This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Mew is the genetic precursor to all pokemon?

#31Mewtwo_soulPosted 5/19/2013 10:21:57 PM
Lexifox posted...
scrappybristol posted...
Lexifox posted...
scrappybristol posted...
Is this really going to become an evolution vs creation debate? Because I've got my lawn chair and some milkduds waiting.


I have no interest in getting caught up in a discussion on religion or science. At worst I might clear up a misconception, but that's the extent of it.


You might have no interest in debating an unwinnable debate but somewhere out there beneath the pale moonlight someone's thinking of-*slap*

... Almost broke into song there.


There's really no point because quite frankly, if you're a religious person you're probably not going to be swayed by rational discussion, and if you're a scientific-minded sort you're probably not going to be swayed by what amounts to old stories and laws.


Meh, sorry to butt in, but believing in a religion doesn't instantly turn someone into an irrational believer, and there are some concepts that can be seen as logical to believe even if a part of the whole seem illogical at the top.

I'll give you some do talk, take stances within such discussion to illogical or fanatical standpoints, but the same could be said for science.

IE: Old argument:

"If it weren't for religion many people wouldn't have died during _____ and ____ time frame."

"Oh really, which explains why scientist make the ultimate weapons of today that can wipe out nations at ease."

/etc.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#32Nightinangle(Topic Creator)Posted 5/19/2013 10:28:49 PM
That is why that is unwinnable debate though, science always grows, and religion can grow on science.
#33LexifoxPosted 5/19/2013 10:28:49 PM
Mewtwo_soul posted...
Meh, sorry to butt in, but believing in a religion doesn't instantly turn someone into an irrational believer, and there are some concepts that can be seen as logical to believe even if a part of the whole seem illogical at the top.

I'll give you some do talk, take stances within such discussion to illogical or fanatical standpoints, but the same could be said for science.

IE: Old argument:

"If it weren't for religion many people wouldn't have died during _____ and ____ time frame."

"Oh really, which explains why scientist make the ultimate weapons of today that can wipe out nations at ease."

/etc.


I'm not trying to say that once you become religious you hear facts and then go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU ALSO JESUS!", or that when you're an atheist you hear anything and then demand the facts and if you can't hear the facts than "LOL AREN'T YOU TOO OLD FOR FAIRY TALES".

The fact is that if you are a religious person, you're more likely to accept supernatural things, and things that cannot be explained or proven with concrete evidence, just as if you're a more scientific-minded person then you're less likely to accept something as fact unless it can be proven or supported.

I'd also wager that most of the people here are either younger and thus less likely to have stronger critical thinking and debate skills, or have had their beliefs sufficiently ingrained into them, so they're not likely to be swayed by debate.
---
"Murder of the living is tragic, but murder of the idea is unforgivable." - Janus, speaker of the synod
#34Mewtwo_soulPosted 5/19/2013 10:30:56 PM
Lexifox posted...
Mewtwo_soul posted...
Meh, sorry to butt in, but believing in a religion doesn't instantly turn someone into an irrational believer, and there are some concepts that can be seen as logical to believe even if a part of the whole seem illogical at the top.

I'll give you some do talk, take stances within such discussion to illogical or fanatical standpoints, but the same could be said for science.

IE: Old argument:

"If it weren't for religion many people wouldn't have died during _____ and ____ time frame."

"Oh really, which explains why scientist make the ultimate weapons of today that can wipe out nations at ease."

/etc.


I'm not trying to say that once you become religious you hear facts and then go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU ALSO JESUS!", or that when you're an atheist you hear anything and then demand the facts and if you can't hear the facts than "LOL AREN'T YOU TOO OLD FOR FAIRY TALES".

The fact is that if you are a religious person, you're more likely to accept supernatural things, and things that cannot be explained or proven with concrete evidence, just as if you're a more scientific-minded person then you're less likely to accept something as fact unless it can be proven or supported.

I'd also wager that most of the people here are either younger and thus less likely to have stronger critical thinking and debate skills, or have had their beliefs sufficiently ingrained into them, so they're not likely to be swayed by debate.


Again, I fully understand, I was just more making point on the wording than anything, and just pointing it out what I meant considering people don't exactly like to read on this site, and something stated like that would be easily mistaken as an offense to one side of beliefs, or as a joke (which would be at those who believe in religious concepts, expense)
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#35Nightinangle(Topic Creator)Posted 5/19/2013 10:32:02 PM
Wait please don't get me modded ovre this guys...
#36Mewtwo_soulPosted 5/19/2013 10:33:29 PM
Nightinangle posted...
Wait please don't get me modded ovre this guys...


We're not actually fighting over anything, and you can't really be modded for a topic that was not derived for an argument in the first place, now specific posters within an argument can be modded however, though I don't see why anyone would moderate any post in this topic so far as all has been civil as unlikely as it is to occur on this dreadful but addicting site.
---
Only insecure and ignorant people try to debase someone online based on their username.
#37Nightinangle(Topic Creator)Posted 5/19/2013 10:36:43 PM
Mewtwo_soul posted...
Nightinangle posted...
Wait please don't get me modded ovre this guys...


We're not actually fighting over anything, and you can't really be modded for a topic that was not derived for an argument in the first place, now specific posters within an argument can be modded however, though I don't see why anyone would moderate any post in this topic so far as all has been civil as unlikely as it is to occur on this dreadful but addicting site.


haha ^.^ well thanks then. My ex that this topic seems to keep bringing up used to get really deep into these debates.
#38stranksyPosted 5/20/2013 2:11:15 AM(edited)
I have a theory about Mew, actually... if humans evolved on the Pokemon world, and are entirely separate species from Pokemon, that implies that there are (or were) real-life animals on the world at some point. As such, I believe that Mews used their transforming ability to usurp the ecological niches of many (perhaps all) of these animals. Having the ability to transform at will, and also, seemingly, a far greater intelligence than Ditto, it is possible that Mews would be able to more freely manipulate their transformations, and thus create incredibly powerful versions of real-life animals.

As these animals settled further and further into their ecological niches, they would likely lose more and more of Mew's original traits, having little or no use of them in their new environments. This explains why Mews are able to learn virtually every move in the game; Mews created virtually every move in the game, excluding those used by legendaries created by Arceus separately from the Mew species itself. Additionally, after the new Pokemon spawned from Mews lose the ability to transform, natural evolution (as it occurs in real life, observed on countless occasions [literally every living being, and several that don't exist anymore]) will occur - thus Kabutops being a hypothesized ancestor of Scyther (and, by some, Genesect).

Some existing species, of course, retain more of Mew's original traits; Eevee, for example, still has a great deal of genetic flexibility. Ditto also retains Mew's transforming abilities - I suspect this to be a primitive form of parasitism, wherein Ditto's forefathers merely floated from niche to niche, utilizing specific characteristics only when absolutely necessary. As such, it ended up losing all of Mew's original powers apart from the trademark mimicry.
---
When life's really getting you down, take solace in the fact that you're going to die.
#39Nightinangle(Topic Creator)Posted 5/20/2013 7:51:00 AM
That would be really beat if there is that much more to pokemon from what I know.
#40javel34Posted 5/20/2013 7:56:43 AM
Nightinangle posted...
<---Cheerleader who is not native to English.

Please. What does this mean?


What does being a cheerleader have to do with anything?
---
Black 2 FC: 3569 1730 6208