Is Syamsu a creationist or an evolutionist?

Syamsu,So that's it?All that denial of variation, differential reproductive success, & that comparisons within populations are "rubbish", "false", & "nonsense", despite agreeing to it, isn't worthy of at least a partial retraction?Wouldn't you at least agree to my low cunning & resourcefulness, that I managed to get you to agree that the things that you claimed were false, can in fact be true, & not only that, are relevant?I'm not baiting you, Syamsu, I'm after Mammuthus' $5 bet from post 166. At the very least you owe me one last response so that I qualify?$2.50 each?Or should I look up the word "magnanimous" in the dictionary? But to be perfectly honest, given the utterly pointless runaround you have given both others & myself, I'm not inclined to.Mark

Syamsu,Once more for the hard of understanding......Of course I haven't convinced you of anything, you are to insulated from reality with your own erroneous interpretations to realise the colossal hypocrite you have become. That is why victory could only present itself by forcing you to make contradictory statements.You claimed the comparative "method" was "false", "rubbish", & "pointless". You also claimed that variation & differential reproductive success were erroneously connected to natural selection, making lofty claims as to how Darwinists have got it wrong.Then you agreed to,

quote:

---

#1 For sexual reproducers: The changes in ratios of alleles due to natural selection within a breeding population as a whole, cannot occur unless there are members of a population that are fitter than others.

​

And again to this one:

​

#2 For asexual reproducers: The changes in ratios of homologous alleles/genes due to natural selection within a population as a whole, cannot occur unless there are members of a population that are fitter than others.

---

So, let's see. That would be variation & differential success accounted for, plus the "comparative method" being decidedly un-rubbish, un-pointless, & un-false, right? The Darwinists got it right then?!Everything you argued against you conceded to in agreeing to those statements.Markps Mammuthus- That's $5, as agreed, Euro's will do nicely ------------------
"The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one's mind a pleasant place in which to spend one's time" - Thomas Henry Huxley

Syamsu, 1/ I'm not saying comparison is meaningless, you are. Though lord knows why since you agreed to #1 & #2!2/ I'm not comparing elephants & ants.3/ What "trick"? You made statements that you contradicted, there is no smoke & mirrors, no mystical force, you actually didcontradict yourself. You agreed #2. You tell me?Mark

Syamsu, So what? In that case you are just saying the same thing using different words.You have still contradicted yourself.And with someone as slippery as yourself, that's the best were gonna see. After all, would you credit someones opinion when they contradict that same opinion? I wouldn't.Mark------------------
"The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one's mind a pleasant place in which to spend one's time" - Thomas Henry Huxley

Syamsu, If you consider it meaningless why did you agree to #2? Very puzzling!Please, please, please, Syamsu, for the edification of us all, please tell us why a "comparative method" is "false", "rubbish", "pointless", & now unscientific, & yet you agreed to such a description?Anyone who can agree to disagree with himself in such a way can only lead onlookers to conclude your own POV is "false", "rubbish", "pointless", & "unscientific". Such blatent hypocrisy is rare enough, Syamsu, to see you attempt to defend it is highly entertaining. I'm not comparing elephants & ants in the first place, making your comment moot. I am comparing pheno/genotypes within a population & how they change........1/ What is unscientific about comparing ratios of geno/phenotypes in a given population before & after a selective pressure is brought to bear?Furthermore natural selection is not necessarily "replacing", it can lead to equilibria, thus trashing your latest misunderstanding regarding "replacement factors".2/ Specifically, how do you have an ESS within a population without one phenotype being directly relevant to others?If you can't show my POV to be unscientific, then I do not accept your conclusion. Why don't you show that I'm being unscientific?Mark------------------
"The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one's mind a pleasant place in which to spend one's time" - Thomas Henry Huxley[This message has been edited by mark24, 11-12-2003][This message has been edited by mark24, 11-12-2003]