Questions...

Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?

The key word here being 'certain'... I personally believe that they do not withold the cures but often make them so ridiculously expensive and inavailable that they never reach the stage to become available for chemist or prescription use.

I think a lot of 'hoping this is the truth' has influenced the above :(



Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?

No, simply because they would love another excuse to raise the price of their services. "Service X is our greener service and so the price is indeed 10 fold".


Do you believe in aliens?

Yes. I believe there must be 'something out there'; whether that is a fellow race similar to human- kind or simply an oozing moss, i find it hard to believe Earth is the only place containing life within the Universe and beyond.

Where do you think we came from?

Depending on what you mean by this question, kindly select the appropriate answer from below:

a) Evolutionary process. b) When a mummy & daddy love each other very much....
 
Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?

I don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me because the purpose of those organisation is to maximise their profits. If witholding it would be more profitable than releasing it, it might be withheld.

Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?

Same answer as above.

Do you believe in aliens?

Believe? No. I consider it extremely highly probable that alien life of some form exists somewhere and highly probable that alien people are alive somewhere. Although the existence of people is probably extremely rare, there are an extremely large number of opportunities for it to happen, even just in this galaxy.

Where do you think we came from?
Earth. Probably in the area now known as Africa.
 
Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?
No

Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?
No

Do you believe in aliens?
I have been in a spaceship with aliens (and no I wasn't probed)

Where do you think we came from?
The aliens told me that they put us here about 100,000 years ago
 
Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?

It's possible... same answer as below really.


Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?

possibly? I wouldn't know having not looked into it.


Do you believe in aliens?

I'm open to the possibility, though I doubt there is intelligent life, if any at all tbh.


Where do you think we came from?

Asuming you mean Humanity, then where we came from is hard to exaplain in short, but how we came to be IMO is from God.
 
Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?
No not really but they do not spend time and money looking for certain treatments because there is no money in it eg AIDS.


Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?
maybe 10/20 years ago but not now


Do you believe in aliens?

err no

Where do you think we came from?
fish at one point in time
 
Do you think major pharmaceutical companies withhold certain cures to benefit their own profits?

Do you think power companies withhold major advances to maintain their profits?

In other words do you think they put money before the health of people?

of course they will. People are just statistics to companies... not flesh and blood.. they have targets to meet like every other company.

They will manipulate the herd as much as it is in their power to do so to maximize their profit without destabilishing their own position. (and without decimating the herd of course)

Even if one of these companies e.g. Smithkline Beecham were to be found guilty of horrendous crimes against people....

the only penalty is one which they understand....a Fine and can easily live with.

And so it goes on and has went on for a long time......
 
I think we have grown into what we are today, I dont believe we evolved from apes but I do believe there is simply a very strong resemblence. our brain might have been at a similar level but then so is a cats to a dogs, a whale to a shark and a rat to a mouse.
No-one is claiming that humans evolved from modern apes. That's a strawman from some creationists. The idea is that modern apes and humans evolved from a common ancestor, a very long time ago.

I think we have always been humans, even as cavemen we was never described as apes, the person to have invented the wheel certainly wasnt an ape.

Humans (and pre-human hominids) never really were "cavemen", but that's besides the point. The hominids you refer to existed long after the split I refer to above and the wheel was invented long after that.

when a species evolves, the whole species evolves, not a segment of it.
Why?

in argument though you can compare the sub catagories to seperate, compare a black man to a white man and you can easily see different features. this is the equivelant of comparing types of horse, there are types of human of which are by coincidence seem to originate from particular parts of the world.
Which subcategories are you refering to? Minor variations in features are just that - minor. Skin colour is an obvious adaptation to local enviromental conditions by varying melanin production - less melanin provides a slight advantage in conditions of less sunlight, more melanin provides a slight advantage in conditions of more sunlight (UV exposure rather than sunlight, to be accurate).

whether evolution depends on where you are in the world or not I do not know
It does, because that determines enviromental conditions. Melanin is an easy example - it's a UV filter. Ideally, a certain amount of UV should penetrate the skin - it's good for you. So in parts of the world which commonly have relatively high levels of UV exposure, it's beneficial for people to have very high levels of melanin in their skin, to try to filter UV down to optimum levels, but in parts of the world which commonly have relatively low levels of UV exposure, it's beneficial for people to have very low levels of melanin in their skin, to make the most of the small amount of UV. It's also beneficial to be able to vary melanin production in response to seasonable variations in UV exposure - a suntan.

but it does bring up new questions. apparently all life is meant to have originated from africa. and yet to the north of this is the sahara desert, the most dead of all deadlands.
It's there now, but it wasn't back then. Even in recorded history, it was far less harsh than it was now. Even if it had been as bad, some people would still have striven to find out what, if anything, was on the other side. People are like that.

to answer the evolution of ourselves - I would like to think we are getting more evolved over time but I highly doubt it as what proof is there?

Archeological remains. Genetics. It's all evidence, not proof.

I cant see us changing thinking about it. look at the apes, gorrillas, dolphins, seaguls, the platupus, penguin and many other creatures we dont so much have data on. admittedly we havent studied long enough to be able to prove the evolutionary theory, but we have been around since the stoneage, and all that has changed is what we have learned and not us ourselves.

Humans are a relatively long-lived species and in recorded history they have generally adapted our environment to suit them rather than vice versa and/or used their intelligence and tool-using ability to construct protection from the environment. In other words, humans have acted to stop human evolution in physical terms. Given that and the relatively short time-frame you're looking at, it's no surprise that you don't see physical changes in humans.
 
It's funny how people just seem to "buy" the idea that evolution is an explanation of life in this thread, when evolution alone doesn't explain where we came from, or atleast not where we originaly came from.
 
1 no

2 no

3 i hope there are, so yes

4, big bang, let off by god. but the creation of man....god (but in stages) for rest of worl, aka other animals, evolution)
 
by no means do i want to divert this thread, but can you back up your statement there? (not flaming, just curious)

Article I read in New Scientist just before Christmas:

http://www.newscientist.com/channel...es-causing-human-evolution-to-accelerate.html

Unfortunately you can't read much of it online :(

yantorsen said:
you'll no doubt get linked to a 100% reliable Wiki article.

New Scientist reputable enough for you?


More on evolution:

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/being-human/human-evolution
 
Last edited:
you'll no doubt get linked to a 100% reliable Wiki article.
Feel free to try to find examples of me linking to Wikipedia as a reliable source for anything much.

Do you even know what I'm being asked to substantiate? You're speaking without knowledge and I'm midly curious as to how far your lack of knowledge extends.
 
Feel free to try to find examples of me linking to Wikipedia as a reliable source for anything much.

Do you even know what I'm being asked to substantiate? You're speaking without knowledge and I'm midly curious as to how far your lack of knowledge extends.

when did I mention you?

and I've no idea how you've asumed the last bit?

care to explain...
 
by no means do i want to divert this thread, but can you back up your statement there? (not flaming, just curious)

If you're a creationist, there's no point in me providing any references to any evidence that humans have ever evolved in any way. Your faith would come first.

If you aren't, I'm not sure why you're asking that question. Surely you must have seen some evidence, or references to evidence, for yourself? I made a point of explicitly stating that it was evidence, not proof.
 
when did I mention you?

and I've no idea how you've asumed the last bit?

care to explain...

Posts 51 and 52.

I made a statement. shaffaaf27 else asked me, that's me personally, to substantiate it. Their question was explicitly asked of me personally, not as an open question. You replied, saying that "you'll no doubt get linked to a 100% reliable Wiki article." Since the question was asked of me personally, not an open question, the implication is that you had no doubt about my reply.
 
Posts 51 and 52.

I made a statement. shaffaaf27 else asked me, that's me personally, to substantiate it. Their question was explicitly asked of me personally, not as an open question. You replied, saying that "you'll no doubt get linked to a 100% reliable Wiki article." Since the question was asked of me personally, not an open question, the implication is that you had no doubt about my reply.

so it is, I hadn't read the quote included in the post.

sorry for the misunderstanding, but can you please exaplain why I have no knowledge please?
 
Back
Top Bottom