|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18298 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Theo writes: That's because Pythagoras lived from 580BC to 520BC before Jesus stepped out of eternity into time as a baby. Of course, you will demand evidence from me, which I don't have. My point was that you can't believe in someone before they were born. Pythagoras didn't believe in Jesus.The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9142 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3
|
Again point missed. How could Newton believe in Evolution, before it was thought up?
I thought Jesus has always existed? Don't answer. Pulling your chain. 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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Your comment, although entertaining, didn't answer my question. "Why do you need to believe that all life shares a common ancestor to examine and compare the DNA of humans and other animals?"--Dredge Wrong question. There is no "need to believe". You either want to understand how biology or you don't. That's the choice. If you want to understand biology then evolution and UCD are the best tools for understanding biology. If you don't want to understand biology and instead protect a failing theology, then you make the arguments you are making. It's a choice, not a need. For example, can you explain why there is more sequence conservation in exons than in introns when we align orthologous sequence between disparate species? What can we use from ID/creationism to help explain this pattern? I can't think of anything. However, this is EXACTLY the pattern of sequence conservation we would expect from evolution and UCD. Exactly. What about the pattern of base substitutions? Can ID/creationism explain to us why we see more transitions than transversions when we compare single nucleotide polymorphisms between different species? No. Evolution and UCD can, and they allow us to understand what we are seeing in biology. What about the pattern of shared and derived features? Can ID/creationism explain why we see a nested hierarchy instead of some other pattern? No. However, this pattern is exactly what we would expect to see if evolution and UCD are true. Those concepts allow us to understand what we are seeing in biology. I could go on and on and on. You either want to understand biology or you want to protect a failed theology. Your choice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Show me a scientific paper that says animal models are used because of UCD. I already did that. https://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&m=902182#m902183
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5948 Joined: Member Rating: 5.5
|
One of the funniest things about "creation science" is how much effort leading creationists have to put into explaining away why the evidence looks for all the world like evolution.
Rather than always having to discount and refute and explain away the evidence, why don't they just look at what the evidence is telling them?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9142 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3
|
Or present the evidence that points toward creationism.
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
dwise1 writes: One of the funniest things about "creation science" is how much effort leading creationists have to put into explaining away why the evidence looks for all the world like evolution. That comes from their raison d'etre for participating in these discussions. Are ID/creationists interested in actually figuring out why we see what we do? No. They are here to protect their beliefs. ID/creationists aren't interested in explanations. They are interested in beliefs. Science, on the other hand, is all about explanations, beliefs be damned. This is why you see people like Dredge who use phrases like "need to believe". That's just not how it works. It is projection on the part of ID/creationists. As is true of many other areas of life, what people accuse others of is often a strong clue as to what those accusers are actually doing themselves. ID/creationists have a dogmatic belief that must be adhered to, so they assume it is the same for scientists. They never stop and think that scientists follow the evidence without reference to beliefs. Instead, we see ID/creationists labelling theories with "-isms" while calling them religions. Why? They are trying to level the playing field, and/or battling their own cognitive dissonance which is often the source of projection. For Dredge, UCD has to be a belief because his worldview just can't cope with UCD being an evidenced based conclusion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18298 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Dredge writes: This sounded so outlandish that I had to investigate. I came up with Researchers trace the potato's origins, learn about its untapped potential. This superstition includes the hilarious belief that humans and potatoes, for example, evolved from the same organism. I kid you not ... that's what Darwinoids actually believe!! Am I missing something? Can you show me the source that led you to that conclusion?The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
FLRW writes:
Those researchers wouldn't know ... they're just guessing. Their proposal can't be tested and is therefore worthless as science. No one can ever know what process produced the history of life on earth.
several researchers have proposed that early life was characterized by rampant horizontal gene transfer
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Phat writes: This sounded so outlandish that I had to investigate. All life shares a common ancestor. If you pick any two species you can trace their family tree back until you arrive at that shared ancestor. The shared ancestor between potatoes and humans, or rather animals and plants, would be a simpler single celled eukaryote, something along the lines of modern protists. The shared ancestor would be neither a potato nor a human.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10038 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dredge writes: Those researchers wouldn't know ... they're just guessing. Their proposal can't be tested and is therefore worthless as science. It can be tested by measuring phylogenetic signal in shared DNA sequences. The fact that you have to pretend that this evidence doesn't exist says quite a lot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18298 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Taq writes: To be honest, I never understood Biblical Creationists much either. Of course, God *could* have tricked science, but why on Earth would He need to do that? ...ID/creationists aren't interested in explanations. They are interested in beliefs. Science, on the other hand, is all about explanations, beliefs be damned. My only beef with "scientists" is when they try and prove that Jesus never existed. Beyond that, I respect science. And is a guy who builds a biblical Theme Park near Cinncinati any wiser than a Hedge Fund Manager who has a bit of an ego and likes to write books? The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of a doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy, The Kingdom of God is Within You (1894). When both religious and non-religious people reach the same conclusions then you know religion isn't the reason.--Percy Nor are Democrats the best party or the only one we should have. -Phat,2022 addressing The Peanut Gallery.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4411 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.4
|
My only beef with "scientists" is when they try and prove that Jesus never existed. Can you point to a single scientist who worked on a project to "try and prove that Jesus never existed" or a single paper written by a scientist "trying to prove that Jesus never existed?" That's a lot different from pointing out that there is not a single scrap of evidence that Jesus ever existed.
Beyond that, I respect science. Yeah, right.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 94 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
Hilarious. It's amazing how many people believe that Darwinoid superstition ... an atheist fairy tale foisted on the gullible masses by atheist scientists.
If you pick any two species you can trace their family tree back until you arrive at that shared ancestor.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8527 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
It's amazing how many people believe that Darwinoid superstition ... I keep telling you, Altar Boy, those meat-crackers do bad things to your head. If you truly believe that crap then you have ingested enough of the poison. Stop, man.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024