Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: The Rutificador chile
Post Volume: Total: 919,509 Year: 6,766/9,624 Month: 106/238 Week: 23/83 Day: 2/4 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Unintelligent design (recurrent laryngeal nerve)
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 451 of 480 (568270)
07-05-2010 3:28 AM
Reply to: Message 448 by ICdesign
07-05-2010 3:20 AM


Re: burden of proof
ICDESIGN writes:
OK then. How would the Circulatory system function if all the pathways were not complete, for one small example?
And who says it wasn't functioning when the pathways weren't as they are now? Remember, "different" does not mean "non-functoining".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by ICdesign, posted 07-05-2010 3:20 AM ICdesign has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 452 of 480 (568273)
07-05-2010 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 449 by crashfrog
07-05-2010 3:26 AM


Re: burden of proof
I wonder how long until "They're still plants/They're still bacteria/They're still flies". comes up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by crashfrog, posted 07-05-2010 3:26 AM crashfrog has not replied

Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 1058 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 453 of 480 (568284)
07-05-2010 6:44 AM
Reply to: Message 416 by Percy
07-04-2010 8:18 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Percy writes:
we also think the person advocating a position should be providing the "examples and possibilities."
Are you suggesting that no one on the evolutionary side of this debate is willing to play devils advocate for even a moment?
If this forum comprised exclusively of evolutionists then you must acknowledge that the thread would make for a poor debate(and poorer science) on the subject if no one is willing to weigh up the pros and cons. This suggests to me that your argument is made from a position of weakness and that you are adopting a tribal mentality in your responses.
Your response also smacks of "let the creationists come up with their ideas and we can knock them down".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by Percy, posted 07-04-2010 8:18 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by cavediver, posted 07-05-2010 7:00 AM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 456 by Huntard, posted 07-05-2010 7:03 AM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 460 by Percy, posted 07-05-2010 7:55 AM Big_Al35 has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 454 of 480 (568286)
07-05-2010 7:00 AM
Reply to: Message 453 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 6:44 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Are you suggesting that no one on the evolutionary side of this debate is willing to play devils advocate for even a moment?
So what you're asking is: pretend that gravity does not cause the Moon to orbit the Earth. What else could it be?
can you not see just how ridiculous this is? And you are accusing us of poor science?
I repeat:
The question is, why are *YOU* so scared of the explanation given? Why are *YOU* so pressured into ignoring the world-wide collective knowledge of developmental biology? Why are *YOU* so unable to accept the findings of good science.
The answer is, of course, your adherence to 4000 year-old shepherds' tales.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 6:44 AM Big_Al35 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 7:13 AM cavediver has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22954
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 455 of 480 (568287)
07-05-2010 7:02 AM
Reply to: Message 417 by Huntard
07-04-2010 8:25 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Yep, thanks for noticing!
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 417 by Huntard, posted 07-04-2010 8:25 AM Huntard has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 456 of 480 (568288)
07-05-2010 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 453 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 6:44 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Big_Al35 writes:
Are you suggesting that no one on the evolutionary side of this debate is willing to play devils advocate for even a moment?
Why would we need to do that?
Your response also smacks of "let the creationists come up with their ideas and we can knock them down".
If the creationists would support their ideas with evidence, we wouldn;t be able to knock them down.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 6:44 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 1058 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 457 of 480 (568289)
07-05-2010 7:13 AM
Reply to: Message 454 by cavediver
07-05-2010 7:00 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
cavediver writes:
So what you're asking is: pretend that gravity does not cause the Moon to orbit the Earth
Gravity does not cause the moon to orbit the Earth! It's the bending of the space time fabric caused by the Earth that keeps the moon in orbit.
I hope this illustrates my point.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 454 by cavediver, posted 07-05-2010 7:00 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by Huntard, posted 07-05-2010 7:25 AM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 461 by cavediver, posted 07-05-2010 7:57 AM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 462 by cavediver, posted 07-05-2010 7:58 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 458 of 480 (568292)
07-05-2010 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 457 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 7:13 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Big_Al35 writes:
Gravity does not cause the moon to orbit the Earth! It's the bending of the space time fabric caused by the Earth that keeps the moon in orbit.
And scientists (and others too I'sd say) refer to this "bending of the space time fabric caused by the Earth" as gravity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 7:13 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22954
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 459 of 480 (568294)
07-05-2010 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 448 by ICdesign
07-05-2010 3:20 AM


Re: burden of proof
ICDESIGN writes:
OK then. How would the Circulatory system function...
Maybe you could propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics to discuss the evolution of the circulatory system? This thread is about whether the recurrent laryngeal nerve is really an example of unintelligent design.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by ICdesign, posted 07-05-2010 3:20 AM ICdesign has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 468 by ICdesign, posted 07-05-2010 11:49 AM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22954
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 6.9


Message 460 of 480 (568296)
07-05-2010 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 453 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 6:44 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Big_Al35 writes:
Are you suggesting that no one on the evolutionary side of this debate is willing to play devils advocate for even a moment?
I don't know, this is the first time you've expressed a desire for an evolutionist to play devil's advocate for you. Now that you've made this desire clear maybe someone will volunteer. Or maybe not.
If this forum comprised exclusively of evolutionists...
It's not. Creationists in just this thread alone are you, traderdrew and ICDESIGN.
If you'd like to resume actually discussing the topic then perhaps you could tell us what the principles of ID tell you that ID scientists should be looking for regarding the RLN? What reconstructions of the design and implementation process do the principles and evidence allow you to make? What does the evidence tell you about the designer himself, and how does it help you find evidence of the designer?
And if you don't wish to resume discussing the topic then, well, could you resume discussing it anyway?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 6:44 AM Big_Al35 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by Huntard, posted 07-05-2010 8:03 AM Percy has not replied
 Message 464 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 8:44 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 461 of 480 (568298)
07-05-2010 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 457 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 7:13 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Gravity does not cause the moon to orbit the Earth! It's the bending of the space time fabric caused by the Earth that keeps the moon in orbit.
And that is what we call gravity. Given that General Relativity happens to be my area of professional expertise, I tend to know these things...
I hope this illustrates my point.
Nope

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 7:13 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3902 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 462 of 480 (568299)
07-05-2010 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 457 by Big_Al35
07-05-2010 7:13 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
I repeat:
The question is, why are *YOU* so scared of the explanation given? Why are *YOU* so pressured into ignoring the world-wide collective knowledge of developmental biology? Why are *YOU* so unable to accept the findings of good science.
The answer is, of course, your adherence to 4000 year-old shepherds' tales.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Big_Al35, posted 07-05-2010 7:13 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

Huntard
Member (Idle past 2554 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 463 of 480 (568302)
07-05-2010 8:03 AM
Reply to: Message 460 by Percy
07-05-2010 7:55 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Percy writes:
It's not. Creationists in just this thread alone are you, traderdrew and ICDESIGN.
And Slevesque. You're getting less astue Percy! First the wrong forum, and now skipping one of your own admins! Tsk tsk.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by Percy, posted 07-05-2010 7:55 AM Percy has not replied

Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 1058 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


(1)
Message 464 of 480 (568315)
07-05-2010 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 460 by Percy
07-05-2010 7:55 AM


Re: Beyond reasonable doubt.
Percy writes:
And if you don't wish to resume discussing the topic then, well, could you resume discussing it anyway?
Ok...I am gonna check out the Is it science and Human Origins threads. After all, my member rating is not going to improve by sticking around here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by Percy, posted 07-05-2010 7:55 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

ICdesign
Member (Idle past 5056 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


(1)
Message 465 of 480 (568368)
07-05-2010 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 449 by crashfrog
07-05-2010 3:26 AM


Re: burden of proof
Meffert and Bryant (1991) used houseflies to test whether bottlenecks in populations can cause permanent alterations in courtship behavior that lead to premating isolation. They collected over 100 flies of each sex from a landfill near Alvin, Texas. These were used to initiate an ancestral population. From this ancestral population they established six lines. Two of these lines were started with one pair of flies, two lines were started with four pairs of flies and two lines were started with sixteen pairs of flies. These populations were flushed to about 2,000 flies each. They then went through five bottlenecks followed by flushes. This took 35 generations. Mate choice tests were performed. One case of positive assortative mating was found. One case of negative assortative mating was also found.
This is one of your proofs Crash? I'm not sure if I should laugh or puke. A fly is a fly. It always has been and thats all it ever will be.
No, actually, I'm just better informed than you.
you haven't given me anything to respond to but a bunch of evo-babble in this entire post. If you were even a fraction as smart as you think you are you would understand that if Macro-evolution had been taking place all this time we would be surrounded by millions and millions of transitional forms. Is that what we see in the REAL world? No it isn't. We see every species staying within its own kind just like the bible has clearly stated all along. I mean go back and read the foolish examples you just gave me. You've got to be kidding. Your waisting my time Crash & burn.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by crashfrog, posted 07-05-2010 3:26 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by Theodoric, posted 07-05-2010 11:30 AM ICdesign has replied
 Message 472 by Huntard, posted 07-05-2010 12:10 PM ICdesign has not replied
 Message 479 by crashfrog, posted 07-05-2010 4:41 PM ICdesign has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024