1 First?

2 Didn't Stalin die a long time ago?

3 What I never understood about the asteroid-wiped-out-the-Dinos theory is... Why JUST the Dinos?

4

Although Obama is the left's asteroid, as with Chixulub, he will not become an their "aha! moment."

I highly doubt this.  The Left has been impervious to logic and fact for years.

Liberalism is their religion. 

5  That socialist guy... what was his name?  Hitler!  That's the guy.  He died.

6  Mao.  Another mean little fucker.  He croaked some years ago.

7 That means 'Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure' in what language?

8 The metaphor's more apt than you know.  Currently science works on the assumption that a combination of factors did in the dinosaurs--climate, geological activity, and so forth--but that Chixulub was the coup de grace that finished them.

And thus with Obama.  Even with the details off, the metaphor is quite fitting indeed.

9 Barry is this generations Jimmy Carter.  Apparently, ignoring history is bad.

10 Mao.  Another mean little fucker.  He croaked some years ago.

He lives on, his image beaming out from Christmas trees everywhere.

11

Sure enough, that was the unintentional point of Brooks' latest article.

http://tiny.cc/8mbjl

12 "But maybe over time newer generations with less of a stake in big-governmentism will see the Obama failure and move away from it."

You mean the legions of newly graduated unemployed who a few years ago sang Obama's praises?

Or how about the ones that have recently seen their parents lose their home or life-savings?
 

13 Posted by: lando034 at August 26, 2011 10:40 AM (0wofC)

The correct "First" post is:

Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

You may substitute the 'u' for the '*' if you desire. (I don't mind other people cursing, I just don't do it).

14 Barry is this generations Jimmy Carter. Apparently, ignoring history is bad. Posted by: toby928™ at August 26, 2011 10:44 AM (GTbGH) I knew Jimmy Carter. I lived thru Jimmy Carter. And obama is alot worse. G-D help us all

15  The problem is that there are plenty of dumb asses who still adhere to this socialist shit and they are young,  stupid college kids.  I think it's wishful thinking to imagine this shit will die out without a very hard fight.

When I was a younger lad I thought that Reagan had put the nail in the coffin of the libs.  "Now we'll have history showing tax cuts kick-start the economy!"  The old believers in socialism still believe and teach their revisionist history to the young believers.

They will always be here.

16 Yes yes. Eventually the libbie boomer types (and Silents too) who are the bane of my Xer existence will die off . . . Leaving us with a wasteland. Hoo. Ray.

17 Every generation needs its brush with socialism. Seems we are doomed to only learn through our own mistakes. Hopefully, this will be the last brush for next 30 years or so.

18 Why JUST the Dinos?

As I understand the actual theory, it was a "mass extinction event" across all types (reptiles, mammals, avians, fish, etc.)  It's just that when we think of that time period, we don't consider the fact that all those other species already existed.

Also, the meteorite itself didn't cause the extinction, it happened (by the theory as I understand it- and I'm not a scientician) over the course of the next many years.  If that's the case, it's just a case of the Dinos not being able to adapt quickly enough either through new migration habits/routes or other modified behaviors.

Other species died out as well, for the same reasons.

19 Please note I said LIBBIE boomers and silents - not all!!!! I know the majority have sense in their heads. but they let their dimmer little brothers and sisters get away with WAY too much

20
Every day at Daily Kos there are tons of posts about What Happened. It's always the weather, the message, Obama was a Manchurian candidate (for them), they system, the enemy -- never the philosophy.

21 Problem is - this isn't science; it's greed.  The majority will always prefer theft from the affluent minority over working.  OK - it IS science that it won't work in the very long run, because once you start stealing from the affluent (who earned it in the first place), no one will be motivated to earn enough to replace the victimized affluent minority.

But to the extent it is science, it can always be occluded by the new elite - the powerful (or "The Party Faithful" if you prefer), who prefer power over earned wealth.  They simply write the history books to suit their thesis.  There is no asteroid buried in the earth somewhere that you can dig up to prove your theory.

22  You mean the legions of newly graduated unemployed who a few years ago sang Obama's praises?

Or how about the ones that have recently seen their parents lose their home or life-savings?
 
Posted by: Marcus

The ones who are still blaming Bush.

23 Seems we are doomed to only learn through our own mistakes. Hopefully, this will be the last brush for next 30 years or so. Posted by: lando034 at August 26, 2011 10:49 AM (0wofC) Yoos think yoos got 30 years left?

24

AllenG,

 

Ha. My mistake. Was just waiting around for doom.

25 Ken I haz my Daily DOOM?

26 Any conservative/small government gains we make will be lost as soon as the economy gets back on its feet.  We're a people with short attention spans I'm afraid.

27 a good quote from Chesterton

Our political vagueness divides men, it does not fuse them. Men will walk along the edge of a chasm in clear weather, but they will edge miles away from it in a fog. So a Tory can walk up to the very edge of Socialism, if he knows what is Socialism. But if he is told that Socialism is a spirit, a sublime atmosphere, a noble, indefinable tendency, why, then he keeps out of its way; and quite right too. One can meet an assertion with argument; but healthy bigotry is the only way in which one can meet a tendency.



Read the whole thing though.

28 This hurricane is just what obama needs. It is called another excuse for his shitty policies. The hurricane is why we will go back into deep recession and why Egypt goes full Muzzie

29 Sure enough, that was the unintentional point of Brooks' latest article.

The comments are enough to make me put a Perry bumper sticker on my car.

30

First of all, rdbrewer is pimping for a job at NRO.  And he may just get it.  He's not a good blogger, he's a good pundit.  Different animals.

Second of all, what do the scientists say about anthrogenic continental drift?

31 With regard to the Asteriod theory of non-Avian dinosaur extinction (note birds are dinosaurs, they survived the impact just fine):  the objections to the theory are many and valid, among the most logical is that there is absolutely no proof that there were any dinosaurs alive at the time of the impact.  Only one set of dinosaur bones was discovered within feet of the iridium layer.

The most likely scenario is that a variety of killing mechanisms hit at the same time: asteroid, vulcanism, tectonic, biological.  To put it another way we are continuing to discover new things about today's Eco-systems, what kind of dunderhead thinks he can make definite statements about an Eco-system collapse that occurred 65 million years ago!

32 No DOOM on Fridays.

33 The American left has seized the means of cultural communication, hijacking the media, the educational system and entertainment,

Doom!

The Slow Disappearance of the American Working ManWhile unemployment is an ordeal for anyone, it still appears to be more traumatic for men. Men without jobs are more likely to commit crimes and go to prison. They are less likely to wed, more likely to divorce, and more likely to father a child out of wedlock. Ironically, unemployed men tend to do even less housework than men with jobs and often retreat from family life, says W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia.

Vacuum that couch, you potatoe!

34 what kind of dunderhead thinks he can make definite statements about an Eco-system collapse that occurred 65 million years ago! Posted by: Bob from Virginia at August 26, 2011 10:53 AM (SBjsJ) the 65 million year old man. I think Mel Brooks played him the movie

35 According to the Brooks' article, the under 30 crowd is +11 Republican... hopefully that bodes well for the future.

36 Jimmy Carter also made a lot of Republicans.

37 18 Why JUST the Dinos? As I understand the actual theory, it was a "mass extinction event" across all types (reptiles, mammals, avians, fish, etc.) It's just that when we think of that time period, we don't consider the fact that all those other species already existed. Well, yeah... but why did the Dinos, generally acknowledged the most successful form of animal to ever exist, die out in their entirety... after all, the mammals, the reptiles, fish, etc., are still with us. If the crocodile made it, why not the triceratops? Or an ocean-based dinosaur? And if the tiny mammals survived, why not some tiny dinosaur?

38 Why JUST the Dinos? Posted by: CoolCzech Because... Shut up.. that's why..

39

Posted by: lando034 at August 26, 2011 10:54 AM (0wofC)

the under 30s who voted for Obama w/ 66% of the vote?

40 He has been busily creating a better, more effective case for smaller government than conservatives could have on their own--and more quickly.

The problem with the left though, is that it is a religious thing for them.   They have absolute faith - blind, dumb and stupid faith - that socialism works.  It has never been about the mountains of evidence that notwithstanding hundreds of millions of murders committed to ensure it's success didn't help it to succeed.  No - it has been that there has never been enough socialism.  Enough pure socialism.  The kind of socialism that only they know with absolute faith, will work.

Sure, in a sane world, Barry would be a catalyst.  Unfortunately, that is not the world we live in.  We live in a world where the most acclaimed minds we have call for even more stimulus while evidence shows the last stimulus failed.  Where printing even more fiat money will work this time because it simply wasn't enough to work last time.

41 And if the tiny mammals survived, why not some tiny dinosaur?

Dude.

42 Chixulub

That's Spanish for "Stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure".

43
...He's more like the left's insanely itching hemorrhoid.

44 Posted by: John Maynard Keynez at August 26, 2011 10:51 AM (8E9QA)

Sorry, the DOOM store is closed Friday - Sunday. It will re-open at roughly 7:30 AM CDT on Monday.

The comments are enough to make me put a Perry bumper sticker on my car.

The more people try to complain about things Perry does, the more people like him. It's almost like the elites don't get the fact that people are fed up with the Aristocracy.

In many ways, Perry is the perfect anti-establishment candidate (despite being popular with the establishment until he challenged Romney and put Rove in his place)- He doesn't have deep establishment roots, he's one of the few people who's actually worked with his hands for a living, and he got relatively average grades at a State University. He's the embodiment of the "normal" American. Except for the part where he's the Texas Governor.

45 Who will be there to go, "Aha!" if humans are dinosaurs in this scenario?

46 The lure of socialism or, for that matter, the lure of any messiah that will come and solve all of our problems if we just sacrifice logic and surrender our freedom to him, is simply too strong to disappear.  The formula of "you are being oppressed by X and all we need to do is to follow Y and we will all be wearing silk underwear" is simply to attractive to die.  We all want a free lunch and if we have to kill a few whoevers to get it, it is a small price to pay. 

Evil never sleeps.

47

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 26, 2011 10:57 AM (8y9MW)

and he switched from Dem to GOP to Tea Party, something that has happened to many americans in his time

48

AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy),

 

Ahhh, re-reading it, for 30 and under WHITE americans. From +7 D to +11 R.  Not as good as I thought, but still a movement in the right direction.  

49 @31: I think - this is just a pet idea of mine - that what killed the dinos zeroes in on them in particular. Perhaps some sort of disease that picked up on an autoimmune weakness specific to them. Another thought... we all get old because our genetic code starts to deteriorate after too many generations of cells copy them, sort of like making too many generations of photocopies blurs the image over time. Yet newborn babies "start fresh," seemingly. Is it possible that given enough time, even a species "ages" and eventually even the newborns aren't genetically "fresh" anymore? After all, the dinosaurs were around for hundreds of millions of years... perhaps their line was just genetically exhausted.

50 If the dinosaurs are extinct, explain Helen Thomas.

51 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 10:55 AM (niZvt)

As others are saying, birds are dinosaurs.  They seem to have survived just fine.  So, really, it was the "big" dinos that died out.  My guess would be, largely, from increased competition for fewer resources- that is, they were just too big for the new climate to support.

52 Who will be there to go, "Aha!" if humans are dinosaurs in this scenario?

Me.  That's who.

53

Posted by: lando034 at August 26, 2011 10:59 AM (0wofC)

okay that's the right direction, as a 22 year old Hispanic that's a registered Republican who voted for McCain/Palin, I can tell you the biggest prob w/ the under 30s is that too many think Clinton saved the economy in the 90s w/ lib policies, they have no retrospective of the 94 revolution that made Clinton the GOP's...er..b*tch during the 90s

54 But resist, we muchÂ… we mustÂ… and we will muchÂ… aboutÂ… thatÂ… be committed.

Words truer which are... be spoken... never.

55

Barack Obama is on the wrong tack. Thinking he is sailing with the winds, he really sails against a strong headwind. In doing so he risks his ship and his crew, putting them in peril. He may make slow progress, until the headwinds of the storm pick up and drive him back. Ultimately, he will fail.

It is when he realizes this failure is imminent, when he realizes he must change course, when he realizes that he does not know what next to do, it is then the time to fear what he, out of desperation, may do. When he knows he will be unable to ride out the storm and must act, the Pirate Community suspects he will be unable to do so. Many ships in stormy seas were lost by Captains unable to make the proper command decisions.

56 obama is gonna have a statement on the hurricane??? What could he possibly say that matters? Other than blaming President Bush and the Tea Party?

57 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 10:59 AM (niZvt)

Okay, my actual theory that I will never try to convince anyone is correct:  God was done with them.

I fully admit this is 100% faith based, and I have no evidence.  Thus the reason I'll never try to persuade anyone to this view.

58 Some idiotic bitch from some Northeast state government was just on the news, saying that "this may takes weeks or even MONTHS to respond to." WHAT? Florida gets rolled over by far worse hurricanes and recovers rapidly. The freaking northeastern liberals that want to run our healthcare can't get their Precious Big Government to fix power lines in less than weeks or MONTHS? Good Grief. Assholes.

59 You see the same thing with the science of nutrition. So many researchers had invested their careers in the idea that saturated fat causes heart disease that by the time controlled trials showed that theory to be be false it was too late to turn the ship around. So now everyone is getting horrendous dietary advice until those guys die off. Too bad that millions of people will suffer and die early deaths in the meantime.

60 Okay, my actual theory that I will never try to convince anyone is correct:  God was done with them.

No, it was single-payer health care.
I was there, and a member of the tar party.

61 51 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 10:55 AM (niZvt) As others are saying, birds are dinosaurs. They seem to have survived just fine. So, really, it was the "big" dinos that died out. My guess would be, largely, from increased competition for fewer resources- that is, they were just too big for the new climate to support. Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 26, 2011 10:59 AM (8y9MW) Actually, the people that actually study birds - Ornithologists - bitterly dispute this, and say it is obvious to them that this is not true. There are significant differences between the two, and while they may be related, it's a bridge too far to say that a bird IS a Dinosaur.

62

@60 ha.

63 For those who didn't get the memo - it's "TOE" the line, not "TOW" the line.

It refers to putting your toes on a line to make your formations nice and straight.*

Could it be possible that obama, who is a Stuttering Clusterfuck Of A Miserable Failure, is an Extinction Level Event for the Dem Cong??

(*Insert DADT joke here.)

64 We see the same thing happening with the Global Warming debate. More evidence is piling up that other factors (e.g. solar cycles, cosmic rays) affect global temperatures and that AGW wrong. The difference is, that belief or non-belief in plate tectonics or the asteroid-based demise of dinosaurs didn't has a price tag associated with it like AGW does.

65 I have my own theory regarding the extinction of the dinosaurs and I expect that proof will be shortly forthcoming as soon as scientists find a dinosaur fossil with well creased pants.

66

I had thought about that long march through the institutions and how the capture of them by the left destroyed them, and my theory was that in capturing the institution and turning it from its stated mission to a mission of supporting the Left line was what destroyed the institution.  Those people who belonged to the institution or used it, but were not of the Left, ceased to use it and went away, leaving the Left with a empty shell.

Sort of like what happened to the mainline protestant churches when the Left got in control of them.  They were turned from churches into socio-political pressure groups and bled out members as those who didn't share the Left's vision went to find churches that would just be churches.  The Left thought they were getting something of value by taking over these institutions and they ended up with hollow legions.

67 After all, the dinosaurs were around for hundreds of millions of years... perhaps their line was just genetically exhausted.

Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 10:59 AM (niZvt)

I don't think it works that way.  Evolution isn't a process of life forms becoming more awesome, it's a process of throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks, with a side effect that things sometimes get more sophisticated.  So long as something survives to breed, it succeeds.

68 *semi interesting Side note, their were groups of dinosaurs that survived long after the comet.

link to daily mail, "Dinosaurs that lived 500,000 years after meteor."

http://tinyurl.com/3ehvdnu

*Also - in southern Utah I have seen, (now) underground collections of bones where the dinosaurs were all huddled tightly together, without attacking each other, as different species.  The guys theory was that they were trying to escape something like a flood or fire.

Like anything that's been politicized, the stories of dinosaurs are much more interesting and complex then is openly discussed.

69 Unfortunately, the left is like a lot of other parasites in that it implants its eggs -- the bad ideas of socialism -- into the brains of an unwitting host -- our children attending universities. Thus socialism will escape eradication until we find a mechanism for educating people without leftist indoctrination. Like the man said, every generation is going to have to fight for its freedom all over again.

70 it's a process of throwing shit at a wall and seeing what sticks

Much like a political campaign.

71 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 11:05 AM (niZvt)

Meh.  Obviously a stork is not a T-Rex.  It's useful shorthand to say they share a whole bunch of characteristics.

Among other things, I'm not aware of any dinosaur (except maybe the pterosaurs) that we even think had hollow bones- which is a requirement for birds, IIRC.  But they have so many other similarities, that it's convenient short-hand.

It's also a good way to help move away from the "dinosaurs are lizards" theory that was held for most of my childhood.  I'm guessing the correct answer is somewhere in between.  That, if an actual dinosaur were alive today, it would actually get it's own phylum.

72 Hey Fluffy.  I bought a Perry 2012 sticker off cafepress.  $5.  My car probably will get keyed, but I will think of it as a taking one for the team.

73 That, if an actual dinosaur were alive today, it would actually get it's own phylum.

And would be affirmative actioned into an Ivy League school.

74 My thought, and remember I am Sub-Tard, is the dinosaurs went extinct because gravity increased as the universe slowed its expansion. This did two things: (1) caused excessively large animals to shrink or collapse, and (2) caused loosely orbiting asteroids (real big rocks) to crash into larger more stable orbiting planets. (this would also have condensed a planets orbit making seasons shorter). The Sub-Tard Theory of the Universe. This also explains why we don't have any creatures of equal size to the dinosaurs today. A sticky question for the Darwinians is why the size of creatures got smaller rather than bigger over time. Sub-Tard says that gravity is not a stable unchanging energy, but varies based on the rate of the universe's expansion. Universe in high expansion, gravity on earth low, universe is slow expansion, gravity on earth increases, universe stops expansion, we literally collapse. Sub-Tard thinks black holes are the vacuum cleaners of the universe that suck up debris, super condense them in preparation for a new big bang. Sub-Tard thinks the universe is much like a flowering bush. Sub-Tard has pretty pictures in his head. Groove on.

75 It's also a good way to help move away from the "dinosaurs are lizards" theory that was held for most of my childhood.  I'm guessing the correct answer is somewhere in between.  That, if an actual dinosaur were alive today, it would actually get it's own phylum.

Would you guys quit bringing up accurate history?
I need an excuse to un-sock.
Everybody knows that oil is nothing more than piles of melted dinosaurs, anyway.

76 Florida gets rolled over by far worse hurricanes and recovers rapidly. The freaking northeastern liberals that want to run our healthcare can't get their Precious Big Government to fix power lines in less than weeks or MONTHS? Good Grief. Assholes. Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 11:02 AM (niZvt) Well up here, as you well know, to repair anything you have to first deal with the unions and the mafia. It does complicate things.

77 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at August 26, 2011 11:08 AM (FkKjr)

This is why I have a huge problem with the idea of Macro-Evolution (The Origin of Species, as it were).  Where are the "failed" fossils.  If evolution is the act of nature throwing random genetic mutations into the DNA code, there should be far, far more "failed" specimens than "successful," but we don't have any fossils anywhere of such "failed" specimens.  Just based on shear numbers there should be some.

Micro-Evolution, I don't have a problem with.  But the idea that one species becomes a whole different species seems to be pushing the theory beyond any actual evidence.

78 This old quote from Monty relates,

"weeds of envy, will to power, and urge to get something for nothing are evergreen in the human heart." -Monty - AOSHQ

79 66 - Mikey - I've had similar thoughts but there is a factor missing in your analysis. Even liberals actually have functional brains. They are constantly in a state of cognitive dissonance - I've seen it firsthand (my friends and family). It's VERY hard to maintain Liberalism. So not only do you lose people who get sick of the lies and irrationality in those institutions, but those left plus the institutions themselves are majorly damaged just from the constant cognitive dissonance the new "mission" requires.

80 Micro-Evolution, I don't have a problem with.  But the idea that one species becomes a whole different species seems to be pushing the theory beyond any actual evidence.

That's why it's a theory, and not a law.
Maybe it takes God's approval and several tens of thousands of years.
Except in the case of mules.

81

I am a Vietnam War-era backlash.  I grew up in the Sixties, and I witnessed an anti-war protest with my own eyes.  I saw the chaos and excesses of the Crazy Radical Far Left, and I became a conservative out of sheer revulsion.  I remained one through observation and I grew to be an effective one through study and analysis.

This post reminded me of my early adulthood, and the events that shaped my worldview.  I am an ideological warrior and a patriot because of what I perceived about how the world worked, and what caused human misery.  And I think rdbrewer is exactly right: this disaster that an immature and inattentive American electorate has entrusted their governance to is perhaps the best thing Conservatism has had happen to it since the American Revolution.  If a close encounter with THIS dangerous animal can't convince Americans that they need to vote intelligently and with an eye toward their rights and interests (broadly understood), then the entire American experiment was always doomed to fail.  Because by now, only the hard-core illogical fanatics that rdbrewer refers to that simply canNOT admit error will stand by a completely discredited ideology.

I remember when Saigon fell, and what it felt like.  Young Americans that will be voting for the first time in five years are experiencing the same thing right now.  And I bet you that the Randians will vastly outnumber the Alinskyites for a generation because of what they perceive about the fellow travellers of the current statists that they can observe following such a tragic course today.

82 Meh.  Obviously a stork is not a T-Rex.  It's useful shorthand to say they share a whole bunch of characteristics.

Among other things, I'm not aware of any dinosaur (except maybe the pterosaurs) that we even think had hollow bones- which is a requirement for birds, IIRC.  But they have so many other similarities, that it's convenient short-hand.

It's also a good way to help move away from the "dinosaurs are lizards" theory that was held for most of my childhood.  I'm guessing the correct answer is somewhere in between.  That, if an actual dinosaur were alive today, it would actually get it's own phylum.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) is tired beyond tired of the trolls at August 26, 2011 11:09 AM (8y9MW)

Probably a Subphylum or Superclass but not a Phylum. Body plan and all that..

 

83 Where are the "failed" fossils.  If evolution is the act of nature throwing random genetic mutations into the DNA code, there should be far, far more "failed" specimens than "successful," but we don't have any fossils anywhere of such "failed" specimens.  Just based on shear numbers there should be some.

 Fossils are most likely to be a typical specimen, because typical specimens are what actually spread all over the place.  If you dug around in a cemetery a thousand years from now, you'd most likely find a typical human's skull, not a baby with a deformed skull.  Doesn't mean the baby with the deformed skull didn't exist.  Remember that Evolution takes place over millions of years, so minor mutations add up to substantial change.

Micro-Evolution, I don't have a problem with.  But the idea that one species becomes a whole different species seems to be pushing the theory beyond any actual evidence.

I understand the position, but disagree amicably. However I am frequently annoyed by the way 'scientists' push evolution as dogma as opposed to what it is, a scientific theory. 

84 63 For those who didn't get the memo - it's "TOE" the line, not "TOW" the line. It refers to putting your toes on a line to make your formations nice and straight.* I LUV it when gals Toe the Line!!!

85 #37 Well, yeah... but why did the Dinos, generally acknowledged the most successful form of animal to ever exist, die out in their entirety... after all, the mammals, the reptiles, fish, etc., are still with us. If the crocodile made it, why not the triceratops? Or an ocean-based dinosaur? And if the tiny mammals survived, why not some tiny dinosaur? Because size matters.

86 I remember when Saigon fell, and what it felt like.  Young Americans that will be voting for the first time in five years are experiencing the same thing right now.  And I bet you that the Randians will vastly outnumber the Alinskyites for a generation because of what they perceive about the fellow travellers of the current statists that they can observe following such a tragic course today.

... Sock off ...

I hope you're right, and I hope it's more than one generation.
It's been TWO generations getting us to this point (half of mine, most of our kids).
It will take four generations to permanently right the ship.

In the meantime, we should also teach accurate history, what the difference between facts and opinions are, and how to prove which is which.  That was possibly the best course I had in grade school, back when we were inventing dirt.

87 86 #37 Well, yeah... but why did the Dinos, generally acknowledged the most successful form of animal to ever exist, die out in their entirety... after all, the mammals, the reptiles, fish, etc., are still with us. If the crocodile made it, why not the triceratops? Or an ocean-based dinosaur? And if the tiny mammals survived, why not some tiny dinosaur? Because size matters.

Posted by: jim at August 26, 2011 11:22 AM (iqGl1)

The most successful form of animal that ever lived are the Insects. Hands down.

88 73 That, if an actual dinosaur were alive today, it would actually get it's own phylum. Helen Thomas has her own phylum? Oh, wait... you said, alive.

89 77 Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at August 26, 2011 11:08 AM (FkKjr)

Micro-Evolution, I don't have a problem with.  But the idea that one species becomes a whole different species seems to be pushing the theory beyond any actual evidence.
  Micro-Evolution is adaptation. Nothing new here, every farmer in 18th century Somerset County England knew how to hybridize a species (animal or plant) for specific characteristics. Hell Darwin needed only look out his window to discover that idea, which he didn't, it was already accepted knowledge. Calling it Micro-Evolution is merely a beard to dress up the failure of Evolution as a theory.

90 88 86 #37 Well, yeah... but why did the Dinos, generally acknowledged the most successful form of animal to ever exist, die out in their entirety... after all, the mammals, the reptiles, fish, etc., are still with us. If the crocodile made it, why not the triceratops? Or an ocean-based dinosaur? And if the tiny mammals survived, why not some tiny dinosaur? Because size matters.

Posted by: jim at August 26, 2011 11:22 AM (iqGl1)

The most successful form of animal that ever lived are the Insects. Hands down.

 

See Sub-Tard theory of gravity at 74. All your questions will be answered.

91 The most successful form of animal that ever lived are the Insects. Hands down.

The first amoeba that ever existed is still alive today.  Think about that.

92

The most successful form of animal that ever lived are the Insects. Hands down.

With mosquitos, cockroaches, and fire ants being the best of the best of the best.  The little bastards.

93

 TexasJew,

 

Not Homo Sapiens? I would argue we make up in influence what we lack in numbers....

94 Citizens were grateful and provided them with food, water, etc. Unsure about pussy? Posted by: Fish the Impaler at August 26, 2011 11:15 AM (Lt/Za) ALWAYS the best way for a gal to show gratitude. Always.

95 Failing to do so would be to admit error and to allow a deep narcissistic wounding

Not to mention a loss of grant money!

96 The first amoeba that ever existed is still alive today. Think about that.

Posted by: toby928™ at August 26, 2011 11:28 AM (GTbGH)

How would we know? Really, was anyone around who even knew what an amoeba was- let alone had the equipment to check? Does it have one of those cool tracking collars like we put on wolves and foxes and such?

This is what annoys me about the paleontologist crowd in general: they speak as if we "know" anything about the period at all.  We don't.  We have some educated guesses, but we don't know anything.

97 Among other things, I'm not aware of any dinosaur (except maybe the pterosaurs) that we even think had hollow bones- which is a requirement for birds, IIRC.  But they have so many other similarities, that it's convenient short-hand.

They do now, actually.  They also found some actual fossils at the K-T layer (that's that iridium dust clay layer that marks the period of the impact).  It's fairly recent, and I don't have the links in front of me, but hey, you know how to use Teh Intarwebs. 

The best 'link' conceptually is the Velociraptor and its cousins.  Think of them as mean-ass killer proto-turkeys and you're beginning the process.  The pros even think most dinos had hair or feathers now--state of the theory is much different then even when my young-for-these-parts punk @$$ was a kid.

But that's neither here or there.  Most could not adapt, so they died when the conditions they were best fit for changed.  Those that could, adapted and eventually became unrecognizable.  Not rocket science to me, but your mileage will vary.

And still a most apt metaphor.

98 "If you dug around in a cemetery a thousand years from now, you'd most likely find a typical human's skull, not a baby with a deformed skull." If, on the other hand, the dig site used to be a dirty linens closet in an Illinois hospital. . .

99 "Sub-Tard thinks the universe is much like a flowering bush." You didn't happen to invent the Encore Azalea, did you?

100

The problem with rejecting macro-evolution on the basis of a lack of specimens is with the definition of "failure", and the requirements for finding such.

First you have to understand what a "failure" is from an evolutionary point of view.
It is not simply the individual creature died or died before reproducing; lot's of individual creature die before reproducing, but we in no way characterize that as a species-wide or adaption-wide "failure".
It has to be looked at from a group perspective; does the adaptation, over a wide range of specimens, provide for a particular advantage in some aspect of survival.

That leads to the next critical factor of survival advantages - they are not stable. Even today that is an illusion that cripples the environmental movement - no ecosystem is permanently stable. Every creature within it is constantly modifying itself, looking for a better way to survive. Over time the balance in the system shifts, and new modifications are required for survival. Worse, the entire system does not remain isolated - new creatures can migrate to the system. Worse yet, the entire climate can shift, skewing the requirements to survive.
That means that what was advantageous today can be thoroughly useless "tomorrow". When you are looking for "failures", every fossil of every extinct species is a failure. Sure it lasted 5M years - then stuff changed and it was gone. What was an advantage stopped being one and the species failed.

Then we get to the question of analysis of micro-changes. Remember that we do not have complete specimens but only fossils. We do not even have complete fossils most of the time! We definitely do not have complete genomes.
Just because we have enough human remains and can analyze them far enough to know when we developed different colored hair, different colored skin, and other survial adaptations, in no way means we can determine the same for dinosaurs.
There could be well be massive differences between two otherwise "identical" fossils that we simply have not, or even cannot, identify just from a few bones that have transformed into rocks.

So the "failures" exist everywhere, you just have to know how to define them and be able to find them.

101 How would we know?

Think about it.

102

This is the fundamental reason to limit the scope of the federal government. We continue to have departments, agencies and laws that are either dysfunctional or have failed to fulfill their intended purpose. Why? Because Congress and the Executive are unwilling to admit a program has failed or doesn't work or that they made a mistake in enacting it in the first place. This won't change. Its human nature. Which the Constitution was an attempt to transcend.

Human nature is the same at the state and local level. But at least you have an increased chance that some state or city will wise up, have some balls and come up with something that works or shit-can the whole thing [finding that the sky didn't fall when it was shit-canned]. And the rest of the retards will get the picture.

103 How does one reconcile this theory with the alien invasion hypothesis?

Extraterrestrial  feng shui?

104 People often forget the tragic loss of the Great Old Ones and their Shoggothic horde that the Chixulub event caused.

105 off, damn sock.

106 I saw the article; And thought Ace had written it. It appears Ace isn't the only one heavily invested in word futures.

107 Think about it.

Posted by: toby928™ at August 26, 2011 11:35 AM (GTbGH)

When an amoeba splits, two new amoebas are created.  We know this because there are mutations during the split, so neither is exactly the same as the original.  An amoeba dies when it reproduces.

108 Obama is not the Left's Chixulub.  He is the Left's Yog-soggoth, He who opens the Door for Cthulhu.  Cthulhu 2012!  Why vote for a lesser evil?

109 Posted by: Sam at August 26, 2011 11:35 AM (V9Tsq)

See, that's not actually as good an answer as it seems at first blush.

What it's basically saying is, "Well of course there are no 'failed' fossils! We can't have any!" (Over simplified, yes, but gets to the heart of the argument, which was also expressed earlier).

The thing is, that pretty well invalidates the theory, doesn't it?  Or, at least, makes the theory nonsensical, since that means it can never be fully proven nor disproven.  Think if Newton had said, of gravity, that "Well, we'd never be able to see if something went up into the air and didn't come down- it would be drown out in all the averages."

Of course, then we get back to my personally held theory of The Origin of Species: God made it that way (through means that bear no experimentation, and don't really matter).  I can't prove mine, either, but at least I don't try to act like mine is verifiable.

Think about it.

Still missing it.  DNA mutations can occur in asexual reproduction, too.

110 An amoeba dies when it reproduces.

But it has an unbroken stream of consciousness.  ;-)

111 "Because Congress and the Executive are unwilling to admit a program has failed or doesn't work or that they made a mistake in enacting it in the first place. This won't change. Its human nature. Which the Constitution was an attempt to transcend." I really don't think so. I think it's plain and simple venality. Concentrating power and forcing massive amounts of money to flow through as small a choke point as the federal government is going to draw all of the smart thieves to where the skimming is easy. These guys are like brown bears plucking migrating salmon from the streams. Only these bears build dams and have the genetic engineering chops to make salmon that migrate 365 days a year.

112

So it is a question of balance and stamina. Conservatism might very well suffer the asteroid impact effect of running out of steam/believers. Liberalism, being mostly idealistic and passive, is reasonably easy. Conservatism, being mostly pragmatic and active, is generally hard. I worry because there are so many more poor, care-for-me, people on Earth than there are self-reliant self-starters. The numbers, the balance, favors the Socialist/Communist/Liberal view of how the world should work, surely. Woe, woe, woe....

113

First you have to understand what a "failure" is from an evolutionary point of view.
It is not simply the individual creature died or died before reproducing; lot's of individual creature die before reproducing, but we in no way characterize that as a species-wide or adaption-wide "failure".
It has to be looked at from a group perspective; does the adaptation, over a wide range of specimens, provide for a particular advantage in some aspect of survival.

That is not what I think of when contemplating evolutionary failure.  If the evolutionary process is helped along by random genetic mutations, where are the species/fossils with 3 eyes, not just two?  A third eye in the back of the head?  Why exactly five fingers and toes on the hand/foot and not four, three or six?  I don't understand why none of these random mutation "failures" can be found.  It's like only successful mutations ever existed and then the species with them were subjected to evironmental changes to cause the species to die off.

114
"As in the case of the opponents of plate tectonics, the proponents of big government will slowly die out as the evidence slowly accumulates."

The key to understanding the ideology of the Left is to understand that it is a religion. It's no coincidence that the rise of leftest ideology is congruent with the demise of Christianity. People need to believe in something and if it's not one thing it will be another.

If you really expect that the Left is going away, you have to ask yourself:
What will take its place?
I don't see mass conversions back to Christianity (or Islam for that matter).

The history of Leftism has seen it morph from one form to another.  The turn of century progressives, Fascists, Marxists and others have all served this purpose.

No, Leftism isn't going away.  It will simply morph into something worse than already is.

115

I really don't think so. I think it's plain and simple venality. Concentrating power and forcing massive amounts of money to flow through as small a choke point as the federal government is going to draw all of the smart thieves to where the skimming is easy.

These guys are like brown bears plucking migrating salmon from the streams.

Can't say I disagree. My point assumed a "true heart" is possible. I often apply your point to comments on campaign finance reform. If the fed didn't do everything, there would be no reason to lobby and corrupt them.

 

116

"An amoeba dies when it reproduces."

 

Sort of like your average wife's sex drive?

117

RayJ,

Unless being a liberal or a conservative is genetic... then the left is in trouble and we will have proof of evolution. Alas, too late for the left to glory in having won the argument.

 

118

Speaking of failed institutions, the Detroit Public School system just ran a commercial upstairs encouraging people to register their kids - their slogan "I'm in!"

 

119 I LUV it when gals Toe the Line!!!

You said it!

120 lando034

The Left is a suicide cult.  What you and I consider failure is a success for them.

The point that I making is that the Left fills a spiritual need that used to be filled by religion.  If you expect people to abandon it, there has to be an alternative.
I don't see one.

Religions typically self destruct when they reach this point. The suicide of the West is indication of that. If look at Islam, you can see that they're doing pretty much the same thing.

My point is, the fun's about to start.

121

Well no Allen, I was not saying we cannot have any failed fossils; I was saying that ALL fossils of non-extant species represent evolutionary failures.

Which of course goes back to what I said, it is matter of how you are looking at the function of evolution.
If you are expecting dramatic visual evidence of every single modification then indeed there will never be the evidence you want.
Of course by that standard, virtually nothing can be proven - show me the physical triangle that is 3 light years one side, 4 light years on another side, and that you have measured the third side and discovered that it is precisely 5 light years in length. What, it doesn't exist? Ah ha! The Pythagorean Theorum is nonsense!

Or maybe not.

122

That is not what I think of when contemplating evolutionary failure. If the evolutionary process is helped along by random genetic mutations, where are the species/fossils with 3 eyes, not just two? A third eye in the back of the head? Why exactly five fingers and toes on the hand/foot and not four, three or six? I don't understand why none of these random mutation "failures" can be found. It's like only successful mutations ever existed and then the species with them were subjected to evironmental changes to cause the species to die off.

Except they do exist - some of them anyway, and many of them are still alive.

Horses have one toe, and there are fossils of pre-horses with more than one toe.
Spiders have eight eyes. Other insects do not. Some animals have their eyes in front for binocular vision, others do not.

One problem with looking for some of these variations is assuming they would be useful in the first place. We can see how fusing toes into one can provide an advantage for horses, as well as see how stopping at two, or three, or four toes works for other creatures, and how five toes works for still others, but what advantage do you perceive there would be for six fingers/toes? As it is, people are born with extra digits, but as yet they have not been sufficiently functional to provide enough of an advantage to propogate through the gene pool.

So these things do exist, in a dizzying array of forms. That every variation does not exist, or has not been found, for every single creature in no way means they are absent.

123

#79 BlackOrchid - good point.  The constant doing one thing while proclaiming you are actually doing another would have an effect on a person, especially if that person wasn't really conscious of how out-of-whack things were.  There would be the low level nagging idea that something wasn't right, but no clue as to what was wrong.

That would be very dispiriting, I think, and would drain off the enthusiasm that either mission would need for success.

124

There won't be a point when liberals suddenly change their minds about about big government, no matter what evidence appears before their eyes.

It's not a matter of "evidence".  it's a matter of priorities.  You have very different priorities than a leftist so what looks like "proof" to you is meaningless to them.  Leftists are not interestsed in a growing economy or increasing society's wealth.  That isn't waht leftism is about.  Quite the opposite, actually.

125 "These were people who had staked their entire careers on a certain way of viewing things and who were not about to just let it go and admit they were wrong."

Have you seen what I've done with global warming, cooling, and climate change? Now how exactly would admitting I'm wrong help me and my pocketbook - you tell me.

126 Obama, like Carter before him, may serve to usher in a period when the leftists are on the ropes, but they won't stay there. 

They'll regroup and invent new ways to tell the same old lies, and even invent a few new lies along the way. 

Leftists aren't wrong, they are evil.  There is a difference.  Their bad ideas never go away because evil never does. 

127 111 An amoeba dies when it reproduces. So it fucks off and dies?

128 I think it's a beautiful hypothesis, but I think it represents what *should* happen more than what *does* happen. Leftist nanny-state-ism has been a multigeneration phenomenon, though its influence has varied (from Revolutionary France to the Utopian Colonies of the 1800s to Gramsci and the Soviets to the New Deal to the 60s to the barnacle-encrusted housing projects of Europe to today's Political Correctness). I don't think it's going to experience any kind of "dinosaur event," slow or fast. While stupid and impossible, it is also simple and seductive. It's such an easy position to take, especially since it has an almost irresistible appeal to people who would rather feel than think. The nanny-state left do not ever seem to have been seriously inconvenienced by utter failure before, I'm not optimistic that utter failure now will put the brakes on. Just to be a pessimist, I think we're entering a stage of long, slow war between technologies and techniques of liberation and technologies and techniques of control. Internet vs. censorship, mobile technology vs. mobile monitoring and control... and how it goes from here is truly anybody's guess. There *could* be a sudden shift, I'm just not sure it will be anything like a "preference cascade," it seems more like it will be a "control revolution," wither something that makes people more independent or more dependent.

129

Posted by: Sam at August 26, 2011 12:43 PM (V9Tsq)

If you're still here... would the six finger/toe thing on humans be considered a birth defect or an evolutionary gene mutation?

Plus, I'm not thinking that an evolutionary gene mutation needs to be useful, just that it occurred at all.

Or is it that when unuseful gene mutations show up, we call them birth defects?

Will check back later, have to go run some errands.

130 If I could redesign aspects of the human body, I'd have the pink fingers be a second set of thumbs, and have retractable claws.

Just as a thought experiment, if we had tails, would we have them inside, or outside our trousers?

131 ". . . but what advantage do you perceive there would be for six fingers/toes?" It would be simpler to halve, third, and quarter on two hands.

132 Not to be a martinet... "Chicxulub" It's "Chicxulub."

133 Thanks, Keppich. 

134 I like the way I spelled it better.

135 @133 self Sorry--that came out wrong. People could halve and third on one hand and do quarters and sixths on two. Accepting that our species has been around for 200,000 years, is that sufficient time for that specific mutation to have developed? If so, I would think that the people with that mutation would benefit so greatly from the lower barrier to understanding fractions that they would become dominant. It could be that five fingers on each hand hits some kind of neuromuscular point of diminishing returns.

136 "3 What I never understood about the asteroid-wiped-out-the-Dinos theory is... Why JUST the Dinos?" Dinos always gets raised because they're the Big Sexy - really big fossils, and the stuff of B movies; but, whether it was an asteroid, or a complete mountain range going vulcan for decades, it's never been "JUST" Dinos. They went down in the most recent of the five biggest planetary extinction events shown by the fossil and ground stratification records; we're somewhere in the sixth one right now - which, coincidence or not, started with the Industrial Age. The big animals tend to go first, with the top predators hanging on the longest, working their way down through the others; from there, what goes next is all the stuff that supports widespread, diverse planetary life: water quality, air quality, plant life, etc. Since there's no higher predators to predate the top predators, a lot more of them are around to allow for circumstances which result in preservation of the most find-able and most striking fossils - falling into mud-pits and tar-pits (which maybe this time will be Canadian tar sands spills), getting caught in mud-slides, etc. It's all part of the circle of death: millions of years from now, some insectoid blog commenter will be posting on Ace of Splay-foot Slugs HQ: What I never understood about the asteroid-wiped-out-the-Humanoids theory is... Why JUST the Humanoids?

137 From that post by Daniel Greenfield there is this comment, almost to the day a year ago: "Xenaclone said... I'm not aware of any female Islamic newsreaders on the BBC! Strangely, in the UK, we celebrate our diversity. I guess that's what comes of being an island people who have undergone invasion and migration for over 2,000 years... How many Native American newsreaders are there? 9/01/2010" Just look at how they are celebrating their diversity today.

138

If you're still here... would the six finger/toe thing on humans be considered a birth defect or an evolutionary gene mutation?

Plus, I'm not thinking that an evolutionary gene mutation needs to be useful, just that it occurred at all.

Or is it that when unuseful gene mutations show up, we call them birth defects?

I suspect it depends on where in the process you encounter them.

When they first show up they could well be birth defects. Take sickle cell trait for example.
Reinforced, it is inevitably lethal.
Unreiforced it provides a significant resistance to the debilitating and frequently lethal malaria.
Is it an evolutionary adaptation or a birth defect?

A critical thing to remember is that evolution does not produce what any particular observer thinks would be best, but what a particular individual creature finds more effective.
If a random mutation/adaptation is effective it is projected into the population.
If it is particularly effective it propogates throughout the population.
If other factors isolate that population from its progenitor it produces speciation.

And let us also note that not every variation induces evolutionary speciation automatically. Simple color variations are like that. It is only if the populations begin to reproduce based on that variation and then additional factors contribute to differences between the populations that they ultimately become different species. Otherwise you just get sub-species that are still completely interfertile, albeit visually distinct.

139 "51 Posted by: CoolCzech at August 26, 2011 10:55 AM (niZvt) As others are saying, birds are dinosaurs. They seem to have survived just fine. So, really, it was the "big" dinos that died out. My guess would be, largely, from increased competition for fewer resources- that is, they were just too big for the new climate to support." Actually, what they say, from developmental signs and DNA and stuff, is that birds are not dinosaurs, but instead birds and dinosaurs share a common ancestor. Well, of course all of them believe in evolution, so what do they know ...

140 Isn't this the same blog that was all Confront Obama With The Implications of Religious Doctrine yesterday? And yet today, it's all Variable Effects of Evolution Through Natural Selection Over The Eons. I get so confused: Is this place 6,000 years old, or billions of years old? Are we down on Darwin, or down WITH Darwin?

141

Accepting that our species has been around for 200,000 years, is that sufficient time for that specific mutation to have developed? If so, I would think that the people with that mutation would benefit so greatly from the lower barrier to understanding fractions that they would become dominant.

It could be that five fingers on each hand hits some kind of neuromuscular point of diminishing returns.

Unless they lived in a Base 20 Culture.
Or a Base 16 Culture.
Or even our own Base 10/Decimal/(increasingly) Metric Culture.

Of course it is also possible that the people who originally developed all that Base 12 derived science DID have some mental quirk that made it easier for them to process things on a Base 12 basis. That would be something you could never find in the fossil record. They may even have had 6 fingers on each hand but it was simply never recorded. Again it would not show in the fossil record.

And yes, perhaps five fingers is the limit. I recall when I was younger reading musings of the pinky becoming vestigial or even disappearing. Then of course I learned more of the mechanics of the grip and the relevance of the pinky, and I suspect its disappearance would be bad for our tool use.

142 What I never understood about the asteroid-wiped-out-the-Dinos theory is...

Why JUST the Dinos?

It wasn't just the dinos. And not all the dinos were exterminated - birds are a type of dinosaur. And by the same token, not all leftist nanny-state types will perish, there will always be ditzy libs who envision the world that way.

143 Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure.

144
7 That means 'Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure' in what language?

Mayan?

145 It is "toe the line" not tow the line.  It is referencing falling out for formation in the military, everyone in the same row the same way, all their toes lined up. (sigh) You are not the only one, I have seen this error three times today.

146 "Yes yes. Eventually the libbie boomer types (and Silents too) who are the bane of my Xer existence will die off . . .

Leaving us with a wasteland. Hoo. Ray."

Sorry, not all of us boomers are libs.  I've been a small gubbermint conservative for 30+ years.  I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976 and that was the LAST Dummocrat I ever voted for. 

147 I remember reading that book as well. It sort of fits the global warming followers. Science never claimed to be perfect, but the history of science is filled long held assumptions that took forever to overcome and with many rear guard battles. Including some very famous scientist. Einstein was against quantum mechanics for example. Another was the case of Galileo. People don't realize it was not just the Catholic Church that was against him, but many academics who held on to the idea that ancient Greek science was the finial answer to all problems. They had spent their entire lives playing with epicycles and here this Galileo comes along makes their entire lives work meaningless. Galileo himself not only was a victim of old ideas, but also did his own oppressing by telling Kepler that the moon had nothing to do with the tides, and that Kepler should stop going on about mystical forces from the moon acting a distance..... Newton came along and solved that problem and the rest is history....