Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1056 of 1429 (901196)
11-05-2022 7:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1054 by Tanypteryx
11-05-2022 7:06 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
1047/70
Dredge writes:
if no one accepted Universal Common Descent, those genetic similarities would still exist, right? 
Tanypteryx writes:
yes they would still exist regardless of beliefs
Okay, since those genetic similarities exist regardless of beliefs about their origins, it follows that medical science can make use of those genetic similarities, regardless of beliefs about their origins, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1054 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-05-2022 7:06 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1063 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 12:28 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1057 of 1429 (901197)
11-05-2022 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1055 by dwise1
11-05-2022 7:17 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Sorry, I don't follow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1055 by dwise1, posted 11-05-2022 7:17 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1082 by dwise1, posted 11-08-2022 9:58 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1058 of 1429 (901200)
11-05-2022 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 1054 by Tanypteryx
11-05-2022 7:06 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
The pattern of genetic similarities is clear and obvious for every species that has been sequenced so far. They all fit into a nested hierarchy that demonstrates inheritance and common descent.
... until you get to the level of Phyla, at which point you realise that nested hierarchies exist only within Phyla. The different Phyla themselves don't collectively form a nest hierarchy, thus disproving the theory of UCD.
But evolutionary scientists ignore that inconvenient truth, coz it ruins one of their favourite atheist bedtime stories (UCD), thus corrupting the noble pursuit of science.
The moral of the story is:
You can't trust evolutionary scientists to tell the truth. Treat everything they tell you with suspicion, doubt and skepticism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1054 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-05-2022 7:06 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1059 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-05-2022 8:08 PM Dredge has replied
 Message 1078 by Taq, posted 11-07-2022 10:53 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1060 of 1429 (901218)
11-06-2022 11:35 AM
Reply to: Message 1059 by Tanypteryx
11-05-2022 8:08 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
You haven't shown any supporting evidence that genetic comparisons of phyla don't fit into a nested hierarchy.
Providing any such evidence would be pointless.
Darwinist assume UCD is a fact, therefore the entire history of life on earth forms one huge nested hierarchy.
The fact that all life contains DNA is all the genetic evidence a Darwinist needs to declare that all phyla form a nested hierarchy ... which makes a farce of the concept of nested hierarchies based on genetics, I should think.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1059 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-05-2022 8:08 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1061 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 11:39 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 1079 by ringo, posted 11-07-2022 11:00 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1081 by Taq, posted 11-07-2022 11:06 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1062 of 1429 (901220)
11-06-2022 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 1061 by Tanypteryx
11-06-2022 11:39 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Btw, I'm still waiting for your response to Message 1056.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1061 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 11:39 AM Tanypteryx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1080 by ringo, posted 11-07-2022 11:04 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1064 of 1429 (901223)
11-06-2022 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1063 by Tanypteryx
11-06-2022 12:28 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Tanypteryx writes:
medical science doesn't have to rely on beliefs because they have evidence of common descent.
Evidence of UCD is irrelevant to Message 1056, so I'm still waiting for your response.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1063 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 12:28 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1065 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 1:22 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1066 of 1429 (901225)
11-06-2022 5:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1065 by Tanypteryx
11-06-2022 1:22 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
How?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1065 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 1:22 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1067 of 1429 (901226)
11-06-2022 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 965 by Taq
10-31-2022 12:02 PM


Re: UCD evidence
Dredge writes:
If UCD is so important to biological and medical science, why is it that you can't cite even ONE EXAMPLE of how the UCD has made a practical contribution to biological or medical science?
I searched the scientific paper you provided for a practical application of UCD. The following quotes (with emphasis added) sum up what I found therein:
"The novel patterns that we have identified MAY provide new insight into cases where studies using traditional animal models were unable to produce results that translated to humans" ....
"we note that the larger set of disease classes do have ancient origins, SUGGESTING that many non-traditional animal models have the POTENTIAL to be useful for studying many human disease genes" ...
"From an evolutionary perspective, human disease genes tend to have particularly ancient origins, suggesting that disease-causing mutations are more often identified in “older” genes ...
The implications of these observations in the context of how human disease research is conducted ARE NOT WELL UNDERSTOOD" ...
"Consequently, it MAY be possible to study disease genes in a broad spectrum of animal models" ...
"This analysis suggests that roughly 10% of all human disease genes could POTENTIALLY be better-studied in selected non-bilaterian species" ...
"While these remote animal species are less complex than humans, it is QUITE POSSIBLE that studying the most distant forms of these genes would reveal insights into the most basic functions they evolved to perform and, by extension, their relationship to human disease" ...
"Thus, this majority set of disease classes MAY also be PROMISING candidates to study in a more diverse set of animal species.
Our results imply that there MAY be utility in studying disease genes that have primarily pre-vertebrate origins in non-traditional animal models" ...
"Future efforts to extend and refine our analyses could THEORETICALLY produce methods that could direct an investigator to a set of model species that would be well-suited to studying a particular human disease gene or disease class. That said, there are MANY OBSTACLES that make this DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE AT THE PRESENT TIME
."
Did you notice the pattern of SPECULATION evident in those quotes?
Where is the description of a practical application of UCD? I couldn't find one ... all I found was lots of useless Darwinist THEORIZING about what might have happened millions of years ago and lots of useless SPECULATION.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 965 by Taq, posted 10-31-2022 12:02 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1077 by Taq, posted 11-07-2022 10:51 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1068 of 1429 (901227)
11-06-2022 6:07 PM
Reply to: Message 970 by Tanypteryx
10-31-2022 7:09 PM


Re: UCD evidence
Tanypteryx writes:
And yet we use UCD anyway, because it explains the relatedness.
An explanation of the relatedness is not a practical application of UCD in medical or biological science.
Such an explanation is, in effect, just a useless story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 970 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-31-2022 7:09 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1069 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-06-2022 6:11 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1072 by xongsmith, posted 11-07-2022 8:38 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1070 of 1429 (901229)
11-06-2022 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 970 by Tanypteryx
10-31-2022 7:09 PM


Re: UCD evidence
Tanypteryx writes:
Well, you suck at making psychological assessments.
I recognize reality and would rather describe it accurately, than distort it as you do.
Silence.
Please be advised that you are a seriously brainwashed and clinically delusional Darwinist who is thetefore incapable of recognizing reality.
You need help and possibly psychiatric medication.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 970 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-31-2022 7:09 PM Tanypteryx has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1073 of 1429 (901235)
11-07-2022 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 1072 by xongsmith
11-07-2022 8:38 AM


Re: UCD evidence
wrongsmith writes:
Your JOB HERE is to find a single case of Medical or Biological science that reveals that UCD is NOT TRUE.
And to present a single practical application that works without it, from a second descent.
... two fine examples of why your name has officially been changed to "wrongsmith".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1072 by xongsmith, posted 11-07-2022 8:38 AM xongsmith has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1083 of 1429 (901409)
11-09-2022 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 1077 by Taq
11-07-2022 10:51 AM


Re: UCD evidence
Dredge writes:
Did you notice the pattern of SPECULATION evident in those quotes?
Taq writes:
Yes. It's called research. They are using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research. That is a practical use.
So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD.
Wow, that's bizarre.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1077 by Taq, posted 11-07-2022 10:51 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1084 by Taq, posted 11-09-2022 1:15 PM Dredge has replied
 Message 1087 by xongsmith, posted 11-09-2022 5:13 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1085 of 1429 (901412)
11-09-2022 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 1084 by Taq
11-09-2022 1:15 PM


Re: UCD evidence
Dredge writes:
So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD.
Taq writes:
No. I never said any such thing.
Perhaps you could address what I actually said?
In effect, it is what you said.
In effect, you're saying a theoretical use of UCD is a practical use of UCD.
Like I said, bizarre.
Which treatment of which disease has resulted from
"using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research", as described in that paper? Message 1077

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1084 by Taq, posted 11-09-2022 1:15 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1086 by Taq, posted 11-09-2022 2:52 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1089 of 1429 (901683)
11-13-2022 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1088 by AZPaul3
11-09-2022 5:28 PM


Re: UCD evidence
AZPaul3 writes:
He has to continue to lie and obfuscate otherwise he is admitting that UCD and common descent are linchpin concepts in evidence of the reality of evolution.
Irrelevant to my argument.
His gutter religion cannot accept the reality of evolution and he must fight against the obvious no matter how stupid and inane his arguments.
Irrelevant to my argument.
Reality is anathema to him.
Irrelevant to my argument.
Strawmen are his only arguments.
You've just presented four strawman arguments.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1088 by AZPaul3, posted 11-09-2022 5:28 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1090 by AZPaul3, posted 11-13-2022 9:04 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 1091 by Theodoric, posted 11-14-2022 12:04 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1092 of 1429 (901885)
11-15-2022 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1077 by Taq
11-07-2022 10:51 AM


Re: UCD evidence
Taq writes:
They are using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research. That is a practical use.
Wrong, Einstein. That is a theorectical use. It becomes a practical use when it results in an improvement in the treatment of a disease.
So, which treatment of which disease has resulted from
"using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research", as described in that paper? Message 1077
If you can't tell me (and you can't), you don't have a practical use.
Trying to pass off a theorectical use as a practical use demonstrates that you're a typical Darwinist ... ie, a bs-artist and a con-man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1077 by Taq, posted 11-07-2022 10:51 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 1093 by Taq, posted 11-15-2022 1:59 PM Dredge has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024