Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What evidence is needed to change a creationist
Percy
Member
Posts: 22394
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 46 of 144 (447314)
01-08-2008 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Volunteer
01-08-2008 12:33 PM


Volunteer writes:
If evolution were a fact, proven beyond doubt,...
Theories are never proven. The best they can achieve is to become accepted after an intense period of review, vefication, replication and successful predictions.
...or even a convincing theory, we could not possibly expect to see thousands of reputable scientists rejecting it outright.
Discovery Institute's list of Scientists who Dissent from Darwinism contains only about 750 names.
On the other hand, the National Center for Science Education's Project Steve currently has around 800 names supporting evolution. The catch is only scientists name Steve are allowed to sign, so since Steve's are about 1% of scientists, that means that around 80,000 scientists accept evolution.
80,000 supporters versus 750 dissenters. That's less than 1% dissenting. Can you name any successful theory supported by less than 1% of scientists?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Volunteer, posted 01-08-2008 12:33 PM Volunteer has not replied

  
Volunteer
Junior Member (Idle past 5909 days)
Posts: 21
From: Tennessee
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 47 of 144 (447749)
01-10-2008 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lithodid-Man
12-24-2007 3:33 AM


Changing my view of creation
Another thing that would be necessary is for evolution to seem more logical. If order does not come from chaos in the natural world it would not make logical sense to argue that it did with respect to origins.
If complex systems such as computers require the need of a designer to find both purpose and function it doesn't make logical sense to think that infinitely more complex systems such as the human body occurred without an intelligent agent. Logic would indicate that if something looks designed it must be designed.
Maybe someone can explain the logic in Punctuated Equilibrium (PE).
Stephen Gould and Niles Eldredge tried to explain away the fact that the fossil record showed abrupt appearance of species and stasis, or lack of substantial change, throughout a species' range in the fossil record. Eldredge and Gould stated that the abrupt appearance of species could be exlained by the transition occurring quickly, geologically speaking, in small, isolated populations such that the transitional forms would be highly unlikely to be preserved. What are Gould and Eldredge ultimately saying? What is PE? Ultimately, PE is a proposed mode of evolution. What is evolution? Is it not change? PE is supposed to be a mode of change and yet the evidence for it is stasis. But what is stasis? Is it not lack of change? So then lack of change (stasis) is the evidence for change (evolution via PE)!
Man, I have a headache. I'm going next door to play a little chess with my neighbor and think logically for a while.

"Faith is: the substance of fossils hoped for,the evidence of links unseen."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lithodid-Man, posted 12-24-2007 3:33 AM Lithodid-Man has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by DrJones*, posted 01-10-2008 6:11 PM Volunteer has not replied
 Message 49 by Coragyps, posted 01-10-2008 6:23 PM Volunteer has not replied
 Message 50 by sidelined, posted 01-10-2008 6:48 PM Volunteer has not replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 48 of 144 (447756)
01-10-2008 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Volunteer
01-10-2008 5:55 PM


Re: Changing my view of creation
If complex systems such as computers require the need of a designer to find both purpose and function it doesn't make logical sense to think that infinitely more complex systems such as the human body occurred without an intelligent agent
So by that logic a complex system such as a designer must have a even more complex designer and so on and so on and so on....
Who designed god?

soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Volunteer, posted 01-10-2008 5:55 PM Volunteer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by jaywill, posted 01-12-2008 7:07 AM DrJones* has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 49 of 144 (447763)
01-10-2008 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Volunteer
01-10-2008 5:55 PM


Re: Changing my view of creation
If order does not come from chaos in the natural world it would not make logical sense to argue that it did with respect to origins.
I'm not sure what sense of the word "chaos" you intend there, Vol. But have you ever heard of Werner Heisenberg? Or of quantum mechanics?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Volunteer, posted 01-10-2008 5:55 PM Volunteer has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 50 of 144 (447775)
01-10-2008 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Volunteer
01-10-2008 5:55 PM


Re: Changing my view of creation
Volunteer
If complex systems such as computers require the need of a designer to find both purpose and function it doesn't make logical sense to think that infinitely more complex systems such as the human body occurred without an intelligent agent.
And what of the infinitely more complex system that entails God? What would be the intelligent agency that allows for the complexity of that system?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Volunteer, posted 01-10-2008 5:55 PM Volunteer has not replied

  
Volunteer
Junior Member (Idle past 5909 days)
Posts: 21
From: Tennessee
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 51 of 144 (447821)
01-11-2008 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lithodid-Man
12-24-2007 3:33 AM


Other questions about evolution
I was unaware that this forum existed until recently and I have several unanswered questions in my mind. Evolutionary theory suggests that life evolved through minute changes witin organisms over long periods of time. If this is true, how would the heart, which requires the brain to tell it to beat, function during its intermediary stages while the brain was evolving? When did the heart, which is a whole system by itself, decide to evolve and become a complex circulatory system? How did this circulatory system evolve in small increments separate from the heart if it needs all of its parts together to function?
What about the nervous system? When did a primitive unintelligent organism decide that it needed to develop a nervous system? Why did the organism need a nervous system if it survived without one? When did a primitive organism decide it needed a muscular system, a respiratory system, and a digestive system?
How did all of these complex systems evolve separate from each other if they need to work together?

"Faith is: the substance of fossils hoped for,the evidence of links unseen."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lithodid-Man, posted 12-24-2007 3:33 AM Lithodid-Man has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by AdminNosy, posted 01-11-2008 1:41 AM Volunteer has not replied
 Message 55 by EighteenDelta, posted 01-11-2008 8:02 PM Volunteer has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 52 of 144 (447822)
01-11-2008 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Volunteer
01-11-2008 1:28 AM


Topic Control Volunteer
Hi Volunteer,
We try to control the topics in a thread here so things aren't any more chaotic than they already are.
I think you question is too far from the focus of the thread to be discussed here.
You may propose a new topic in the Proposed New Topics thread if you like. However, maybe you should do a bit of reading and research on your own first.
These kind of questions can sometimes be difficult to answer but yours are particularly easy. We have extant organisms around today who circulate "blood" without a brain for example.
The rest of your questions are based on a deep, deep lack of understanding of the evolutionary model and are best answered in another thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Volunteer, posted 01-11-2008 1:28 AM Volunteer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Archer Opteryx, posted 01-11-2008 6:00 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3598 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 53 of 144 (447854)
01-11-2008 6:00 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by AdminNosy
01-11-2008 1:41 AM


Re: Topic Control Volunteer
I second our admin, Volunteer. Looks like you already have the start of a workable OP in Message 51.
The evolution of nervous and circulatory systems is a fascinating topic. We could get a good thread out of questions like these.
Welcome to EvC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by AdminNosy, posted 01-11-2008 1:41 AM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3598 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 54 of 144 (447855)
01-11-2008 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by nwr
01-08-2008 1:27 PM


on second thought....
Volunteer:
Molecular biologist and medical doctor Michael Denton - "Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century." Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis
(Bethesda, Md: Adler & Adler Publishers, Inc. 1986), p.358.
nwr:
A quote from a review of a more recent Denton book: "From the impossibility of evolution to the inevitability of evolution: Anti-Evolutionist Michael Denton turns into an 'Evolutionist'.
Please feel free, Volunteer, to quote Denton's more recent work as well.
Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by nwr, posted 01-08-2008 1:27 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 144 (448053)
01-11-2008 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Volunteer
01-11-2008 1:28 AM


Re: Other questions about evolution
Volunteer writes:
...how would the heart, which requires the brain to tell it to beat, function during its intermediary stages while the brain was evolving? When did the heart, which is a whole system by itself, decide to evolve and become a complex circulatory system?...
Why do you suppose a brain-dead individual still has a heart beat? (No, that's not a veiled insult of creationist, I mean in the clinical sense.)
The human heart does not require the brain to tell it to beat. The heart has 3 systems to regulate the heart each with its own intrinsic rate.
Sinoatrial node (SA node)
Atrioventricular node (AV node)
And third the Purkinje fibers
Next, the heart is an organ not a system, it is part of the circulatory system. Have you taken even an intro bio course yet?
The heart doesn't require the brain for any stages of evolution. I know you think these arguments are clever, but they are simply demonstrating to the rest of us how little you know.
-x

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Volunteer, posted 01-11-2008 1:28 AM Volunteer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 01-12-2008 7:24 AM EighteenDelta has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 56 of 144 (448128)
01-12-2008 7:07 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by DrJones*
01-10-2008 6:11 PM


Re: Changing my view of creation
Who designed god?
No one. God always was. It may break my heart to admit it but that's the way I see it.
Do you think the "Cosmic Buck" stops anywhere? I do.
I think if there is anything which always was and aways will be, is ever existing and self existing, it is probably more like me than it is like a rock or a weed or even a dolphin or chimpanzee.
If anyone is an all-powerful and eternal Being, I think that Being, is more like a human being than like a chimp, an ape, or a colony of ants, or a tree, or a rock.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by DrJones*, posted 01-10-2008 6:11 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Rrhain, posted 01-13-2008 1:40 AM jaywill has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1942 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 57 of 144 (448130)
01-12-2008 7:24 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by EighteenDelta
01-11-2008 8:02 PM


Re: Other questions about evolution
I know you think these arguments are clever, but they are simply demonstrating to the rest of us how little you know.
This is a problem I have with arguing the big picture of evolution. Many knowledgeable people get down on details about bacteria or enzyms and score all these little knowledge points.
You come away saying to yourself "Well, she certainly knows more about bacteria than I do." Or you admit that on some minute small level that person has mastered the facts to expose how much they know.
But after a little while you think about the big picture again of macro evolution and it seems no more likely than before.
I find that most strigent defenders of macro evolution only like to drag you down into minute details about minute things proving the superiority of their mastering of knowledge of small issues.
It doesn't make us have more confidence that your big picture is plausible.
Okay, so you dazzle me with how much you know about proteins, and how uneducated I am about proteins. Somehow after the brow beating is over I still find it hard to believe that random minute modifications brought about the human brain from a little one celled "simplier" life without design.
( I would say piece of dirt. But then a mighty chorus would swell up "Evolution does not concerned origin of life issues. You don't understand Evolution." )

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by EighteenDelta, posted 01-11-2008 8:02 PM EighteenDelta has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2008 1:21 PM jaywill has not replied
 Message 60 by Rrhain, posted 01-13-2008 1:43 AM jaywill has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 58 of 144 (448212)
01-12-2008 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by jaywill
01-12-2008 7:24 AM


Re: Other questions about evolution
But after a little while you think about the big picture again of macro evolution and it seems no more likely than before.
It doesn't make us have more confidence that your big picture is plausible.
... I still find it hard to believe that random minute modifications brought about the human brain from a little one celled "simplier" life without design.
Have you ever defined what you think the "big picture" is made up from? If you want to discuss things as a "macro" level you need to start with defining what constitutes macro versus what constitutes micro.
See:
MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?
Dogs will be Dogs wil be ???
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 01-12-2008 7:24 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 59 of 144 (448346)
01-13-2008 1:40 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by jaywill
01-12-2008 7:07 AM


Re: Changing my view of creation
jaywill responds to DrJones*:
quote:
quote:
Who designed god?
No one. God always was.
So if god doesn't need a creator, why does the universe? What's so special about god? If you're willing to concede that there are some things that do not need outside direction, why can't the universe be one of those things?
quote:
Do you think the "Cosmic Buck" stops anywhere? I do.
Why can't it stop with the universe? If you're going to concede that it has to stop, why can't the universe be that place?
Note: Cosmogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by jaywill, posted 01-12-2008 7:07 AM jaywill has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 60 of 144 (448347)
01-13-2008 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by jaywill
01-12-2008 7:24 AM


Re: Other questions about evolution
jaywill writes:
quote:
But after a little while you think about the big picture again of macro evolution and it seems no more likely than before.
If 1 + 1 = 2, why can't 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 10?
"Macroevolution" is nothing more than a lot of "microevolution." So if you're willing to concede that evolution happens, why can't it happen as much as you like?
How does the genome know that it isn't allowed to evolve anymore?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by jaywill, posted 01-12-2008 7:24 AM jaywill 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