Photos, vids, etc ....
- Thread starter Shiftless2
- Start date
Looks like Burgess Meredith to me:
Meredith as Henry Bemis in The Twilight Zone episode "Time Enough at Last"
Same glasses in both pics.S2 #2
For those that don't recall the Twilight Zone episode the exaggerated thick-lensed eye-glasses
are the prop key to the episode plot.
Same glasses in both pics.
For those that don't recall the Twilight Zone episode the exaggerated thick-lensed eye-glasses
are the prop key to the episode plot.
Funny how I can't remember names any more.
I do remember the Twilight Zone episode though.
The plot revolved around how much Bemis liked reading.
Then there was the Penguin in "Batman" 1966.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Shiftless2
Well-known member
Don't laugh too hard
Dumbest argument for religion ever, since clearly humans have evolved even in the last 5000 year, getting taller, stronger, longer living, etc.
His argument is that mutations are so common that we could not have survived very long.
And that is ridiculous since the whole point is there are beneficial mutations and harmful mutations, and the whole point of evolution is that natural selection will only promote the beneficial ones.
That's my conclusion too. BUT !!
There are other explanations.
"Evolution" explains it. Evolution doesn't explain it well.
It seems obvious humans having 20:20 vision is an advantage over being entirely blind.
But the notion that the entire vision system evolved incrementally, not merely the magnificent eyeball, but also
the optic nerve, and the visual cortex, that may seem less likely,
and may seem to support notions such as "intelligent design".
That's not an endorsement of religion. It's a disclosure of what may be unanswered questions.
I have read the argument of how such a complex chain of components like vision could not incrementally evolve.
But I do not believe it since there are plenty of examples of less evolved systems like for vision.
I think the better argument would be that if there were "intelligent design", then we would not have things that are liabilities left over from previous states of evolution, like the appendix.
Humans tend to have a linear perception of time.
Reality is more complicated.
For what may seem to us to be a supernatural creator to engineer such miracles as 20:20 vision that supernatural creator would first have to exist. And that means evolution, right?
We didn't evolve, but he / she / it did ? Therefore that premise does not disprove evolution, it changes the date.
Some may attempt to confuse the issue by speculating on non-sequential time, in a manner that a greatness so powerful it created itself.
That's rather more storybook rhetoric than scientific explanation.
Reality is more complicated.
Intelligent design does NOT replace evolution as an explanation, it merely postpones it.
For what may seem to us to be a supernatural creator to engineer such miracles as 20:20 vision that supernatural creator would first have to exist. And that means evolution, right?
We didn't evolve, but he / she / it did ? Therefore that premise does not disprove evolution, it changes the date.
Some may attempt to confuse the issue by speculating on non-sequential time, in a manner that a greatness so powerful it created itself.
That's rather more storybook rhetoric than scientific explanation.
Why do men have nipples?
Good point in that a creator solves nothing because then who created the creator?
Interestingly enough, since women create the ovum, they all start out female with an X chromosome.
Even worse is that the Y chromosome is falling apart, is about half the size it used to be, and likely will become unviable in 4 million years.
Shiftless2
Well-known member
By way of background her shirt said "Release the Epstein files"
