|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why is evolution so controversial? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Sorry for the bad detail look at it here: http://www.johnhawks.net/...celeration/accel_story_2007.html add [blockcolor=white] and [/blockcolor] codes to get
Enjoyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2137 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
We need to talk about your points, but since I am the Creationist here (population 1). Can we stay on the immediate topic. I think that time will bring us back to your points. I see you folks going on and on about various aspects of population dynamics, with you trying to set the groundwork for a 6,000 year old modern human. And failing. But you must realize that science is a cohesive whole and you can't just pull at one thread and hope to unravel the entire construct. The evidence is absolutely against a young earth and a young human species, and it is rather unseemly for you to ignore all of that evidence and try to pursue just one very narrow approach which you think can support your beliefs. You can't just ignore huge amounts of evidence! And to keep this post directly tied into the theme of the thread: Evolution is so controversial because a small number of folks won't accept it, for religious, not scientific, reasons, and run around making a big stink. They have no evidence supporting their positions, as you are demonstrating, but make up for that lack by religious zeal and stubborn denial of the evidence that contradicts their beliefs. In other words, you can't keep ducking the dating issue as that alone disproves your beliefs.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
I am sure sfs has gone threw Hawks’s null hypothesis. I think it will put a exclamation on my point. I do not usually do this but I will let the author explain:
quote: quote: In other words, from what sfs does accept by Hawks’s method, the high rate of selection observed now (current levels) shows an impossible number of selections, if extrapolated to the past. Hawks is right sfs is clearly wrong. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Thanks RAZD..You the man, woman, thing...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: I admit there is no way to get to 6000 years from here. Sorry to disappoint you. Let us move on in the discussion, if needed radio dating. My apologies to all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1436 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Just a thought ...
If you multiply the curve for "Predicted fixed and near-fixed variants (constant rate model)" by an exponential decay curve for (correctly modeling) the loss of long sections over time you will get a curve that fits the data better than the "Predicted fixed and near-fixed variants (demographic model)" and that this would show that sfs is correct. Enjoyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Genomicus Member (Idle past 1972 days) Posts: 852 Joined: |
Let us move on in the discussion... Still waiting for your reply to my points. Either admit your argument was flawed or refute my arguments, but don't duck.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Possibly (I think most participants have had enough), as I understand it, sfs is arguing discrepancies in the methodology. When something shakes up the little world that some PhDs occupy, the first thing that goes is methodology (no matter how well accepted). You see, by my own admission, I have no skin in the game here. When was the last time you witnessed a Creationist supporting a evolutionist findings? Hawks is very set in his worldview of evolution. What gets me is the backdoor critics that rear their heads when something in science is about to change. I can not prove that sfs is wrong the same way sfs can not prove Hawks is wrong. If so, write the paper so we will read it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Genomicus...It has been a while, please let us take up one point at a time so we can all participate.
Your first point is?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
the first thing that goes is methodology How much time have you spent in a lab performing experiments? When I get results that contradict expectation, the first thing I think is: "I must have done something wrong." Why should I think otherwise?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
When something shakes up the little world that some PhDs occupy, the first thing that goes is methodology (no matter how well accepted). Why should any PhD be shaken by claims that are founded on false assumptions? There is absolutely no reason why any population should grow at the same rate throughout history.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Am I wrong to think that is procedure and not methodology. Methodology: Methodology is the systematic, theoretical analysis of the methods applied to a field of study. wiki Procedure: Instructions or recipes, a set of commands that show how to prepare or make something. wiki
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: What discussion are you referring to? Post # would help.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3440 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Really? I have spent a lot of time running down the evidence for evolution. Science is based on evidence measurable by the scientific method. I am a firm believer in empirical evidence. I would like to examine the following: Darwin’s Galapagos finches : This seems to be a trait influenced by epigenetic changes. Epigenetic changes involve switching on or off gene segments by chemical tags acting on the genome and not actually changing the genetic code. Well, where did the coding segment for the trait originate?How would Darwinian evolution explain epigenetic changes? The DNA segment not used for long stretches of time is not culled from the genome. Should it not be identifiable as a non selection in a allele cluster? Swept from the genome by a classic selective sweep.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2137 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
quote: Really? I have spent a lot of time running down the evidence for evolution. Science is based on evidence measurable by the scientific method. I am a firm believer in empirical evidence. I tend to doubt that. You are pursuing one very narrow line of evidence, and posters here have showed you where you are wrong. And there is a huge amount of evidence out there that you are ignoring--evidence which disproves the beliefs in a young earth and a recent origin for modern humans.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024