Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9101 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: sensei
Upcoming Birthdays: Tusko
Post Volume: Total: 904,370 Year: 1,251/14,231 Month: 175/1,076 Week: 284/234 Day: 50/86 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals
Percy
Member
Posts: 21346
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 106 of 1408 (894712)
05-27-2022 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by Dredge
05-27-2022 7:34 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
The task I mentioned is quite obviously impossible ... just as it's impossible to understand - know - how a macro-evolutionary transition that occurred millions of years ago progressed.

No one can possily know what steps were involved, let alone know how evolutionary mechanisms produced those steps.
For the first time you're actually saying something true that people can agree with. We cannot know things that happened long ago for which almost no evidence survives.
But the other thing you've been arguing, that false equivalence, is still false. Knowing how evolution works is one thing, and we understand that pretty well. Knowing how something specifically evolved billions of years ago for which almost no evidence survives is a different thing and is unlikely to happen. As you've been told, there are hypotheses, and while we can continue our research and hope for breakthroughs in the form of new evidence or reasoning, working out how, for example, eukaryotes evolved hasn't happened yet.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Dredge, posted 05-27-2022 7:34 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 4:25 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 21346
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 107 of 1408 (894713)
05-27-2022 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Dredge
05-27-2022 7:52 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
My philosophy and religion have nothing to do with my argument.
Yeah, well I don't believe you. When someone is determinedly irrational, illogical and ignorant, it's always because of philosophy, religion or politics.
Moreover, I accept the scientific evidence that suggests life on earth has evolved over perhaps billions of years.
That contradicts your assertion that no one knows how evolution works.
But as for knowing how it evolved ... well, that's clearly impossible.
Why do you think that? Everything evolved according to the theory of evolution.
I think what you meant to say, since it would be consistent with what you just said previously, is that we don't know the details of how it evolved. We don't the know the specific mutations or the specific evolutionary selection pressures. We often don't possess a fine timeline of fossil changes. There's a lot that happened in the past that we cant know because it either left no evidence behind or the evidence did not survive.
For example, consider the hypothesis that the early eukaryotes came about over millions of years by one prokaryote gradually increasingly the degree of absorption of another prokaryote with which it had established a symbiotic relationship.
The only way to know how eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes is to take a prokaryote and produce an eukaryote from it ... which is obviously impossible.
Why do you think this? It obviously isn't true. Successfully producing a eukaryote in the lab would not mean that nature did it the same way billions of years ago.
Scientists can't even demonstrate that eukaryotes did in fact evolve from prokaryotes, much less know how it happened.
We agree. Actually uncovering enough evidence to *know* how something happened billions of years ago is pretty unlikely. But there are hypotheses based on the scant evidence we do have. One hypothesis is that eukaryotes evolved directory from prokaryote ancestors. In this scenario the nucleus must have somehow gradually evolved.
In another hypothesis eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes through a symbiotic relationship where one prokaryote eventually became the nucleus of the eukaryote.
Those are just the simplified versions of a couple hypotheses. I'm sure there are other hypotheses. We could get into more detail about those hypotheses if you can ever get past just repeatedly asserting either the obvious or the absurd.
Actually, they have far better than the foggiest. They have clearly constructed hypotheses.
Big deal. Forming a hypothesis is not the same as knowing ... not even close.
You're making the same mistake as candle2, confusing not knowing something with not knowing anything. I don't think anyone here has any trouble conceding that there is plenty we don't know of life's billions of years of history on Earth. You shouldn't have any trouble at all indicating things we don't know.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Dredge, posted 05-27-2022 7:52 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 7:31 AM Percy has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 108 of 1408 (894797)
05-29-2022 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Tanypteryx
05-26-2022 11:48 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanyptyeryx writes:
I claim to know how evolution works.
Splendid. Well, if you know how evolution works, please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Please describe how birds evolved from reptiles. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.
Please describe how amphibians evolved from fish. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.

Edited by Dredge, .


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-26-2022 11:48 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by ringo, posted 05-30-2022 12:47 PM Dredge has replied
 Message 123 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-30-2022 2:04 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 109 of 1408 (894798)
05-29-2022 9:42 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Tanypteryx
05-26-2022 11:48 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
Well, that's the interesting thing, any good biologist and certainly every paleontologist understands the processes of evolutionary transitions in the fossil record.
Amazing! How did they go back in time and observe those transitions? For that is the only way anyone can know what processes were involved.
It is microevolution all the way through the transition. There is no separate process of macroevolution. Every evolutionary biologist knows this.
Yes, I agree that every evolutionary biologist knows that's the theory. But we all know that a theory is neither a fact nor truth nor knowledge.

Edited by Dredge, .


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-26-2022 11:48 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 110 of 1408 (894799)
05-29-2022 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Tanypteryx
05-27-2022 1:46 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
Well, they're probably the ones who have been studying evolutionary processes. They realize that there is really no separate process of evolution called macroevolution, so they describe all evolution as microevolution.
... but what a pity no one can prove that known micro-evolutionary mechanisms are responsible for producing the macro-evolutionary transitions evident in the fossil record.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-27-2022 1:46 AM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by ringo, posted 05-30-2022 12:49 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 111 of 1408 (894804)
05-30-2022 3:59 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by AZPaul3
05-27-2022 3:02 AM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
AZPaul3 writes:
Yes, we know how macro-evolution works. We can describe in detail how macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record got to first base and then rounded to home.
Really? Wow.
In that case, please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Please describe how birds evolved from reptiles. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.
Please describe how amphibians evolved from fish. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced those steps.
First base is micro-evolution. In fact all the bases are micro-evolution. Can you really be so mind-numbing dumb you can’t see how the accumulation of small incremental changes leads to large differences?
As dumb as I am ( my IQ is less than 10), I actually undertstand the theory you describe.
But did you know that reciting a theory doesn't demonstrate that that you know anything, much less know what happened millions of years ago?
When growing up did you record, document, each millimeter of your micro growth? Of course not. You didn’t even notice. But after years of this incremental change what you do see is that you finally reach over 5 feet. A macro achievement. 
That's pretty deep. I'll have to give it some thought.
Your inability to comprehend that macro is nothing more than the accumulation of micro is another symptom of your deep mental deficiencies that listens to illusion and shows you visions of specters, phantasms of your disturbed mind. Seek professional psychiatric help before you get “that” message in your head and you go off to kill a bunch of kids in a school.
Thank you very much for that wonderful and sage advice.
In none of this is there any kind of god. Again the demented human mind conjures its fantasies. You hear the voices of your invisible masters and see the visions of ghosts giving you dire warnings.
Your wisdom is astounding.
You are one sick puppy.
You noticed too? Sadly, you're not the first person to tell me that. Deep down, I know it's true.
Register with the police
Already done.
and for god sake stay away from guns.
For god's sake? Which one?

Edited by Dredge, .


This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by AZPaul3, posted 05-27-2022 3:02 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Tangle, posted 05-30-2022 4:17 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 05-30-2022 7:08 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 117 by AZPaul3, posted 05-30-2022 7:37 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8890
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 112 of 1408 (894805)
05-30-2022 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Dredge
05-30-2022 3:59 AM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Dredge writes:
In that case, please describe how eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes. Describe the steps involved and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
Grow up.
You've been told that no one knows that and probably never will. The ToE does not depend on us knowing every detail of every species' evolution over all time.
Instead we use the massive amount of evidence we DO have from fossils, geology, molecular genetics and observations of modern organisms (amongst other things) to form an overall theory of how all life forms have changed over time.
If you want to insert your god between eukaryotes and prokaryotes feel free to make yourself look really stupid.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 3:59 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 7:56 AM Tangle has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 113 of 1408 (894806)
05-30-2022 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Percy
05-27-2022 8:31 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Percy writes:
We cannot know things that happened long ago for which almost no evidence survives ...
​Knowing how evolution works is one thing, and we understand that pretty well. Knowing how something specifically evolved billions of years ago for which almost no evidence survives is a different thing and is unlikely to happen.
Please explain how you can claim to know "pretty well" how evolution works, if you can't describe how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?

Edited by Dredge, .


This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Percy, posted 05-27-2022 8:31 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by AZPaul3, posted 05-30-2022 7:21 AM Dredge has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 7480
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 114 of 1408 (894808)
05-30-2022 7:08 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Dredge
05-30-2022 3:59 AM


10 Point IQ Fails Again.
In that case, please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved.
Please describe how birds evolved from reptiles.
Please describe how amphibians evolved from fish.
The answers have already been given to you and the evidence is available all across the net for those willing to learn. With a 10 point IQ, however, I’m thinking you would not comprehend the data so it’s no use trying to teach you.
But did you know that reciting a theory doesn't demonstrate that that you know anything, much less know what happened millions of years ago?
That’s your 10 pt IQ showing again. Working the theory …
[aside]
“theory” as in real scientific theory, not the pull-it-out-your-ass kinda theory creation weenies use to obfuscate the reality.
[/aside]
Working the theory is, in fact, knowing what and how it happened. Again, your 10 pt. intellect will not comprehend.
That's pretty deep. I'll have to give it some thought.
Don’t strain yourself.
and for god sake stay away from guns.
For god's sake? Which one?
Yours.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 3:59 AM Dredge has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 7480
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 115 of 1408 (894809)
05-30-2022 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by Dredge
05-30-2022 4:25 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Please explain how you can claim to know "pretty well" how evolution works, if you can't describe how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?
Johnny one note.
You have already been told. The macro development of anything is the result of millions of generations of micro.
But, as a stupid sham of a debate tactic, you want to claim that if we haven't each detail of each molecule then the theory falls apart.
No, idiot. A scientific theory like ToE becomes the searchlight and describes how any macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded. Not in molecular detail but in enough detail to see natures workings.
But you gotta work at understanding the theory properly first. Something your 10 pt intellect struggles with.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 4:25 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by Dredge, posted 06-03-2022 12:00 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 116 of 1408 (894810)
05-30-2022 7:31 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Percy
05-27-2022 9:01 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Moreover, I accept the scientific evidence that suggests life on earth has evolved over perhaps billions of years.
Percy writes:
That contradicts your assertion that no one knows how evolution works.
There is no contradiction at all. I can accept that life on earth evolved without knowing (or anyone knowing) the first thing about how evolution works.
Dredge writes:
But as for knowing how it evolved ... well, that's clearly impossible.
Percy writes:
Why do you think that?
I think the the only way to know how macro-evolutionary transitions happened millions of years ago is to have directly observed them ... which is impossible.
Everything evolved according to the theory of evolution.
Can you prove that?
I think what you meant to say, since it would be consistent with what you just said previously, is that we don't know the details of how it evolved. We don't the know the specific mutations or the specific evolutionary selection pressures.
If you don't know the specific details of the process, how can you claim to know how evolution works?
If I claimed to know how to split an atom, but couldn't describe the details of the process, I wouldn't expect anyone to believe my claim.
Dredge writes:
The only way to know how eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes is to take a prokaryote and produce an eukaryote from it ... which is obviously impossible.
Percy writes:
Why do you think this? It obviously isn't true.
How could anyone know how to produce eukaryotes from prokaryotes without actually doing it?
Successfully producing a eukaryote in the lab would not mean that nature did it the same way billions of years ago.
Sounds fair enuf.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Percy, posted 05-27-2022 9:01 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by ringo, posted 05-30-2022 12:52 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 127 by Percy, posted 05-31-2022 11:23 AM Dredge has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 7480
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 117 of 1408 (894811)
05-30-2022 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by Dredge
05-30-2022 3:59 AM


Redundedundedundant
As dumb as I am ( my IQ is less than 10) ...
You don't need to keep repeating this. We understood this when you first said you were catholic.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 3:59 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2203
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 118 of 1408 (894813)
05-30-2022 7:56 AM
Reply to: Message 112 by Tangle
05-30-2022 4:17 AM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Tangle writes:
You've been told that no one knows that and probably never will.
So on one hand you claim to you claim to know how evolution works, but on the other hand you admit you don't know how of the any of the macro-evolutionary transitions I mentioned proceeded.
Seems to me like your hands have built a contradiction.
The ToE does not depend on us knowing every detail of every species' evolution over all time.
Can you describe how even one macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by Tangle, posted 05-30-2022 4:17 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Tangle, posted 05-30-2022 8:05 AM Dredge has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8890
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 119 of 1408 (894814)
05-30-2022 8:05 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Dredge
05-30-2022 7:56 AM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Dredge writes:
So on one hand you claim to you claim to know how evolution works, but on the other hand you admit you don't know how of the any of the macro-evolutionary transitions I mentioned proceeded.

Seems to me like your hands have built a contradiction.
You're either as stupid as you claim to be or a troll. Either way, c'ya.
quote
Can you describe how even one macro-evolutionary transition in the fossil record proceeded?
Abstract
In the past few decades, many new discoveries have provided numerous transitional fossils that show the evolution of hoofed mammals from their primitive ancestors. We can now document the origin of the odd-toed perissodactyls, their early evolution when horses, brontotheres, rhinoceroses, and tapirs can barely be distinguished, and the subsequent evolution and radiation of these groups into distinctive lineages with many different species and interesting evolutionary transformations through time. Similarly, we can document the evolution of the even-toed artiodactyls from their earliest roots and their great radiation into pigs, peccaries, hippos, camels, and ruminants. We can trace the complex family histories in the camels and giraffes, whose earliest ancestors did not have humps or long necks and looked nothing like the modern descendants. Even the Proboscidea and Sirenia show many transitional fossils linking them to ancient ancestors that look nothing like modern elephants or manatees. All these facts show that creationist attacks on the fossil record of horses and other hoofed mammals are completely erroneous and deceptive. Their critiques of the evidence of hoofed mammal evolution are based entirely on reading trade books and quoting them out of context, not on any firsthand knowledge or training in paleontology or looking at the actual fossils.
Evolutionary Transitions in the Fossil Record of Terrestrial Hoofed Mammals - Evolution: Education and Outreach

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Dredge, posted 05-30-2022 7:56 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Dredge, posted 06-03-2022 12:32 PM Tangle has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20832
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.5


(4)
Message 120 of 1408 (894825)
05-30-2022 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Dredge
05-29-2022 9:32 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
please describe how a whale's blowhole evolved.
It's a nostril. Not very mysterious.
Dredge writes:
Describe the steps involved...
1. It moved.
Dredge writes:
... and how natural selection and environmental pressures produced each of those steps.
When you live in the water, it's more efficient to breathe through the top of your head instead of the front of your face. Transitionals with their nostrils closer to the surface had a better chance of survival - they didn't have to stand on their tails to breathe. (Maybe that infamous "vertical whale" had his fatal accident while taking a breath.)
Fun fact: Baleen whales have two blowholes - i.e. nostrils. Are you puzzled about how two nostrils evolved into one in toothed whales?

"I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!"
-- Lucky Ned Pepper

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Dredge, posted 05-29-2022 9:32 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Dredge, posted 06-03-2022 8:05 AM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023