Waxing Erotic

[thumper]

Umm... you better clarify "CBT" for Thumper. He's going to want the name of this therapist.

Cognitive Behavior Therapy

[Tom Allen]

The Theory of Evolution is a tautology. There is no fossil record to verify it. In other words: NO science can confirm (nor deny) the theory. "Survival of the Fittest" is the logical verbal equivilent of "Good students get A's in school".

Since what you're referencing shows that you haven't really read or understood the theory, I'm going to suggest that you might be interested in reading "The Selfish Gene," which is probably one of the better modern explanations for lay (i.e., non-sciencey) people, followed, perhaps, by "The Blind Watchmaker." I mention this only in the interest of education, should you be so inclined.

[Atone]

I had a CBT therapist explain to me

Umm... you better clarify "CBT" for Thumper. He's going to want the name of this therapist.

I was going to ask the same thing, I want one of those.

-A

[Atone]

Cognitive Behavior Therapy

Darn, I have one of those. Actually she is more eclectic but includes CBT in her bag of tricks. I may have a hard time getting through my next session now.

-A

[thumper]

*Awesome* way to adjust my outlook on life...

[davidphd1866]

Tom,

Thank you for the references. I am familiar with both of those books--but haven't read them.

I suspect that your suggestion implies your own personal belief in Darwin's book "On the Evolution of Species" (which I HAVE read) is sufficiently strong so as to categorize others as uninformed simply because they don't agree with you.

Perhaps my point was missed--and your comments indicate such--I am not attempting to disprove Darwin's Theory. Instead, I am saying that it remains unproven. My hasty explanations--which caused you to comment on my scientific background--may have been too casually submitted and lack total relevance. For that I apologize.

I will say in different words that I find your statements earlier about the amount of respondants who say they don't believe in Darwinism to be insulting. If you limited your condescension of the great unwashed masses to those who don't believe we landed on the moon, you'd have been more correct.

David

[hammyma]

I should have known better than to mention Evolution: apologies.
Let's just say that the group (self)selected to be sadistic waxers of body hair seem to have evolved some rather odd ideas about us 'normal' people. (I *love* CelticQueen's thought about their sadistic tendencies.)
A useful definition: 'belief' is 'acceptance without need of facts'. I don't know what the word is for 'non-acceptance despite facts'.

[Dev]

I don't know what the word is for 'non-acceptance despite facts'.

I think that falls under the general rubric of "I have made up my mind, don't bother me with the facts."

D

[likes2blocked]

Perhaps my point was missed--and your comments indicate such--I am not attempting to disprove Darwin's Theory. Instead, I am saying that it remains unproven.

Actually, there have been some fairly recent experiments that do provide what I consider to be sufficient proof. Also, while I was working on my dissertation, I had the "bloody obvious" concept explained to me. It is quite obvious from the various domesticated animals and the breeding for and against various traits that the forces of both natural and human-driven selection can result in some interesting lines. Given what we now know about genetics, including the likelihood of mutation, evolution should really be an accepted theorem.

[Celtic Queen]

Let me give a specific example. If Evolution is the "random mutation of cells" that adapt over "millions of years" then why is this mutation showing no evidence of a continuous evolution? Put another way, if we RANDOMLY evolved from the monkey, where is the half monkey? Where is the almostbutnotquiteyethuman monkey? Where is the manbearpig? The fossil record shows discreet differences in species--not a continuous evolvement from one to the other. Remember the bell curve....random....a continuous function and not a discreet one. If Evolution REALLY was what was happening, we'd probably look a lot more like Klingons than humans. We'd have really tough, impenatrable skin, super strength, super intelligence, etc. etc.....yet we remain soft humans. And why after millions of years is the shark still too stupid to distinquish between a surfboard and a succulent seal? (try to resist the fact that surfboards haven't been around for millions of years) "The World's Greatest Predator" has to bite something before they know if it is good food or not?

David

I dont want to wade into the veracity of the theory - or indeed the rights or wrongs of teaching it as received wisdom but here's a point about continous evolution that sprang to mind..There is an assumption that evolution will optimise all components so why is this manifestly not the case? My two pennies worth is that the development isnt a linear thing at all. Infact, selection is more of a random scatter pattern so that certain environments favour features and enhance them but conversely, poor design may go uncorrected. Our own species is a great worked example of this. We are probably as evolved physically as we need to be now. We dont need to grow fur in the Northern hemisphere, we create clothes. We dont need to evolve better and faster legs - we have cars and - my own view - the whole childbirth process is so utterly flawed and badly designed that we should actually be following the path of the panda. Why not produce offspring that can walk within hours, eats solids and has a significantly smaller head that doesnt involve such damage to the mother? If we are the downtown cousin of the monkey then why are there still monkeys?

If you are dipping into the works of Dawkinsby the way, the God Delusion - although a little weighty at times - is well worth reading too.



Shall we now cut and paste this debate into the waxing forum for their view to show that although we may be a bunch of sick perverts, we might just have something interesting to debate rather than the optimum amount of eyelash tint needed to dye blonde eyelashes?