Explain Your Religious Views or Lack Thereof

[Lammatrey]

Do you think religion should be banned?

In a sense, yes.

You're fucking joking, right? Why the fuck do you have the right to tell other people who they can and can't worship?

[Seperates]

In a sense, yes.

You're fucking joking, right? Why the fuck do you have the right to tell other people who they can and can't worship?

HOW DARE YOU BAN MY HUMAN SACRIFICE.

YEAH MAN, WHAT THE FUCK.

[Neo Rome Republic]

In a sense, yes.

You're fucking joking, right? Why the fuck do you have the right to tell other people who they can and can't worship?

Also disregarding, that banning religion in the past, has failed to eliminate it.

[O5vx]

DNA do not change over time.

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

[Seperates]

You're fucking joking, right? Why the fuck do you have the right to tell other people who they can and can't worship?

Also disregarding that banning religion in the past, has failed to eliminate it.

I think that that would be more to the point.

Talking about 'rights' about telling people what they can and can't worship stopped when we started banning traditional drug use from Native American rituals.

[Blasveck]

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

YES IT DOES.

Mutations.

[The Silence of Night]

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

What part of DNA DOESN'T change?

[Seperates]

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

Yes, it does. The telomeres shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Also disregarding that banning religion in the past, has failed to eliminate it.

I think that that would be more to the point.

Talking about 'rights' about telling people what they can and can't worship stopped when we started banning traditional drug use from Native American rituals.

Now ''the freedom of getting high'' is the real civil rights battle.

[Shaggai]

DNA in itself does not change.

Yes, it does. The telomeres shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

To be fair, there may be other causes than just telomeres. But they mostly involve changes to DNA anyway.

[Grave_n_idle]

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

We can add biology to physics on the list of sciences you'll debate, but don't understand?

[Seperates]

Yes, it does. The telomeres shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

To be fair, there may be other causes than just telomeres. But they mostly involve changes to DNA anyway.

It was the only example that I could think of off the top of my head, but there are probably better ones in the scientific literature.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Actually, yes it does. Radiation and other chemicals changes DNA, along with coding, transcribing and translating errors. Most of the time, these are caught by some of the 'editing' processes in the cell. However, some of these cells normally either self destruct, or the process is irrelevant because 90% of our DNA doesn't actually code for anything important. But you know cancer? That is when DNA has changed so much within a cell that it grows rapidly without stopping, which is why it is nearly impossible to stop.

DNA in itself does not change.

You are wrong.
The end.

[O5vx]

DNA in itself does not change.

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

[Blasveck]

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

Transforming=Changing

[Grave_n_idle]

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

...

Parody?

(Please be)

[The Silence of Night]

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

You don't know what you're talking about, do you?

[Uiiop]

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/transforming
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definitio ... sformation
trans·form (trns-fôrm)
v. trans·formed, trans·form·ing, trans·forms
v.tr.
1. To change markedly the appearance or form of
trans·for·ma·tion (trnsfr-mshn, -fôr-)
n.
A marked change, as in appearance or character, usually for the better.

What's the difference?

[Seperates]

I think that that would be more to the point.

Talking about 'rights' about telling people what they can and can't worship stopped when we started banning traditional drug use from Native American rituals.

Now ''the freedom of getting high'' is the real civil rights battle.

Whenever anybody says to respect my religion I ask them to respect my right to human sacrifice. And I then ask them to volunteer for a human sacrifice. And if they say no, I inform them that they are impeding on my religious rights and disrespecting my religion, the penalty for which is... death via sacrificial dagger.

[Shaggai]

To be fair, there may be other causes than just telomeres. But they mostly involve changes to DNA anyway.

It was the only example that I could think of off the top of my head, but there are probably better ones in the scientific literature.

The main exaples I was thinking of were various types of DNA damge, like transcription errors and radiation and so on.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Yes, it does. The telomeric shorten, and eventually, run out. That's why you die and age even if you stayed healthy your entire life. If DNA didn't change, we could live for fucking ever.

Dude, the sheer existence of cancer renders your argument as irrelevant.

It is only transforming, not changing.

Stop
Being
Wrong

[O5vx]

You all crazy. That's my explanation for your blatant dishonest to what you claim to understand. I refuse to continue arguing when you will continue to make up stuff.

[Blasveck]

You all crazy. That's my explanation for your blatant dishonest to what you claim to understand. I refuse to continue arguing when you will continue to make up stuff.

What part are we not understanding?

[Ermiopa]

Now ''the freedom of getting high'' is the real civil rights battle.

Whenever anybody says to respect my religion I ask them to respect my right to human sacrifice. And I then ask them to volunteer for a human sacrifice. And if they say no, I inform them that they are impeding on my religious rights and disrespecting my religion, the penalty for which is... death via sacrificial dagger.

Respecting Religion =/= Participating in Religion

Also, there are no longer any religions apart from extremely obscure cults, that require human sacrifices.

[Grave_n_idle]

You all crazy. That's my explanation for your blatant dishonest to what you claim to understand. I refuse to continue arguing when you will continue to make up stuff.

Are you implying that we wrote all those scientific, engineering (etc) links ourselves?

Otherwise, I'm not sure how anyone but you is 'making up' stuff.