Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,278 Year: 5,535/9,624 Month: 560/323 Week: 57/143 Day: 19/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Potential falsifications of the theory of evolution
Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(2)
Message 286 of 968 (593430)
11-27-2010 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 283 by Minnemooseus
11-18-2010 8:29 PM


Re: Potential falsifications
You can be damn sure that I wasn't probing for real (major) falsifications when I started this topic.
Of course not. That would have suggested that you were a scientist first and foremost, rather than an atheist.
I know that such possibilities are very slim at best
That is called pre-judging the situation. The noun (you may have heard it) is "prejudice".
Perhaps the term "hypothetical falsifications" would have been better
It would certainly have been less scientific. When you dismiss the possibility of falsification a priori you have already abdicated as a scientist.
As in, "they don't really exist, but hypothetically, what would do the job"
Good boy. Nobody is going to charge you with heresy.
Why continuously badger someone for something you know doesn't exist?
Here lies the body of the Scientific Method, which had to be humanely put down because it's pedantic requirements were making the great god Neo-Darwinism uncomfortable.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-18-2010 8:29 PM Minnemooseus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Wounded King, posted 11-27-2010 3:34 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 329 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-30-2010 12:27 AM Kaichos Man has replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(1)
Message 288 of 968 (593435)
11-27-2010 4:23 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by Wounded King
11-27-2010 3:34 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
maybe you can provide us with a real (major) falsification of evolution
Hm. Lack of fossil evidence of transitional species? No. That was covered by the alibi -sorry, theory- of punctuated equilibrium. A small subpopulation becomes sexually isolated, madly mutates into a superior organism, breaks out of its isolation, outcompetes and replaces its predecessor.
Hang on, though, aren't the mutations necessary for this frantic evolution mathematically more likely to occur in the larger, unisolated population? What's that? Stick my fingers in my ears and say "La-la, la-la"?
Why on earth would I do that?
Okay. Let's try something else. How about the problem of unicellular to multicellular?
Let's see- we have unicellular creatures by the number, even a few bicellular (mainly yeast). Next step up the ladder is eight-celled, but they're parasites who do not yet have a host so they don't count in the ascent of life. Next step up is twenty-two celled. So we have to believe that life jumped unaided from two to twenty-two cells, or that there were intermediate creatures that have since become extinct (despite the fact that their simplicity made them very durable) without leaving any fossil trace at all.
What's that? Again with the La-la!
Dear me, this is harder than I thought. What about the non-existence of the Trilobyte's ancestor?
Oh, that's right- they were "soft-bodied", and didn't leave any fossils. Funny, though, I mean there were plenty of soft-bodied creatures that preceded the Trilobyte that did leave fossils, and Trilobytes are so plentiful you'd think we'd find at least one of their forefathers. Come to think of it, why would a segmented creature with multiple limbs be soft-bodied?
Oh, I forgot. The theory required it. That is so much more important than concrete evidence.
Dear me, what to do.
Invertebrate to vertebrate? Exoskeletal, dorsal respiratory system, ventral nervous system to endo skeletal, dorsal nervous system and ventral respiratory system without so much as a suggestion of fossil evidence for all of these amazing transitions?
La-la? >sigh<
Cold-blooded to warm-blooded? Even though a warm-blooded creature requires 10 times as much food as a cold-blooded creature? And in turn the creature needs to be warm-blooded in order to gather 10 times as much food? So in order to become warm-blooded you have to already be warm blooded?
La-la? Thought so.
The chance assembly of a single reproducing genome? 1 to 10 followed by 4,200 zeros? And that's not counting a cell membrane, protoplasm, organelles, mitochondria, plasmids etc?
La-la? La-la-la-la-la?
Im afraid you are right, Wounded King. The Theory of Evolution cannot be falsified. Because every time it is, the leak will be plugged with some idiotically improbable just-so story.
What we are dealing with here is FAITH, not science. The theory of evolution is the doctrine of atheism, and atheism is very much a religion.
You can't falsify Faith. Believe me, I know.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by Wounded King, posted 11-27-2010 3:34 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by Meldinoor, posted 11-27-2010 4:46 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 290 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 5:21 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 291 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 5:41 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 298 by bluegenes, posted 11-27-2010 8:36 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 307 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2010 9:55 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 312 by subbie, posted 11-27-2010 10:46 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 325 by Taq, posted 11-29-2010 4:24 PM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(2)
(1)
Message 292 of 968 (593448)
11-27-2010 7:17 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by Meldinoor
11-27-2010 4:46 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
Hi Meldinoor.
It's true that larger populations tend to have more genetic diversity, but smaller populations can change faster as novel mutations can become fixed more easily
But the smaller population can fall out of equilibrium much more easily, which makes rapid change far more likely to result in extinction. This is what Haldane examined in his dilemma; the fact that any mutation can only be fixed gradually, with the passage of a large number of generations, if the population is going to remain in equilibrium. The large population, apart from numerically containing the greater number of mutations, can sustain a much higher background mortality rate.
This is why many evolutionists have returned to neo-Darwinism, preferring to deal with the paucity of the fossil record than the manifold logical inconsistencies of punk eek.
You're assuming that organisms evolved multi-cellularity one cell at a time. Why are you making this assumption?
Because I'm assuming that the prospect of 11 bicellular organisms forming a co-op is beyond the imagination of even the most gullible evolutionist.
Familiar with the term "Gish Gallop"?
No. I'll check it out and get back to you.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Meldinoor, posted 11-27-2010 4:46 AM Meldinoor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 310 by Theodoric, posted 11-27-2010 10:22 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(1)
(1)
Message 293 of 968 (593450)
11-27-2010 7:35 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by Panda
11-27-2010 5:21 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
I don't think you even know what a falsification is.
A falsification is a deductive prediction which, if verified, shows an hypothesis to be false.
Example:
Hypothesis: All species evolved from a common ancestor (Molecule to Man evolution).
Prediction: If evolution is true, the fossil record will be full of the remains of transitional species.
Result: The fossil record shows only a handful of (highly disputed, even among evolutionists) transitional species.
Conclusion: Molecule to Man evolution is falsified.
You see, if it was science, it would be quite straightforward. But your dealing with faith here. The religion of atheism. Every falsification must be dogmatically countered with a "just so" story (like punctuated equilibrium) to preserve the precious theory.
When the hypothesis itself is used to decide whether the falsification is valid, you are fighting an uphill battle.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 5:21 AM Panda has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by frako, posted 11-27-2010 7:40 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 303 by jar, posted 11-27-2010 9:42 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 304 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2010 9:45 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


Message 295 of 968 (593452)
11-27-2010 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Panda
11-27-2010 5:41 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
This difference ranges from one end of the spectrum to the other with many shades of 'warm-bloodedness' inbetween.
Please provide a reference for this.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 5:41 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 8:53 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 311 by Theodoric, posted 11-27-2010 10:24 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(1)
(1)
Message 296 of 968 (593453)
11-27-2010 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by frako
11-27-2010 7:40 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
like the ones listed here and more found every year ?
Wow, that's great, Fraco. So there's no more need for punctuated equilibrium? That's a relief. As theories go, it was a real dog anyway.
sorry to dissapoint you but fossils form very rarely
What an absolute crock. Take a look around at the millions of fossils that are forming right now. And then think that, according to evolution, we've had lakes and rivers and oceans and snow and wind for millions of years with thousands of deluges and floods of varying intensity and expanse. We would be up to our freaking armpits in transitional fossils- if evolution was true.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by frako, posted 11-27-2010 7:40 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by cavediver, posted 11-27-2010 8:23 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 300 by frako, posted 11-27-2010 9:14 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 301 by Percy, posted 11-27-2010 9:31 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 302 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-27-2010 9:40 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 308 by frako, posted 11-27-2010 9:56 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


Message 320 of 968 (593629)
11-28-2010 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 301 by Percy
11-27-2010 9:31 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
By the way, about Haldane's Dilemma that you mentioned earlier, Wikipedia describes what has been known for about a half century
The entry for Haldane's Dilemma on Wikipepedia has been edited no fewer than 279 times. That's because an evolutionist troll sits on it and re-institutes his own mendacious viewpoint whenever somone tries to correct it.
However, we don't have to put up with that unscientific childishness, Percy. Simply furnish your own peer-reviewed solution to Haldane's Dilemma and the case is closed.
We're waiting!

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by Percy, posted 11-27-2010 9:31 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by Panda, posted 11-28-2010 7:26 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 322 by Percy, posted 11-28-2010 8:31 AM Kaichos Man has replied
 Message 323 by Theodoric, posted 11-28-2010 9:21 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 324 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-28-2010 10:12 AM Kaichos Man has replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(3)
Message 330 of 968 (594001)
12-01-2010 4:06 AM
Reply to: Message 324 by Dr Adequate
11-28-2010 10:12 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
Solutions to the Cost-of-Selection Dilemma, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 71, No.10, pp,3863-3865, October 1974
The cost of natural selection revisited, Ann. Zool. Fennici. 40:185-194, April 2003
The entry for Haldane's Dilemma on Wikipepedia has been edited no fewer than 279 times. That's because an evolutionist troll sits on it and re-institutes his own mendacious viewpoint whenever somone tries to correct it.
If it is, as you claim, "mendacious", you should be able to point out something in it that can be shown to be false.
Either that or evolutionists have developed a new special sort of mendacity which involves telling the absolute truth.
So, is there anything in the artcle which is not true?
We're waiting.
However, we don't have to put up with that unscientific childishness, Percy. Simply furnish your own peer-reviewed solution to Haldane's Dilemma and the case is closed.
Solutions to the Cost-of-Selection Dilemma, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 71, No.10, pp,3863-3865, October 1974
The cost of natural selection revisited, Ann. Zool. Fennici. 40:185-194, April 2003
Dear me, Doctor. Epistasis and Soft Selection. Is that the best you can do? These two documents contain the seeds of their own destruction.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-28-2010 10:12 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 334 by Percy, posted 12-01-2010 7:14 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 336 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-01-2010 5:44 PM Kaichos Man has replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(1)
Message 331 of 968 (594002)
12-01-2010 5:00 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Percy
11-28-2010 8:31 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
Why ever in the world would anyone want to begin an extended discussion with you when your history says you abruptly abandon discussions and only participate for at most a couple weeks at a time, the only exception being right after you first joined.
First of all, Percy, you would be aware that Creationists are outnumbered something like 10 to 1 on this forum, so you would expect there to be a very high burn-out rate. There comes a point when you are being offered the same old laughably improbable just so stories, together with the assertion that these same stories constituted a "rebuttal" last time they were used, that you despair of making any headway and you need a good long rest.
Secondly, I notice that many an evolutionist takes a long vacation from these boards, but upon their return they are not subject to the hectoring you have directed at me.
As an evolutionist you can be as virulent as you like. As a moderator you should at least attempt some level of even-handedness.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Percy, posted 11-28-2010 8:31 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by Percy, posted 12-01-2010 7:28 AM Kaichos Man has replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(1)
Message 332 of 968 (594003)
12-01-2010 5:17 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by Panda
11-27-2010 8:53 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
So what does this prove, Panda? That some mammals have the ability to conserve energy when resting (hibernating bears, sleeping bats) and that some cold-blooded creatures (sharks and rays) can maximise temperatures to their eyes and brians?
This is a million miles away from suggesting there is gradation in endothermy/ectothermy. As the Wikipedia article states:
The creatures traditionally regarded as warm-blooded have a larger number of mitochondria per cell, which enables them to generate heat by increasing the rate at which they metabolize fats and sugars. These animals require a much greater quantity of food than cold-blooded animals to sustain their higher metabolism.
Metabolic versatility on the part of endotherms and ectotherms does not mean they are on the same scale.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by Panda, posted 11-27-2010 8:53 AM Panda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by Panda, posted 12-01-2010 5:39 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(2)
Message 337 of 968 (595334)
12-08-2010 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 335 by Percy
12-01-2010 7:28 AM


Re: Potential falsifications
But when you decide you need some time off and leave a topic in mid-discussion, please do not upon your return accuse the other side of ignoring that topic, something you've done several times now in your short time here
Please show me exactly where I've done this.

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may have not devoted myself to a fantasy." Charles Darwin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by Percy, posted 12-01-2010 7:28 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 338 by Percy, posted 12-08-2010 9:03 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(4)
Message 339 of 968 (595883)
12-10-2010 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 329 by Minnemooseus
11-30-2010 12:27 AM


Re: The difference between "possible" and "probable"
The (biological) theory of evolution is the collected best thoughts of how (biological) evolution happened. It is a big, complicated theory made up of many smaller theories.
While the falsification of any or all of these theories is possible, the falsification probability is much higher for the the smaller subtheories. At this point in the study of (biological) evolution, while still in concept possible, it is highly unlikely that the "big picture" theory is going to collapse - That "big picture" theory is very strong.
Sadly true, Minnemooseus.
The fact is that the little theories all bite the dust; abiogenesis, single-celled to multicelled, invertebrate to vertebrate, cold blooded to warm blooded etc. but the big theory remains unaffected.
That's because you can't bring down a religion by disputing individual points of doctrine.
Faith is, by definition, uninterested in the facts.

"When man loses God, he does not believe in nothing. He believes in anything" G.K. Chesterton

This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-30-2010 12:27 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 342 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-11-2010 1:24 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 343 by Percy, posted 12-11-2010 8:24 AM Kaichos Man has not replied

Kaichos Man
Member (Idle past 4606 days)
Posts: 250
From: Tasmania, Australia
Joined: 10-03-2009


(3)
Message 340 of 968 (595885)
12-11-2010 12:11 AM
Reply to: Message 336 by Dr Adequate
12-01-2010 5:44 PM


Re: Potential falsifications
Did you not read the papers, or did you just not understand them?
Dear me, Doctor. I am forced to ask you the same question.
The earlier paper invoked "supergenes" -which I assume is a 1974 expression for hox genes and epistasis- to try and get around the dilemma. While it is true that epistasis allows a few mutations to have a broad effect, it also raises the spectre of having to account for the stochastic simultaneous creation of highly complex and interconnected genetic architecture.
Evolutionists can't show how RM/NS can create a single enzyme, let alone a homeobox gene and its attendant slave genes.
The later paper suggested that under soft selection the cost of selection can be discarded, before lamenting the fact that soft selection may not even be a major, let alone the dominant, form of adaptation.
Are you suggesting that these two papers allow the Wikipedia troll to continue to claim that Haldane's Dilemma has been solved?
I doubt that the authors of these papers would agree with you!

"When man loses God, he does not believe in nothing. He believes in anything" G.K. Chesterton

This message is a reply to:
 Message 336 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-01-2010 5:44 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 341 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-11-2010 1:19 AM Kaichos Man has not replied
 Message 346 by Taq, posted 12-13-2010 6:02 PM Kaichos Man 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