Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9094 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,806 Year: 12,918/6,534 Month: 201/2,210 Week: 142/390 Day: 51/47 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   WTF is wrong with people
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 21 of 457 (707546)
09-28-2013 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by frako
09-27-2013 8:25 PM


Re: so much for smarts
Ok say we make a virus that attacks cancer cells and only cancer cells uses them like any other virus turns them in to a factory of viruses that spread to other cancer cells.
Silly Frako. You know that Fundies have explanations for this stuff so that they can continue taking modern medicines and still avoid a fiery hereafter. When microorganisms mutate that is mere micro-evolution because the resulting organism is still of the germy kind. Perfectly allowable. As long as only ark animals undergo macro-evolution, and then only to the extent allowable to counter a scientific argument against the Flood, that's cool too.
What I cannot understand is how many Fundies avoid the urge to visit Jesus in prison or to feed and shelter a hungry illegal immigrant Jesus, or to not cast the first stone. It's almost as if only the Torah matters...
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by frako, posted 09-27-2013 8:25 PM frako has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 85 of 457 (707794)
10-01-2013 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Faith
10-01-2013 12:30 AM


Re: Back on topic
So explain to me again why the non combining regions of every boys Y chromosome are not identical and thus are not exactly like Noahs?
It occurs to me that we've had this discussion before, and that the result was a long retreat to your blog.
As was pointed out before you ran away last time, dog breeders actively fight diversity in their breeds by artificially culling out anything that does not (for example) have its spots in exactly the right places. But that kind of culling is not what happens in nature. Only fitness related selection occurs. That's why humans are so diverse. Likely they are far more diverse than the ancestors they evolved from.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Faith, posted 10-01-2013 12:30 AM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 145 of 457 (707910)
10-02-2013 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by PaulK
10-02-2013 1:21 AM


Re: Back on topic
t is obviously absurd to say that the appearance of a new variation not found in the parent species represents a reversion to the parent species. And yet, that is what your argument seems to amount to.
You've explained this as well as I've seen it explained, but Faith seems to think species are like show dogs. If they are a tiny bit off color, or their ears are droopy rather than floppy, they don't get ribbons.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by PaulK, posted 10-02-2013 1:21 AM PaulK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Theodoric, posted 10-02-2013 9:13 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 160 of 457 (707963)
10-02-2013 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Percy
10-02-2013 7:47 PM


Re: Back on topic
You're saying that when scientists think a species is descended from another species, in reality they're the same species
I think what she means is that she is only interested in speciation that produces new kinds. She does not care about evolution between finches with different sized beaks. I don't have an issue with that. The problem is that Faith thinks the proper way to get us to talk about her topic is to redefine species to her liking.
I can understand her frustration, but I'm not going to help her out by giving her control of the dictionary. Particularly when "kind" is so poorly defined. For example Lions and other big cats that can't mate are still of the "Catty" kind, but humans and all other apes are of different kinds by fiat.
And of course even resolving that issue does not make her diversity argument any more rational. It's no more convincing here than it was in the other two threads devoted to the topic.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Percy, posted 10-02-2013 7:47 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 12:04 AM NoNukes has replied
 Message 168 by Percy, posted 10-03-2013 8:54 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 162 of 457 (707968)
10-03-2013 12:12 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Faith
10-03-2013 12:04 AM


Re: Back on topic
Species the way that word was used back in Darwin's day
Apparently you missed the significance of the finch beak example. Darwin meant to include such changes as evolution, and he did not make other than a quantitative distinction between that and any other evolution.
You are the one deviating from Darwin's day.
t is indeed frustrating not to be able to get something so simple across.
We understand what you are trying to convey. The problem is that we recognize instantly that what you say is wrong.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 12:04 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 12:17 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 165 of 457 (707972)
10-03-2013 12:44 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Faith
10-03-2013 12:17 AM


Re: Back on topic
You do not "recognize" what I say is wrong,
Yes, I do recognize it is wrong, and so does everyone else here. Isn't it at least possible that you are simply not capable of seeing the holes in your explanations? And the problem isn't the terminology. We've all spotted you that mistake.
You want to believe that we just cannot get it, but given the way you have to bail out of other discussions about genetics because they are too hard for you, just how likely is it that you are some kind of evolution savant on the topic of genetic diversity?
And now I know you don't either.
And yet I haven't tried to characterize your argument, and I haven't said anything about evolution that you disagree with. You've formed your opinion that I don't understand you simply from knowing that I disagree. That tells me that you cannot even conceive of being wrong on a topic you know next to nothing about.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 12:17 AM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 172 of 457 (707989)
10-03-2013 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Faith
10-03-2013 10:33 AM


Re: Back on topic
what you do often have is alleles that weren't expressed in the mother population that are now expressed in the daughter population,
Despite the fact that you badly want, and perhaps need the above to be true, the above would be something to demonstrate rather than to just assert. Are you able to do that knowing that doing so would help support your case?
Certainly what you are describing is not Mendellian genetics.
It is certainly possible that an unexpressed gene can become expressed, but that possible explanation is ruled out in every single case where we can actually identify the new or unique gene associated with the new and unique trait. And if I recall correctly, Dr. Adequate provide a number of cat and dog examples of exactly that the last time we discussed this. You in turn provided nothing.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 10:33 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 11:21 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 175 of 457 (707994)
10-03-2013 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by jar
10-03-2013 9:39 AM


Re: We are all the same kind
And she is kinda right. There is more genetic diversity within the Animalia kind than in the Primate kind and more diversity in the Primate kind than in the Homo kind and more diversity within the Homo kind than within the Homo sapiens sapiens kind.
Kinda right except that there is no animal kind. What she is actually claiming is that humans would have to be less diverse than whatever were their immediate predecessors, rather than to every possible animal that ever existed.
And her reasoning is that since wiener dogfs are less diverse than wolves she must be on the right track. By the way, I wonder what part of the genome those scrunchy wiener hind legs were hiding in since they could not possibly be mutations, right?
Her conclusion is just asinine and does not comport with the facts.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by jar, posted 10-03-2013 9:39 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by jar, posted 10-03-2013 11:28 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 177 of 457 (707998)
10-03-2013 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by Faith
10-03-2013 11:21 AM


Re: Back on topic
ALLELES, not "genes." Back later.
The distinction scarcely matters here. Please return with support for your statement or don't bother.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 11:21 AM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 184 of 457 (708018)
10-03-2013 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Tangle
10-03-2013 2:37 PM


Re: Back on topic
So seals and cheetahs are breeds and deveoped from the very same original genotype.
I think she means that they are each derived by breeding from separate yet to be named animals and not that they are related in any way to each other.
Either way though, it is pretty easy to say, 'I consider' when you don't have to defend your statement. In an evidence based discussion though, 'I consider' statements don't amount to anything.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Tangle, posted 10-03-2013 2:37 PM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 5:36 PM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 191 of 457 (708043)
10-03-2013 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by Faith
10-03-2013 10:38 PM


Re: Back on topic
dictionaries can be written to prove anything.
Pathetic. You misuse word after word and then somehow it is the fault of the dictionary that your sentences and arguments make no sense. I wonder what happens on your blog when there is no one to give you any feedback.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 10:38 PM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 192 of 457 (708044)
10-04-2013 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Faith
10-03-2013 5:36 PM


This isn't about the dictionary...
That is, I'm answering a definitional claim with a definitional claim based on the fact that all breeds develop from reduced numbers and therefore reduced genetic diversity.
You cannot solve your problem with a dictionary. What you are doing is pretending that calling an ear a leg allows a dog to walk on his head.
The distinction between dog breeds and bottle necked cheetahs is not merely a matter of definition. Cheetahs are genetically similar to each other in ways that collies are not. Cheetahs were once an ordinary species with the same kind of genetic variety you see in other big cats. But now they are so alike that a cheetah will accept skin grafts from any other unrelated cheetah. This result came from speciation followed later by near extinction, and not by a loss of diversity resulting from speciation.
Now maybe you want to argue that I am wrong about cheetahs. Sure, go ahead and make your case. But simply 'considering' cheetahs breeds is not an argument. It's naked assertion.
None of us ought to give a hoot that you 'consider' yourself right. And that's how it should be until you make a successful, evidence based argument.
What sort of evidence would you have me produce in such a case?
Because you are wrong, I don't expect that you can provide any evidence. I expect you to keep on announcing that nobody understands how right you are.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Faith, posted 10-03-2013 5:36 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:46 AM NoNukes has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 201 of 457 (708057)
10-04-2013 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by Faith
10-04-2013 12:46 AM


Re: This isn't about the dictionary...
by the reproductive isolation of a small number of individuals which naturally has less genetic diversity than the previous population.
And of course this is simply yet another case of you defining words, in this case breeding, that already have meanings. The fact remains though, that for cheetah's the reduction of diversity was not due to speciation, but to extinction of the more diverse population. So the cheetah does not support your position that evolution is like breeding.
The point is to talk about the method that forms breeds, not the condition of the breeds.
Not exactly. The point is your claim that the condition of the breeds, i.e. their lack of genetic diversity, arises from speciation.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:46 AM Faith has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 202 of 457 (708058)
10-04-2013 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 196 by Faith
10-04-2013 1:09 AM


Re: What's wrong!
Of course they shouldn't limit their dictionaries to what creationists prefer, but they SHOULD limit their dictionaries to what they actually know instead of defining things according to what the ToE requires them to infer.
Your behavior is childish.
If you don't think the definition of mutation reflects reality, that means you don't think mutations actually occur and not that the definition of mutation is wrong.
Unicorns don't exist and never have. That does not mean that the definition of unicorn as a creature with a horn extending from its forhead is wrong.
It's hilarious to listen to you pretend that there is actually some kind of organized Creation Science genetics that you know and we don't. Yet you haven't cited a single reference that suggests that there is some organized usage of the terms as you use them that (to paraphrase the infamous Justice Taney) anyone ought to give the least bit of respect.
Not only do you not like the definitions or species, mutations, alleles, breeds, evolution, etc. -- until I and others called you on it, you pretended that those terms had the meanings you prefer and that we were mis-defining them.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 1:09 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Coyote, posted 10-04-2013 11:03 AM NoNukes has not replied
 Message 206 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:03 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 219 of 457 (708094)
10-04-2013 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by Faith
10-04-2013 12:57 PM


Re: More or less a summary perhaps
Mutations are considered to be accidents, and if they ever produce a viable beneficial allele it would be very rarely
Yes, and there is no reason whatsoever to find disagreements about the frequency of occurence of new alleles confusing if you have even reasonable intelligence.
And to be frank, unless you quantify exactly what "rarely" means, it is not even clear that you've identified a disagreement. After all, evolution as postulated by scientists occurred over long periods of time. No one has claimed that species are created every other fortnight, or that beneficial mutations are common even compared to neutral mutations.
Simple change in allele frequencies has been generally understood to be all that's required to produce new phenotypic variations
Reference please. Because what you claim to be the 'general understanding' sounds very much like made up nonsense. I'll accept instead if you can show me that this is generally what creationists favoring biologists believe.
Changes in frequencies has been generally understood to show changes in the distribution of traits in a population but not in the traits of an individual. Because the frequency of allele's in an individual is a nonsense concept.
Take your time though. I know you are already on the hook to providing references for other nonsense you've said here.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I believe that a scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy.
Richard P. Feynman
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 12:57 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Faith, posted 10-04-2013 3:34 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022