Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9181 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,281 Year: 5,538/9,624 Month: 563/323 Week: 60/143 Day: 3/19 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Dogs will be Dogs will be ???
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 82 of 331 (473461)
06-29-2008 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Beretta
06-29-2008 1:42 PM


Re: Faith vs Fact
Beretta writes:
Except when it comes to Darwinian evolution where faith in the supposed ”fact’ that evolution has occurred overrides all other possibilities and thus ”facts’ are forced into the framework of the overriding belief system.
What other possibilities? What other testable hypotheses have been presented that attempt to account for the full range of diversity on this planet? You've been asked to point towards a design hypothesis repeatedly but always dodge the issue.
Without a counter hypothesis you have nothing to argue for. You rely solely on the criticism of a ToE "framework" to define your position!
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Beretta, posted 06-29-2008 1:42 PM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by brendatucker, posted 06-29-2008 5:08 PM RickJB has not replied
 Message 85 by Beretta, posted 06-30-2008 4:53 AM RickJB has replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 87 of 331 (473496)
06-30-2008 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Beretta
06-30-2008 4:53 AM


Re: Intelligence
Beretta writes:
In the beginning, God...
Which "God"?
How?
When?
How can we test for him/her/it?
Without working hypotheses for these questions you have no useful answers.
Beretta writes:
or "In the beginning, nothing (hydrogen? dirt?)created everything by random processes and no plan.
The universe is underpinned by various forces. Knowledge of these forces enables us to better understand the Universe's workings. Gravity, for example, isn't a random process.
Beretta writes:
Macroevolution is not testable.
Evolution is testable in many ways and your attempt to hide behind the "macro" canard indicates that you concede this.
So called "macroevolution" is just "microevolution" over a long period of time. Until you are able to produce a working hypothesis to explain why evolution is limited to "microevolution" then you are just hand waving.
ID has no answers beyond "Goddidit".
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Beretta, posted 06-30-2008 4:53 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Beretta, posted 06-30-2008 10:27 AM RickJB has replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 89 of 331 (473498)
06-30-2008 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Percy
06-30-2008 7:37 AM


Re: Intelligence
Topic drift partly my fault too! I'll leave it there..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Percy, posted 06-30-2008 7:37 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 93 of 331 (473507)
06-30-2008 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Beretta
06-30-2008 10:27 AM


Re: Intelligence
Beretta writes:
How about who cares which God, how or when. The fact remains that we have design, very clever, very intricate, very organized -so that tells me that there has to be a designer.....
This is moving OT. We should start a new thread for this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Beretta, posted 06-30-2008 10:27 AM Beretta has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by NosyNed, posted 06-30-2008 11:12 AM RickJB has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 101 of 331 (473720)
07-02-2008 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Beretta
07-02-2008 8:13 AM


Re: Faith vs Fact
Beretta writes:
The complexity of what exists is also far more indicative of an outside intelligence than of random changes and selection without a plan.
Your opinion does not make it a fact. Perhaps you could help us understand the concept outside intelligence by contributing to the "Spotting Beretta's designer" thread?
Beretta writes:
You only have to look at how nerve impulses work or at the complexity of the eye
Eye development presents no problems for evolution.
Eye evolution A
Eye evolution B
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Beretta, posted 07-02-2008 8:13 AM Beretta has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 108 of 331 (473868)
07-03-2008 11:00 AM
Reply to: Message 107 by Beretta
07-03-2008 10:22 AM


Re: Brainwashed by Imagination/Evolution
Beretta writes:
...blindness perhaps, inability to see outside the box possibly...
If, unlike scientists, you can truly "see outside the box" then perhaps you'd like to contribute to the discussion about the nature of a proposed designer in the Spotting Beretta's designer thread that I started and you appear to be ignoring.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by Beretta, posted 07-03-2008 10:22 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Beretta, posted 07-04-2008 6:39 AM RickJB has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 124 of 331 (474679)
07-10-2008 6:39 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Beretta
07-10-2008 6:13 AM


Re: Funny fish
Beretta writes:
Really cute -I like that fish -but when I look at it, I instinctively know it is a fully functional creation.
All animals are and were transitionals. All are and were "fully functional". You are "debunking" a strawman version of the ToE.
Besides, and with respect, your "instincts" about the matter count for precisely nothing.
By the way, will you ever get around to telling us about your design hypothesis? All you seem capable of doing is picking holes in a non-existent, strawman version of the ToE.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Beretta, posted 07-10-2008 6:13 AM Beretta has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 136 of 331 (474798)
07-11-2008 3:56 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Beretta
07-11-2008 3:42 AM


Re: ERV hype
Beretta writes:
Junk’ DNA is thought by evolutionists to be useless DNA leftover from past evolutionary permutations.Unfortunately 'thought' speaks of preconceptions and prejudice as always. But now many of the DNA sequences formerly relegated to the junk pile have begun to obtain new respect for their role in genome structure and function, gene regulation and rapid speciation.
Blah, blah, blah. Lots of handwaving but no content.
How do you account for the correlation of ERV positions in the DNA of humans and apes?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Beretta, posted 07-11-2008 3:42 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Beretta, posted 07-11-2008 4:25 AM RickJB has replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 139 of 331 (474802)
07-11-2008 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Beretta
07-11-2008 4:25 AM


Re: ERV hype
Beretta writes:
There are lots of correlations - we have a lot of morphological similarities; similarity leads to similar recipes for structure; how about our recipes have similarities?
Thing is, your "recipe" accurately reflects evolutionary change! We share many ERVs with creatures with whom we have a recent common ancestor (primates), whilst sharing far fewer with rodents, for example. The further back in time the common ancestor, the fewer ERV correlations.
Plotting the occurence of ERVs gives a very clear evolutionary roadmap. Your "recipe" points squarely at evolution....
Beretta writes:
The point is that the endogenous retrovirus story is far from proven to be fact; it's an assumption based upon an original assumption that evolution has happened.
No, it's an observation made long after the ToE was proposed. ERVs exist. They are a fact. They are entirely consistent with the ToE.
Furthermore, you have yet to share your ideas on a design hypothesis, so how about addressing your own assumptions?
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Beretta, posted 07-11-2008 4:25 AM Beretta has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Beretta, posted 07-13-2008 5:36 AM RickJB has replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 148 of 331 (475052)
07-13-2008 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Beretta
07-13-2008 5:36 AM


Re: ERV hype
Beretta writes:
Pity that molecular phylogenies compared with morphological assumptions come up with so many contradictory 'trees' of life.
Examples?
Morphology is naturally limited to structural appearance. Similar traits can and do and arise independently. The existence of so-called "cyptic species" and the process of convergent evolution mean that a reliance on morphology alone can not always give a clear picture.
The study of DNA has helped to solve this. The ability to study DNA gives biologists a tool to use alongside morphology, in the same way as a capenter uses a router to cut a hole and then sandpaper to make finer adjustments.
Neither Morphology or the study of DNA contradict the ToE.
Edited by RickJB, : Link added.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Beretta, posted 07-13-2008 5:36 AM Beretta has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 152 of 331 (475103)
07-13-2008 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by AdminNosy
07-13-2008 8:20 AM


Re: Topic Please
I denfinitely carry some responsibility for the topic drift.
Apologies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by AdminNosy, posted 07-13-2008 8:20 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 214 of 331 (476147)
07-21-2008 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 213 by AlphaOmegakid
07-21-2008 1:57 PM


Re: Can you see my hands waiving?
AOkid writes:
I'm sorry, but you are going to have to provide evidence that this organization of algae cells was mutational.
Um, the paper outlines the fact that they DID mutate - in 100 generations, no less. That's your evidence. Scientists watched it happen in a lab and wrote it down so others could replicate the experiment and confirm it for themselves. That's science in action.
You now have to propose what else might have caused the Chlorella Vulgaris to change its structure. Magic? Divine intervention?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 213 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 07-21-2008 1:57 PM AlphaOmegakid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 07-21-2008 3:26 PM RickJB has replied
 Message 232 by RAZD, posted 07-22-2008 7:36 AM RickJB has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 216 of 331 (476165)
07-21-2008 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid
07-21-2008 3:26 PM


Citation.
A quick online search yielded this citation:
Organism Size Promotes the Evolution of Specialized Cells in Multicellular Digital Organisms
by Martin Willensdorfer, Program for Evolutionary Dynamics, Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University
NCBI
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 215 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 07-21-2008 3:26 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by RAZD, posted 07-22-2008 7:36 AM RickJB has not replied

  
RickJB
Member (Idle past 5109 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 239 of 331 (476243)
07-22-2008 7:46 AM
Reply to: Message 237 by RAZD
07-22-2008 7:37 AM


Re: Canidae prone to rapid evolution
RAZD, for all your good intentions ID proponents like Beretta are simply not prepared to work on one topic in the manner that you favour.
As soon as the evidence piles up they revert to a scattershot approach and muddy the waters by throwing out innumerable falshoods that cry out for a response.
Beretta stopped engaging with you long before the thread drifted OT.
In any case you are in the right. Perhaps the best way to ensure a very clean topic is to have a great debate with limited access.
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by RAZD, posted 07-22-2008 7:37 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by RAZD, posted 07-22-2008 7:37 PM RickJB 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