)))))


    I've done a lot more research on the reef environment than
    I have or ever will do on fetal development. I'm sorry to
    disapoint you in that I have not done extensive research
    on fetal development. :)

    Wayne Sallee
    Wayne's Pets
    Wayne@WaynesPets.com
     
    Wayne Sallee, Feb 2, 2006
    #99
  20. Peter Pan

    Pszemol Guest

    Re: What's the best SALT? IO facts !!

    "Wayne Sallee" <Wayne@WayneSallee.com> wrote in message news:43E279CC.8020302@WayneSallee.com...
    > I've done a lot more research on the reef environment than
    > I have or ever will do on fetal development. I'm sorry to
    > disapoint you in that I have not done extensive research
    > on fetal development. :)


    I am affraid, you are missing the point...

    You do not need any reaserch to know, being a human,
    that you do not need branchia nor the tail... but you had
    them, guaranteed, before you were born...
    There is not question about "if" they are there - they are!
    This is the fact. The question is "why", or "what for".
     
    Pszemol, Feb 2, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.