Karl_Magnus
Sergeant
Then you aren't French Canadian.
-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
Evolution is wrong,Development is right
- Thread starter GreenLight7
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
Sergeant
Both are proven theories, macro evolution being the older of the two, not that you can use the two terms independently and only "believe" in one. One can only argue for replacing the current theory of evolution for a better theory of evolution, not no evolution. Otherwise you pick a fight with biology, genetics, geology, medicine, chemistry and physics which all contributed many experiments to prove the theory so good luck with that.
As for the OP: Bollocks. Get some higher education, then come back.
what if the moooon were made of cheese?
Aho
Recruit
I told this guy not to snort that old butter.
CoolYo
Regular
I should clarify I suppose. I certainly believe macro-evolution is plausible and feasible, it is just that the current model of macro-evolution is not absolute, as even richard dawkins will tell you it can not be a law, as it does not have a mathematical relationship in nature as all other scientific laws do. However, he also suggests that to consider it a mere theory is intellectually dishonest and open to dismantling by laymen, so therefore should call it a fact not quite up-to par with a law absolute truth, but not mere scientific conjecture or speculation either. With which, I have bit of an issue I think that it is capable of having a more mathematical basis in nature. However, I do not want to make this post too long, so suffice to say i should correct myself in that i agree with macro-evolution, but that i believe it is still feasible and within parameters to suggest there might be 2 origin points rather than 1 which is commonly believed that we all originated from the ocean which may be true, but could also be that there are 2 origin points rather than 1, which even some famed biologists and chemists have thought might be the case with insects for instance. There are also mathematical approaches that can be attempted to have a more concrete vision of macro-evolution.
Discussing evolution on a taleworlds video game forum has to be an absolute low in ones life.
What you wrote.In what base evolution is?ten Men skulls and ten monkey skulls,And?You can see how sciementists recognized age of Moon,-"Measure." "18,7 billion" "It is not right,too high number....try without plumbum" "aaahn...without plumbum three and half billion" "that's right."
So...with half science they measured and NOW MEASURE wrong,Recent news-Scientists proven........that skull,found in 2015 NOW proves..." what they do for 5 years?Measure to GET right age? They found remains of animal by their measurement older than they thought can be in water,you can search.And.HOW THIS PROVES ANY EVOLUTION.WHAT ANIMAL BELIEVES THAT HIS ANCESTOR WAS MONKEY.Pigs have some organs similar to human,you are a pig?Elephant are clever,you are an elephant?
In Some Games Word "evolution" Used as same as Develop i do not like it,evolution is stupid insulting theory,Much people,Like me,Who want TO BUY That Game Not Like It,SO WE WANT TO BUY THIS GAME WITH STILL HEART,When it Comes.
So...with half science they measured and NOW MEASURE wrong,Recent news-Scientists proven........that skull,found in 2015 NOW proves..." what they do for 5 years?Measure to GET right age? They found remains of animal by their measurement older than they thought can be in water,you can search.And.HOW THIS PROVES ANY EVOLUTION.WHAT ANIMAL BELIEVES THAT HIS ANCESTOR WAS MONKEY.Pigs have some organs similar to human,you are a pig?Elephant are clever,you are an elephant?
I Started discussion to putoff word evoltion from all game.
In Some Games Word "evolution" Used as same as Develop i do not like it,evolution is stupid insulting theory,Much people,Like me,Who want TO BUY That Game Not Like It,SO WE WANT TO BUY THIS GAME WITH STILL HEART,When it Comes.
Last edited:
Hey recruits, wanna see more crazy **** like this? Then why not spend some time at the Anachronistic guild. Here at the TW forums we got all kinds of crazy and debates that will keep you enraged, engaged until the end of time of itself. Come on in, the water is putrid.
Those poor evolutionists, wasting their time when some religious baloney from millenia ago had it all worked out! Immunologists are similarly disproved by random Karens on facebook that have 'researched' vaccinations.
Out of interest OP, what part of Bannerlord are you refering to that mentions evolution?
Out of interest OP, what part of Bannerlord are you refering to that mentions evolution?
whats a plum bum
have some from my avatar mate
People that base their reality on religious texts that are centuries old, written with a social context that does not exist anymore, with no consideration for all knowledge that mankind has learned from that point in history until today... Please, never cease to exist, we need you to see how far we have evolved.
Also, OP, nobody has ever said that man comes from monkey, what has been said is that mankind had shared ancestry with apes some 5-8 million years ago. And in case you are wondering, apes are not monkeys and mankind has no relation to monkeys, well, aside from the enjoyment of chaotic behavior just to piss people off.
Also, OP, nobody has ever said that man comes from monkey, what has been said is that mankind had shared ancestry with apes some 5-8 million years ago. And in case you are wondering, apes are not monkeys and mankind has no relation to monkeys, well, aside from the enjoyment of chaotic behavior just to piss people off.
This is oxymoron. A theory ceases to be a theory when it is proven. It is called a theory precisely because it hasn't been proven.
And the self awareness of people in this thread is very comedic.
Incorrect
The meaning of the term scientific theory (often contracted to theory for brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory. In everyday speech, theory can imply an explanation that represents an unsubstantiated and speculative guess, whereas in science it describes an explanation that has been tested and widely accepted as valid.
Ciderglove
Recruit
This is oxymoron. A theory ceases to be a theory when it is proven. It is called a theory precisely because it hasn't been proven.
And the self awareness of people in this thread is very comedic.
I think you are operating with a faulty definition of 'theory'. Ideas that haven't been proven are 'hypotheses'. Ideas for which there is enough evidence to believe that they are our current best model for understanding something are called 'theories'. Hence the Theory of General Relativity is not 'unproven'; it is our best model (for now) for understanding big space stuff.
Then again, they remind us on what we have lost.
Imagine how easy and carefree our existence could be.
(And btw, with a look upon our world and what we are doing, i wouldn't say it helps us much to be "evolved".
We know so much more, but we are still a species made of stupid assholes, otherwise we woudln't burn the tree we are living on.)
That been said, all will be good, our lord and savior will come
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Iää Iää Cthulhu!
Evolution kinda works as a term in game development since REAL evolution does NOT mean progress/improvement (as it is often used), it is simply continuation. It USUALLY results in something better, but not always. It is largely random and up to circumstances.
And since the defintion of "better" for a game is largely subjective...yeah.
And since the defintion of "better" for a game is largely subjective...yeah.
- Status
