|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,488 Year: 3,745/9,624 Month: 616/974 Week: 229/276 Day: 5/64 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Genesis "kinds" may be Nested Hierarchies. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes: How is the observed phylogeny a myth? Not all ancestors are observed: "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." S. J. Gould, "Evolutions Erratic Pace", Natural History, vol. 86, (1987) p.14. "... does [the lack of fossil evidence] permit us to invent a tale of continuity in most or all cases? I submit, although it may only reflect my lack of imagination, that the answer is No" - S. J. Gould.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
jar writes: the Fact of Evolution It is a fact that all life on earth evolved from unicellular organisms?
Both the fact of Evolution as well as the fact that the Theory of Evolution is the only explanation that has ever been presented or tested are both supported by the majority of the recognized Christian faiths. Only the Christian Cult of Ignorance & Dishonesty deny those two facts. A million wrongs don't make a right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Dredge writes: I'd forgotten about how Nebraska Man was invented on the basis of one pig's tooth. That episode demonstrated that the standards of evolution science are of the highest quality. In the highly unlikely event you'd like to know the actual facts about Nebraska Man I post the Wiki on it below. What you should - but won't - notice is that it happened almost 100 years ago, was never accepted as an ape by science and was rejected by the same science a couple of years later. This proces is how science works and it's how you got to hear about it. In contrast, the ignoramouses and liars at your creationist web sites still bring these things up as though there was something wrong with the process when it's actually conclusive proof that science works. Mistakes and faulty hypotheses are discarded and knowledge increases.
quote: Nebraska Man - WikipediaJe suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Ah, Gould quote mined again.
I love quote mining Gould, too.
Gould writes: My bold. Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists -- whether through design or stupidity, I do not know -- as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups. From Gould, Stephen Jay 1983. "Evolution as Fact and Theory" in Hens Teeth and Horse's Toes: Further Reflections in Natural History. New York: W. W. Norton & Co., p. 258-260.
Gould writes: My bold. The argument that the literal story of Genesis can qualify as science collapses on three major grounds: the creationists' need to invoke miracles in order to compress the events of the earth's history into the biblical span of a few thousand years; their unwillingness to abandon claims clearly disproved, including the assertion that all fossils are products of Noah's flood; and their reliance upon distortion, misquote, half-quote, and citation out of context to characterize the ideas of their opponents. From "The Verdict on Creationism", The Skeptical Inquirer, Winter 87/88, pg. 186.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Dredge writes: Really? In primary school? I think someone called Dredge is very economical with the truth here...
I knew that ... learnt it all in primary school.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Dredge writes: It is a fact that all life on earth evolved from unicellular organisms? It is a fact that ALL of the evidence ever found shows that life on Earth began as unicellular organisms. Based on the fact that the evidence shows the Biblical Creation stories are factually wrong, it is also a reasonable conclusion that what ALL of the evidence shows is what actually happened.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
I know this was written a while ago, but I'm only just catching up on this thread. Just a minor nit:
Taq writes: The nested hierarchies were first described by Linnaeus, hundreds of years before Darwin. A hundred years before Darwin. Linnaeus, 1707-1778. Darwin, 1809-1882. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
I take your point. If you took the skeletons of all creatures in the world today, you could line them up to form lots of imaginary "evolutionary sequences". All you need to "join the dots" is a bit of imagination. You can play the same meaningless game with fossils. And yet scientists consistently come to the same nested hierarchy arrangement, just as Linnaeus had, and amazingly they also match what is derived from DNA It's the consilience of results that demonstrates accuracy. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Dredge writes: Not all ancestors are observed: The fossils that are observed do fit into a nested hierarchy. It isn't a myth. Every single fossil is evidence for evolution because they fit into a nested hierarchy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Dredge writes: A million wrongs don't make a right. You have yet to say a right thing about phylogenetics, so what does that tell you?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
If you took the skeletons of all creatures in the world today, you could line them up to form lots of imaginary "evolutionary sequences". All you need to "join the dots" is a bit of imagination. So you can easily show us an example of such. Including, of course, your rationale for arranging them in that particular order.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
If pigs could fly...
Maybe you should try to explain the joke to creationists. Dredge doesn't seem to be very bright and I don't think that Dredge could even understand the basics. I'll start. Pigs are tetrapods. Same as birds and bats and humans and Komodo dragons. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5949 Joined: Member Rating: 5.5
|
I started studying "creation science" in 1981, but it wasn't until a few years later that I was able to discuss any of it with a creationist. That was Charles whom I mention in my 1990 essay, Why I Oppose Creation Science (or, How I got to Here from There). He was a fundamentalist Christian but he had earned a BS Biology. He described Duane Gish of the ICR as his hero. I saw him again years later. He was still a Christian, but he was completely disgusted by the gross dishonesty of creationists and wanted nothing to do with them.
In his objections to evolution, he included the evolution of wings. Now, wings are modified forelimbs, but in his "objection" he had wings being additional limbs such that the end result would be like the popular image of angels with legs, arms, and wings. I questioned that on the spot and he realized his mistake. So, yeah, I do not doubt that Dredge would make the same mistake. The difference is that he is so dishonest that he will continue to bluff in order to push his wrong ideas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
They have to arrive at a nested hierarchies otherwise evolution falls to pieces - and that would be like losing one's religion or getting kicked out of the cult.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Real trees have real branches - not assumed or imaginary ones.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024