Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 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:   Proof of evolution!!!
Christian7
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 1 of 110 (263851)
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


Read this whole thing first, then decide to promote or not:
Hello, I am an alien, and I have come to earth recently after seeing a horrendus explosion destroy half the human race. I have come with archeologist who have dug up some interesting objects.
What we found was mind boggling.
We picked up complicated, and structured objects made of silicon that tramsit electricity to perform calculations. It was unbelievable. But I knew that humans couldn't have created it, even though it seemed pretty convincing.
Just because it looked like an intellegent design didn't mean it was. So I had a theory, this computer evolved from simple forms. In order to proove my theory I had to find these simpler forms.
As we dug deeper and deeper we did indeed find simpler computers. Unbelievable!!! My theory had so much evidence now!!! We found a Comadore 64 preceeding long before the Gate way. We knew that the commadore much have progressed over trillions of years of Natural Selection into a Gateway! I mean DUH!!!
We found knifes, and simpler knifes and simpler knifes. Some were made of rock. It was obvious that evolution took place. At first I was foolish enough to believe that the computer was intellegently designed, but after much research we have concluded that since the humans are too stupid to have created the computer and since we have overwelming evidence of its evolution that it has indeed evolved from the calculator, which evolved from an even simpler device.
OMG LIKE EVOLUTION IS SO TRUE!!!!!!!

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminNWR, posted 11-28-2005 5:34 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 11-28-2005 10:11 PM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 11 by randman, posted 11-29-2005 2:01 AM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 13 by Modulous, posted 11-29-2005 3:00 AM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 3:01 AM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 16 by Dr Jack, posted 11-29-2005 5:51 AM Christian7 has not replied
 Message 101 by travis1986, posted 12-05-2005 9:24 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 110 (263858)
11-28-2005 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


What position will you be defending?
This looks like a reasonable topic for Intelligent Design. I hope that is what you intended.
I expect that some people will be arguing that biological organisms are very different from digital electronic equipment, and that while there may be a good case to be made that digital electronics is designed, the inference does not carry over to biological organisms.
Can I assume you will be arguing that the inference does carry over? Will you be able to defend that position?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 5:17 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 8:11 PM AdminNWR has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 3 of 110 (263925)
11-28-2005 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminNWR
11-28-2005 5:34 PM


Re: What position will you be defending?
Yes I will be defending intellegent design.
Let them argue as they will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminNWR, posted 11-28-2005 5:34 PM AdminNWR has not replied

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 110 (263929)
11-28-2005 8:27 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 5 of 110 (263930)
11-28-2005 8:31 PM


Do computers self-replicate?
Oh, no, they don't?
Well, thread's over. Guido loses again. WTFPWND!!! Oh noes!!!!11!1oneone!! Bad analogies FTL!

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 8:46 PM crashfrog has not replied
 Message 7 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 8:49 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 6 of 110 (263935)
11-28-2005 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 8:31 PM


Your just jelous cuz I won that other argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 8:31 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Christian7
Member (Idle past 247 days)
Posts: 628
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 7 of 110 (263937)
11-28-2005 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by crashfrog
11-28-2005 8:31 PM


Just as things made of sillicon do not link up and form next generation composites, protiens do not have this ability.
The first cell must already exist before it can replicate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 8:31 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Omnivorous, posted 11-28-2005 9:06 PM Christian7 has replied
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 11-28-2005 9:10 PM Christian7 has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 8 of 110 (263940)
11-28-2005 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Christian7
11-28-2005 8:49 PM


guido writes:
The first cell must already exist before it can replicate.
The first replicator need not be a cell.
You've lost twice in 8 posts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 8:49 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Christian7, posted 11-29-2005 6:15 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 9 of 110 (263941)
11-28-2005 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Christian7
11-28-2005 8:49 PM


Just as things made of sillicon do not link up and form next generation composites, protiens do not have this ability.
Says you. The truth, of course, is exactly the opposite. Not only do proteins self-assemble in the cell, classes of proteins exist that assemble copies of themselves from other protein sequences.
But, just like a creationist, you've moved the goalposts. You lost the argument about evolution in the space of a single post, so naturally you're trying to move the argument to abiogenesis.
I mean, I fuckin' took you out. In a single stroke, in an instant, like a Toshiro Mifune movie. I carved your post up like an Easter ham. So, naturally, you're trying to pretend that your humiliating defeat didn't just happen, and that it was your intent to talk about abiogenesis all along. Well, tough titties. You don't have what it takes to win there, either. And this isn't the thread or forum for it. You should have specified that the biochemical origins of life was your subject from the beginning. But that blunder has cost you dearly, indeed.
Here's what I just did to you. Pretend that you're watching from the point of view of your argument.
I'm sorry, am I bragging too much? There's not really much else to do in this thread. It's ridiculous that it was even promoted in the first place. Move it to the coffeehouse; no serious discussion is going to happen here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 8:49 PM Christian7 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Christian7, posted 11-29-2005 6:10 PM crashfrog has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 10 of 110 (263958)
11-28-2005 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


shopping.
selection.
same thing.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 5:17 PM Christian7 has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 11 of 110 (263993)
11-29-2005 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


interesting discussion of data
I notice no detractors really took on the OP and the issue of who would someone interpret the data if they assumed Intelligent Design could not exist in the first place.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 5:17 PM Christian7 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 11-29-2005 2:51 AM randman has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 12 of 110 (263996)
11-29-2005 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by randman
11-29-2005 2:01 AM


Proof of intelligent Aliens?
Guidosoft writes:
Hello, I am an alien, and I have come to earth recently after seeing a horrendus explosion destroy half the human race. I have come with archeologists who have dug up some interesting objects.
Hey Alien! Yo..wassup? You seem to know English quite well! I wanna find out more about what planet you are from!
Guido, the Alien writes:
What we found was mind boggling!
We picked up complicated and structured objects made of silicon that transmit electricity to perform calculations.
Those are known as calculators.
Alien writes:
Pretty interesting how they were created! There is some speculation... It was unbelievable. But I knew that humans couldn't have created it, even though it seemed pretty convincing.
Why not, alien?
Alien writes:
Just because it looked like an intellegent design didn't mean it was. So I had a theory, this computer evolved from simple forms. In order to prove my theory I had to find these simpler forms.
You mean that calculator we found? Sheeesh!
Guido/alien writes:
As we dug deeper and deeper we did indeed find simpler computers. Unbelievable!!! My theory had so much evidence now!!! We found a Comadore 64 preceeding long before the Gate way. We knew that the commadore much have progressed over trillions of years of Natural Selection into a Gateway! I mean DUH!!!
Aliens say "Duh"? Wow!
Guido/Alien writes:
We found knifes, and simpler knifes and simpler knifes. Some were made of rock. It was obvious that evolution took place. At first I was foolish enough to believe that the computer was intellegently designed, but after much research we have concluded that since the humans are too stupid to have created the computer and since we have overwelming evidence of its evolution that it has indeed evolved from the calculator, which evolved from an even simpler device.
OK, Alien! You have made your point.
NWR writes:
I expect that some people will be arguing that biological organisms are very different from digital electronic equipment, and that while there may be a good case to be made that digital electronics is designed, the inference does not carry over to biological organisms.
Guido, now not an Alien writes:
Let them argue as they will. Just as things made of silicon do not link up and form next generation composites, protiens do not have this ability.
The first cell must already exist before it can replicate.
Omnivorous writes:
The first replicator need not be a cell.
This message has been edited by Phat, 11-29-2005 03:39 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by randman, posted 11-29-2005 2:01 AM randman has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 13 of 110 (263998)
11-29-2005 3:00 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


Evolved
Yes, computers have evolved, they have changed over time. You, mr alien, have made a valid inference. Some aliens have suggested that all computers were created at the same time by humans, and that the sun went supernova for 40 days (this they claim was the reported explosion, despite there being evidence of a massive string of nuclear detonations on the earth surface), sorting the computer remains (indeed all remains) into perfect order before the supernova cooled down and the sun went normal again.
So congratulations for not invoking the magic sun hypothesis.
Now, you need to develop a Theory for your inferred phenomenon of computers changing throughout time. I doubt its going to be the same as the biological theory of evolution (which you are trying to lampoon), you don't even have the starting observations of Darwin, no reproduction, no fecundity, no population stasis, no heredity. There are also no later observations, there is no mechanism that one computer can use to pass its design onto offspring. If you dig through the dirt long enough you'll also find computer factories, blueprints and design specifications. Perhaps you'll even find a computer that has not been fully built yet, a tremendous aid to your research.
I would say the evidence would clearly point to advanced tools of an advanced organism as a starting point for a theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 5:17 PM Christian7 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Darkmatic, posted 11-30-2005 9:41 AM Modulous has not replied
 Message 51 by bkelly, posted 11-30-2005 9:29 PM Modulous has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 14 of 110 (263999)
11-29-2005 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Christian7
11-28-2005 5:17 PM


The OP does not actually look like a serious attempt at an argument. Nevertheless sicne a serious answer has been requested here it is.
While the fossil record demolished the old idea of "fixity of species" it was not the key ptoof of evolution.
Evolutionary theory succeeded for the following reasons whcih are not strongly related to the fossil record:
1) It explained why taxonomy formed a nested hierarchy
2) Most importantly it explained biogeography. Both Darwin and Wallace did signiicant work in this area - and that is no coincidence.
3) There was a workable explanation based on observation
None of these applies to the example in the original post. Thus the OP does not come even close to representing the reasoning behind the acceptance of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Christian7, posted 11-28-2005 5:17 PM Christian7 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by mark24, posted 11-29-2005 5:37 AM PaulK has replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5194 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 15 of 110 (264014)
11-29-2005 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by PaulK
11-29-2005 3:01 AM


Not to mention reproduction with variation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 3:01 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by PaulK, posted 11-29-2005 6:16 AM mark24 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