Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is evolution so controversial?
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 166 of 969 (724195)
04-14-2014 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by vimesey
04-14-2014 10:22 AM


Re: Why so hostile?
student exchange programme....
More likely a 'buffoon' exchange program. You Brits and your spelling, it's as if you think that you invented English.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by vimesey, posted 04-14-2014 10:22 AM vimesey has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 167 of 969 (724196)
04-14-2014 1:08 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by NoNukes
04-14-2014 9:20 AM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
I think what Faith was trying to say is that we are unlikely to find a cow skeleton down there even if the earth were only 6000 years old and that we have deliberately picked something difficult to find.
If the earth is only 6000 years old, cow skeletons in those lower strata should be pretty easy to find, but we haven't. If her scenario was correct all the fossils in the world would be a jumbled, totally mixed mess. There would be no layering.
By having a list of things and giving general ways for creationists to compose examples of their own, the impression of deck stacking is avoided. Of course there is more reliance on the logical thought processes of creationists...
Maybe we should have a thread where we list all the things we can think of that could falsify the ToE.
The deck actually is stacked. It's stacked with all the evidence that confirms the ToE. That overwhelming stack of evidence does completely falsify Faith's arguments in genetics, evolution, geology, and the flood.
Every single argument she has ever made in the science discussions has been flattened by the stacked deck of evidence. Never once has she presented a valid piece of evidence or demonstrated an understanding of a scientific subject.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by NoNukes, posted 04-14-2014 9:20 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Percy, posted 04-14-2014 1:32 PM Tanypteryx has replied
 Message 173 by NoNukes, posted 04-14-2014 3:52 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


(5)
Message 168 of 969 (724198)
04-14-2014 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Tanypteryx
04-14-2014 1:08 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Tanypteryx writes:
If the earth is only 6000 years old, cow skeletons in those lower strata should be pretty easy to find, but we haven't. If her scenario was correct all the fossils in the world would be a jumbled, totally mixed mess. There would be no layering.
[Faith]"You're forgetting that this is an immense flood and would behave differently than normal floods. It would sort sediment into different layers, and it would also sort animals and plants into these layers in a way precisely resembling an evolutionary progression (which is what huge floods do), and it would also transport entire burrows and egg clutches and even footprints intact. The flood will create both marine and terrestrial layers (no, it isn't contradictory, you just have no idea what a flood this big can do), and it will keep land animals from being deposited in marine layers, and marine animals from being deposited in terrestrial layers.
"The sediment carried and deposited by the flood was eroded from the Earth's surface during the flood, or it wasn't, I can change on a dime on this point. Some canyons were carved by catastrophic releases of water from high altitude lakes left over from the flood, some weren't, but you can't tell which are which, you have to ask me and I'll tell you, though I'll be so vague you'll never know what I'm actually saying, and then I'll accuse you of misrepresenting what I say."
[/Faith]
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-14-2014 1:08 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-14-2014 2:20 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 172 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 3:06 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 169 of 969 (724199)
04-14-2014 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by shadow71
04-12-2014 7:43 PM


Re: This is becoming tiresome
In a nutshell;
Shapiro denies random mutation and natural selection, and postulates natural genetic engineering. His findings confirm his theory that evolution is not random, that the genetic engineering of the cells is driven by sentient changes in answer to the environmental events that occur.
I have shown you in extensive threads that Shapiro is indeed invoking random mutations and natural selection. He just tries to rename them in a bit of showmanship. That's it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by shadow71, posted 04-12-2014 7:43 PM shadow71 has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 170 of 969 (724200)
04-14-2014 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Percy
04-14-2014 1:32 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Percy writes:
[Faith]"You're forgetting that this is an immense flood and would behave differently than normal floods. It would sort sediment into different layers, and it would also sort animals and plants into these layers in a way precisely resembling an evolutionary progression (which is what huge floods do), and it would also transport entire burrows and egg clutches and even footprints intact. The flood will create both marine and terrestrial layers (no, it isn't contradictory, you just have no idea what a flood this big can do), and it will keep land animals from being deposited in marine layers, and marine animals from being deposited in terrestrial layers.
"The sediment carried and deposited by the flood was eroded from the Earth's surface during the flood, or it wasn't, I can change on a dime on this point. Some canyons were carved by catastrophic releases of water from high altitude lakes left over from the flood, some weren't, but you can't tell which are which, you have to ask me and I'll tell you, though I'll be so vague you'll never know what I'm actually saying, and then I'll accuse you of misrepresenting what I say."[/Faith]
And she says it all in a tone that implies everyone else are complete idiots for not immediately bowing down and praising her insightful logic and knowledge.
She would have more credibility if she told us that god and satan had a wager and satan had created the earth to look 4.5 billion years old just to test our faith in god.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Percy, posted 04-14-2014 1:32 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 171 of 969 (724201)
04-14-2014 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Bolder-dash
04-14-2014 7:04 AM


Like these guys you mean:
That is not what I meant since that is not what I said. Here it is again.
You count the number of scientists who reject evolution, have a degree in the biological sciences, and whose first name is Steve (or a derivation thereof, such as Estaban or Stephanie). I will do the same for the number of scientists who do accept evolution as the best explanation for biodiveristy in biology.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Bolder-dash, posted 04-14-2014 7:04 AM Bolder-dash has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-14-2014 10:13 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(3)
Message 172 of 969 (724202)
04-14-2014 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Percy
04-14-2014 1:32 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
[Faith]"You're forgetting that this is an immense flood and would behave differently than normal floods. It would sort sediment into different layers, and it would also sort animals and plants into these layers in a way precisely resembling an evolutionary progression (which is what huge floods do), and it would also transport entire burrows and egg clutches and even footprints intact. The flood will create both marine and terrestrial layers (no, it isn't contradictory, you just have no idea what a flood this big can do), and it will keep land animals from being deposited in marine layers, and marine animals from being deposited in terrestrial layers.
"The sediment carried and deposited by the flood was eroded from the Earth's surface during the flood, or it wasn't, I can change on a dime on this point. Some canyons were carved by catastrophic releases of water from high altitude lakes left over from the flood, some weren't, but you can't tell which are which, you have to ask me and I'll tell you, though I'll be so vague you'll never know what I'm actually saying, and then I'll accuse you of misrepresenting what I say."
[/Faith]
--Percy
To think that Faith has the audacity to accuse others of adhering to unfalsifiable claims. Her ultimate explanation is, "The Flood acted against every known geologic and physical process in order to produce a fossil record that exactly matches the known and observed processes of evolution acting over millions of years".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Percy, posted 04-14-2014 1:32 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 173 of 969 (724206)
04-14-2014 3:52 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by Tanypteryx
04-14-2014 1:08 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
If the earth is only 6000 years old, cow skeletons in those lower strata should be pretty easy to find, but we haven't.
Fossils are always tough to find.
I'm not really trying to defend Faith's comment. I know that it is not defensible. What I am saying that the comment is that it is not flat out stupid given a high level of ignorance and arrogance of the commentor.
I was trying to leave it as something a little more positive than that but you guys pushed me to be more specific.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-14-2014 1:08 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 3:59 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 174 of 969 (724207)
04-14-2014 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Tanypteryx
04-14-2014 12:38 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
quote:
I do remember that there were some surprises when the DNA comparisons of families in Class Aves (birds) were completed. For example, if I remember correctly, Old World Vultures and New World Vultures were not closely related. Old World Vultures and Storks were related and New World Vultures and birds of prey were related.
  —Tanypteryx
I'm sure there are lots of surprises and equally lots of problems that were solved. But there were no occasions where storks were found to be closely related to, say, worms or dogs and if we found any it would be a real problem - equivalent to the rabbit in the cambrian but very easy to find - unlike the rabbit.
quote:
I think it is more likely that we would develop a separate Theory of Evolution for XYZ life. This is what we will do when we discover extraterrestrial life.
We'd have to wouldn't we? Because the current one wouldn't fit. If we found that the stork and the vulture had totally different molecular makeup and pigs and horses another, it would make a proper mess. and if the toE was wrong, it could easily have done that.
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-14-2014 12:38 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 175 of 969 (724209)
04-14-2014 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by NoNukes
04-14-2014 3:52 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Fossils are always tough to find.
Indeed. However, when you fail to find a single mammal, from a cat to a gopher to a rabbit, in the Devonian or anything below it . . . I think a light bulb should go off.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by NoNukes, posted 04-14-2014 3:52 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-14-2014 10:58 PM Taq has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 176 of 969 (724225)
04-14-2014 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Taq
04-14-2014 2:53 PM


Not all the Steves in the Project Steve list are biological scientists
Taq writes:
Bolder-dash writes:
Like these guys you mean:
That is not what I meant since that is not what I said. Here it is again.
You count the number of scientists who reject evolution, have a degree in the biological sciences, and whose first name is Steve (or a derivation thereof, such as Estaban or Stephanie). I will do the same for the number of scientists who do accept evolution as the best explanation for biodiveristy in biology.
Reference links:
The main "Project Steve" page - Project Steve | National Center for Science Education
The "Steve" list - List of Steves | National Center for Science Education
You are implying (at the minimum) that all the scientists of the "Project Steve" list have biology related degrees. Not all do, and that was what Bolder-dash was pointing out in message 152.
The "Project Steve" list (see main page) seems to require some variety of science degree but not a biology related degree (although many do indeed have biology related degrees).
I repeat one of Bolder-dash's examples:
quote:
Stephen Robert Anderson
Professor of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, Yale University
Ph.D., Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
I think that Bolder-dash had indeed made a valid point, to counter anyone who promotes the "Project Steve" list as being made up of only biological scientists.
Moose

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith
"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien
"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 2:53 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 10:44 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied
 Message 181 by NoNukes, posted 04-15-2014 8:36 AM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 177 of 969 (724226)
04-14-2014 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by Minnemooseus
04-14-2014 10:13 PM


Re: Not all the Steves in the Project Steve list are biological scientists
You are implying (at the minimum) that all the scientists of the "Project Steve" list have biology related degrees.
Actually, I never mentioned Project Steve in any of my posts, although those in the know would have jumped to that conclusion.
I think that Bolder-dash had indeed made a valid point, to counter anyone who promotes the "Project Steve" list as being made up of only biological scientists.
I agree. The NCSE should edit that list.
Just by a quick skim, I would say that around 70% of the Steve's on that list would fit my criteria. If we cut the list in half, I would also suspect that we would have 100 fold more Steve's that support evolution than the number Steve's who reject it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-14-2014 10:13 PM Minnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 178 of 969 (724227)
04-14-2014 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Taq
04-14-2014 3:59 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Indeed. However, when you fail to find a single mammal, from a cat to a gopher to a rabbit, in the Devonian or anything below it . . . I think a light bulb should go off.
A sudden moment of endarkenment?
Or do you mean "on"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 3:59 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Taq, posted 04-14-2014 11:11 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 179 of 969 (724229)
04-14-2014 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Dr Adequate
04-14-2014 10:58 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
A sudden moment of endarkenment?
Or do you mean "on"?
"On" would be better, but "off" sadly still works in twisted American vernacular. It is one of those cases where words take on the opposite meaning, such as "setting an alarm off" means that you triggered it on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-14-2014 10:58 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 180 of 969 (724230)
04-15-2014 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by Theodoric
04-14-2014 9:44 AM


Namibia/Russia same place
Well, I won't be surprised if American Fundie College kids are taught:
Namibia/Russia, same evil place. They all vote for that gay Muslim Communist Obama
Although, him being in Russia might explain the biology teacher he claimed to have had. Probably trained in the Lysenko era.
Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Off-topic banner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Theodoric, posted 04-14-2014 9:44 AM Theodoric 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