|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6011 days) Posts: 571 From: New Hampshire, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Quote mining? The Pilbeam quote... | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Thank you for your explanation of the larger picture and the smaller picture within, however we are debating ONE solitary issue here.
Did Milton present and use the quote in question out of context ? Could I get a yes or a no to the following question : Pilbeam's adjective of "meagre" was said to describe the fossil void ? If yes then which fossil void ? Milton's entire point is to evidence his contention that the transitional evidence is virtually non-existent. Why can't Pilbeams quote be an honest assessment of the missing link evidence at the time of the quote ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
I am impressed and stricken with laughter in your ability to paste and cut. I get your point but I truly fail to see how I have done what you are claiming.
Tell you what IF you can IN YOUR OWN WORDS explain my argument in context without cut/paste and then prove how I am in error I will straight out admit defeat and officially withdraw this evidence as some evidence against evolution. What do you say ? And NosyNed if you read this then the same applies to you. And if Zhimbo reads this then the same applies to you. Just remember my conditions stated above.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Traz Inactive Member |
quote: All right. As far as I can tell, you are arguing the following: When David Pilbeam said there were not enough fossils between eight and four million years ago to reconstruct the path of hominid evolution during that period, that means hominids did not evolve from primates. You are wrong because eight to four million years ago is not the entire history of hominid evolution; because we also have genetic evidence to go on; and finally because even if humans did not evolve from primates (and you would become famous for proving this, my friend!), you would still have to show that we did not evolve from anything else either. This has been explained to you already, though, and better at that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Could I get a yes or a no to the following question : Pilbeam's adjective of "meagre" was said to describe the fossil void ? If yes then which fossil void ? Milton's entire point is to evidence his contention that the transitional evidence is virtually non-existent. I'm not going to go back to reading the original material. Maybe we can do that a bit later. I do think that the word meagre was intended to apply to a fossil void in the intial raise of the homonid or pre-homonid forms. That is there is a shortage of details at around the time we separated from the line leading to our nearest existing relatives. However the quote is being "mined" to suggest that there is such a shortage of fossils covering the entire path from clearly non-human but erect homonids to us that the conclusion that we are connected to them is higly suspect or false. This is not true. You state:
Milton's entire point is to evidence his contention that the transitional evidence is virtually non-existent.
If that is the case then Milton's contention is wrong. Just plain wrong.
Why can't Pilbeams quote be an honest assessment of the missing link evidence at the time of the quote ?
Ah, now this is a little different. The phrase "at the time of..." makes a difference. I don't know what evidence was available "at the time of" the quote. I assume by this you mean that things have changed. At this time the assessment is no longer valid. Now we have moved the argument from where we started. We started using Milton's quote in support of a lack of transitionals period, full stop. Now we seem to have decided that there might be transitionals today but not at the time he lifted the quote. Is that where we are now? (btw while I don't know about things "at the time of" the quote I suspect that the contention of Milton's was still wrong. We'll see about that level of detail in a bit)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Zhimbo Member (Idle past 6011 days) Posts: 571 From: New Hampshire, USA Joined: |
quote: Yes, yes, I know that's a misleading quotation. Not really my point. I'm just curious what the word "evidence" is supposed to refer to? Are you implying the the Pilbeam quote is evidence? Wow. Other than the fact, that, once again, the quote iss about the details of hominoid evolution, not whether apes and humans had a common ancestor or whether evolution occurs(is this point really so hard to understand?), it's not evidence. It's somebody opinion. There's a difference. Even if the quote meant what Milton seems to be implying, it still wouldn't be evidence. If you want to talk about evidence, then talk about the evidence, not someone's cute, secondhand joke about the evidence. And, finally, once again: If Milton is quoting Pilbeam's opinion, shouldn't it actually reflect Pilbeam's opinion?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Round and round we go.
Can I take a minute here and put everything in chronological order. Way back in another topic I posted the Leakey/Pilbeam quote as evidence against the claim that the missing link has been found and established the ToE to now be a fact. Actually that was Milton's contention of which I agree with. Milton/I are saying that the Leakey /Pilbeam quote to be an honest assessment of the amount of evidence that exists in the area called the "fossil void" by Leakey. Milton/I are saying the Pilbeam quote becomes evidence that there is a meagre amount of total evidence proving the missing link. I acknowledge that Pilbeam obviously believes that evolution is a fact, however his quote says what it means that there isn't enough evidence to go on and claim victory. You disagree, and decided to create a topic for debate. If I understand you correctly you are saying that Pilbeam was not referring to missing link evidence but something else. I say he was referring to what Leakey called the fossil void and I and Milton say the fossil void in question is the crucial transitional/missing link evidence. Pilbeam believes evolution to be a fact and the only controversies are minor and theoretical in areas of HOW it happens. I do not question or dispute that. But how does that negate what I believe to be his honest assessment of the fossil void evidence which he described as "meagre". If you want to claim that he was not referring to the fossil void I am claiming then explain and prove from the text we are using.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Milton/I are saying the Pilbeam quote becomes evidence that there is a meagre amount of total evidence proving the missing link. There is a serious misunderstanding between us buried in this sentence. What is this "the" missing link? A "link" implies two things being joined in some way? What do you think are those two things? Why is it just one link? How many links do you think there are? If more than one, what other things are being joined?
I say he was referring to what Leakey called the fossil void and I and Milton say the fossil void in question is the crucial transitional/missing link evidence. What fossil void is in question? Could you explain that a bit more?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Yes, the fossil void AKA transitional fossils/bones between ape and upright man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Uh, there was more than one question in that post. Could you finish up?
Also, "upright man" is what exactly? And "ape" in this context? (note it can't be a chimpanzee ok? ) ------------------Common sense isn't [This message has been edited by NosyNed, 12-20-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
M82A1 Inactive Member |
WILLOWTREE writes: Every fossil is a transitional species because evolution never stops. Yes, the fossil void AKA transitional fossils/bones between ape and upright man. ------------------"The only thing necessary for the Triumph of Evil is for Good Men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5032 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
It it possible that Vrba's "pulse" notion has confused the issue of MAMMAL diversification IN AFRICA with primate lineage biogeography. I rarely discuss this topic for that currently "modern" reason. Gould is happy enough to still ask if anyone has any ideas what a dino brain might NOT be and there being little traffic on this there is also less on the new mammal movie at the SMITHSONIAN or the primate "in the audience."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
Which reminds me, WillowTree there are still questions here for you.
Common sense isn't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
MarkAustin Member (Idle past 3815 days) Posts: 122 From: London., UK Joined: |
quote: Just a reminder. Neo-Darwinian Evolution is not "just" a theory. In science a theory is a generally accepoted best explanation to a problem. Theory has a far stronger meaning in science than in common useage. Theories do not "grow up" to become facts: they remain provisional, like everything in science including facts. However, both the fact of evolution and the theory explaining it are amongst the most securely established in science. For Whigs admit no force but argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
SweeneyTodd Inactive Member |
Willowtree wrote:
quote:------------------------------------------------------------- Milton/I are saying that the Leakey /Pilbeam quote to be an honest assessment of the amount of evidence that exists in the area called the "fossil void" by Leakey. ------------------------------------------------------------- So are assessments are honest as long as you agree with them? If someone else's assessment (opinion) is contrary to this one, do you think they are automatically lying? And I don't know why you keep referring to "claiming victory", as though that is a goal of any of this. Its about understanding and knowledge and science, not about claiming victory. And yes, you/Milton do seem to be twisting the quote to meet you desired end. ST
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3047 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
I lost track of this topic when the Forum was reorganized.
What questions remain ? I thought I won this debate until this moment when I ran into it here.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024