religion and hybrids

[rich333]

I vote we move toward the origin of man.

Seems there's plenty of hominid fossils....but not so much it terms of human fossils...

So.... Where exactly did we come from?

Were we really genetically manipulated?

Is the bible actual proof of alien beings coming to earth?

 

[airenlow]

 

[beautifullywild77]

Oh darn, Airenlow beat me to the Aliens meme! I love that guy!

But I do have this one

 

[rich333]

Hehe!

I expected more of an intellectual response from you guys!

Oh poo!

 

[beautifullywild77]

Ok (clears throat) the bible says that ....

 

[Tara80]

Hehe!

I expected more of an intellectual response from you guys!

Oh poo!

I'm sorry Rich. Here:

 

[diamondlil]

I'm sorry, let me see if I can help you. With the hawks I think you are referring to... you have to apply the same logic you would to any belief in god. You can't prove any god one might chose to believe in doesn't exist. In the same manner you can't prove that hybrids of any type haven't occurred in nature at one time or another. So, regardless of means, likelihood, or discovery.... one simply has to realize this. Wolphins may be rare, but they have been known to occur.

I don't have to apply any logic to any belief in god. Whatever belief system someone else chooses to follow is their choice and as you cannot prove a negative any particular religious group could actually be on the money.
If you choose to believe that hawks are an agent of hybridisation between isolated species of snakes, that's your choice. I can't prove the negative.
Wolphins certainly do exist though, as they have been seen, recorded and studied. They are a tangible, as opposed to a mystical entity.
I thought this thread was about how people who subscribe to certain religions in which hybrids are frowned upon would feel about the hybridisation of cornsnakes? So as endlessly fascinating as you have declared your own thoughts to be to you, aren't they actually rather besides the point?

 

[Nanci]

I heard a thing on Coast to Coast, or whatever that overnight show is, that they weren't aliens, they were angels. What is your opinion on that, Richard?

 

[beautifullywild77]

Aliens, Angels, Tomatoe, tomato!

 

[Tara80]

Tomato, potato... bacon. I'd like some bacon.

 

[susang]

I vote we move toward the origin of man.

Seems there's plenty of hominid fossils....but not so much it terms of human fossils...

So.... Where exactly did we come from?

Were we really genetically manipulated?

Is the bible actual proof of alien beings coming to earth?

Now I'm soooo offended and denigrated by this comment. What about the origin of woman, yet again another man who thinks woman don't count, lol.

 

[beautifullywild77]

mmmm I have bacon in the fridge.

There are many religions out there that believe bacon to be the spawn of the devil. I say it was heavenly sent by Aliens!

 

[susang]

Tomato, potato... bacon. I'd like some bacon.

No! no pork the bible...

 

[Carpe Serpentis]

I don't have to apply any logic to any belief in god. Whatever belief system someone else chooses to follow is their choice and as you cannot prove a negative any particular religious group could actually be on the money.
If you choose to believe that hawks are an agent of hybridisation between isolated species of snakes, that's your choice. I can't prove the negative.
Wolphins certainly do exist though, as they have been seen, recorded and studied. They are a tangible, as opposed to a mystical entity.
I thought this thread was about how people who subscribe to certain religions in which hybrids are frowned upon would feel about the hybridisation of cornsnakes? So as endlessly fascinating as you have declared your own thoughts to be to you, aren't they actually rather besides the point?

No, you don't have to apply logic to any belief or thought process.

I'm not saying that hawks are an agent or have been an agent of hybridization. I am saying that hybrids do exist and have been found to exist naturally and man made. I am saying that one can not rule out the possibility of hybrids in others given that they have been found to exist in nature in other species.... intergrades... etc.

I'm no longer sure what this thread is about. Looks like it is a thread about cat, alien, dog, etc. type memes to me.

As to your final question, aren't your thoughts besides the point? I would say that no ones thoughts as they relate to a question are besides the point. Earnest questioning and earnestly relating ones point however absurd another may view that point is never besides the point in my mind.

I am also saying that ones personal beliefs do affect whether one believes hybrids are right, wrong, or indifferent. Those personal beliefs may be shared with others as when those beliefs are colored by a shared religious belief.

I would argue that hybrids have played their role in evolution allowing a larger genetic pool to be formed where they do indeed occur and have been proven to do so.

I would also argue that the baraminology or creationist scientist argument would make the term hybrid of little value as it concerns corn snakes if one considers that all snakes constitute a kind. Any breeding for hybrids would actually be a potential step closer to that original kind and therefore potentially more pure than either species was before the hybrid occurred.

The conservationist argument founded on a baraminology type approach is also null and void where it concerns hybrids or designer corn snakes. Dogs being a domesticated animal are a far cry from wolves and jackals just as designer corn snakes or hybrid corn snakes are a removed from their wild counterparts. Man has done the selecting for traits in all of these cases. Nature has not been the natural selection... but rather man has been acting as the selector for the traits man has saw fit to select for whether it be temperament or its paint job so to speak.

Now, whether one cosmically agrees with these statements or one believes do to ones religious teachings that any of these statements are wrong I am open to that possibility as well. I just want to see the logic behind it or at least understand the belief system behind it even if no logic is present. That is where I am personally coming from.

 

[susang]

Oh! come on really just let it go, some have tried to make this thread intellectual, some of have added a sense of humor and some are just a joke. Seriously a know-it-all, diarrhea of facts that for some part are just that poo.

 

[diamondlil]

No, you don't have to apply logic to any belief or thought process.

I'm not saying that hawks are an agent or have been an agent of hybridization. I am saying that hybrids do exist and have been found to exist naturally and man made. I am saying that one can not rule out the possibility of hybrids in others given that they have been found to exist in nature in other species.... intergrades... etc.

I'm no longer sure what this thread is about. Looks like it is a thread about cat, alien, dog, etc. type memes to me.

As to your final question, aren't your thoughts besides the point? I would say that no ones thoughts as they relate to a question are besides the point. Earnest questioning and earnestly relating ones point however absurd another may view that point is never besides the point in my mind.

I am also saying that ones personal beliefs do affect whether one believes hybrids are right, wrong, or indifferent. Those personal beliefs may be shared with others as when those beliefs are colored by a shared religious belief.

I would argue that hybrids have played their role in evolution allowing a larger genetic pool to be formed where they do indeed occur and have been proven to do so.

I would also argue that the baraminology or creationist scientist argument would make the term hybrid of little value as it concerns corn snakes if one considers that all snakes constitute a kind. Any breeding for hybrids would actually be a potential step closer to that original kind and therefore potentially more pure than either species was before the hybrid occurred.

The conservationist argument founded on a baraminology type approach is also null and void where it concerns hybrids or designer corn snakes. Dogs being a domesticated animal are a far cry from wolves and jackals just as designer corn snakes or hybrid corn snakes are a removed from their wild counterparts. Man has done the selecting for traits in all of these cases. Nature has not been the natural selection... but rather man has been acting as the selector for the traits man has saw fit to select for whether it be temperament or its paint job so to speak.

Now, whether one cosmically agrees with these statements or one believes do to ones religious teachings that any of these statements are wrong I am open to that possibility as well. I just want to see the logic behind it or at least understand the belief system behind it even if no logic is present. That is where I am personally coming from.

Cool beans my friend. I'll stop poking you in the ribs over the hawks, even though it made me splutter and chuckle when you first mentioned it.
I saw a wonderful program about Alfred Russel Wallace a couple of weeks ago that I think you would have enjoyed, (Bill Bailey's jungle hero). His passion for science was enthralling, but in particular his collections of various beetles found many intermediate forms between previously discreet species.
(Edited to add, of course my thoughts are besides the point. I'm under no delusions that anyone else finds me as interesting as I do!)

 

[Nanci]

The conservationist argument founded on a baraminology type approach is also null and void where it concerns hybrids or designer corn snakes. Dogs being a domesticated animal are a far cry from wolves and jackals just as designer corn snakes or hybrid corn snakes are a removed from their wild counterparts. Man has done the selecting for traits in all of these cases. Nature has not been the natural selection... but rather man has been acting as the selector for the traits man has saw fit to select for whether it be temperament or its paint job so to speak.

Except you can go out in the wild any day and catch a wild cornsnake which is identical to a cornsnake who has been produced from many generations of captive ancestors. You cannot say the same for any dog breed. The only change to the "domesticated" cornsnake is the color. And perhaps a predilection for pinky mice as the initial diet. You could hatch a cornsnake (of normal color) and release it and it would stand as good a chance of survival as a wild-bred counterpart.

 

[diamondlil]

Except you can go out in the wild any day and catch a wild cornsnake which is identical to a cornsnake who has been produced from many generations of captive ancestors. You cannot say the same for any dog breed. The only change to the "domesticated" cornsnake is the color. And perhaps a predilection for pinky mice as the initial diet. You could hatch a cornsnake (of normal color) and release it and it would stand as good a chance of survival as a wild-bred counterpart.

Good call!:cheers:

 

[Tara80]

Except you can go out in the wild any day and catch a wild cornsnake which is identical to a cornsnake who has been produced from many generations of captive ancestors. You cannot say the same for any dog breed. The only change to the "domesticated" cornsnake is the color. And perhaps a predilection for pinky mice as the initial diet. You could hatch a cornsnake (of normal color) and release it and it would stand as good a chance of survival as a wild-bred counterpart.

Perhaps because the hobby is newer?
This can only be said to a degree though. Many morphs wouldn't survive, would scale-less or micro scale? Would they be more prone to diseases? You can certainly breed for larger corns or smaller corns.

 

[NiklasTyreso]

The only change to the "domesticated" cornsnake is the color. And perhaps a predilection for pinky mice as the initial diet.

I have had cornsnakes for 20 years and get worried about recent reports that cornsnakes (sometimes) have started eating other snakes.
I do not think that is a typical behavior for cornsnakes.