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: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Comparitive delusions
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 196 of 216 (298898)
03-28-2006 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 191 by Faith
03-27-2006 2:21 PM


Faith's "Crap" reasoning
quote:
You have the evidence of the sloth's breakfast. All you have is inferences and interpretations for the Grand Stories of the ToE and OE, based on the fossil record and the geologic column and that's it. It's ALL interpretation of very vague clues.
Ha..inconsistent again. You should really find out about the subjects you are debating before futher embarrassing yourself.
The sloths breakfast is a past event that is inferred. For example, the gypsum cave is full of coprolites..meters deep in fact. However, nobody alive actually witnessed the sloths crapping them out. That they came from sloths is inferred from DNA evidence here:
Poinar HN, Hofreiter M, Spaulding WG, Martin PS, Stankiewicz BA, Bland H, Evershed RP, Possnert G, Paabo S.
Molecular coproscopy: dung and diet of the extinct ground sloth Nothrotheriops shastensis.
Science. 1998 Jul 17;281(5375):402-6.
and here
Hofreiter M, Poinar HN, Spaulding WG, Bauer K, Martin PS, Possnert G, Paabo S. A molecular analysis of ground sloth diet through the last glaciation.
Mol Ecol. 2000 Dec;9(12):1975-84.
The only reason we know the sloths are the crappers is that the DNA contained is most closely related to those of extant sloths such as two and three toes sloths and other DNA evidence from additional extinct sloths such as the 12 foot tall Mylodon darwinii. We also know that none of the sloths examined exist anywhere anymore i.e. they are extinct sloths.
None of this was witnessed. It was inferred via the FACT of heredity and the inference of identity by descent in this case that extinct sloths though very different from modern sloths are more closely related to sloths than to any other animal. That is nice since the fossils say the same thing completely independent of any of this analysis.
And now moving to what the sloth had for breakfast, in both of those studies, there was morphological analysis of plants in the coprolites...most of those plants no longer exist in the places that the coprolites were found...not surprising since the Pleistocene-Holocene transition had a huge impact on the flora of North America. The sloth diet is inferred from plant morphology. It was confirmed in those studies by genetic analysis of the plant content...how was it confirmed? because the plant genes in the coprololites are similar to known extant species , genera, families of plants because genetic similarity is transmitted from generation to generation i.e. identity by descent.
All of this is inference from morphology, genetics, and the fossil record and is based on the principles of genetics and evolutionary theory.
Now, how could you establish what I had for breakfast? Or a more apt comparison to the sloths would be, how could you establish that a turd you find came from me and what did I eat? You would examine the feces for traces of my DNA...how would you know it is my DNA? You would have to compare it to other humans and other mammals to establish that it is human DNA and then more specifically that it came from me using common forensic markers. Why? because it is a past event and you don't know that I am the crapper. Why would the DNA evidence establish me as the culprit? For the same reasons that you can establish that a sloth crapped out a coprololite without having seen it do the deed!!!!
What did I eat? morphological and genetic studies of the content would be done..the same way as with the sloth.
So, on the one hand, you accept the inferences of a sloths diet and that sloths produce coprolites..the same way you say it is science to establish that one can identify me genetically from my feces and establish what I ate...but both are completely dependent on evolutionary principles which you claim are wild speculation or fraud...thus your argument is inconsistent, and you support is nil, and your reasoning is crap...and I don't need to do a genetic test on your reasoning to establish that it is crap

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Faith, posted 03-27-2006 2:21 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:01 PM Mammuthus has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 197 of 216 (299061)
03-28-2006 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Mammuthus
03-28-2006 4:02 AM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
That kind of sleuthing is not at all in question. What is in question is the whole Depositional Environment scenario with its very specific flora and fauna based only on the geological column / timetable, because there is no other evidence. It is that geo column /timetable interpretation of the strata, and the interpretation of the fossils found therein that is impossible to prove. It's all a wild speculation based only on the gradations of the fossils. Oh and radiometric dating. Yeah, I know my reasoning about how the layering with its discrete contents and its sharp demarcations -- (abe: and it's oh-so-precisely specific labeling in terms of eras-per-sediment (chortle)} -- couldn't possibly be the result of bazillions of years of accumulation doesn't mean anything to anybody here, and there are all these supposed Answers to it, but to me it's still as obvious as the Emperor's New Clothes, and needs no "supporting evidence" as it is self-evident, etc. It still makes me laugh to think of it. At least I can amuse myself in this hopeless debate.
This message has been edited by Faith, 03-28-2006 06:05 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2006 4:02 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Jazzns, posted 03-28-2006 6:15 PM Faith has replied
 Message 200 by mark24, posted 03-28-2006 6:42 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 207 by Mammuthus, posted 03-29-2006 3:29 AM Faith has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 198 of 216 (299075)
03-28-2006 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Faith
03-28-2006 6:01 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
The only "Emperor's New Clothes" is your now extensive canned responses that have, ironically, evolved over the course of your participation on this board.
Lately with you it has not become an exercise of how can you participate in the debate but rather how many obfuscated points can you make against your opponents in the fewest number of words.
The good thing for your opponents though is that all it serves to do is actually provide more and more examples of the type of behavior this thread was started to discuss.
Even after being told about how in reality layers are not discrete or sharply demarcated you continue to talk about them like they are. I know you have read the posts that talk about this because you responded to the. Therefore the only way you could not know this information is if you have achieved somewhat a mastery of self-delusion.
Therefore if you choose to remain in this state your only recourse is exactly what you are doing now. Completely self-destructing.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:01 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:17 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 199 of 216 (299078)
03-28-2006 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Jazzns
03-28-2006 6:15 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
For all the screaming about how I'm not supplying support for my positions, you'd think all you guys did was support yours, but it sure looks to me like 95% of your effort goes into nagging and denigrating me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Jazzns, posted 03-28-2006 6:15 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by ReverendDG, posted 03-28-2006 6:47 PM Faith has replied
 Message 204 by Jazzns, posted 03-28-2006 8:03 PM Faith has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 200 of 216 (299100)
03-28-2006 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Faith
03-28-2006 6:01 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
Faith,
That kind of sleuthing is not at all in question.
But it is. YOU question it, do you want a quote?
The rest of your post is irrelevant to the post you replied to. One wonders why you typed it.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:01 PM Faith has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 201 of 216 (299102)
03-28-2006 6:47 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Faith
03-28-2006 6:17 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
For all the screaming about how I'm not supplying support for my positions, you'd think all you guys did was support yours, but it sure looks to me like 95% of your effort goes into nagging and denigrating me.
i guess its time to play the martyr card then? It's sort of frustrating that people who want to show that some of your ideas just do not work, are eather ignored, misinterpreted or handwaved
I guess you havn't read any of the topics in the last month then? or even this thread?
who is screaming? the woe is me thing really does get tiresome.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:17 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 7:08 PM ReverendDG has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 202 of 216 (299115)
03-28-2006 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by ReverendDG
03-28-2006 6:47 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
Hey I'm not playing martyr. Where does this stupid idea come from? I'm not complaining about anything. This is simply an honest statement. I don't have the energy lately to deal with all this, that's all I'm saying. Good grief you guys truly are a pack of jackals. Face it, it's a fact. I'm not even complaining about THAT. Facts are facts.
This message has been edited by Faith, 03-28-2006 07:09 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by ReverendDG, posted 03-28-2006 6:47 PM ReverendDG has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by ReverendDG, posted 03-28-2006 7:13 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 208 by lfen, posted 03-29-2006 3:35 AM Faith has not replied

  
ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 203 of 216 (299119)
03-28-2006 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by Faith
03-28-2006 7:08 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
You are purely exagerating, it is complaining, if you can't answer people don't make statements. Faith do you understand how debate works?
if you don't feel like you can debate then take a leave, its not a fact at all its just you complaining about not being agreed with. if you don't like what we say then you have the right to leave, but insulting people doesn't make things better

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 7:08 PM Faith has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 204 of 216 (299123)
03-28-2006 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by Faith
03-28-2006 6:17 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
For all the screaming about how I'm not supplying support for my positions, you'd think all you guys did was support yours, but it sure looks to me like 95% of your effort goes into nagging and denigrating me.
Well there is nothing really much more to talk about because you have no position worth any reply of substance. How the heck else was I supposed to respond to that post of yours. All it contained was your accumulated self-promulgating 'all yous all ideas are OBVIOUSLY pathetic' rant.
You have stated that you have no desire to learn what your opposition's position is. I am still interested in helping you learn for example what mainstream geology actually is but the problem is that you have set yourself up so that the only thing that can be attacked is you.
Your only argument is that your points are OBVIOUS and as such is simply a structure built entirely of your own opinion and thus motivations for such.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:17 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 12:53 AM Jazzns has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 205 of 216 (299182)
03-29-2006 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Jazzns
03-28-2006 8:03 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
It IS obvious. But you all refuse to THINK about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Jazzns, posted 03-28-2006 8:03 PM Jazzns has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by mark24, posted 03-29-2006 2:51 AM Faith has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 206 of 216 (299203)
03-29-2006 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Faith
03-29-2006 12:53 AM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
Faith,
It IS obvious. But you all refuse to THINK about it.
This is is Faithspeak for "I have no evidence so I'll just repeat my mantra".
There is evidence of a 4.5 bn year old earth, & you counter that with your evidence-free opinion. Wow! Who's not thinking?
Mark
This message has been edited by mark24, 03-29-2006 02:52 AM

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Faith, posted 03-29-2006 12:53 AM Faith has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 207 of 216 (299204)
03-29-2006 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by Faith
03-28-2006 6:01 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
quote:
That kind of sleuthing is not at all in question
How can you say that? It is completely in question according to you. You should not accept a single aspect of the methodology in my last post nor the conclusions of the two studies I posted that are based on the use of such methodology. YOU said the only FACTS are those that are witnessed. I presented a case where NONE of the events were witnessed. They were ALL inferred using scientific methodologies that use present techniques to make determinations of past events whether it be what produced a coprolite and what it ate or what I had for breakfast this morning based soley on forensic analysis of my feces. Thus, you are being completely inconsistent in your position. Just as you cannot support your assertion that the fossil record and geology are wild speculation, you cannot support your claim that you accept the scenario I portrayed in my post based on genetics and morphology. Interpretations of the fossil record are based on the same methodology as my sloth example. You are screwed either way because you are inconsistent. You basically cannot claim anything about science at all. That is my point. To be true to your beliefs you are confined to what the bible talks about and no more. Thus, cud chewing rabbits must exist even if they don't. The facts are wrong but your position would be consistent. Everything about science you must reject 100%. You cannot say that on Tuesday I will accept that genetic forensics is ok science but on Wednesday, everything it is based on is wild speculation. You either understand (which you don't) the science behind each position and accept it or reject, or you don't understand it and have no informed opinion whatsoever.
Be consistent or admit you don't know what you are talking about in the science fora. Not knowing something is not a defect, but pretending to know when you don't while admitting you don't have the energy to find out in any case is crossing the border of a behavior most fundamentalists claim is a big no no.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 6:01 PM Faith has not replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 208 of 216 (299205)
03-29-2006 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by Faith
03-28-2006 7:08 PM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
Good grief you guys truly are a pack of jackals. Face it, it's a fact. I'm not even complaining about THAT. Facts are facts.
Except when they are opinions, similes, analogies, etc. Jackals are small dogs that live in Africa. I know you aren't really asserting that the posts you object to are somehow being typed by African wild dogs, but it's typical of you to say "truly" and "Facts are facts" when speaking of non factual opinion.
But note that you are quite skillful and persistent in baiting the "jackals". I dont' think you are a martyr but you do state outrageous viewpoints that you know will bring an outcry and then you pretend to innocence and bewilderment about the responses you get. This is the game you play here. Been too long since I read Eric Berne's Games People Play to recall if he had a transactional analysis of it.
You make references that you are tired of playing your game yet you still go on with it. I've no idea why. Maybe you do?
I write this knowing there is a very good chance that you will respond by claiming that I am persecuting you. So let me anticipate that possiblity by admitting to you that I am persecuting you just like you want me to. It gives me great satisfaction that all the religious fundamentalist that self righteously pushed their antirational antiscientific smug self satisfied opinions on me when I was a mere child were wrong. I enjoy seeing how ridiculous fundamentalist thinking is and it gives me satisfaction to see how you can not justify the ancient nonsense that gives you a feeling of absolute rightness. You have chosen to embrace the prejudice mythologies of the dark ages and have come here for reasons that I haven't yet even been able to guess at.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Faith, posted 03-28-2006 7:08 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Mammuthus, posted 03-29-2006 4:17 AM lfen has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 209 of 216 (299213)
03-29-2006 4:17 AM
Reply to: Message 208 by lfen
03-29-2006 3:35 AM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
quote:
You have chosen to embrace the prejudice mythologies of the dark ages and have come here for reasons that I haven't yet even been able to guess at.
I can stab at the motivations of Faith and people like her...fear and laziness. The fear component is that fundamentalists see how fast science has progressed and to some extent they embrace the products of science (popping pills using computers) even while hating the scientific process. They fear that there will be fewer people they can hold in thrall to their religion should people begin to appreciate and understand the scientific method. Hence, the constant assaults on the education system for example..ignorant people are easy to control.(Actually wonder why they don't embrace the Amish and abandon technology).
That leads to the second motivation (or lack thereof) laziness. The leaders of these groups want power. The followers want to feel superior to everyone else without putting much effort into it. Thus, you have fundamentalist criticisms of evolution, cosmology etc. coming from individuals who have clearly NEVER put one iota of effort into actually learning about those fields and what they actually say. That is why for example you see the same stupid statements from AIG and other creationist websites cut and paste over and over again in these and other forums. It is certainly and easier proposition than actually learning any science.
It is also easier for people like Faith to demonize her opponents as jackals or in another thread, comparing them to "Hitler" . Another aspect of wishing to feel superior to her opponents. A typical feature of fundamentalists.
It actually makes me appreciate people like jar, Phat, and Percy all the more. They are believers but are not in thrall to such a narrow, hate inspired, vitriolic dogma yet they have faith. Scientific discovery seems to enhance rather than challenge their beliefs. It seems that perhaps the faith of the fundamentalists is especially weak so they compensate by being extra dogmatically rigid and aggressive...ultimately my take on comparative dilusions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by lfen, posted 03-29-2006 3:35 AM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by lfen, posted 03-29-2006 11:58 AM Mammuthus has replied
 Message 211 by jar, posted 03-29-2006 12:14 PM Mammuthus has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 210 of 216 (299326)
03-29-2006 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by Mammuthus
03-29-2006 4:17 AM


Re: Faith's "Crap" reasoning
The fear component of your analysis seems to me a good possibility to explore. The phenomena of fundamentalism whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Moonies, Mormons or whatever does seem tied to authoritarianism in some respects. I don't want to commit a Godwinism but I'm thinking I should try to read the studies done about the good Germans who just went along with the Nazis out of conformity etc. Perhaps there lies insights into what appeals to fundamentalists of whatever persuassion.
Laziness is probably part of it but I don't see it as being particularly unique to fundamentalism but just an aspect of human nature that impacts our beliefs as well as consumer and health behaviour among a wide selection of behaviours.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Mammuthus, posted 03-29-2006 4:17 AM Mammuthus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by Mammuthus, posted 03-30-2006 2:55 AM lfen 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