Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 519 of 1429 (896218)
08-03-2022 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 507 by Dredge
08-03-2022 8:02 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Percy writes:
More accurately, it is assumed that life in the past followed the same processes as life today. We know how evolution works because we can observe it in real time today.
This comment represents a degree of progress and thus, a glimmer of hope.
You've at least admitted that ToE is based, not on a fact, but on an assumption. Well done.
It's difficult to explain things to people working hard to make sure they don't understand them. Seeking alternative but wrong interpretations of what people say accomplishes your goal of not understanding what was said, but it makes discussion difficult by forcing people to compose long careful replies.
In other words, I was saying something contrary to what you're saying. My first sentence was only calling attention to the common scientific assumption that the laws of the universe are the same everywhere throughout all time. Calling it an assumption, while maybe not the best word, allows room for the concept of tentativity (in other words, it makes clear that nothing is proven), but the assumption is not without mountains of evidence since when we, for example, dig in the ground or look out into space all the evidence we find says that the processes we see having taken place everywhere in the past are the same ones we see taking place here on Earth today.
I'm not sure why, when combined with the second sentence, that you concluded I was saying the ToE is based on an assumption. Every reproductive event, such as the coming together of a sperm and egg, is an example of part of evolution in action, the descent with modification part. We observe it firsthand. If evidence gathered from experimentation and observation can be deemed facts, then the "descent with modification" part of the ToE is based upon fact.
The other part of evolution is natural selection which governs which organisms pass their genes on to the next generation, and our knowledge of it is also based upon experimentation and observation, i.e., facts.
If you do not accept that processes in the past operated the same as today then you must believe that babies in the past were not conceived in the same way as babies today. And you must believe that life living in competition with other life that determined which passed its genes on to the next generation happened differently than it does today. But what we find of past life reveals no evidence that processes were any different in the past than they are today.
There *is* a common creationist argument that life in the past was different from life today ... There is no evidence from the past, neither recent nor distant, that the processes of life were any different from today. If you think these processes were different in the past and at some point changed to the processes we observe today, what evidence are you looking at that tells you this, and when did the change happen?
I can't recall arguing that life in the past was different from life today.
Our position is that evolution operated the same in the past as it does today, but you're arguing that we can't know how evolution operated in the past, which is the same as arguing that it must have operated differently then than it does today.
We know exactly how evolution works because we observe it happening in the here and now.
I'm afraid not. You can't prove that known evolutionary mechanisms were responsible for producing the fossil record, therefore you can't claim to know how evolution works.
There's that word "prove" again. Science has never proven anything and never will. But all the evidence we have suggests that the universe operated the same in the past as it does today.
And we do know how evolution works. We observe it happening in real time in the here and now.
In the sense that you're using the word "know," no, of course not. Everything in science is tentative. What we would actually say is that the theory of evolution provides a robust explanatory framework for the history of life as revealed by the fossil record.
Can you see how confused you are?
I would describe it differently. I would say that you're working very hard that at not understanding what is said.
You say "We know exactly how evolution works" and in the very next sentence in your post you admit that you don't "know" that life on earth evolved according to ToE.
I said that we don't "know" in the sense that you're using the word, because you're using the word in an absolute sense, and that ignores the key concept of tentativity. Nothing in science is known in the absolute sense that you're using the word "know."
I'd prefer to use the word "know" in a more casual sense, but it is probably better to just shift to an alternate and more precise vocabulary. We have a great deal of evidence for how evolution works in the here and now, and we have a great deal of evidence that the universe, including life, operated the same in the past as it does now, strongly suggesting that evolution long ago worked just as evolution does today.
Anyone constructively participating in an exchange of information would ask clarifying questions when a point fails to connect. You instead seem to be working hard at not understanding anything while confounding efforts to communicate using strategies such as making absurd comments about your IQ.
I don't recall "making absurd comments about [my] IQ."
Really? This is from Message 372:
Since I have an IQ of 9, I reside squarely in "idiot" territory.
Moving on:
There is an almost-unanimous opinion on this thread that I am an idiot. I agree with that opinion, which, after all, is formed by individuals of exceptionally high intelligence.
This is just more of the same type of absurdity. The consensus here seems to be that you're a troll, not an idiot.
Science doesn't prove things. As with everything in the universe, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the way we see things happening today is the way they must have happened in the past.
No one has ever observed known evolutionary mechanisms ever producing even a new genera, so what we see happening today is a very poor explanation for what happened in the fossil record, where entire new phyla appear.
Given that all the evidence suggests that the universe, including life, operated the same in the past as it does today, and given that evolution is the mechanism behind changes in life over time, there's no need to actually observe something that happened millions of years ago over a period of millions of years and probably in an unknown place that, given subduction, may not even exist anymore. I continue to avoid the word "know" and say that all the evidence suggests that evolution was the mechanism of change.
Do you have any evidence that life in the past didn't reproduce via the replication of genetic material and that the organisms that passed their genes on to the next generation passed through a selection process governed by the natural environment? In the absence of such evidence, the theory of evolution is the best we have for explaining the available evidence.
I agree that that theory of evolution is the best scientific explanation for the fossil record ... which however, doesn't permit anyone to claim to know how evolution works.
Well, again, I'm avoiding the word "know" because you're using it in an absolutist sense. We do understand how evolution works because we can observe it taking place in the here and now.
In the same way, no matter what the current state of an organism's genome, no matter how much prior change there's been, what could prevent more mutations from occurring? Nothing could prevent this, right? There's nothing that could lock down a genome and prevent further change. If the organism reproduces there will be change, right?
You can't prove, for example, that the genome of a fish eventually gave rise to the gemone of a mammal.
There's that word "prove" again. And again, science has never proven anything, but there are mountains of evidence suggesting that fish and mammals share a common ancestor, so much so that the vast majority of the relevant scientific community (biologists) accepts the Theory of Evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life on Earth, both now and in the past.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 507 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 8:02 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 521 by Tanypteryx, posted 08-03-2022 11:04 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 522 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 11:19 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 520 of 1429 (896219)
08-03-2022 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 514 by Dredge
08-03-2022 8:50 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Incorrect. I don't deny the evidence ... in fact, I accept that ToE is the best scientific explanation for the fossil record.
And to add to this, you also believe that science can't know how evolution produced the fossil record, but you use "know" in an absolutist sense that excludes tentativity.
So I think we're in agreement. Scientists tentatively accept the Theory of Evolution as the best explanation for the record of change found in the fossil record, meaning they don't know this for certain. That doesn't mean they don't have a great deal of confidence in the ToE, just that they understand that scientific knowledge is tentative.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 514 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 8:50 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 526 of 1429 (896229)
08-03-2022 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 522 by Dredge
08-03-2022 11:19 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Percy writes:
The consensus here seems to be that you're a troll, not an idiot.
A troll? If so, that is a grossly unfair assessment; the injustice of the century.

I am here to bring light to the darkness of confusion and delusion.
People trying to be constructive and helpful don't behave the way you do. Examples of your trollish behavior are your absurd comments about your IQ, ignoring responses, just repeating your initial argument over and over again no matter what is posted in response, and playing games with word definitions. These are all typical behaviors of trolls.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 522 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 11:19 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 551 of 1429 (896273)
08-04-2022 8:02 AM
Reply to: Message 533 by Dredge
08-03-2022 2:44 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
In Message 343 I made the point that using science to explain evolutionary transitions in the fossil record is pointless unless the explanation can be proven to be correct ... in other words, without that proof, using science in that context is irrelevant.
There's that word "proof" yet again. That you've done this once more and ignored all the people who have told you that science doesn't prove things is more evidence (not proof) that you are a troll.
Why did you do that?
Why are you doing this? Does what you're doing feel like normal behavior to you?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 533 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 2:44 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 553 of 1429 (896276)
08-04-2022 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 544 by Dredge
08-03-2022 6:41 PM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Dredge writes:
A pelvis that isn't connected to a spine ... hilarious!
Is parading your ignorance really a good strategy?
Science accepts the evidence as it finds it. There are a number of species of whales today that have pelvises unconnected to any other bones. Recently we've come to understand that the whale's vestigial pelvic bones have been coopted for another purpose, becoming involved in the muscles that control the penis.
If you truly doubt that whales have pelvic bones, perhaps you'll believe the artcile Is the Whale Pelvis a Vestige of Evolution? from Reasons to Believe, a creationist website. Even other creationists understand that they exist.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 544 by Dredge, posted 08-03-2022 6:41 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 564 of 1429 (896296)
08-05-2022 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 562 by Dredge
08-05-2022 7:46 AM


Re: Dredge Doesn't Think
Again, science doesn't prove things. It provides evidence, data, observations, around which frameworks of understanding called hypotheses and theories can be constructed.
The principle of tentativity is key. Nothing in science is known for certain. All theories are open to change in light of new evidence and/or improved insights.
This is true of all fields of science, including physics, chemistry, astronomy, cosmology, geology, biology, etc.
This means that currently accepted theories within biology, such as the theory of evolution, can evolve and change and even be overturned if the right combination of evidence and insight were to come to light. But for now the theory of evolution is accepted by the vast majority of scientists in the field of biology. That's the best a theory can do, become accepted. It can never be proven.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 562 by Dredge, posted 08-05-2022 7:46 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 588 of 1429 (896342)
08-06-2022 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 582 by Dredge
08-06-2022 4:42 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
That's bullshit - none of the posters here refuted my argument back then. All those snakes did was ignore that I was arguing that ToE was useless and instead pretended that I was arguing that "principles of evolution" (such as selection acting on beneficial mutations) were useless. I never argued that "principles of evolution" were useless, because they're not.

Those posters deliberately and dishonestly twisted my words and misrepresented my position - in other words, that bowl of spiders were liars. You were probably one of them.
None of these grievances are real. You've had ample opportunities to discuss the issues but haven't availed yourself of any of them, instead taking the troll approach, as you're again doing here.
If you ever decide you would like to engage in discussion it's not too late.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 582 by Dredge, posted 08-06-2022 4:42 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 597 of 1429 (896357)
08-07-2022 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 594 by Dredge
08-07-2022 8:29 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Good question. I have no idea how that little number got there ... it wasn't a quote ... not that it matters.
Information available online says that it's possible to superscript a character inside a textbox, but none of the suggestions work for me.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 594 by Dredge, posted 08-07-2022 8:29 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 606 by Dredge, posted 08-07-2022 11:30 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 624 of 1429 (896409)
08-08-2022 9:21 AM
Reply to: Message 610 by Dredge
08-07-2022 2:10 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
You can't prove that you know what process produced the changes evident in the fossil record, therefore you can't claim to know how evolution works.
Yes, you're absolutely right, scientifically we can't prove it. Scientifically we can't prove anything and never have.
--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Grammar.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by Dredge, posted 08-07-2022 2:10 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 633 by Dredge, posted 08-12-2022 6:53 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 628 of 1429 (896426)
08-08-2022 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 606 by Dredge
08-07-2022 11:30 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Sorry, I don't understand any of that.
It means that it's not impossible that you could have inadvertently cut-n-pasted a superscript into the textbox, but there's no doubt that you did cut-n-paste it in. There's no other way it could have gotten there.
There's nothing in the software, no glitch, that would do that because the superscript is a unicode character, and there's nothing in the software for representing unicode characters. If you copy unicode characters into a textbox then the software will pass them on when it writes the message to the database, but it can't itself put unicode characters in a textbox. Your superscript "6" takes three bytes to represent, in hex: 0xE2, 0x81, 0xB6. That this is a unicode character is hidden from us by browsers and tools like Micosoft Word. Here's a bunch of unicode characters:
⁶ ¢ ® ™ © ¿ € ¥ ⅝ ×
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 606 by Dredge, posted 08-07-2022 11:30 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 692 by Dredge, posted 08-16-2022 10:46 PM Percy has replied
 Message 894 by Dredge, posted 10-12-2022 10:33 PM Percy has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 646 of 1429 (896568)
08-13-2022 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 633 by Dredge
08-12-2022 6:53 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
You're playing word games. You're trying to give "just so" definitions to words like "know" and "prove" and "theory" in an attempt to make your nonsensical statements sensical. Ain't gonna work. The words already have definitions.
As I've already told you several times, I've abandoned use of the word "know" because of your insistence on using it in an absolute sense. That's not the only definition of "know," but it's the one you're insisting on, an inappropriate one for science though not for religion, and rather than spend time going round and round with you on it I have abandoned use of the word. Tragic, I know.
So I won't be responding to any claims you make about knowing things.
You admit that "scientifically we can't prove" that scientists know what process produced the changes evident in the fossil record.
This isn't an admission but an explanation that takes into account the tentative nature of science.
It follows therefore that since no scientist can satisfy (b), no scientist can claim to "know" how evolution works.
Ignoring this because the word "know" is being used in an absolutist sense contrary to the nature of science with its tentative qualities.
Scientifically we can't prove anything and never have.
That being so, how can a scientist claim to "know" how evolution works even in real-time if he can't prove anything?
Ignoring this because the word "know" is being used in an absolutist sense contrary to the nature of science with its tentative qualities.
Science deals with evidence, and the observational evidence tells us how evolution works in the here and now. But our understanding of how evolution works will change as we gather additional evidence and experience new insights.
Let me take you through the logic of why science can't prove anything. Say science proved something to be true. Now that it's been proven true it cannot someday be proven untrue. If it were later proven untrue that would mean the original proof was wrong. If things proven can later be unproven then nothing is ever truly proven.
Therefore, science makes no attempt to prove things. It supports them with evidence and interpretational frameworks called theories until they're accepted by a majority of the relevant scientific community. That leaves open the possibility of additional evidence and insight changing our understanding. This is the principle of tentativity.
It doesn't matter how carefully you word things. Science already has a clear definition, and playing games with words won't change that.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 633 by Dredge, posted 08-12-2022 6:53 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 647 by Dredge, posted 08-14-2022 2:39 PM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 651 of 1429 (896603)
08-14-2022 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 647 by Dredge
08-14-2022 2:39 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Okay, well since science doesn't prove anything, how can a scientist claim to "know how evolution works"?
I can't tell if you're joking or just being a troll or are just an idiot.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 647 by Dredge, posted 08-14-2022 2:39 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 655 by Dredge, posted 08-15-2022 5:33 AM Percy has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 652 of 1429 (896604)
08-14-2022 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 650 by Dredge
08-14-2022 6:03 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Maybe science just isn't your thing.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 650 by Dredge, posted 08-14-2022 6:03 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 657 of 1429 (896612)
08-15-2022 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 655 by Dredge
08-15-2022 5:33 AM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Dredge writes:
Percy writes:
I can't tell if you're joking or just being a troll or are just an idiot.
It's a serious question. How can a scientist claim to "know how evolution works" if science doesn't prove anything?
Well, I guess that eliminates joking as a possibility. You've asked this and similar questions over and over again, they've been answered over and over again, why are you repeating the question yet again as if none of this thread's history ever happened? Are you a troll or an idiot?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 655 by Dredge, posted 08-15-2022 5:33 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 659 by Phat, posted 08-15-2022 9:42 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 680 of 1429 (896653)
08-16-2022 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 674 by Dredge
08-15-2022 11:44 PM


Re: Dredge thinks not knowing everything is not knowing anything
Despite your certainty that scientists don't know what they think they know in what you deem the proper sense of the word know, scientific progress continues unchecked. Apparently scientists have few problems understanding each other.
Words are vehicles for communicating meaning. That's why brevity and clarity are opposing forces. You've now had many hundreds of words of explanation directed toward you, but what it all means is still lost on you, not because the explanations were deficient, but because it is important to you to not understand.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 674 by Dredge, posted 08-15-2022 11:44 PM Dredge 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