Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Talk:Martin Heidegger

2017-01-30T14:45:51Z

Kokimura: Created page with "I'm rewriting this article because there's nothing on this fantastic philosopher."

I'm rewriting this article because there's nothing on this fantastic philosopher.

User:Kokimura

2017-01-30T14:34:37Z

Kokimura: Created page

Egalitarian male looking to stomp out bias from this site. Heaven forbid we have a Christian site that isn't biased.

Talk:Gay disease

2017-01-30T14:29:22Z

Kokimura: Edited the talk page

Where in the reference does it say '''anything''' about people being unsure as to homosexuals standing in terms of the AIDS epidemic? Fantomas 09:43, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

<blockquote>
"Through media attention to AIDS and homosexual groups which have taken a stand both for their rights and against AIDS, homosexual practices and lifestyles have become more accepted. '''Many people, however, remain unsure whether to blame gays for AIDS or to view them as unfortunate victims in a public health nightmare.''' Media coverage has also caused many homosexuals to question their personal and social acceptance, and ultimately grow scared about their future. The author notes the gulf between religious and moral conservatives who condemn gay sex and homosexuality on the one hand, and Bacchanalian proponents who defend their freedom to have consensual sex with anyone and as often as they please."
</blockquote>
You may not agree with it, but it is there.
--[[User:OfficerDibble|OfficerDibble]] 09:59, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

oops, sorry, i read it twice, i thought - i retract my question. and yes, i don't agree with it. Fantomas 10:31, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

== Is this for real? ==
I don't recall HIV/Aids ever being referred to as "Gay disease". It was initially termed GRID, for "Gay-related immune deficiency". [[User:Dadsnagem2|Dadsnagem2]] 13:43, 18 January 2008 (EST)

== proposed merging with [[AIDS]] ==

Should be merged because the article says it's just another word for it. A section in the AIDS article could replace this one.

:No, the concept of a "[[gay disease]]" is more general. It refers to any disease which is spread by homosexual behavior, especially the sexual behavior of homosexual men (i.e., "gays"). I don't know why people who like homosexuality are always stressing that both men and women are homosexual (with the phrase "gays and lesbians"), but I guess they don't want to be ignored.

:Having your own group of diseases is a great way to get attention (and federal research funds), although the cost in suffering and death may be a bit high for folks like me. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:43, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== "Organizations promoting homosexuality wanted to get the public to believe that AIDS was not just a threat to promiscuous homosexual men" ==

I think I will reword or remove this. There are millions of heterosexuals in Africa and China suffering from HIV/AIDS. It's dishonest to imply gay rights groups practiced revisionism on this particular subject--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 13:03, 24 June 2011 (EDT)
:You're absolutely right about the present, but the snippet there is talking about the early days of the disease's spread in the West, where the vast majority of HIV cases at that time were either homosexual men or IV drug users. No doubt it could be re-worded to make that clearer, but it is an important historical point. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:11, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==''Spreads'' vs ''has spread''==
Ed, actually I prefer "spreads", or even "tends to spread", rather than "has spread". Remember, we are not just describing existing diseases, but also future, yet undiscovered ones. --[[User:LeonardO|Leo-from-UK]] 14:04, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

==LOL, ROFL!!!==

"'''Lesbians were three to four times more likely...to have sex with ''men'' who were high-risk for HIV.'''" I'm no expert, but I think whoever wrote that needs to read up on what "lesbian" means. --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 02:43, 18 September 2011 (EDT)
:::I revised it to say: It is common for some people who self-identify as lesbians to actually be bisexuals. Dr. John Diggs reported: "Australian investigators reported that lesbian women were 4.5 times more likely to have had more than 50 lifetime male partners than heterosexual women (9 percent of lesbians versus 2 percent of heterosexual women); and 93 percent of women who identified themselves as lesbian reported a history of sex with men."[2] It was further reported concerning self reported "lesbians": "In addition to diseases that may be transmitted during lesbian sex, a study at an Australian STD clinic found that lesbians were three to four times more likely than heterosexual women to have sex with men who were high-risk for HIV." [2] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 03:52, 18 September 2011 (EDT)

== Diseases have no sexual orientation ==

This article is just stupid. [[User:ZackV|ZackV]] ([[User talk:ZackV|talk]]) 00:56, 18 September 2016 (EDT)
:Straight people have never had the malady [[Gay bowel syndrome]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:35, 18 September 2016 (EDT)

== Irrecoverably biased ==
This article is incredibly biased and needs to be re-written. Conservative, your comment is absolutely, blatantly false. If it were true that AIDS affected only the gay community, then how is it possible that AIDS is a major problem in some African countries where homosexuality is at best illegal? An estimated 2-5% of Mauritania's population has AIDS, and Mauritania enforces the death penalty for homosexuality. It's quite a stretch to say that even 2% of the population (71828 of an estimated 3,591,400 based on the 2010 census) is a closet homosexual in an Islamic country where one could be killed for being gay.

I'll cover the issues with this article now by section.

I. "It was discovered (and given its original name) by a doctor who himself was a homosexual, so any notion of the name being intended to demean or stigmatise (rather than to help) is ill-formed" .. Really? It's quite obviously called a gay disease for those exact reasons: to demean those with AIDS or to stigmatise them.

"PPNG first appeared in the Philippines among a sexually active core group of prostitutes and servicemen in and around U.S. military bases where many women habitually took black market penicillin as a prophylactic treatment" .. Then we aren't dealing with lesbian women if they're prostitutes servicing US servicemen, are we? Non sequitur and irrelevant.

II. "Common sexual practices among gay men lead to numerous STDs and physical injuries, some of which are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population. Lesbians are also at higher risk for STDs" .. Physical injuries are only sustained during anal intercourse if it is done wrong. If you want to claim that numerous STDs are virtually unknown in the heterosexual population, you better have a ton of research to back it up. Citation. Needed.

"It is common for some people who self-identify as lesbians to actually be bisexuals. Dr. John Diggs reported: "Australian investigators reported that lesbian women were 4.5 times more likely to have had more than 50 lifetime male partners than heterosexual women (9 percent of lesbians versus 2 percent of heterosexual women); and 93 percent of women who identified themselves as lesbian reported a history of sex with men."[2] It was further reported concerning self reported "lesbians": "In addition to diseases that may be transmitted during lesbian sex, a study at an Australian STD clinic found that lesbians were three to four times more likely than heterosexual women to have sex with men who were high-risk for HIV." .. Almost entirely irrelevant.

III. The entire third section is biased. Enough said. "We know how to limit their spread, but many Gay men have died as a result of political suppression of scientific medicine" .. This is possible the most intellectually insulting thing I have read to date on this site.

IV. Citations. Your citations are literally rubbish. Citation number three literally cites citation number two, which cites catholiceducation.org . How incredibly biased. Four citations, only three of which count, one of which cites a biased Catholic site, another cites "War on Intimacy" (probably far right fundamentalist if I had to guess based on the title of the web page), and the last of which cites a paper that's easily 24 years old and not current. This is abysmal. Horrifying. Heaven forbid we have current, relevant, non-biased sources of information.

Microevolution

2017-01-30T13:49:30Z

Kokimura: Quality of life for this article. Fixed a few instances of grammar (capitalisation and a few commas) and spelling issues (Americans can't spell). Added onto the bacteria section because it reads like a fourth grader's science textbook.

'''Microevolution''', broadly defined, is the inevitable small-scale changes in [[allele]] frequencies in a population within the same species. Under this broad definition, this change in overall allele frequencies occurs with every birth or death of a member of the species. In other words, some generations of people might be taller than the last or shorter than the last based on the number of individuals who happen to have the "tall" gene. Microevolution does not involve changing from one [[kind]] to another, and it does not create new kinds.

Evolutionists have argued that the distinction between microevolution and [[macroevolution]] is arbitrary because it is the same process.

== Microevolution in Bacteria ==
Microevolution is the process by which bacteria may develop resistance to antibiotics. We regularly use antibiotics to stop bacterial infections. When a colony of bacteria is exposed to an antibiotic that matches the colony's gram type, the bacteria are likely to die if they do not have genes that produce molecules to inhibit the action of the antibiotic. If the survivors reproduce, the colony will contain only bacteria that have inherited resistance genes. A second application of the same antibiotic will not affect them.

Genes to resist various antibiotics are natural for bacteria to produce because the many species of bacteria war with each other for more space using these chemicals on each other. In order to protect itself, a given species of bacteria would at least have genes for resistance to the particular antibiotic it produces. Resistance genes can also be produced by random mutation, usually through mistakes in copying the DNA during cell division. Furthermore, bacteria can pass genes for antibiotic resistance between strains and even between species through [[plasmids]] containing the gene for resistance.

Because antibiotics have been used so widely in medicine, there is increasing concern about developing strains of bacteria that can acquire multiple resistances to most of the antibiotics we use (such as [[MRSA]]). High compliance with infection control measures and a prudent and more restrictive use of antibiotics are the key measures to prevent epidemics based on bacteria with multiresistance.

== Rapid Rates ==
If the world is as old as is commonly claimed, we should see animals today evolving at a rate consistent with this, over thousands and millions of years. That is why it is shocking for the scientific community that the accumulating evidence shows instead that microevolution occurs over decades, rather than thousands and millions of years. David Skelly of Yale University has observed that the evolutionary rates are far faster than those presumed by evolutionary theory: {{cquote|Ecology is being transformed by the recognition that ecological and evolutionary timescales are not easily differentiated. A 1999 review of evolutionary rates by Andrew Hendry and Mike Kinnison (The pace of modern life: measuring rates of contemporary microevolution. Evolution 53:1637-1653) provided the striking conclusion that rates of contemporary evolution are much faster than generally appreciated... Our work reveals that a number of traits including critical thermal maximum, embryonic development rate, and thermal preference behaviour all show variation consistent with local adaptation that occurs on the scale of decades and tens of meters. These findings offer a startlingly different picture of interactions between organisms and their environment prompting us to rethink, in larger sense, how we should conceive of ecological assemblages.<ref>Skelly, David K. "[http://environment.yale.edu/skelly/RapidEvol.html Rapid Evolution]." ''Yale University''. School of Forestry & Environmental Studies.</ref>}}
====Australia's 'Toxic Toad'====
In one of the most widely publicised cases of unexpected rapid microevolution, Australian Cane Toads defied predictions based on evolutionary theory by experts about how they would react after being introduced to Australia. Within decades they evolved longer legs and heat tolerance, running amok and causing havoc for the wildlife; and instituting a national catastrophe for the continent. {{cquote|The evolutionary processes spawned by the cane toad invasion have occurred in a span of just 70 years. This adds to evidence from the past two decades that populations can adapt quickly when selection pressure is strong. 'We're taught evolution occurs over these very, very long time frames. But in systems like these, it's incredibly fast,' Shine, the study co-author, said.<ref>Roach, John (2006, February 15). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/02/0215_060215_cane_toads.html Toxic Toads Evolve Longer Legs, Study Says]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}} {{cquote|'All of a sudden in the last 10 years it changes,' said Skelly. 'They're moving into areas where the physical environment is not like anything in their native range.' That implies that the cane toads have evolved more tolerance for the hotter climates they are now encountering. This is on top of the discovery last year that the toads at the forefront of the invasion had evolved longer legs than those in the interior of their range. The ability of animals to evolve so quickly needs to be factored into invasions, or the dangers of invasive species will likely be underestimated, argue Skelly and his colleagues Mark Urban, Ben Phillips and Richard Shine in an article in the March 28 issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society-B.<ref>O'Hanlon, Larry (2007, April 2). "[http://news.discovery.com/animals/toxic-cane-toads-evolve-quickly.html Toxic Toads Evolving Quickly]." ''DiscoveryNews''.</ref>}}
====Human Evolution====
According to the assumptions of evolutionary theory, if evolution always went at the rate that we see today, there should be 160 times more differences between humans and apes. So rather than assume 'the present is the key to the past', scientists then decided that evolutionary rates today have accelerated for some reason. {{cquote|If humans had always evolved at this rate, the difference between modern humans and chimps should be 160 times greater than it really is. 'We realised we must be in a transient [phase], that evolution hasn't been going this fast for long in our species,' Harpending said. 'And so we wondered why.'<ref>Roach, John (2007, December 11). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071211-human-evolution.html Human Evolution Speeding Up]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}} {{cquote|'I was raised with the belief that modern humans showed up 40,000 to 50,000 years ago and haven't changed,' explained Henry C. Harpending, an anthropologist at the University of Utah. 'The opposite seems to be true.'... If evolution had been proceeding steadily at the current rate since humans and chimps separated 6 million years ago there should be 160 times more differences than the researchers found. That indicates that human evolution had been slower in the distant past, Harpending explained.<ref>Schmid, Randolph E. (2007, December 10). "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121001235.html?nav=rss_nation Researchers: Human Evolution Speeding Up]." ''The Washington Post''.</ref>}}
====Italian Wall Lizards====
In 1971, scientists introduced 5 pairs of Italian Wall Lizards to a small island off the coast of Croatia. However, the Croatian War of Independence prevented the scientists from returning to the island for more than 30 years. When the war ended, tourism finally began again in 2004, allowing them to return. The researchers were unsure if the lizards would still be alive. Instead, they found the island swarming with lizards, which genetic testing showed to be descendants of their original 5. The new lizards had wiped out native lizard populations by evolving cecal valves, muscles between the large and small intestines, with which to digest native vegetation, an expanded gut structure, as well as a harder bite. {{cquote|Italian wall lizards introduced to a tiny island off the coast of Croatia are evolving in ways that would normally take millions of years to play out, new research shows. In just a few decades the 5-inch-long (13-centimetre long) lizards have developed a completely new gut structure, larger heads, and a harder bite, researchers say... Such physical transformation in just 30 lizard generations takes evolution to a whole new level, Irschick said. It would be akin to humans evolving and growing a new appendix in several hundred years, he said. 'That's unparalleled. What's most important is how fast this is,' he said.<ref>Johnson, Kimberly (2008, April 21). "[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html Lizards Rapidly Evolve After Introduction to Island]." ''National Geographic''.</ref>}}
====Plant Evolution====
Contrary to theoretical predictions based on evolutionary theory, genomes for the Angiosperm ''Silene'' (a flowering plant) evolved far more rapidly than was expected, as reported in the January 2012 issue of ''PLoS Biology''. Researchers are now trying to find an explanation for why such rapid microevolution is occurring, and a new model that will avoid such surprises in the future. {{cquote|Contrary to theoretical predictions, these genomes have experienced a massive proliferation of noncoding content... The evolution of mutation rate, genome size, and chromosome structure can therefore be extremely rapid and interrelated in ways not predicted by current evolutionary theories... We discuss the implications of the unprecedented mitochondrial genome diversity found within Silene and possible alternative explanations for the rapid genome evolution in this genus.<ref>Sloan, D.B., Alverson, A.J., Chuckalovcak, J.P., et. al. (2012, January). "[http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001241 Rapid Evolution of Enormous, Multichromosomal Genomes in Flowering Plant Mitochondria with Exceptionally High Mutation Rates]." In ''PLoS Biology''. Public Library of Science.</ref>}}
====Rodent Evolution====
A 2009 study observed that rodents evolve at "unprecedented rates" given climate change and population growth, and that rapid evolutionary change in rodents has been occurring for over a century. The article also notes research on rapid Micrevolution has previously been "infrequently documented", but that despite this, more and more evidence is cropping up for it. {{cquote|Our results indicate that over the last 100+ years, rapid morphological change in rodents has occurred quite frequently, and that these changes have taken place on the mainland as well as on islands. Our results also suggest that these changes may be driven, at least in part, by human population growth and climate change.<ref>Pergams ORW, Lawler JJ (2009, April 21). "[http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0006452 Recent and Widespread Rapid Morphological Change in Rodents]." PLoS ONE 4(7): e6452. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0006452.</ref>}}

== Microevolution in Creation Science ==
Whilst some [[creationists]] agree with the concept of microevolution, but call it [[adaptation]], they argue that there is a large difference between microevolution and [[macroevolution]]. However, evolutionary scientists do not make any real distinction between the two,<ref>[http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2006/0428doser.shtml AAAS press release]</ref> and leading creationists argue that using the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution" obscures the real distinction, that being between the unobserved information-generating mutations that evolution requires and information-destroying mutations that are observed.<ref>[http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/2996#micro_macro Arguments we think creationists should NOT use] (Creation Ministries International).</ref>

== External links ==
* [http://creationwiki.org/Microevolution Microevolution - CreationWiki]

== References ==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Molecular Biology]]
[[Category:Molecular Genetics]]
[[Category:Microbiology]]