|
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: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
243/17
Dredge writes:
In fact, I don't accept any scientific explanation for the fossil record, because it's impossible to know what process was responsible ...ringo writes:
No problem - I accept that some things cannot ever be known and will forever remain a mystery.
You're condemning yourself to eternal ignorance. Speaking of "eternal ignorance", you have no way of ever knowing if your explanation for what produced the history of life on earth is correct or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4413 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Yep, the science of genetics was so primitive and unreliable 22 years ago that about 35 years ago, law courts worldwide began sending criminals to jail based on DNA evidence. What does this have to do with the question of morphological and genetic phylogenetic trees?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Dredge writes: Tanypteryx writes:
Yep, the science of genetics was so primitive and unreliable 22 years ago that about 35 years ago, law courts worldwide began sending criminals to jail based on DNA evidence.
So do you have anything newer than 22 years ago?As sequencing has gotten cheaper and faster we have seen much better protocols and standards for specific regions of the genome to be compared to give useful phylogenetic trees. I think you misunderstand. Even though you cherry-picked your quotes, they still make it clear that the differences were never perceived as calling genetic descent into question. It was clear that, to the extent it indicates a relationship, phylogenetic evidence was superior. Hippos were once thought closely related to pigs because of morphology, but genetic evidence revealed their closest relatives were whales. No one argued, "But morphologically they're more like pigs, so morphology and genetics are in conflict." Morphology can be very misleading, as in the case of hippos, but as Tanypteryx points out, it can also be very informative. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
A fine example of a belief ("humans evolved from apelike ancestors") being passed off as a fact.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered."--Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
You're very arrogant to think that you can tell WHAT things can not ever be known.
I accept that some things cannot ever be known and will forever remain a mystery. Dredge writes:
On the contrary, I do NOT accept your idea that some things can not ever be known. And I do NOT accept the claim that YOU know what they are. Speaking of "eternal ignorance", you have no way of ever knowing if your explanation for what produced the history of life on earth is correct or not. And I do NOT accept your idea of what "correct" means. When I say we "know" something, I refer to the best current knowledge that we have, not some voodoo absolute knowledge that only you can get from your made-up gods. What we know, science can always change."Let me win. But if I cannot win, let me be brave in the attempt." -- motto of the Special Olympians
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
ringo writes:
How did the two hind-legs of a land animal evolve into the tail of a whale? 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.)Edited by Dredge, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4413 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Drudge writes: Taq writes: A fine example of a belief ("humans evolved from apelike ancestors") being passed off as a fact.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered."--Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"A fine example of a belief ("humans evolved from apelike ancestors") being passed off as a fact. Actually it is a fine example of a fact (supported by all the evidence) being stated as a fact that is supported by all the evidence.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
kjsimons writes:
Indeed. Cosmetology and cosmology are the same thing (the study of beauty and women's makeup and stuff).
Yeah I messed that up a bit! Meant cosmology but that I reckon it won't make any difference to him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
How did the two hind-legs of a land animal become the tail of a whale? They didn't. They atrophied away. The tail was a separate evolved structure that proved more useful than legs. How did it turn out in your myth that the only one telling the truth was the snake? The all-knowing and all-powerful is also all-fibbing?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8536 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
Cosmetology and cosmology are the same thing ... This is the low level of intellect we have to expect from a catholic.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AnswersInGenitals Member (Idle past 173 days) Posts: 673 Joined: |
A good example demonstrating that genetics is a more powerful tool than morphology to establish descendancy is that my son looks much more like the mailman than he looks like me (morphology), but, of course, being my son, a comparison of our DNA would show that he is descended from me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Dredge in Message 305:
I'm not a YEC. I accept the scientific evidence that suggests life on earth began with simple forms perhaps billions of years ago. I accept that those original life-forms were followed by more complex and diverse forms as time went by ... a process which could be called "evolution". Dredge today:
A fine example of a belief ("humans evolved from apelike ancestors") being passed off as a fact. Ignoring where you imply that the fossil record only records increasing complexity and diversity, the change over time visible in the fossil record is a fact that you accept. It's a fact whether you're looking at mollusk or ape fossils (humans are apes), and you said that this change over time is "a process which could be called 'evolution'." Your quotation marks notwithstanding (they don't convey any qualification or uncertainty), you clearly accept that the fossil record reflects that evolution happened, and the fossil record includes humans and their precursors. Spelling it out a bit more clearly, by your own logic humans descending from apelike ancestors is a fact reflected in the fossil record. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Percy writes:
How many times must I repeat that your explanation for the fossil record (ToE) cannot ever be verified as correct or incorrect ... and therefore doesn't qualify as knowledge? Why this reasoning is wrong has been explained to you many times, but you just ignore it and repeat this claim again. Repeating the explanation yet again would be pointless. Perhaps there will come a time when you're ready to discuss this, but you're clearly not there yet. How many times must I repeat that mere belief doesn't magically turn your explanation (ToE) into a fact? How long will it be before the pennies drop? "He who has ears, let him hear!"(Matthew 11:15)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4413 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
How many times must I repeat that your explanation for the fossil record (ToE) cannot ever be verified as correct or incorrect ... and therefore doesn't qualify as knowledge? No matter how many time you are wrong, you are still always wrong.
How many times must I repeat that mere belief doesn't magically turn your explanation (ToE) into a fact? That's why, unlike you, we rely on evidence to support our facts.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
"You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive" (Matthew 13:14)
No matter how many time you are wrong, you are still always wrong.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024