|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: If no one believed evolution created those genetic similarities between species, would those genetic similarities still exist?
If life didn't evolve there is no reason why we would expect to observe a nested hierarchy. We do observe a nested hierarchy, and this is what evidences evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Did you notice the pattern of SPECULATION evident in those quotes? Yes. It's called research. They are using common ancestry to come up with new hypotheses in biomedical research. That is a practical use.
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. That's what science is, theorizing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: ... 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. So you accept common ancestry within phyla? Oh, by the way, entire phyla and kingdoms are rooted by phylogenies of shared genes. Root of the universal tree of life based on ancient aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase gene duplications - PubMed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Darwinist assume UCD is a fact, therefore the entire history of life on earth forms one huge nested hierarchy. You can't even stay consistent. The nested hierarchy is a fact, just like genetic similarities. The nested hierarchy is there whether anyone accepts UCD or not. Also, scientists concluded that all life shares a common ancestor because of the universal nested hierarchy. The observed fact led to the conclusion. Before this point, UCD was still a big question. It could have been that life had multiple origins, but that is not where the evidence led. In fact, Darwin himself did not assume UCD.
quote: All you are doing is beating up on strawmen.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: So you consider mere speculation about a hypothesis that has produced zero practical benefits be a "practical use" of UCD. No. I never said any such thing. Perhaps you could address what I actually said?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: In effect, it is what you said. No, it isn't. You can keep swinging away at your strawmen, or you can actually address what people are saying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Wrong, Einstein. That is a theorectical use. It becomes a practical use when it results in an improvement in the treatment of a disease. Guiding research is a very practical use, whether you like it or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Dredge writes: More bs. The blind leading the blind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
You're digressing. The discussion is not about theorectical approaches to research ... it's about tangible benefits in the treatment of disease. Tangible benefits come from research which is guided by UCD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Which tangible improvement in the treatment of which disease has resulted from research guided by UCD? Tons and tons of diseases. Anything that uses an animal model.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Using animal models doesn't require accepting the theory of UCD. Animals models are used because of UCD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: That is incorrect ... animal models are used bcoz they're genetically and physiologically similar to humans. That's because of UCD.
The history of how they came to genetically and physiologically similar to humans is irrelevant to their utility. It isn't irrelevant.
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Why do you need to believe that all life shares a common ancestor to examine and compare the DNA of humans and other animals? A perfect example of why creationism is a science stopper. All Dredge thinks one should do is just measure stuff. Explain it? OH NOOOOO, CAN'T DO THAT!!! Apply the scientific method? ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Are you saying that, if I get a Covid jab, it won't work bcoz I don't accept "the fact of UCD"? NASA is able to get satellites to orbit the Earth even though there are Flat Earthers. You can continue to deny basic findings in science, but that doesn't change the reality.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10033 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Oh, I get what you mean ... if scientists don't accept that RNA-DNA is the result of Universal Common Descent, RNA-DNA will change or perhaps cease to exist and the vaccines won't work. Scientists do accept UCD, and that helps guide their research into vaccines, virology, and immunology. Your refusal to accept these facts does not make them go away.
So in order for the vaccine's "RNA-DNA mechanism" to work, scientists must first accept UCD. The development of the vaccines required a lot of animal models and understanding of innate and adaptive immunity. Innate immunity was especially important, and our current knowledge is based on phylogenetic analyses of eukaryotes. For example, our understanding of toll-like receptors (TLRs) is based on phylogenetics. These receptors were first discovered in fruit flies, and through common descent we were able to determine how they worked in humans and other mammals. TLR7, specifically, is especially important for understanding the current mRNA vaccines:
quote:
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024