|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,838 Year: 4,095/9,624 Month: 966/974 Week: 293/286 Day: 14/40 Hour: 3/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8557 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from the single-circulation heart of a fish. Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution"... Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution"... Protein differences creating incrementally different structures over generations as determined by changes in the gene sequence and selected for in the environment. That is how all three of your 'please describes' were manifest. And we know this from observation in the field and experiments in the lab. If you want to know how a genome works and how it creates novel proteins then just ask. Keep asking and we may be able to overcome the stupidity of your being an evil satanic catholic. There is hope.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4443 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
Drudge writes: I think it's fair to say atheist Darwinists believe that the history of life on earth proceeded according to ToE ... ie, they believe ToE is a fact. I wonder if any Atheist Darwinists would agree with your fairness? So, you can read the thoughts of a subset of atheists and a subset Darwinists and even better, you know what they believe? How many of these guys are there? Got any names?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22499 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Dredge writes: I think it's fair to say atheist Darwinists believe that the history of life on earth proceeded according to ToE ... ie, they believe ToE is a fact. Oh, yes, those atheist Darwinists are just the worst, aren't they?
Anyone who claims to know how ToE produced the history of life on earth is, in effect, claiming ToE is a fact. Now you're just playing games with the word "know." No one here has used the word "know" in anything other than a scientific sense. Scientific theories are tentative, always open to change. But it is true that science believes that the theory of evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth, including the history of that life as recorded in the fossil record.
Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from the single-circulation heart of a fish. Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced a whale's blowhole and tail from the morphology of a land mammal. Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced any evolutionary transition evident in the fossil record. Please describe the workings in your mind behind repeating what is basically the same question over and over again while never addressing any of the many times it's been addressed. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 6.4 |
Percy writes, in part:
But it is true that science believes that the theory of evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth, including the history of that life as recorded in the fossil record. Wait, wait, wait! Just to pick a minor nit, "believes" is the wrong word. Science accepts as abundantly evidenced that the theory of evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth... ...given that Dredge is dredging around definitions of words like "know". But do carry on, good show!"I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 439 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
Message 120 Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced a whale's blowhole and tail from the morphology of a land mammal. Stop repeating the question and respond to the answer."I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man!" -- Lucky Ned Pepper
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22499 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
xongsmith writes: Just to pick a minor nit, "believes" is the wrong word. Science accepts as abundantly evidenced that the theory of evolution is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life on earth... Good point. Unable to string together chains of evidence and argument to reach valid conclusions he's forced to play games with words, and undoubtedly he'll do it with "believes", too. Of course everything we've been saying is meant scientifically, but restating it in a manner less vulnerable to purposeful misinterpretation, it is the consensus of the relevant scientific community that the theory of evolution best explains the diversity of life. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9510 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Dredge writes: I think it's fair to say atheist Darwinists believe that the history of life on earth proceeded according to ToE ... ie, they believe ToE is a fact. What would be fair to say is that evolutionary biologists (and a few billion other people of all religious beliefs and none) accept evolution as a fact. Because it is. The ToE though, is not a fact in scientific terms, it has a higher status than a simple fact. “[…] a scientific theory is the framework for observations and facts. Theories may change, or the way that they are interpreted may change, but the facts themselves don't change. "For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact, but the overarching theories about evolution, the way that we think all of the facts go together might change as new observations of evolution are made," What Is a Scientific Theory? Neither atheism nor belief has any application in science. And that's a fact.Edited by Tangle, . Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22499 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
This will likely throw a monkey wrench into any chances there were of Dredge comprehending what we're saying, but have to say it: not even facts are immutable. Even our observations, measurements and experimental results are subject to reinterpretation and/or change.
It's important to be clear that what many people call facts are not actually facts. It was not a fact that there were nine planets until 2006 when we lost Pluto, leaving only eight. Of course Pluto continues in its orbit around the sun just as it always has. What was a fact was that there were nine planets under the criteria for planets that existed up until 2006 when they changed the criteria and Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet. It's not possible to bring the number back up to nine by including dwarf planets in the count because Pluto isn't the only one. There's no agreement on an exact count, but the IAU currently counts five dwarf planets: Ceres, Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris. But a fact that I think we did consider an actual fact was that electrons orbit the atomic nucleus in discrete shells. Many websites still describe the Bohr atom where electrons travel "in circular orbits around the nucleus" at discrete energy levels (atom - Orbits and energy levels). This is pretty much what I was taught in 8th grade over half a century ago, and according to Wikipedia it is grossly out of date. Our understanding today is that electrons exist in an electron cloud within which there are atomic orbitals where mathematical functions express the probability of an electron existing at any particular point. Opinion might vary, but in my view how electrons reside in an atom is a fact that has changed. Another fact that has changed is the expanding universe. We knew it was expanding, and we thought it a fact that the expansion was slowing due to gravity because nothing else seemed possible. Then a couple decades ago while trying to measure how fast the expansion was slowing we learned that the expansion was actgually accelerating, giving birth to the term dark energy. I call it a term rather than a phenomenon or a concept because we have no idea what it is. We know what it does, but we don't know what it is. My view, and I know not everyone shares it, is that tentativity extends not only to theory but also to the supposed facts that underlie theory. --PercyEdited by Percy, : Clear up an ambiguous sentence about the electron. Edited by Percy, : Typo.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
not even facts are immutable. I agree with that.
It's important to be clear that what many people call facts are not actually facts. But here, I disagree, unless you want to insist that there are no such things as facts. What makes something a fact depends on human social conventions. And human social conventions change over time, so that what we take to be a fact can change over time. I expect YECs to disagree with this. They do see facts as coming directly from their God, and thus not subject to human social conventions. However, they are just following their own YEC social convention.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9510 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
I think we're just entering the twilight zone with this kind of linguistic juggling. At any point in time we can only work with the 'facts' as we know them and some facts are very, very solid - within the norms of everyday life, apples fall to the ground - fact.
Reclassifying stuff and changing nomenclature doesn't change anything about the stuff itself, just the box we want to put it in. We're refining the information we have about stuff we're naming is all. btw I just love this and needs to be watched at least every six months.Science is fucking cool. Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22499 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
Was traveling, missed this.
... and yet, despite the mountain of "don't know" regarding the ancient past, you still claim to know how evolution works. Fascinating. You're still confusing two different things: how evolution works, and how evolution happened. We know how evolution works because we can study it happening today. We can't know how evolution happened in the past because selection and mutation do not leave evidence behind. Actually, that's not strictly true since mutations in modern descendants can often provide decipherable evidence about the relatedness and evolutionary descent of lifeforms, both extant and extinct. But the important point is the distinction between how evolution works and how it happened. They're two different things. One we know, the other we usually don't, except perhaps at a very undetailed level. For instance, while we don't know the details of the evolution of the whale's blowhole, we do have fossils that indicate a progression (in different ways in different lines of descent), and we do have fetal development, which often provides clues about evolutionary history. Ontogeny doesn't recapitulate ontology in anything like the strict way that Haeckel insisted, but it does provide clues. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
Percy writes:
We can't know how evolution happened in the past because selection and mutation do not leave evidence behind. Actually, that's not strictly true since mutations in modern descendants can often provide decipherable evidence about the relatedness and evolutionary descent of lifeforms, both extant and extinct.
We know that mutation is responsible for the DNA sequence differences between species because of how the differences are biased, as I discussed in post 234. Mutation does leave evidence that we can see today. We also have evidence of selection acting on genomes in the form of sequence conservation. There are regions of the genome that change more slowly over time, and this is due to selection of deleterious mutations in functional DNA.
But the important point is the distinction between how evolution works and how it happened. They're two different things. One we know, the other we usually don't, except perhaps at a very undetailed level. For instance, while we don't know the details of the evolution of the whale's blowhole, we do have fossils that indicate a progression (in different ways in different lines of descent), and we do have fetal development, which often provides clues about evolutionary history.
Mutation and selection in combination with vertical inheritance will produce a nested hierarchy. Whales fit into the nested hierarchy of mammals, and more broadly the nested hierarchy of vertebrates. This is evidence that their genomes were the product of evolutionary mechanisms and vertical inheritance. We could also add patterns of sequence conservation and mutation bias to that list.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 101 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
My "inane questions" have demonstrated that your claim to "know how evolution works" is bullshit.
"Tanypteryx" writes:
I have explained it to you numerous times. You just don't like the answer.
Oh, really, how? It has been explained to you numerous times. You just don't like the answer. Regardless, I shall present my argument one more time: 1. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from a the single-circulation heart of a fish. 2. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produce a whale's blowhole and tail from a land animal. 3. In fact, you don't how evolutionary mechanisms produced any evolutionary transitions evident in the fossil record. 1 + 2 + 3 = your claim to know how evolution works is clearly bullsh_t.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4443 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
Drudge writes: 1. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from a the single-circulation heart of a fish. 2. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produce a whale's blowhole and tail from a land animal. 3. In fact, you don't how evolutionary mechanisms produced any evolutionary transitions evident in the fossil record. Sure we do as we have repeatedly told you. Reproduction, nutation, selection, repeat. Descent with modification. All the evidence supports this process, but you go on and on spewing bullshit.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5951 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2
|
1 + 2 + 3 = your claim to know how evolution works is clearly bullsh_t. No, rather any claim you would make that you know or understand reality would clearly be complete and utter bullshit. We know that from direct observation of your multiple and determined demonstrations of your inability to understand anything despite everybody's attempts to explain it to you. Maybe if you were to stop working so zealously at willful stupidity, you might be able to rise above your origins in the slime of the bottom. I take it that your avatar is a photo of your mother who had dredged you up and that you named yourself after her. Oh well, stupid is as creationists do.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024