@ KAG

But of course that’s what it is . You know what, that does it, I'm not responding to you again, until you respond to these:

It’d be nice to have your response to my post on the thermodynamics issue; presenting that peer reviewed argument for the “proven mathematical and statistical methods [that] do not support a random rearrangement of genomes of simple primordial animals to give the structures we observe in later organisms”; explain how man and animals came to be, why, and why we have things like: vestiges in several animals including humans, ERVs, nested hierarchies etc. Remember, “Godddit” isn’t an explanation; “Explain why this is impossible. What mechanisms prevent evolutionary mechanisms from arriving at our current biodiversity? If you cannot, this is empty talk.”; What mechanism prevents a cumulation of these beneficial mutations? If you cannot substantiate this, your argument is simply personal incredulity: I cannot understand how, so it is impossible.”; “Lions eating hay? I’ll have to see a reference for that, if you don’t mind.”.

If u dont realise that this

A pity u gave up on math but i am sure wil be able to follow this. Experiments like the above point away from evolution. Everything in the end can be broken down to simple numbers. And the probabilty of the nylonase formation can be pegged down to araound 0.0001. Most biochemical changes however are interdependent forming long chains and sequences with little margin for error.
The sequece of respiration has been exhaustively elucidated and also shown to be almost identical at the cellular level across species and hence eons of evolution
A scenario where this biochemical chain reaction developed through a random development of its component enzymes, pathways and substrates would involve multiplying all the component probabilities together. I have seen some estimates of this numbers to be in the order of 10**40 (10 raised to the power of 40). In statistics an event that has a probability of 10**20 is considered not to be possible(the possibility is so low as to be considered immposible).

and all that follows is in answer to some of the issues u raised then maybe it is really wasted

And once again u have sidestepped all the additional issues raised like stereo-specificity, ubiquity of respiration, interdependence of biochemical processes etc

I will get u references on the lions and stuff. Be patient, i do have else to do apart from nairaland

I womnder why women feel a man must have a woman to make him happy
Is it a way of justfying thier existence?

Seun:

So far, we've had ladies and unhappy men trying to answer this question. For a more reliable answer to this question, we need a happy man to answer the question "what makes me happy?" We're waiting!

Wait no Longer
I am a thoroughly happy man.
And its not becos i have a lot of money or a lot of sex or a lot of fame.
I guess its becos i am happy with who i am, what i am, what i am doing, and where i am going.
Life is good, and it just keeps gettting better
Besides, Arsenal is in the final of the Champions League

No, that’s by your argument, which from where I’m sitting is leading up to a strawman

Another famous one-liner. U have completely side stepped the issues raised in the question
I repeat myself again. Is the difference in human appearance a result of evolution and addition of genetic material or the manifestations of combinations of genes inherent in the human?

In much the same way variation in each individual does not make any one human “more evolved”.

In the same way variations in Pseudomonas strains do not make for Evolution or make one strain more evolved than the other !!!!!
Thank u for making my point for me

So you don’t actually have any “proven mathematical and statistical methods [that] do not support a random rearrangement of genomes of simple primordial animals to give the structures we observe in later organisms”? You just thought that would make for a nice soundbyte? Well, I’ll keep my fingers crossed, but I won’t be holding my breath.

Actualy i do. But it would be rather wasted on u. And i dont care for soundbites.
A pity u gave up on math but i am sure wil be able to follow this. Experiments like the above point away from evolution. Everything in the end can be broken down to simple numbers. And the probabilty of the nylonase formation can be pegged down to araound 0.0001. Most biochemical changes however are interdependent forming long chains and sequences with little margin for error.
The sequece of respiration has been exhaustively elucidated and also shown to be almost identical at the cellular level across species and hence eons of evolution
A scenario where this biochemical chain reaction developed through a random development of its component enzymes, pathways and substrates would involve multiplying all the component probabilities together. I have seen some estimates of this numbers to be in the order of 10**40 (10 raised to the power of 40). In statistics an event that has a probability of 10**20 is considered not to be possible(the possibility is so low as to be considered immposible).

Secondly a gradual evolution would suggest a wide variation in the basic mechanism for respiration involving a wide variety of substrates different pathways etc but i dont think this is the case. The gamut of anaerobic and aerobic respiration exists in varying degrees in almost all species.
Another issue is the stereo-specificity of many of the components of life. Random changes should have incorporated various configurations into amino acids ( for example) in the early formation of life. But almost all those necessary for life are skewered in the laevo- direction. these are gaps in logic evolutionists cannot just bridge (my biochem has gone a bit flaky but i am sure these are the basic facts)

But evolutionists know these things and will tell u that becos it happened it must be true. But if u were a policeman u would never arrest a blind man for assasinating kennedy becos of the improbability of a blind man shooting that accurately. But what if his prints were on the gun and he was found on the scene of the crime. Would u still arrest him or woulld u look for another explanation? like
1. He isnt really blind
2. The was someone there holding his hand

No offence but if u r this cluelless and u need it urgently, just contract it out. I am sure there are lots of experts on NL that can help u.
For a fee of course

@KAG

The big guns? Hardly! The oligomer degradation enzyme, though important in its own right, pale in comparism to factors like transitionals, ERVs, and nested hierarchies; and is just another worthy example of increase in information

Don't worry, we will get to those

Don’t be silly, that was the objective. On the other hand, of course assumptions were made before the experiment. Surely you are not suggesting that was wrong? I fail to see what your objection was about. Curiouser and curiouser.

In simpler English, the objection is, almost every assumption in biology since Darwin has been based on the FACT of evolution. If anyone fails to see that this is a fundamental systematic error, then i wonder. It is no different from the creationist basing all their inference from observations on Genesis. It is a case of Genesis vs Origin of the Species. Like I have said before, a lot of evolutionary explanations to phenomena are merely a lot of imagination and wishful thinking. Like the long hair theory, like the Galapagos finches ( i am waiting to hear an evolutionary explanation for homosexuality, that should be interesting)

Looks like someone missed the point. Of course it's micro-evolution, it's an example of a mutation increasing information.

No, u missed the point. Go and do your research and find out what the difference in base pairs is for the old and the evolved strain, compare with existing strains . Also Yomo et al did not mention an addition but a modification of existing genetic materials. Later writers added this
Also find out the statistical deviation of the position of the modified gene to the mean.Then compare with progressive deviation that would be required for a bacterium to evolve into a fish,  U just dont get it do u?

“The newly obtained abilities of PAO5502 were retained even after five successive cultivations on Glu minimal medium” (http://aem.asm.org/cgi/reprint/61/5/2020.pdf)

Good. I can assume that at a point in time modern man was made up of a small group of individuals in a particular a locale before they migrated to other parts, right? We can also assume that they hade sihadr phenotypical characteristics like skin color, hair color and texture, eye color etc, right? As they migrated, they must have evolved into the variants we see today. these variations are also passed on to the offspring.
So by your argument this evolution should add some complexity or material to the genes of some races. Some races should be more  evolved if we assume that that the original strains still exist (because the emergence of mutants does not necessarily destroy or stop propagation of the "pure" strains) Answer this please.


With respect to your question on thermodynamics and statistics, maybe i will write a paper. I know of people who are  currently looking into building a computer model for evolution but are  limited in  technical knowledge and resources but those can be overcome by collaboration with others, I think simmy said he was a biochemist, maybe he would be interested. (its good the genome project is going on so everybody will have access to genetic information) So keep your fingers crossed

Remember, “Godddit” isn’t an explanation

And " It just happened by Chance " is a better one?

First, I had actually never seen the TalkOrigins page you posted, in fact I very rarely use TO, and mostly use it to find refutations to the many quote mines of anti-evolution proponenets.

OK then, my apologies. I will stick to the issues

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t, eh?.

Yes, evolution cannot extricate itself from this and many other dilemmas

I’m not in the habit of answering arguments on behalf of others, especially if they are as long as your attempted rebuttal .

You are also in the habit of avoiding glaring holes in evolutionary arguments with your famous one-liners. I hope u get in the mood soon

Secondly, you really are an arse.

Thank you Sir/Madam (since u seem to be of indeterminate sex) for telling me what I am. I was of the opinion that I was an evolved bacterium

@ada
I served in Port Harcout last year and i decided to stay. Took a job here instead of lagos or Ibadan. I guess i love the place.
When u come around buzz me and i ll show u the ropes

;d

@cocoa
the right type can be hard to find

@KAG

we see mutations adding to genetic material all the time, rearranging, and creating information all the time. I've given the Nylon oligomer degradation enzyme in bacteria as an example, polyploidy is another.

Was trying to keep my posts on this as simple as possible but since u brought the big guns out,lets do it.
Firstly, the case of Nylon oligomer degradation enzyme in Pseudomonas is a classic example of subjectivity in science. One of the preliminary objectives of the experiment was to "evolve a new metabolic activity under laboratory conditions". The assumption was already made b4 the experiment
Secondly, Psuedomonas was shown to be able to metabolise plastic under the right conditions (when u strip away all the jargon), a quality it did not have before. the question is, does this prove evolution? Does this go agianst my thermodynamic/complexity assertion. here are direct quotes from the original paper ( i studied quite some biochem in school so i should be able to interprete a scientific paper dont u think?)

These results suggest that PAO5502 acquires some genetic alterations in the course of acquiring the new metabolic activity

These results indicate that P. aeruginosa PAO5501 and PAO5502 are true derivatives of PAO1.

The experiment gave rise to another modified starin of the bacteria. what simmy would call micro-evolution. It did not increase the numder of genomes in the organism, it only changed the arrangement of the existing genomes and hence phenotype.
This is comparable to the case of a certain species of parrot that was vegetarian but later adapted to eating meet. it was still a parrot., it would still be genetically similar to vegetarian strains and given the right conditons it would revert back to its orginal state. In British zoos in World War 2, lions were fed hay and they survived, is this evolution? Is the lion evolving into a goat. Dogs have been fed beans and such food by humans for hundreds of years, are they anything but dogs. Was the change in diet cosed by and sustained by mutation? or vice versa

Also look at this article attacking creationist explanatin to this phenomenon (though i do not totally support some of the assertions by creationists) the evolutionist was just out to make the creationists look silly, avoiding legitimate questions and covering up with jargon (like is done on this forum). I even have a strange suspicion that this is the article that KAG is basing her assumptions on, just regurgitating the opinions of a similarly biased evolutionists. I have taken the time to read the original findings of Yomo et al

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/apr04.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v17/i3/bacteria.asp

The very fact that these conditons were induced in a lab suggest an outside cognate force behind this "evolution"

Let me show examples of questions raised and flimsy answers

Question :[/b]The researchers have not been able to ascertain any putative ancestral gene to the nylon-degrading genes. They represent a new gene family. This seems to rule out gene duplications as a source of the raw material for the new genes.
P. aeruginosa is renowned for its ability to adapt to unusual food sources—such as toluene, naphthalene, camphor, salicylates and alkanes. These abilities reside on plasmids known as TOL, NAH, CAM, SAL and OCT respectively.2 Significantly, they do not reside on the chromosome (many examples of antibiotic resistance also reside on plasmids).
[b]
Answer

A.Not true, as before, the nylB group comes from a frameshift of an internally repetitious gene (so not surprisingly it is novel). NylA and NylC have not had homologous genes identified as of 2000, but then again a lot of bacterial sequencing has been done since, and as Don Batten states in a footnote, no Flavobacterium genome has yet been sequenced. Gene duplication is a major sources of new genes, but frame shifts, recombination and so on are all other sources of genes.

my comments: he as backed down from the blatant fact that there is no intermidiate putative gene. he reverts to the frameshift explanation which can be argued back and forth to be as a result of an inherent built in mechanism and not of random mutation and subsequent selection. this is a gap that evolutionists time and time again cannot fill. if truely evolution is linearly progressive as they say, this mutation would have been observed in gradual stages in the codons for these enzymes. and more importantly these intermidiate stages would have been able to survive long enough to produce the next stage. but the lack of the enzyme precludes survival of an intermidiate stage until the enzyme is fully manifested. so there is a quantum leap from one stage to the other which suggests a built in mechanism in the parent to adapt to conditions. this mechanism is the transposable element. but consider the evolutionist explanation for this

Now AiG is trying to claim that the nylonases are not due to random mutation and natural selection. Their arguments are spurious to say the least.

Some more background, in Flavobacterium there are four nylonase genes, nylA, nylB and nylB' (which are duplicates) and nylC, carried on one plasmid. In Pseudomonas there are two nylonase genes (nyl A and nyl B, homologous to the nylA and nylB genes in Flavobacterium) carried on two different plasmids. The nylB gene does most of the heavy lifting, so to speak, and it is the nylB gene that was formed from a deletion mutation and subsequent frame shift in the RSII repetitive element. The key here is that the mutation was in an internally repetitive sequence of DNA. Frameshifts in non-repetitive sequences usually end up with a high probability of producing a premature stop codon, resulting in production of short non-functional proteins. However, repetitive sequences are very likely to not produce premature stop codons, and it is likely that long, functional proteins can be produced by frameshifts in these proteins. In the case of nylB, an insertion of a T at position 99 in the repetitive sequence resulted in a start codon and a stop codon some 392 amino acids away.

the probability of the mechanism he highligted is 0.0001 ( a number he suggested himself even though one can argue it is 0.0000000000001). Does this seem like something likely? Besides, the other portion of the probability ( 1 - 0001) would have produced a large number of stop codons effectively truncating the process and preventing transmission to subsequent generations. Proof of this is in a staement by the evolutionist hinself

It is very likely that the genes arose on different plasmids and were stitched together by the transposable elements at a later stage. Furthermore, the transposable elements (IS6100) are present in many different bacteria and are very strongly conserved, suggesting they do not tolerate mutations very well. So given that the transposable elements are conserved in sequence between different bacteria, and that you don't need many mutations to make a functional nylonase, this objection is void.

But , hold on,he is saying here that the very elements allowed to move about freely in the gene and hence a major mechanism for evolution are resistant to mutations. He also said this

Well, transposable elements can result in rapid adaptation, but the mechanism is pure random mutation and natural selection. Transposons are not specifically targeted anywhere, but jump about at random without regard to the cell's "need". They can generate new enzymes by producing recombination of existing enzymes, but they are just as likely to cause damage. One strain produced by researchers had lost nylA as the transposable elements cut it out. Transposable elements are well known as possible agents of evolution.

A bigger example of contradiction and tounge-in-cheek duplicity, i have not seen. With one breath he says tranposons resist mutation, with another he says they are gung-ho genomes, mutating producing new enzymes at random.
This kind of argument is what evolution is all about. They bamboozle unsuspecting laymen with conjecture disguised as fact. Nothind this particular evolutionist has said makes his position superior to the dissenting creationist but the creationist is considered a hack simply becos he will not tow the line of evolutionists

And @KAG
Earlier in this thread i was trying to explain to you how we could use evolution in lower organisms to study in days that which would have taken eons in higher ones. U said u didnt know what i was talking about. I hope u do now

hot-cocoa:

@xkape
out of curiosity, are you speaking from experience then?

Yes

@cocoa

hot-cocoa:

Besides any guy just getting to know a girl will tell u that u should not treat her too nice all the time because she'l take u for granted

I don't know about this one oh. I'm an equal opportunist and expect a certain level of 'niceness' and respect, not just from guys., and I like to think that I treat my friends and people in general with the same level of respect and kindness. So like I said, If I think someone is beginning to play games or manipulate my feelings in any way, then it's time to X them off the list

not all women have enough confidence in self to think like that. most want to be treated nice but when they actually get it they see it as a sign of weakness. Dont ask me why cos i dont know

Studies suggest that women are slightly more intelligent (or so i read somewhere)
but in my opinion, there are substances in make up, chick fashion, and sitcoms (desperate housewives,sex and the city etc etc) that reduce IQ drastically. So the net effect is, go figure

@ Tayo D
Thanx. I believe most of ur comments are spot on, especially those about the various compartments of what we know as hell. About the civilizations before adam, i have heard just little gist about it. I havent been able to determine from the bible for myself one way or another so i would be glad to see what u have to say about it.
cheers.

I have been qietly observing the exchanger bw KAG nferyn and simmy.
Thank God someone else has pointed out some of the points i have been screaming at my evolutionist friends

The big inter- family jumps observed within species cannot be explained away with a graduall speciation. Present observations do not support this, at best we can see within species variation. Our current knowledge of genetics does not support this. we have maped the human genome, we have broken inheritance down to its most basic elements. we can match genes exactly to a sequence of numbers. proven mathematical and statistical methods do not support a random rearrangement of genomes of simple primordial animals to give the structures we observe in later organisms (but this whole argument seems to have gone over everybody's head).

i even tried to to explain the thermodynamic improbability of of evolution but i heard rebuttals such as.
"the earth is not a closed system", duh then no experiment concerning a closed system on earth should be valid. the abstraction of a closed system was used just to demonstrate a basic principle. as nferyn rightly pointed out energy enters and leaves the earth all the time. but even he will not argue that there is a net absorption of energy, and this energy applied within a genetic framework will lead to a degradation of genetic structure, not a build up.
like simi said, mutations cannot consitently add to genetic material over time, it just doesnt make sense. mutations are degradatory (is that a word?) in nature. the larger portion of mutations we observe in organisms today are detrimental or at worst neutral. the seemingly beneficial ones, like those that give resistance to pathogens or chemicals are all within the scope of making a species more adaptable to its environment. it doesnt make the spcies another thing. even KAG has shown that virii have been mutating for eons, but are sttill virri. the mythical unicellular organism that became a multicellular one has nevr been demonstrated
even fossilation show a clear stratification instead of gradiation in species

but as always people will believe what they chose to believe

Brilliant topic

", as in wipe-your-butt-with-a-leaf wild?"
" Who wipes?!!!!"
- Madagascar

", that, Mr Anderson, is the sound of Inevitability"
- Agent Smith, The Matrix

" It has been an honour playing with you gentelmen"
- Titanic

"Good morning my neighbours"
"F**K You!!!"
" Yes, Yes, F**K you too"
- Coming to America

" From now on I shall be known as BETTY"
- Master Pain, Kung Pow - Enter the Fist

@zahymaka
there is no justification for calling pple u dont know f***in morons . It is just a complete lack of manners, and even more so coming from a lady.

glamrocka:

Fuking slowpoke

@glamrocka

Did u just call me a slowpoke?
If i were to decend to ur foul-mouthed-semi-illiterate level i would have said ur father was a slowpoke. But i wont decend to ur level and sarcasm is probably lost on u anyway since u didnt realise my post was just being sarcastic.
Jeeeez the kind of people the allow on the internet these days.

allonym:

There is more evidence to the argument that God created hell.

According to the bible, God created all things and through him, all things which exist were made. If thats not enough for you. . . I don't know what is, but lets go on.

According to the bible, God cast satan out of heaven into hell. This implies that hell already existed. Since before satan's rebellion, there were no other beings to cast into hell or angels to create hell as a dwelling place, God MUST have created hell beforehand.

This is completely untrue, read ur bible before making spurious statements. God cast satan down to EARTH, not hell

afrobeat:

If you are implying that groups of people can be superior to other groups of people then this is contradictory. You imply that no human being is superior to another but groups of people can be superior to other groups of people. But aren't groups of people made up of individual human beings? If individual human beings are contained in groups of people and no individual human being is superior to another individual human being then it necessarily follows that no group of people are superior to other groups of people.

Furthermore, the fact that you actually imply this reinforces my point that although you do not say with your mouth that you are inherently inferior to white people you imply it with your thinking and your arguments.

What the spook are u saying? Anytime someone suggests u people should stop griping abou this racism thing and get on with ur lives u shout U feel inferioir to whites. i dare sa that u and ur band are the inferior ones. ur inferiority is so deep-seated u cant even suggest it to urself. Classic freudian symptoms.

I can agree when you say that . I can say yes at a certain time in history and in a certain place certain people can do better than others in certain aspects/fields but I would never use that to say that it means that the group doing better at that point in time in that particular field is superior. Superior is such a wrong choice of word.

You are contradicting urself becos u do not want to hear the word inferior.
On the athleticism issue. Fine there are social fac tors involved in some sport but what social factor stops u from running? u r using the example of american society (like any americo-centric person that now turns around to talk about feeling inferior) What about other countries without a large population of blacks, where are thier hundred meter runners. The Japanese, some parts of eastern europe, middle east. what social factors prevent these ones from doing the most naturral of sports??
Besides, srinting has been traced to the presence of the protein actinin in the muscles and the prevalence of the protein has been shown to have a strong genetic link.
An inordinate number of the worlds prodigies have been shown to be of Jewish extraction even amongst europeans. what do you have to say to this?
slave traders preffered slaves from the west coast of africa because a greater number of them survide the sea crossing .
why?
U cannot explain away the genetic nature of human traits in a bid to protect urself from percieved inferiority or superiority
Some people will always be better at some things than others simple. wether by nature or by nuture. if u r so convinced it is nuture then we should nuture our children so they can dominate the world instead of staying here m,aking excuses for ourselves
Anytime someone points out the backwardness of the black race in terms of technology, someone points out Egypt
1. There is no proof that the people of ancient egypt were a homogenous group of negroid africans. In fact evidence sucjh as hairs obtained fromhundreds of mummies suggest otherwise. a black mans hair cannot lie can it? At best ancien egyptians were a mixed race group with different races achieving dominance over centuries
2. much of the culture and civilization of ancient egypt was obtained from ancient phoenicians and other meditereanean groups who are definitely not black.
3. the kingdoms of zimbabwe were dfinitely unique among african kingdoms interms of the grandeur of thier buildings but this was not sustained over the centuries nor did it spread effectively to the rest of black africa. so what is ur argument
4. do u realise that by the time europeans firt landed on the shore of west africa . the local civilizations had not even effectively discovered the wheel and axle?

Ok so the europeans have a head start, so get over it and move on. Run like u know how to

@kimba
Dont tchew the guy out, I mighht not agree with his expression but he raised a good point.
Women are always makin a fuss about how they want to be treated right but 70% of the time they stay in abusive and unhealthy relationships for all sorts of reasons
Besides any guy just getting to know a girl will tell u that u should not treat her too nice all the time cos she'l take u for granted. It sounds twisted but it happens

U r right
Church and football are both forms of religion. Religion being a body of beliefs actions and rituals directed at some object of reverence
But religion is different from christianity (i am using christianity here cos u mentioned church)
Beign a christian is a state of existence, like beign a woman is different from being a man. It is not about what u do or what u dont do (to a large extent). The tingle people feel in church is just that, a feeling, it has nothing realy to do with the essence of why they are in church. u can get that tingle anywhere. i know a lot of pple expect to feel something at a service to show that the preacher is "anointed". this is just bollox and religion.
I personally will have a religious experience if Arsenal win the CL

HE most definitely has my vote, but does my vote count?

afrobeat:

Furthermore there are many of you on this board that believe that South Africa would not be as developed as they are now without the whites there. While this may or may not be true I find it really insulting or rather I feel a lot of pity for those of you Africans that look in the mirror everyday and think to yourself that White people are inherently better than you as a black person.
Because although you are not saying so with your mouth you are saying so with your thoughts and philosophy. For example by xkape saying that xkape is implying that he as an African is incapable of ruling his people and determinig right from wrong. We all should be careful about the way we use our mouths to curse ourselves because the power of life and death is in the tongue.

with all due respect afrobeat. this is total bollox.
Please spare me the be-proud-of yourself-as -an african mantra. Its old, tired and has not stood the test of time.
I know exactly what i am, what i can do, what i can't. i don't need any validation from anybody or any association or comparison with any race, black or white.
This said, u will be hard pressed to find anybody prouder of his ancestral heritage, his language,his culture, his beautiful women than me. If i came to the world a 100 times over i would still come as a Nigerian ( i would shuffle the tribe a bit though ) But that does not make me close my eyes to the short-comings of my people.

That aside, why are we all afraid to call a spade a spade? As a human being, in his totality, no one is superior to another . But as groups of people, that is another issue. And superiority is relative, every group has their areas of comparative advantage. When was the last time u saw a white man in the finals of any major 100m dash? Who are those that produce arguably the most soulful music in the world. We accept stereotypes like black people having higher libido than whites and facts like we are physically superior in some sports but when someone suggests white superiority in other aspects we cry RACISM. why the double standard?

People of Indo-Europian stock have shown over time that they are very adept at organising large groups for productive endevour. They have also shown they are less impassioned and more objective in their world-view. THE ONUS IS ON US THE BLACK RACE TO PROVE WE CAN MATCH OR BETTER THEM in this respect just like it is on any white "wimp " to step up and run like carl lewis. the sad part is they seem to be most adept at those thing that change the course of nations and build civilizations. we have our own efforts too (ancient egypt, to an extent) but the deficit is definitelty on their side. if economies were developed by passion, religious fervour, dancing, epicurianism and athleticsm, africa would definitely be the world power.

and please no one should bring up the old europe underdeveloped africa theory. get over it. fight it, overcome it and stop complaining. start with africans underdeveloping africa. mugabe et al. thank god for people like Kuffor,maybe there is still hope

Idekeson:

No amount of development from colonialism can equate the basic right of self determination.

Self determination my black behind!!
Like they determined themselves in Rwanda/Burundi? Like they are determining in Dafur, like we are being determined by 3rd term? And dont say that conflicts occur elswhere in the world cos i will be very pissed

But seriously, Africans have shown over time they cannot rule themselves or determine right from wrong, let alone self. And dont bring any be-proud -of-Africa rhetoric cos the onus is on us to disprove the above statements

Rottweiler:

How do we move forward pragmatically? When we have visionless people at the helms of affairs! We need the past to move forward positively! Take the Niger Delta issue for instance. How do we move forward pragmatically without going back to the past to ascertain the point of derailment.

Go to South Africa. The SA is what it is today because the whites. If a black man at being at the helms of affairs there, South Africa would have been worst off than Nigeria. The Zimbabwe that Mugabe inherited is in shambles today. What is the cause? Colonialism? NO! Visionless leadership. Mugabe was better as a freedom fighter than as a Head of state.

If you hand over 20million Naira in cash to some people today, check them out in 10 years time, they will be poorer than they were before the grant came. A visionless man is a disaster waiting to happen. That is the problem Naija and other African countries are having today.

Well said my broda
As long as we have leaders like mugabe, mbeki, obasanjo, africa will always be in the cess-pool of humanity. In fact as long as we have africans that keep refeering to the "plundering" of our resources by colononialist and refuse to face the very plunder we are doing to ourselves
Whwn white men were ruling nigeria trains were working, now most nigerian children dont even know what a train is, go figure

no worries mate

nferyn:

xkape,

I really wonder why you keep coming up with the second law of thermodynamics. That law does not apply to the earth's ecosystem, as it is not a closed system and even less to our genetic material, as it is a subsystem of subsystems of subsystems of , on our planet all of which are anything but closed.

Show me an example of a truely closed natural system, or a truely ideal Gas. Science is based on sensible approximations. this is the only way we can reach any meaning ful conclusions. even KAG agrees with my supposition on this issue

@KAG
why the "damn , you". totally unnecessary.
at least it is good u admit u cant use a snowflake to explain entropy

2cents
Didnt mean to blah u or anybody else with degrees (even my brother is currently studying the same course) I was just making a commentry on the Nigerian educational standard. Pls no offence intended
And u r right about the certifications too, some of them are cram work, especially the microsoft flavour. But i think open-source certs are the real deal. Its a bit hard to cram for LPIC or RHCE dont u think?

ma guy, bone degree, u can study stupidology in school, go out and get RHCE and get a job at Google. Only dumb Nigerian employees consider our fake degrees. BSc Comp Science? blah!!! 80% of the grads in my set didnt know the difference bw html and hotmail. In IT nobody can develop u but urself. Of course if ur degree is from Princeton or MIT, that is another issue

i used to be shackled by the FTP client question too. until irealised that windows has ftp functionality too, i mean aftyer paying so much for it, i might as well use it. I doesnt have all the functionality of dedicated ftp clients but the drag-and-dropability is so cool, its for dummies like me
so no bother urself my bro just type ftp://yoursite.com and ure good to go