|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Bill Nye vs. Ken Ham | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
No need to "know" anything when you have scientific imagination.
HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
I usually try to remember to list all the possible synonyms, variety, race, breed, species, subspecies, but often forget some of them, Except that these words are not really synonyms. That are used in distinctive ways.
I would like to be as clear as possible so I'll stop using "variety" when I'm talking about animals. Actually, the only classification rank below species officially used for animals is subspecies. Breed is also used when referring to domesticated animals.
Variety is typically a legal term used for plants that have been selectively bred.
subspecies typically refer to two or more groups of organisms that are inter-fertile but posses significant morphological differences.
race is similar to subspecies except that the differences are not significant enough to warrant a separate classification rank. The best way to think about species is that they are distinctive populations of organisms that a separate classification enables more effective communication about that population. Inter-fertility is usually considered a criteria of separating species, but it is not always set in stone. For example, lions and tigers are, for the most part, inter-fertile, but they are different enough in their habits and morphology that they warrant a classification as two separate species. That classification enables us to talk about them more efficiently.
I simply need a way to say clearly that on my model what is called speciation is not macroevolution but just a subspecies that has microevolved to the point that it can no longer interbreed with others of its species. If this is not clear please suggest a clearer way to say what I mean. You mean that you want your cake and eat it too. A speciation event creates two sub-populations that are significantly different from each other so as to require separate classification. You realize that you need to acknowledge that amount of change but don't want to have it recognized as any sort of evolution. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
This is something I posted on another forum about this idea of rapid diversification after the flood. I will just cut-N-paste it.
quote: The idea for this came from creationist complaints that we don't observe evolution happening right in front of our faces. When in fact, if this idea of rapid diversification were true we should be seeing hundreds of speciation events, but we don't. Speciation events are rare, which is more in keeping with a slow, gradual progression of evolution. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
Hydraulic sortibng plus original location of the original creature, plus level of the currents in the ocean that carried them etc etc etc. Hydraulic sorting is just non-sense. Why would giant sauropods like Apatosaurus be found towards the middle of the column and smaller, lighter animals like trilobites be found lower in the column? Why does fine sediment drop out of solution before coarse grains? Original location means little because all the original land surfaces were scoured off by the flood. Level of the currents still doesn't explain how extremely large animals were lifted to the upper portions of the column.
etc etc etc ... Now we are getting somewhere! HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
I don't know how hydraulic sorting would work and neither do you ... Speak for yourself. I know the principals behind how hydraulic sorting would work. An object will require a certain amount of energy to cause it to be suspended in water. How much energy is needed will depend on the mass of the object, its buoyancy and its "hydraulic drag". So an animal such as an Apatosaurus, which is one of the largest land animals that ever lived, would take a tremendous amount of energy to get it suspended in the flood waters. Let's say it will take 1000 units of energy (uoe) to suspend an Apatosaurus. Let's say a grain of sand will take 10 uoe to get it suspended, gravel takes 100 uoe and a trilobite takes 90 (because it is flat and can easily be carried by currents due to hydraulic drag). Note these numbers are arbitrary and only used for illustrative purposes, but it should be clear that it would take more energy to suspend an Apatosaurus than it does to suspend gravel or sand. So now the flood waters come upon the earth with a force never before seen and the energy level quickly rises to 1200 uoe, which means all of our objects are suspended in flood waters and swirling this way and that. The waters reach their peak and begin to subside, which means their energy level begins to fall. When the energy level falls below 1000 uoe the Apatosaurus carcasses begin to fall out of suspension because there is no longer enough energy to keep them suspended. However, everything else is still suspended because energy levels are still high. As the waters slowly calm, and the energy levels slowly fall, there are places the finally fall below 100 uoe and the gravel begins to fall out of suspension. But sand and trilobites are still suspended until energy levels fall again then the trilobites fall out next and finally the sand. So what we have is Apatosaurus on the bottom, then a layer of gravel, then the trilobites and then finally they are covered by sand. You can try this yourself by doing the mason jar experiment I suggested way back in Message 85. Swirl the jar to simulate the energy input of currents.
Original location would determine which current the creature got carried along in to which ultimate grave. But it won't have much to do with where it ends up vertically in the column.
But what I do know is that the strata look like they had to have been laid down in a huge deluge Only very, very superficially. They follow none of the rules of hydrodynamic sorting that should be expected.
the usual interpretation of them as time periods is ridiculous What else would they represent. I tried to get this across to you in the other thread. They could have been formed in 5 minutes, 5 days or 5 years, but what they represent is a period of time that that particular sediment was being deposited. I will accept the assumption that they were laid down 4400 years ago in a 40 day flood - no old time frames. Now explain how they follow ANY of the principals of hydrodynamic sorting. HBD Edited by herebedragons, : No reason given.Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
The term you really meant to use was "hydrologic sorting," Ahh yes, I was thinking something didn't look right about the word "hydraulic", but I couldn't place why. "Hydrologic sorting" ... oooh ... sounds so sciency ... there must be something to it HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
I understand the principle, for pete's sake, there's no need to struggle to "get it across" to me. Nevertheless the strata are DATED according to the particular ROCK that identifies them. Then you don't understand what I'm saying at all. No need to bring up dating. Start by only considering the strata. The thickness only represents SOME time period. I'm am not saying what that time period is. It could be 5 minutes, 5 hours, 5 days, or 5 years. Whatever. It is just SOME time period.
And the idea that they were actually deposited in a short period of time during that overall time period was just made up to answer creationist objections Well, yes, because I believe they were laid down over millions of years. But millions of years is not the starting point. That is not the starting assumption. The starting assumption is that they were laid down during SOME time period and that they were laid down sequentially, with the oldest on the bottom and the youngest on the top.
HOWEVER, "what else would they represent" is just questionbegging No its not. That is exactly what a layer represents - a period of time when a particular sediment was deposited.
since it IS ridiculous to impute long ages of time to a rock, no matter when during that period it was supposedly laid down. maybe so ...
Yes, I know that certain arrangements of different sizes of grains imply known ways that occurs, and in some cases are like things that are found elsewhere, such as in river deltas or whatnot, OK
but concluding from such facts that therefore the rock represents a former river delta, or comparing what happened in a worldwide Flood with ANY known Flood or other observable phenomenon, MAKES NO SENSE. How can that NOT make sense??? Remember, 4400 years ago IS in the OBSERVABLE past. We can know about it. We can apply know processes to understand the processes that happened 4400 years ago, can we not?
I SAID I DON'T KNOW! Not only do you not know, but I think you realize that it is impossible that the layers of the GC were laid down in a mere 40 days and that's why you are kicking and screaming. I came to this realization myself at one time, but instead of lashing out at those who opposed me I listened and I began to realize that there was a better explanation. From there I had to accept that what I thought was true was actually not and I had to abandon those false teachings. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
Good grief, remember we had to constrain the deposition of everything below the Coconino to 40 days because there are footprints in the Coconino that showed LIVING animals? They all have to be dead at the end of the 40 days ... they don't get a whole year to scamper around underwater.
HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
Now, look, the state (thank God) is not preventing Mr. Ham from building his theme park. They're just saying that they won't give him tax rebates for doing so. I am not clear on this... is AIG being denied 501(c) status or are they only being denied incentives to build the park? It does seem as if the park should qualify for 501(c) status. It seems, from the article you referenced, that what the state had a problem with is that AIG would not pledge to not discriminate against hiring non-Christians, which would put AIG at odds with receiving public monies. However, their are ways around this, like having employees sign an agreement that you will support the institution's "mission." In other words, you don't have to BE a Christian, you just have to pretend to be one (I mean act like one) as long as you work there. There are plenty of non-profit Christian institutions that hire only "Christians" yet still meet federal guidelines. I guess I don't get what the problem is and why AIG thinks they are entitled to tax rebates if they won't follow the rules. I suspect that Ham is having trouble getting this project launched and is trying to make it out to look like it was the Big Bad Wolf who has blown his house down. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 887 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
It makes no sense whatever to require a religious organization to hire people who don't share their beliefs Religious organizations are NOT required to hire people who do not share their beliefs. That is religious organizations that do not accept public money. Once you accept public money, whether a religious organization or not, you cannot discriminate. I attended a local Christian liberal arts university. At one time, you had to sign a personal confession of faith to either attend as a student or work as an employee - whether faculty or staff. However, at that time they did not receive federal money; for example, you could not get a Pell Grant while attending there. Then about the same time they made the transition from a college to a university, they began accepting federal money. After that point they could no longer require a statement of faith. What they did was to declare their mission - something to the effect of "providing a Christian liberal arts education and helping students make their faith relevant in our world." Something to that effect. So in order to work there you had to sign a statement that you would agree to support the university in their mission and that you would abstain from behavior that was deemed inappropriate; you know, the 20 commandments. That's it. You didn't have to be a Christian - you could be Muslim, atheist, whatever, as long as you agree to support the mission and have "good" behavior. That's all Ark Park needed to do. Obviously they shouldn't have to hire someone who would say "Now over here you can see this completely ridiculous recreation of a human riding a dinosaur, which we all know is utterly absurd." But if you accept public money you cannot exclude someone for working for you because of their association with a particular religion or ethnic group, and assorted other things. That's the law. Of course Ham and his lawyer are going to read that law differently... that's what they do... HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024