|
Author
|
Topic: A test for claimed knowledge of how macroevolution occurs
|
Tangle
Member Posts: 9616 From: UK Joined: 10-07-2011 Member Rating: 5.6
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
Message 406 of 785 (855721)
06-22-2019 11:54 AM
|
Reply to: Message 404 by Faith
06-22-2019 11:32 AM
|
|
Re: Kinds reproduce according to their kind
Faith writes: Thank you, that was very clarifying. I've printed it out. 'Nested hierarchies' are absolutely fundamental to biology and the ToE. We've been talking about them for 10 years and you still haven't even the most basic understanding of what they are, while never-the-less telling us that they don't matter. How can that be Faith? You must have seen it argued here 5,000 times at least. (I don't think that's much of an exaggeration.)
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 404 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 11:32 AM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 408 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:23 PM | | Tangle has not replied |
|
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 407 of 785 (855725)
06-22-2019 12:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 405 by ringo
06-22-2019 11:45 AM
|
|
You are terrifically confused, but aggressively sure you are right about what you're wrong about. What you are calling the "scientific facts" I'm supposedly "admitting I can't explain" are what I've been saying are relevant to the ToE but not to Creationism. That being the case there is nothing for me to explain. And you can stop with the ridiculous meaningless commentary on what I said about the creation being God's doing. Both systems need a beginning point and for both systems it doesn't have to be discussed. The ToE has a Universal Common Ancestor though it's a tentative concept and not discussed in relation to evolution itself. Same with Creation. It begins with God creating separate Kinds but after that, AS I SAID, the discussion is about the natural phenomena that follow. I understand that everybody's mind is so enveloped in evolutionism it's hard to think in creationism terms.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 405 by ringo, posted 06-22-2019 11:45 AM | | ringo has replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 408 of 785 (855726)
06-22-2019 12:23 PM
|
Reply to: Message 406 by Tangle
06-22-2019 11:54 AM
|
|
Re: Kinds reproduce according to their kind
Nested hierarchies are no doubt essential to the ToE, but biology I doubt it. And RAZD is the one who argues it, but he usually argues a hundred things in one long post. There's a ton of stuff I ignore that's posted here if I don't see its relevance or it doesn't make sense. I have no ambition to learn all the stuff that gets posted here, I have a few pretty circumscribed areas that I pay attention to. But it's nice when at least something is coherent. Look, I have NEVER even commented on nested hierarchies before that I recall, so you can stop with how I always say it doesn't matter. I'm NOW saying it doesn't matter because of how it's come up. And I think I'm probably going to continue with that point of view but we'll see. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 406 by Tangle, posted 06-22-2019 11:54 AM | | Tangle has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 429 by Percy, posted 06-23-2019 7:58 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 711 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 409 of 785 (855727)
06-22-2019 12:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 407 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:13 PM
|
|
Faith writes: You are terrifically confused, but aggressively sure you are right about what you're wrong about.
You are terrifically confused, but aggressively sure you are right about what you're wrong about.
Faith writes: What you are calling the "scientific facts" I'm supposedly "admitting I can't explain" are what I've been saying are relevant to the ToE but not to Creationism.
The facts are relevant, period. If you have no explanation of the facts, you have no explanation. You can't just handwave away the facts that you can't explain.
Faith writes: ... AS I SAID, the discussion is about the natural phenomena that follow.
But it isn't, because you refuse to even try to explain the natural events.
Faith writes: I understand that everybody's mind is so enveloped in evolutionism it's hard to think in creationism terms.
I, for one, know very little about evolution; I am certainly not "enveloped" in it. I'm more or less at the stage where Darwin was when he said to himself, "The Bible story doesn't explain this." I criticize creationism on it's own lack of merit, not because I'm married to evolution. Creationists are the ones who are making the Bible story into a bigger mess than it needs to be.
All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis
That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 407 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:13 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 410 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:38 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 410 of 785 (855728)
06-22-2019 12:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 409 by ringo
06-22-2019 12:29 PM
|
|
No, "facts" that derive from, and are given in support of, the ToE and are NOT relevant to the Creation model are NOT facts I have to deal with. All the stuff about mutations which are assumed to drive evolution is meaningless in the context of the creation model.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 409 by ringo, posted 06-22-2019 12:29 PM | | ringo has replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 467 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 411 of 785 (855729)
06-22-2019 12:39 PM
|
Reply to: Message 404 by Faith
06-22-2019 11:32 AM
|
|
Re: Kinds reproduce according to their kind
"Goddidit" is a brief and accurate shorthand for what you claim over and over again.
God didn't change ANYTHING, he designed a genome for each Kind. But the varieties contained in the genome for apes depends on whether all the different kinds of apes come from one common ancestor, or common ancestor pair, and I've wondered about that. Whatever the original genome for a Kind, all the variations were built into it so that they would descend from that one common ancestor, all the apes from the one ape Kind. Same with cats, dogs, bears, mice, and any others that constitute a Kind. But human beings aren't an ape and aren't related to apes. There was one common ancestor for human beings too, actually a common ancestor pair, the pair Adam and Eve, and all the races of human beings descended from them, the original genome they both possessed containing all the varieties possible. I saw a Mendelian square for how all the different skin colors were in the original human genome, Adam and Eve having a medium skin color but their genome containing every possible combination of skin colors, from darkest to lightest and different color tones as well. It should be the same for all the varieties of human characteristics. That's Goddidit.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 404 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 11:32 AM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 418 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 1:10 PM | | JonF has not replied |
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17996 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 5.6
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 412 of 785 (855730)
06-22-2019 12:43 PM
|
Reply to: Message 407 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:13 PM
|
|
quote:
You are terrifically confused, but aggressively sure you are right about what you're wrong about.
Well let’s see.
quote:
What you are calling the "scientific facts" I'm supposedly "admitting I can't explain" are what I've been saying are relevant to the ToE but not to Creationism. That being the case there is nothing for me to explain.
So in other words they are scientific facts you can’t explain. But you ignore them because you are doing bad religious apologetics rather than science. They are scientific facts. They are relevant. If Creationism can’t explain them - which is what you mean when you say they aren’t relevant - too bad for Creationism.
quote:
I understand that everybody's mind is so enveloped in evolutionism it's hard to think in creationism terms.
It’s not about evolution versus creation - it’s about science versus bad apologetics.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 407 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:13 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 711 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 413 of 785 (855731)
06-22-2019 12:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 410 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:38 PM
|
|
Faith writes: No, "facts" that derive from, and are given in support of, the ToE...
Facts do not "derive from" the ToE. Facts are observations of reality.
Faith writes: No, "facts" that derive from, and are given in support of, the ToE and are NOT relevant to the Creation model...
You have it backwards. If you your model can not explain the facts, it is your model that is irrelevant.
Faith writes: No, "facts" that derive from, and are given in support of, the ToE and are NOT relevant to the Creation model are NOT facts I have to deal with.
You do if you want to be taken seriously scientifically. With this latest tactic of yours, you are divorcing yourself entirely from any pretense of being scientific.
All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis
That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 410 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:38 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 467 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 414 of 785 (855732)
06-22-2019 12:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 407 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:13 PM
|
|
What you are calling the "scientific facts" I'm supposedly "admitting I can't explain" are what I've been saying are relevant to the ToE but not to Creationism. That being the case there is nothing for me to explain.
There is an objective and staggeringly unusual pattern shared by all life. That demands explanation, no matter what your beliefs. That pattern is a fundamental and undeniable property of life. Our theory leads directly to a simple explanation. Common descent. Thing When you can't explain that fundamental property your ideas fail. Trying to claim no explanation is necessary is futile; it's like claiming you can design airplanes without knowing anything about how wings work. Of course you do have an explanation that's useless and sterile. Do I have to repeat it?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 407 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:13 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 416 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 1:06 PM | | JonF has replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 467 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
|
|
Message 415 of 785 (855736)
06-22-2019 1:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 410 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:38 PM
|
|
Dupe. . Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 410 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:38 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 416 of 785 (855737)
06-22-2019 1:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 414 by JonF
06-22-2019 12:48 PM
|
|
I think you've got ringo's misunderstanding about my comments about mutations mixed up with the nested hierarchy discussion somehow. Anyway, the nested hierarchy is a way of organizing the Linnaean system and since he developed his system before the ToE came along it's certainly relevant to Creationism. Classifying all living things is something a creationist would do. The idea that it proves relatedness from one to another, i.e. common descent, is what's in question. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 414 by JonF, posted 06-22-2019 12:48 PM | | JonF has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 420 by JonF, posted 06-22-2019 1:14 PM | | Faith has replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 467 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
|
|
Message 417 of 785 (855738)
06-22-2019 1:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 410 by Faith
06-22-2019 12:38 PM
|
|
qsNo, "facts" that derive from, and are given in support of, the ToE and are NOT relevant to the Creation model are NOT facts I have to deal with. [/qs]
The relevant facts (not "facts") do not derive from the ToE. Linnaeus discovered them and published a nested hierarchy of life long before Darwin was born and more than 100 years before Darwin published the ToE.
The relevant facts (not "facts") do not derive from the ToE. It is true that those facts support the ToE in that the ToE provides a stunningly obvious and simple explanation. But that's what any defensible theory of life must do. But you have no explanation. This fundamental, possibly [i]the[i] most fundamental, property of life demands explanation. Your ideas fail.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 410 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 12:38 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 419 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 1:12 PM | | JonF has replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 418 of 785 (855739)
06-22-2019 1:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 411 by JonF
06-22-2019 12:39 PM
|
|
Re: Kinds reproduce according to their kind
No.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 411 by JonF, posted 06-22-2019 12:39 PM | | JonF has not replied |
|
Faith
Suspended Member (Idle past 1743 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: 10-06-2001
|
|
|
Message 419 of 785 (855741)
06-22-2019 1:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 417 by JonF
06-22-2019 1:08 PM
|
|
I don't recall Linnaeus arranging his system as nested hierarchies. If he did please show me.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 417 by JonF, posted 06-22-2019 1:08 PM | | JonF has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 423 by JonF, posted 06-22-2019 2:15 PM | | Faith has replied |
|
JonF
Member (Idle past 467 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: 06-23-2003
|
|
|
Message 420 of 785 (855742)
06-22-2019 1:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 416 by Faith
06-22-2019 1:06 PM
|
|
We know that's what you question. The issue is that your ideas provide no explanation for a fundamental, perhaps the most fundamental, property of life. One that demands explanation, just as the fact that sparks fly when you rub certain things. Do you think explaining and understanding electricity was not worthwhile?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 416 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 1:06 PM | | Faith has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 421 by Faith, posted 06-22-2019 1:21 PM | | JonF has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2