Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2264 of 2926 (902807)
11-27-2022 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 2261 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 4:58 PM


Re: Usable energy
Yep! You are completely unable to reply, as usual.





We should call you "Trash Man". Or "Garbage for Brains" since all you can spew is the same old stupid garbage over and over again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2261 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 4:58 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2266 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 5:13 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2269 of 2926 (902812)
11-27-2022 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 2266 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 5:13 PM


Re: Usable energy
Not just smilies. Personally, I cannot stand smilies. They remind me of Clippy, perhaps the most useless and counter-productive feature Microsoft ever came up with (outside of hiding file extensions as a default). It actually kept you from being able to use Help directly. My very first action after having installed Microsoft Office was to kill Clippy.
Smilies are just inane. But then so are you, so I use laughter -- -- to communicate how ludicrous you are. Your mindless troll garbage deserves nothing but ridicule, which is what I express.
I could just write that I'm laughing at you, but your stupid troll brain would not see it. So I have to draw a picture for you.
And how can you possibly use the Internet if you do not have even the minimal understanding of TCP/IP protocols? You are doubtless so stupid you don't even know the difference between TCP and UDP.
For that matter, how can you use a computer if you cannot even explain a basic CPU acquisition-execution cycle? Or the build process in C and C++?
According to your garbage criteria, neither computers nor the Internet should be able to function unless you personally are able to describe precisely how they work! No, you do not know that and yet they do still function.
You stupid troll!







This message is a reply to:
 Message 2266 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 5:13 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2271 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 6:24 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2273 of 2926 (902816)
11-27-2022 6:33 PM
Reply to: Message 2271 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 6:24 PM


Re: Usable energy
Unlike you who has nothing but garbage.
More than 1400 of your posts here are nothing but pure mindless garbage. Quite a legacy! Will that be the epitaph on your tombstone? "Most Prodigious Generator of Pure Garbage on the Internet -- By Sheer Volume, Not Quality".
At least one hint of some kind of thought process occurring within your cranium would be a very welcome change.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2271 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 6:24 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2274 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 6:48 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 2277 of 2926 (902822)
11-27-2022 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 2265 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 5:10 PM


Re: A Simple Question
Well now, dwise1 now is an expert in religion.
Well, I undoubtedly know far more about religion than you do.
Also:
  • Biology
  • Evolution
  • Creationism (especially "creation science")
  • Genetics
  • Genetic algorithms
  • Mathematics
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Physiology
  • Astronomy
  • Astrophysics
  • Geology
  • Geography
  • Meteorology
  • Electronics
  • Computer science
  • Computer electronics -- my boss, a highly experienced EE, often had to have me explain digital logic to him
  • Computer architecture -- including intimate details of the logic circuitry of a CPU
  • Computer programming -- both assembly and higher-level languages
  • Network
  • Network protocols and protocol suites
  • Network programming
  • Multiprocessor and multithreaded programming
  • Digital communications and protocols
  • Radio communications
  • GPS
  • Radar systems
  • Greenhouse control systems
  • Cryptography
  • Military science
  • Logistics
  • Military Drill
  • Naval Architecture
  • Navigation
  • Ship sensor and weapons systems
  • Ship operations
  • Naval communications
  • Aircraft design and operation
  • Spacecraft
  • Army field operations
  • Wargaming
  • Martial arts -- karate, Aikido
  • History -- eg, US, European, Russian, Japanese
  • Linguistics
  • English -- learned mainly from 2 years German with very little from 12 years of English classes
  • German
  • French
  • Spanish
  • Italian
  • Russian
  • Latin, Greek, Hebrew
  • Studied Dutch, Japanese
  • Construction
  • Architecture
  • Partner dancing
Just a quick list that I jotted down off the top of my head. Oh, and I'm constantly working to learn about even more subjects.
My son's fiancée was amazed at how much he knows about almost everything. After she met me, she told him, "Now I understand."
And all you know is how to apply a bandaid and do some arithmetic. You most definitely do not understand anything about evolution, but then you're a creationist; understanding evolution is against your faith.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2265 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 5:10 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2281 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 7:46 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2278 of 2926 (902823)
11-27-2022 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 2274 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 6:48 PM


Re: Usable energy
I can explain how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. And I can explain the Kishony and Lenski experiments.
Really? Then why have you never done so?
I don't mean in your self-published bullshit articles which have been reviewed and pronounced as garbage. Any fundie can explain everything by just saying "goddidit" (I'm not saying that that was your precise approach). By "explaining" one would expect an actual explanation which actually works.
Empty boasting like that just makes you look even more ludicrous and even more of a loser.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2274 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 6:48 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2283 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 7:49 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 2291 of 2926 (902838)
11-27-2022 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 2283 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 7:49 PM


Re: Usable energy
I wrote the papers, too bad you don't understand introductory probability theory, you might be able to understand them.
MrIntelligentDesign also "wrote the papers". Pure twaddle. Like you, he had to self-publish, AKA "vanity press". Because everybody you presented them to could see their true value ... rather total lack of value.
Too bad you don't know anything about basic evolutionary theory. If you were to, then you might understand why you're so wrong.
Here's your chance for another try at ringo's question for you, one of the most basic questions in evolution:
ringo writes:
Do you understand yet that A → B and A → C are NOT the same as B → C ?
You still can't answer that question? You brag that you know more about biological evolution than everybody else and you are completely helpless in answering one of the most basic questions about it?
You are below pathetic! And you think you're some kind of stable genius?
And that is why everybody is laughing at you.
Tell us how wonderful of a C++ programmer you are and how it has nothing to do with biological evolution.
Tell us how wonderful of an arithmetic student you are and how it has nothing to do with using the Internet.
You are so stupid you cannot even recognize your own troll garbage when it's thrown back in your face.
Congratulations! You have finally sunk lower than Dredge!
 
You have a lot of work to do on yourself. But perhaps one day you can finally become a Mensch. Frankly, I don't think you have it in you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2283 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 7:49 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2293 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 9:13 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2296 of 2926 (902844)
11-27-2022 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 2293 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 9:13 PM


Re: Usable energy
Too bad you can't explain how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatment fails. Who expects a C++ programmer to explain that?
You do, you fucking idiot! That's what most of your 1400 posts of recycled garbage have been demanding of us! That's all you've been trying to do here!
What the hell is wrong with you?
Oh yeah, you're a creationist. You creationists are very badly damaged.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2293 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 9:13 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2301 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 7:37 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2297 of 2926 (902845)
11-27-2022 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 2294 by Kleinman
11-27-2022 9:16 PM


Re: Licensed to Bull
I think you would play the perfect monkey in a Scopes monkey trial redo.
You're so stupid you don't even know what the Scopes trial was.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2294 by Kleinman, posted 11-27-2022 9:16 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2298 by AZPaul3, posted 11-27-2022 9:44 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 2302 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 7:39 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2312 of 2926 (902872)
11-28-2022 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 2308 by Kleinman
11-28-2022 8:25 AM


Re: Usable energy
The great and wise Theodoric doesn't understand what the multiplication rule of probabilities does to evolution.
Actually, we understand it far better than you do.
Willfully ignorant and stupid creationists keep insisting that evolution is like one individual winning the lottery many times in a row. That is because you creationists have no clue what evolution is nor how it works, but rather you just made up a bullshit nonsense strawman to flail against (and you can't even make any progress in that fake staged fight).
Please explain to us the probability of a lottery draw being won by at least one individual among millions. And then explain to us why you think that that has nothing to do with evolution.
For that matter, do please explain to us what you think that evolution is and how it works. None of your stupid click-bait!
OBTW, thank you for yet again admitting that you have no clue what you are talking about.
Even though you are far too stupid to realize what you're actually doing, we can see it very clearly, which is why we are all laughing at you and your willful stupidity.
... Scopes monkey trial ...
Also, thank you for admitting that you have no clue what the Scopes trial was nor what it was about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2308 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 8:25 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2319 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 4:51 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(2)
Message 2314 of 2926 (902874)
11-28-2022 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 2313 by AZPaul3
11-28-2022 10:50 AM


Re: Usable energy
... and your papers are are toilet tissue.
I respectfully disagree on that one point.
His sorry excuses for papers are like Chick Pubs tracts. On one family outing, I went into a public restroom and someone had put Chick Pubs tracts in every stall and on every horizontal surface. I appreciated that he had provided emergency toilet paper for us in the most altruistic form of charity (ie, of the four kinds of charity listed in the Pirke Avoth, the best is when the donor does not know the recipients and the recipients do not know the donor). Unfortunately, the pages were far too small and the paper of such poor quality that they were absolutely useless as toilet paper; try crumpling a page up as per the Sears&Roebuck protocol and it's reduced to a small wad. A complete waste.
And Chick Pubs tracts are superior to Kleinman's "papers".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2313 by AZPaul3, posted 11-28-2022 10:50 AM AZPaul3 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2321 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 4:55 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(1)
Message 2316 of 2926 (902899)
11-28-2022 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 2315 by Taq
11-28-2022 11:18 AM


Re: Creationist Thermodynamics
Creationists talking about thermodynamics often reminds me of babies pounding on a keyboard thinking they are doing something amazing on the computer.
Creationists are not just notorious for not understanding thermodynamics, but they are also legendary.
Most of my exposure to creationist nonsense about thermodynamics came from the ICR (Institute for Creation Research, basically the creators of this entire "creation science" hoax) and the ICR's most prominent founding members, Dr. Henry Morris, PhD Hydraulic Engineering (AKA "The Father of Flood Geology" even though he and Whitcomb just stole it from SDAist George McCready Price) and Dr. Duane Gish, PhD Biochemistry (best known for the Gish Gallop that every creationist tries to emulate). From their books, it appears that Morris contributed much more to creating creationist misrepresentation of thermodynamics.
About half a decade ago I bought the book, The Age of the Earth by USGS Research Geologist G. Brent Dalrymple, and found that its preface contained an unexpected gem: Dalrymple's first encounter with Morris and Gish.
In 1975, Morris and Gish visited the US Geological Survey (USGS) to give a lecture and seminar on "creation science". This was around the time that they had started playing their game of "Hide the Bible", having finally realized that being honest about the religious basis for creationism was what was losing them their lawsuits, so they scrubbed their "educational" materials of all overtly religious content (eg, removing Bible verses, renaming "God" as "some unknown Creator") and lying by insisting that "all our objections to evolution are purely scientific, nothing religious about it", all in a deliberate campaign to deceive the courts and the public. Ironically, they succeeded in deceiving themselves more than anybody else.
By 1975, they had already crafted their misrepresentation of thermodynamics (though they obviously just plain didn't understand it themselves), which they presented to several hundred USGS scientists. The follow-up discussions were very lively as those scientists kept trying to help Morris & Gish overcome their gross misunderstanding of geology, radiometric dating, and thermodynamics.
Our long and bitter experience with creationists has taught us that creationists are incapable of learning. That is not true, especially in this case. Morris & Gish did definitely learn their lesson. From that point forward they made sure to avoid talking with scientists, especially scientists active in the fields that the creationists are misrepresenting.
This has no real meaningful tie to the actual laws of thermodynamics. At best, there are ties to entropy in Shannon information, which isn't thermodynamics. The real thermodynamics is occurring at the biochemical level, the actual template driven replication of DNA. The flow of energy from the environment through the metabolism of life is where the actual thermodynamic processes exist.
Kleinman refers to the thermodynamics of descent with modification, though he never explains what he means by that.
My question for him is how that is supposed to differ from the thermodynamics of descent without modification.
We know for a fact that descent does happen, since life does that all the time. So the real thermodynamics of descent on the biochemical level does indeed work with no problem, because if it didn't then life would not exist and persist.
So how is the thermodynamics of descent supposed to differ depending on whether there is modification or not?
Of course, that last question begs the question of whether there can possibly be descent without modification. To have descent without modification the offspring would have to be genetically identical to their parents. Since that hardly ever happens (except in cases of virgin birth, AKA "parthenogenesis, and other instances of natural cloning), then that would mean that descent with modification is the norm for life and that there exists no problems in the thermodynamics of descent with modification.
So what the hell is Kleinman's problem with life doing what life naturally does?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2315 by Taq, posted 11-28-2022 11:18 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2317 by Taq, posted 11-28-2022 1:38 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 2323 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 4:59 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2330 of 2926 (902932)
11-28-2022 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 2329 by Taq
11-28-2022 6:08 PM


Re: Creationist Thermodynamics
The Jukes-Cantor model is not thermodynamics. People use the term "entropy" outside of thermodynamics. One common example is the use of entropy in information theory, which is not thermodynamics.
Kleinman is pulling the typical creationist deception known as semantic shifting: taking a term out of context and misapplying it in a different context. For example theory has a specific scientific meaning quite different from its street meaning, so creationists misapply the street meaning to scientific theory as in "Evolution is only a theory." The same applies here as creationists abuse entropy in its many contexts, only one of which has anything to do with thermodynamics. BTW, semantic shifting also has different meanings in its various contexts, such as in linguistics.
Either Kleinman is too stupid to realize his mistake, or else he is deliberately engaging in deception. Or both, given that he's a dishonest creationist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2329 by Taq, posted 11-28-2022 6:08 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2331 by Taq, posted 11-28-2022 6:36 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 2333 by Kleinman, posted 11-28-2022 6:46 PM dwise1 has not replied
 Message 2336 by Theodoric, posted 11-28-2022 7:06 PM dwise1 has not replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(2)
Message 2532 of 2926 (903559)
12-13-2022 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 2527 by Phat
12-13-2022 1:58 AM


Im quite sure I would never make a good creationist since I dont understand the science,physics,and chemistry behind it.
Neither do the creationists, so you would fit right in.
In order to be a "good" creationist, all you need do is to deny reality, pontification on things, both scientific and not, that you both know nothing about and misrepresent grossly, lie, lie, lie, and above all refuse to answer any direct questions (especially any requests for you to explain just what the hell you're talking about) in various manners (but most commonly by "responding" with demands for non-trivial answers, insisting that you absolutely want that answer, and then ignoring the answer when you receive it -- or just simply hurl empty insults -- , all for the sole purpose of deflecting and diverting).
As we all can observe objectively, that is what Kleinmen has been doing in order to generate over 1500 garbage messages, troll droppings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2527 by Phat, posted 12-13-2022 1:58 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2533 by Kleinman, posted 12-13-2022 10:14 AM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2539 of 2926 (903569)
12-13-2022 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 2533 by Kleinman
12-13-2022 10:14 AM


And yet again, right on cue, Kleinman proves my point about him offering nothing but garbage.
And now for Littleman's grand revelation to us about biological evolution, all while he is not only incapable of answering ringo's simple direct question, but is also very terrified of it:
ringo writes:
It's simple math: Do you understand yet that A → B and A → C are NOT the same as B → C ? I'm going to keep asking until you answer.
Anybody with any actual knowledge of evolution would be able to answer that question with ease. But stupid creationists like you cannot answer it and are terrified of such questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2533 by Kleinman, posted 12-13-2022 10:14 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2544 by Kleinman, posted 12-13-2022 12:03 PM dwise1 has replied

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5930
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


(2)
Message 2540 of 2926 (903570)
12-13-2022 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 2538 by ringo
12-13-2022 11:03 AM


You can't trump reality with mathematics.
I actually think that that's what he's trying to do. Just like his fellow stupid creationist, Sledge, and most other stupid creationists.
They practice simple Word Magick fueled by a lot of arrogant ignorance and wishful thinking. Maybe it's because of their religious mindset (Dan Barker: "Fundamentalism is when your theology becomes your psychology.") that fundies in general and creationists in particular seem to believe that they can change reality simply by redefining words. That's what we see them do when they use the argumentum ad dictionario, arguing with dictionary definitions which do not apply to the context they're trying to distort. In science, we develop definitions to describe what we observe, whereas in religion and theology (and philosophy and the law) one uses definitions to create and change reality. IOW, Word Magick!
Sledge has tried to argue that if he doesn't believe in universal common descent, then it doesn't exist. Word Magick. Littleman keeps trying to redefine reality by applying mathematics sans modèle ("Math model? We don' need no stinkin' math model!"). In order to use mathematics to analyze reality, you first need to construct a mathematical model that describes the system; without a proper math model, all your calculations are nothing but farts in a high wind. Littleman not only refuses to use a math model, but he mocks the very idea.
I'd call him a "loon", but that might be mistaken as disparaging Canadian coinage.
{
Scene from when I was in "The Peg" (Winnipeg for those of us south of the border):
The parking meter told me to insert two loonies. Despite Kleinman, I was still left short one loonie and so couldn't park there.
}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2538 by ringo, posted 12-13-2022 11:03 AM ringo has seen this message but 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