flamingjimmy Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Maybe, but only because nationalism and patriotism are modern ideas for going to war, and modern wars have industrialised killing. Give machine guns to the Crusaders, or the armies of the Reformation, and I'm sure they could knock up a tally close to modern trends. That's only because nations are pretty modern ideas as well. The same driving force behind nationalism was causing wars long before some french dude got around to properly defining it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 The same driving force behind nationalism was causing wars long before some french dude got around to properly defining it. Maybe, but historically wars in Western Europe have been over monarchy and power (the 100 Years War, Wars of the Roses, Civil War, Wars of Sucession) or religious differences (Wars of Religion in France, our own Reformation). Mix in a healthy dose of Empire building (Spanish) and you have the history of nearly every war in Europe up to the Seven Years War. After that we get the wars of national interest and patriotism. Around the era when we started building a trading empire for ourselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 1) Microevolution - Unequivocally proven through numerous scientific studies. Includes concepts such as mutation, recombination, natural selection, etc. 2) Macroevolution - Extrapolation of microevolution to account for all changes in body designs, speciation, appearance of new phyla, etc I accept microevolution as a scientifically reliable theory- as for the second, there is little evidence supported by the record of nature or current scientific research. Just revisiting this "I don't believe in macro-evolution" canard. Consider these two points: 1. Micro-evolution is a small amount of change. Macro-evolution is a larger amount of change. Small changes over time that are retained and added to result in ... larger changes. Simple. Anybody that claims that micro-evolution is possible, but macro-evolution is not, needs to explain how small changes cannot accrue over time to result in large changes? What exactly is the mechanism that prevents this? 2. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 2. This. That's brilliant that is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glamrocker Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Of course they existed ,its just that Noahs Ark couldnt fit them in because of their size hence they were wiped out by the flood...sillys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 That's brilliant that is! Yes I thought so. Just wondering where all the transitional letters are though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.