|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes:
Prove it. You can't. All you can do it is recite Darwinist folklore and mindlessly claim it's factual.
we have the original land animal the whales evolved from: pakicetus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes:
I'm not arguing that there is a lack of evidence for evolution - I'm arguing that it's impossible to know what caused it. That's sad for you but science doesn't need what you insist on having to know that the middle ear evolved - we have the fossils to prove it. The article you linked doesn't explain what caused the evolution of the middle-ear ... because no one knows. Your article is just one more example of not knowing how evolution works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
kjsimons writes:
Dr. Bechly doesn't deny that evolution has happened ... he argues that ToE can't account for what is observed.
Not stupid but somewhere along in his life he became a looney! He now basically believes in an intelligent designer for some crazy reason. Many otherwise intelligent people can be total loons about some things and that's what's happened to this doctor. I feel sorry for him but nothing he says has any effect on the reality of evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
we have the original land animal the whales evolved from: pakicetus. Prove it. You can't. OK, so here is a book that shows the evidence, the "proof" from your vernacular, that whales evolved just as advertised, step-by-step, through each variant we can identify.
The Emergence of Whales Here. Something a little less challenging to not stress your mind. Whale Evolution So, tell us Altar Boy, what specific facts cited in this work do you question? Show us on what page and what paragraph where the authors get it wrong. Where are the errors? Can you find any? You keep saying we haven't got this stuff but there it is. You keep saying it's wrong. OK. Where? Show me. Go ahead, Cracker-Meathead, show us the depth of your scholarship.Edited by AZPaul3, : added site Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
Proof is a concept which applies only in mathematics. Evidence is what applies in science.
Have a read of this. Have a go at trying to understand it. Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
He's wrong and so are you. Get over it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Prove that he's wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4
|
You will never understand science. Proof has nothing to do with science. Science uses evidence.
Edited by Theodoric, : better word choice What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.5
|
Dr. Bechly doesn't deny that evolution has happened ... he argues that ToE can't account for what is observed. Does he really? Which specific observations does he dispute? How would he correct the Theory of Evolution to more accurately describe reality? Does he provide any supporting evidence? Citations would be niceStop 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9516 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Dredge writes: I'm not arguing that there is a lack of evidence for evolution That would be rather difficult wouldn't it?
I'm arguing that it's impossible to know what caused it.
Nobody is disagreeing. Of course that's impossible to know. The article you linked doesn't explain what caused the evolution of the middle-ear ... because no one knows.
Yup, no-one knows. Nor can we ever know. Fascinating isn't it - to make sense of it we need to form hypotheses from how we know evolution works today. Your article is just one more example of not knowing how evolution works.
Nope, it's one more article showing that evolution happened. If you want to discuss what we know about the process of evolution and how it would have applied to events in the far distant past we'll happily get into that.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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
No, you prove that he's right. This is your sword to fall on, not mine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Prove that he's wrong. What's the point of arguing about this? If you doubt that ToE fully explains evolution, you are entitled to those doubts. But just repeating your doubts doesn't do anything. You won't persuade anybody that way. I disagree with Bechly, but I don't repeatedly tell him that. He is entitled to his own doubts, too. Bechly isn't persuading the biologists, just as Behe isn't persuading the biologists. Meanwhile, ToE continues to generate a considerable amount of good scientific research. The contrary ideas of Behe and Bechly have failed to generate substantial research programs.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
nwr writes:
You don't seem to understand my argument. I'm not arguing that ToE is inadequate and I'm not trying to persuade anyone that it is. What's the point of arguing about this? If you doubt that ToE fully explains evolution, you are entitled to those doubts. But just repeating your doubts doesn't do anything. You won't persuade anybody that way. My argument is that no one can prove that ToE (or any other theory) describes the process that shaped the fossil record, therefore no one can claim to know how evolution works. Even if ToE is an accurate description of the process that shaped the history of life on earth, no one will ever know, because no one can prove that it is. Darwinists (like those on this site, for example) claim to know how evolution works, but they can't prove it, so it seems to me that they're seriously delusional or seriously brain-washed ... or worse.
Bechly isn't persuading the biologists, just as Behe isn't persuading the biologists.
No kidding? Bechly and Behe are not going to persuade all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there. On the contrary, all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there will be hostile to any suggestion of intelligent design in nature. "The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” (Psalms 14:1)Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, . Edited by Dredge, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined: |
Once again Dredge, proof is not a concept that exists in science - only falsifiable hypotheses backed by evidence.
Read this article - it'll give you a start at understanding what you're trying to attack.
Until you understand what you're trying to attack, you're just Don Quixote, tilting at windmills.Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
My argument is that no one can prove that ToE (or any other theory) describes the process that shaped the fossil record, therefore no one can claim to know how evolution works. Yawn! Science isn't about proof. Science is about the best explanation, given the evidence. Neither you nor Bechly nor Behe has a better explanation.
Bechly and Behe are not going to persuade all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there. There are also many Christian biologists out there. "Atheist" has nothing to do with the issue.
On the contrary, all those rusted-on atheist biologists out there will be hostile to any suggestion of intelligent design in nature. I'm not hostile to the idea that there is intelligent design in nature. But I am hostile to the stream of lies and bullshit coming from the intelligent design movement.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024