|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6186 days) Posts: 690 From: USA West Coast Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution is NOT science: A challenge | |||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
said:
quote: [qs]"You lump all lesbians together into one and decide that all of them hate men"[/quote] quote: Maybe it's because you also said: "Let me get started on gays and lesbians". and "I don't agree with lesbianism." But tell me, Riverrat, what kind of lesbian am I?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Is it your point that if there are any gaps in the evolutionary history of a species, we cannot say that it has evolved at all, is that correct?
Yes or no.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Unresponsive. Answer the questions:
Is it true that germs cause disease? Is it true that matter is made up of atoms? Are they true "enough" for us to teach them as true in science class? Yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Just a joke, hon.
quote: LOL! There are hot ones and less hot ones. I happen to work with a lot of gay men and women in a very gay-friendly town, and I saw one woman's friend, and she looked just like a young Ralph Macchio. IOW, she looked an awful lot like a 14 year old boy wearing reflective shades, a bandana around her head and a white T-shirt with the sleeves rolled up.
quote: Goofy? How am I goofy? (I'm not being defensive, I'm just curious what you find goofy about the picture. FYI, my position is almost textbook-perfect, if I do say so myself.)
quote: That's "chauvinistic".
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: OK, I'll clue you in. I'm not a lesbian, riverrat. I've been happily married for almost 12 years now to a wonderful man who is also a member of this forum (Zhimbo), though he doen't post much these days because he is getting ready to defend his PhD in Cognitive Science this spring.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Nothing is science is proven. Do you disbelieve all of science now?
quote: I asked you a specific question that required a simple, yes or no answer. Please stop avoiding the question. I will repeat it below:
Is it your point that if there are any gaps in the evolutionary history of a species, we cannot say that it has evolved at all, is that correct?
Yes or no.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Unresponsive. I asked you very specific questions that require only a yes or no answer. Please stop avoiding answering these very simple questions: Is it true that germs cause disease? Yes or no?Is it true that matter is made up of atoms? Yes or no? Are they true "enough" for us to teach them as true in science class? Yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Do you disbelieve all of science now? quote: Right. I wouldn't teach it as proven either. As I have been saying, NOTHING IN SCIENCE IS PROVEN. However, do you think we should teach the best current explanations (theories) that we have that explain the evidence?
Is it your point that if there are any gaps in the evolutionary history of a species, we cannot say that it has evolved at all, is that correct? Yes or no. quote: So, you "do not know" if any creature anywhere has ever evolved AT ALL? You "do not know" if we have observed any change in the alelle frequencies in populations over time? Is this the case with you? This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-24-2004 09:24 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Then you were taught poorly or you didn't retain what you were taught properly. Being able to literally "see" some kinds of scientific evidence does not have any bearing whatsoever on if the related explanation of why the evidence appears as it does qualifies as a theory or not. Is the Atomic Theory of Matter true "enough" for us to teach it as true in science class? Yes or no?
quote: Um, what? Of course we know how many, many germs cause disease. Is the Germ Theory of Disease true "enough" for us to teach it as true in science class? Yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: But what about the Christians who do deserve it but who don't get healed anyway? What about all those sick Christian children who believe in God with all their innocent, pure hearts and who have never done anything that any reasonable person could construe as terribly sinful? Why do they die?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: 1) What is the barrier that prevents many many small changes in a species from becoming large changes over a long time span? 2) What are your falsifications of the entire fossil record? 3) How do you explain the fact that species which show greater morphological similarity also show greater genetic similarity, if common descent with modification is false?
However, do you think we should teach the best current explanations (theories) that we have that explain the evidence? quote: Excellent! Then you agree that we should teach the ToE, because it is the best current scientific explanation of the evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: No, you don't love science. You have a very strange idea of what science is and how it works. Remember, you have pretty much been told this by actual scientists on this board! You have squandered your time here by working desperately to maintain your misconceptions that have been pointed out to you by actual professional scientists instead of learning and correcting them.
quote: It's not where I put my faith either. This thread is about if the ToE, as scientists use and develop it, is religious in nature. So far, you have not shown this to be the case. This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-25-2004 08:53 AM This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-25-2004 08:54 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Right. However, as I explained to you in my last message, the fact that you cannot literally "see" some kinds of scientific evidence has no bearing whatsoever on if the explanation for the evidence qualifies as a theory or not. You just have to be able to detect it in some way. It's called "inference", and it's how the vast majority of science works. A Neuroscientist can't "see" the firing of neurons in a brain. Does that mean that the inference that brains work by the firing of neurons should be doubted? Do you often just ignore what people write?
quote: So, do you think that the evidence for the Atomic Theory of Matter is strong enough for us to teach it in science class, or not? Yes or no?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Wow, that explains a lot. Your God likes 'em dumb.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2200 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Sorry, this isn't really an answer. We have directly observed species changing in response to environmental pressure. What is the mechanism by which many of these small changes are prevented from accumulating, over time, into large changes?
quote: Actually, the ordering of the fossil layers was done by Creationists decades before the ToE was a twinkle in Darwin's eye. Please stop making claims about things that you don't know anything about. And anyway, can you please give an explanation, then, of why the fossil record appears as it does if the Paleontologists have it totally wrong? For example, why are flowering plants not ever found below a certain layer?
quote: Why do you think there aren't connections between species? What overwhelming evidence do you have which refutes the entire fossil tree of life, or even just part of it? How do you account for the amazing congruence between morphological trees of life and genetic trees of life if the ToE is false? I am open to your evidence. Please provide it, and give specific examples.
quote: This is interesting. Do you have a link to a detailed description of this? Since you are making a very serious accusation of outright fraud on the part of hundersd of thousands of scienctists, maintained for hundreds of years, I hope you are well-prepared to provide a great deal of evidence to back it up. Otherwise, I fully expect a retraction and an apology for making such a serious accusation without just cause.
quote: Are you seriously asking this question?
quote: Cars do not reproduce themselves with DNA, do they, so comparing them to organisms which do is not useful. You are also not understanding the scientific terminology I have used. "Morphology" refers to the physical construction of an organism, as opposed to it's genetic code. It doesn't refer to "things that morph". So, "morphological similarity" between species means that species are more or less similar in construction, and the morphological tree of life shows how all species are related to each other using these greater or lesser similarities in structure to show common descent. When DNA and it's role in heredity was discovered a few decades ago, scientists began constructing another tree of life, this time based upon genetic similarity between species, with the more genetically similar species being mapped as more closely related, and the less genetically similar species being mapped farther apart. As it turns out, the morphological and genetic trees of life are extremely similar. If all life isn't related, and if it doesn't all descend from a common ancestor, why would these two trees of life be so similar?
quote: Please define exactly what you mean by the term "complex life".
quote: Do you believe that God should be included in science class? If so, why?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024