Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why should ID be taught in science classes...
molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 91 of 105 (437703)
12-01-2007 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Beretta
12-01-2007 12:57 AM


BERETTA. CUT IT OUT.
Beretta, take your evolution stuff to the appropriate thread(s).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Beretta, posted 12-01-2007 12:57 AM Beretta has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 92 of 105 (437709)
12-01-2007 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by ringo
11-29-2007 10:33 AM


Genetic information
Which contained all the genetic material found in a modern banana -nothing added; some information lost perhaps, but not added.
That argument has never made any sense to me. How does rearranging the bits and pieces on a DNA molecule change the amount of information?
Mutations are mistakes made during the transfer of information from one generation to the next.(like birth defects)Evolutionists postulate that if these mistakes are beneficial to the animal, it will give the mutated animal an advantage and natural selection will then preserve that advantage.
It seems logical enough but does it line up with reality?
Years and years of experimentation has shown that mutation cannot develop new organisms or even cause useful changes to existing organisms because mutations never add useful information.
They are analogous to misspellings in a book.
Even examples of 'beneficial mutations' such as sickle cell anaemia (causing resistance to malaria)do not create new features or improve overall survivability.
Belief that mutations could slowly change an animal into some other animal is analogous to believing that a black and white TV could be changed into a color one by throwing random parts at it. The impacts will definately produce change but will the changes be beneficial?
Read 'Principles of Genetics' -EJ Gardner or 'Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome' -Dr JC Sanford (highly recommended)
-and lest I be suspended once again, let me get back on topic.
We should teach the children the truth about what we actually know about mutations not what we imagine must have happened.Science as opposed to philosphical musings.
"So class, we have no evidence of anything beneficial occurring due to random undirected mutations but we BELIEVE that evolution happened and we hope that in the future we may obtain the necessary evidence to suggest that we may be right after all. In the meantime lets return to the actual provable science.
Yes, 'faith moves mountains but only knowledge moves them to the right place'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by ringo, posted 11-29-2007 10:33 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by ringo, posted 12-01-2007 2:57 AM Beretta has not replied
 Message 98 by Wounded King, posted 12-01-2007 5:27 AM Beretta has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 93 of 105 (437711)
12-01-2007 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Fosdick
11-29-2007 11:05 AM


Re: Decrease in genetic information
See reply to Ringo -message 58

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Fosdick, posted 11-29-2007 11:05 AM Fosdick has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 94 of 105 (437712)
12-01-2007 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 60 by JB1740
11-29-2007 11:15 AM


Re: How would ID's Supernatural-based Science Work?
what value is there in giving cave fish eyes that don't function?
Well I would surmise that they did work at some stage or they wouldn't be there at all. Loss of information through mutation causing genetic blindness in some, while others are unaffected? Interesting question, I'll look into it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by JB1740, posted 11-29-2007 11:15 AM JB1740 has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 95 of 105 (437715)
12-01-2007 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by Fosdick
11-29-2007 1:05 PM


Re: Decrease in genetic information
Hoot Mon writes:
On a very broad scale of genetic information, would you say a bacterium has more or less of it than a human? On a narrower scale would you say a hummingbird has more or less of it than a crocodile?
Fact:
Humans have 1000 times more DNA than bacteria -yet salamanders, which are amphibians, have 20 times more DNA than humans. Humans have 30 times more DNA than some insects, but less than half of that of certain other insects.
Question:
"And so children given the above and given that evolution says bacteria evolved successively into fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and man -give us your ideas on probable scenarios that would throw our expected scenario so out of kilter and what plausible story we could hypothesise to overcome this difficulty..."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Fosdick, posted 11-29-2007 1:05 PM Fosdick has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by molbiogirl, posted 12-01-2007 3:01 AM Beretta has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 96 of 105 (437716)
12-01-2007 2:57 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Beretta
12-01-2007 2:26 AM


Re: Genetic information
Beretta writes:
-and lest I be suspended once again, let me get back on topic.
So how about answering a question from the OP?
quote:
When not teaching the conventional science syllabus, how much time should be apportioned to ID and how much to the Maharishi's work? On what basis would you make these apportions? Message 1
Edited by Ringo, : Spellings.

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Beretta, posted 12-01-2007 2:26 AM Beretta has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 97 of 105 (437718)
12-01-2007 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Beretta
12-01-2007 2:57 AM


SHUT UP BERETTA
I know you're getting lots of help going off-topic, but it all seems to begin with you, so here's the deal. In this thread, please do not mention evolution or any evidence related to evolution. Address yourself specifically to the topic, describing positive reasons why ID should be taught in science class, and absolutely avoiding to complete exclusion negative reasons why evolution is wrong. Each failure to follow this request will receive a 24 hour suspension.
What part of DO NOT MENTION don't you understand?
Shut. Up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Beretta, posted 12-01-2007 2:57 AM Beretta has not replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 98 of 105 (437735)
12-01-2007 5:27 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Beretta
12-01-2007 2:26 AM


Re: Genetic information
Years and years of experimentation has shown that mutation cannot develop new organisms or even cause useful changes to existing organisms because mutations never add useful information.
No it hasn't. Do you have evidence of any mutational screen or experiment designed to look for 'new organisms'. There are none because no one except a creationist would expect 'new organisms' to appear from nowhere in the course of an experiment.
As to never adding useful information there are numerous examples presented ad nauseam of beneficial traits which can arise from de novo mutations. This whole line of argument is rubbish , no one except creationists think that for a trait to be beneficial it must rely on the addition of 'information', however you mean that term.
Even examples of 'beneficial mutations' such as sickle cell anaemia (causing resistance to malaria)do not create new features or improve overall survivability.
Ummm, what do you mean by overall? Do you have evidence that the mortality rates in areas with endemic Malaria would be exactly the same if there were no sickle cell or similar alleles?
Your statement about what we 'know' about mutations just shows that all you know about mutations comes from creationist propaganda, and apparently JC Sanford's book.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Beretta, posted 12-01-2007 2:26 AM Beretta has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 99 of 105 (437737)
12-01-2007 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Percy
11-29-2007 2:07 PM


Re: How would ID's Supernatural-based Science Work?
Your core problem is obvious: whenever called upon to present the evidence for ID, you instead criticize evolution.
I have actually presented some evidence that points to creation as more probable than evolution. Unfortunately maintaining that evidence against evolution is not evidence for creation does not hold up to closer examination. For instance, the genetic information example makes evolution look far less plausible than creation or some sort of ID proposition. There are lots of examples where evidence against evolution makes creation look more feasible if you look at the details of what is actually scientifically known.
You accept that scientists can decipher biological processes like the type III secretory system, but not that they can decipher the mechanisms behind hereditary change.
Both can be deciphered -but hereditary change cannot necessarily be scientifically extrapolated to include all that is implied by the term 'evolution'.
To demonstrate the logical incoherency and circularity of Darwinist thinking:
"The prevailing assumption in evolutionary science seems to be that speculative possibilities, without experimental confirmation, are all that is really necessary.The principle at work is the same one that Waddington, Medawar and Mayr invoked when challenged by the mathematicians. Nature must have provided whatever evolution had to have, because otherwise evolution wouldn't have happened.It follows that if evolution required macromutations then macromutations must be possible, or if macromutations are impossible, then evolution
must not have required them. The theory itself provides whatever supporting evidence is essential." (Johnson -'Darwin on Trial')
IDists need to explain things like how the designer makes the change within the genome
It appears that the designer put all the necessary information for variation and survival of different kinds of animals from the beginning. They vary according to environmental necessity or selective breeding. For example, breeding of different kinds of dogs show many different varieties are possible through selective breeding but there is no evidence that anything but some kind of dog is possible.Through selective breeding, information is lost so you'll never get a big dog out of a chihuaha once the info for long legs is bred out but if you want long legs again, cross the chihuaha with a long legged dog and put that genetic feature back.
Same with humans -different amounts of melanin for skin color in isolated populations and different inherited features but all human and they won't ever be anything but human.
Breeders pursuing conscious goals, intelligently guide their process and even then, the potential for variability runs out and the process reaches its natural limit.
And lastly, of course, there's the question of evidence for the actual designer.
Just as SETI surveys radio emissions of stars looking for codelike sequences that would indicate intelligent origin, so scientists should have the academic freedom to be able to look at DNA and other info-rich systems in nature and consider the possibility of an intelligent causation.
Neither evolution nor creation can be proven by scientific experiment but there are just some facts that make one explanation appear more likely than another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Percy, posted 11-29-2007 2:07 PM Percy has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 100 of 105 (437739)
12-01-2007 5:44 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Fosdick
11-29-2007 7:32 PM


Re: Empiricism
just say that God is not empirical and therefore falls off the table of scientific consideration.
Unless God did it, not via means of evolution in which case evolution falls off the table by virtue of being untrue.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Fosdick, posted 11-29-2007 7:32 PM Fosdick has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 101 of 105 (437740)
12-01-2007 6:38 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by RickJB
11-30-2007 7:33 AM


Re: How would ID's Supernatural-based Science Work?
Evolution is based on mutation.
Or 'Believed' to be based on a prior commitment to evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by RickJB, posted 11-30-2007 7:33 AM RickJB has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 102 of 105 (437741)
12-01-2007 6:42 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Fosdick
11-30-2007 10:36 AM


Re: Empiricism
Science has a much to do with religion as a volcano has to do with the uplifting powers of salvation
Unless God is real and did create everything - in which case, it should have everything to do with science and reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Fosdick, posted 11-30-2007 10:36 AM Fosdick has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 103 of 105 (437742)
12-01-2007 6:48 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Fosdick
11-30-2007 2:18 PM


Re: Empiricism
Paraphrasing what I have said before: You can't get a pig to fly over the barn and you can't get a true believer to see over the wall of blind faith.
Especially if they're a true fundamentalist evolutionist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Fosdick, posted 11-30-2007 2:18 PM Fosdick has not replied

Beretta
Member (Idle past 5597 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 104 of 105 (437743)
12-01-2007 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Fosdick
11-30-2007 7:13 PM


Re: Empiricism
Science had to be invented to cast off the falacies and foolishness of religion.
Or perhaps evolution starting with the Big Bang and abiogenesis in a primitive primordial soup had to be invented to cast off the reality of God.
Maybe all the intellectual compromise is being propogated by evolutionists to keep their faith alive.
Edited by Beretta, : Incomplete

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Fosdick, posted 11-30-2007 7:13 PM Fosdick has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 105 of 105 (437751)
12-01-2007 8:25 AM


Alas, poor topic! What to do?
Hi folks!
Beretta shows no interest in addressing the topic of this thread, but the lesson of his several suspensions indicates that he's simply going to continue to ignore moderator requests to stay on topic.
I can suspend Beretta for longer and longer periods of time until he either begins staying on topic in threads (unlikely) or he gives up and goes away (likely) or the suspension becomes permanent (unlikely in the absence of abusive behavior), but losing a member just because of inability to stay on topic seems extreme.
So I think I'll just close this thread. If anyone ever shows an interest in actually discussing the pro side of teaching ID in science class then this topic can always be reopened, or another thread can be proposed.
I will not take sides in this discussion, but because I'm closing this thread before anyone has had an opportunity to reply to Beretta's last set of messages, I want to make it clear to anyone reading this thread that the absence of responses to Beretta should in no way be taken as an indication that his arguments have carried the day. The truth be known, beyond declaring his position, he never actually addressed himself to the issue of why ID should be taught in science class.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024