|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Common descent. Your denial doesn't work. Creationists' rejection of common descent has prevented them from doing any useful medical research. Which useful medical science do YECs reject?"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
You contradict yourself. We're related but we're not related?
You don't need the theory of UCD to figure out that mammals are "more closely related to humans" physiologically than mollusks or fish. Dredge writes:
Show us your probability calculations. They probably experimented with lots of different mammals before simply choosing those that worked best ... trial and error ... nothing to do with the theory of UCD. "Trial and error" would require a lot of errors. "Here, George, try some octopus insulin. If it kills you, we'll try salmon on the next guy.""Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9
|
Sludge writes: Even the village idiot would expect non-human mammals to more closely model human conditions than mollusks or fish. It is interesting that even the village idiot recognizes the obvious evolutionary relatedness of humans with other vertebrates, mammals, placentals, and apes, and the more distant relatedness with all the invertebrates.
Sludge writes: You don't need the theory of UCD to figure out that mammals are "more closely related to humans" physiologically than mollusks or fish. YOU may not need it, but WE have that knowledge and find it quite useful. And we just keep learning more and more.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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined:
|
Tanypteryx writes: YOU may not need it, but WE have that knowledge and find it quite useful. And we just keep learning more and more. That's basically the main point on why this is such a silly argument to put forward. No one NEEDS a hammer to drive in a nail.But it certainly does make it a lot easier to USE the proper tool for the job. UCD is the nail-gun of evolution - the best tool for the job that's ever been invented. Spend your time ruining your pliers and screwdrivers trying to hammer nails all you want.We'll use the nail-gun and complete 100 projects to your 1. Not to mention there's no slow down to inventing/learning better and better tools for the way Science works either... ongoing improvement, ongoing self-correction, ongoing results in 'best progress.' Forever and ever. Ramen.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
ringo writes:
How does denying the theory of universal common descent prevent "useful medical research"?
Common descent. Your denial doesn't work. Creationists' rejection of common descent has prevented them from doing any useful medical research.Your denial doesn't work.
I don't recall denying universal common descent. My position is, I neither deny UCD nor accept it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
So you are just a troll. Got it. Thanks for the admission.
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
What does any of that have to do with whether or not the theory of UCD has proven useful in the field of medicine? meanwhile we have museums and libraries full of supporting evidence and you have a fictional book written by a bunch of bronze age Jewish goat herders. Is strawmaning really the best you can do?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
Just noting that you still have never presented an argument or supporting 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 Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
You don't need the theory of UCD to figure out that mammals are "more closely related to humans" physiologically than mollusks or fish.ringo writes:
No contradiction. According to taxonomy and physiology, humans are obviously more closely "related" to other mammals than they are to You contradict yourself. We're related but we're not related?non-mammals like mollusks and fish ... regardless of being "related" according to the theory of UCD. "Trial and error" would require a lot of errors. "Here, George, try some octopus insulin. If it kills you, we'll try salmon on the next guy."
A scientist with any common sense would first experiment with insulin from mammals. ... no need for the theory UCD. Why would anyone experiment with octopus or fish insulin if they were considered toxic to humans?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
You don't need the theory of UCD to figure out that mammals are "more closely related to humans" physiologically than mollusks or fish.Tanypteryx writes:
In what way has the so-called knowledge of UCD been found to be "useful" in medicine?
YOU may not need it, but WE have that knowledge and find it quite useful. It is interesting that even the village idiot recognizes the obvious evolutionary relatedness of humans with other vertebrates, mammals, placentals, and apes, and the more distant relatedness with all the invertebrates.
A human's "evolutionary relatedness" to invertebrates is based on a theory ... as opposed to human "relatedness" to other mammals according to morphology and physiology, which is based on facts. Correction: A human's "evolutionary relatedness" to invertebrates is a theoryEdited by Dredge, .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Stile writes:
Which "job" in the field of medicine has been made "a lot easier" by the theory of UCD?
No one NEEDS a hammer to drive in a nail.But it certainly does make it a lot easier to USE the proper tool for the job.
UCD is the nail-gun of evolution - the best tool for the job that's ever been invented
Evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency within a population. So please explain how "UCD is the nail-gun of evolution". Spend your time ruining your pliers and screwdrivers trying to hammer nails all you want.
Sure ... if by "projects" you mean useless bed-time stories from Darwinist folklore about what might have happened millions of years ago.We'll use the nail-gun and complete 100 projects to your 1. But if by "projects" you mean medical applications, it appears UCD has accomplished zilch.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
Sludge writes: In what way has the so-called knowledge of UCD been found to be "useful" in medicine? You have already been give numerous examples, that you ignore.
Sludge writes: A human's "evolutionary relatedness" to invertebrates is based on a theory ... That is incorrect. It is based in the same biology that tells us our evolutionary relationships to the vertebrates.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 Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
Thank you for the correction. What I should have said is, "evolutionary relatedness" is a theory.
That is incorrect. It is based in the same biology that tells us our evolutionary relationships to the vertebrates.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
Please b advised that no one has yet provided an example of how UCD hss proven useful in medicine. You have already been give numerous examples, that you ignore. All that has been provided thus far is lame Darwinist propaganda.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4344 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.9 |
Sludge writes: Please b advised that no one has yet provided an example of how UCD hss proven useful in medicine. All that has been provided thus far is lame Darwinist propaganda. And there we have undisputable proof that you are just a pathetic troll, in your own words. No example, no evidence would ever satisfy you, but luckily, you don't get to decide what data any science uses including medical science. All the discoveries we have made in biology, including the evolution and relatedness of life on this planet are part of our arsenals of tools that can be utilized by medical science. Interestingly, something we never see is creationism, ID, or prayer being useful tools in the medical science toolkit. Faith healers are not replacing neurosurgeons. We are all carrying on using our knowledge to learn more new things and you have no influence over the tools we choose to use. We have tried many different ways to provide information to correct your confusion and delusions, but you remain committed to misunderstanding and misinterpreting us.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
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024