Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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:   Why is evolution so controversial?
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 240 of 969 (724347)
04-16-2014 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by Faith
04-16-2014 1:20 AM


Re: It's just a big convoluted mental construct
It would be nice if you did find a rabbit in the Precambrian but as I realized here you aren't going to because obviously the Flood, which is the only viable alternative theory, didn't happen to sort things in such a way that a mammal would be found in the Precambrian.
Um so what mechanism of the flood was responsible for burying things in a way like this.
I would get your idea if say for example every large thing was at the bottom and progressively smaller ones to the top. Or even in a reverse order, or all jumbled up. But its not they are layered in a clear order as expected by the theory of evolution.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by Faith, posted 04-16-2014 1:20 AM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 253 of 969 (724378)
04-16-2014 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by Faith
04-16-2014 2:58 PM


Re: You can't disprove a construction built out of hot air
Again, microevolution supports the creation of separate Kinds, and microevolution is observed and observable, macroevolution is not, it's pure fantasy.
Whats a Kind? its not a word used in science or evolution but a lot by creationist but no definition, what scientists need to observe so called "macroevolution" is speciation we have observed that, we dont know what a kind is maby once its defined we can go and look if we have seen that too.
Pressie wants me to look at bores from bore holes. I'm sure one can see lots of layers of different kinds of rock and fossils and so on. What one can NOT see is time periods despite his insistence that that is so. He doesn't seem to know the difference between observation and interpretation, but then that's what all this OE and Evo stuff does to a person.
If you bored a hole in to a tree to see its rings and given your knowlege of how trees grow would you conclude that the rings where made in different time periods.
If you bore a hole in some snow and found layers, and using your knowlege of the mechanics of snow would you conclude that the layers must have been layed in different time periods?
The same goes for rock layers you just lack the knowledge of geology to come to the same conclusion
Perhaps if I had another lifetime to put to the task I'd give some attention to the supposed upward changes in fossilized flora and fauna within the rock that are taken as examples of evolutionary change over time, I mean such facts as what I reported is described for the Devonian at Wikipedia, a certain kind of plant at the bottom of the rock being considered to be the evolutionary precursor to a different kind of plant higher in the rock and so on. The idea that there is a time succession is pure fantasy. It fits some sort of order you all have in your minds, but again it IS all in your minds, all this is purely mental stuff without actual reality. You have NO idea how a "vascular" plant became a "seed bearing" plant, you simply believe that's what happened and you insist all the rest of us believe it, and you get away with it for most of credulous humanity. Utter fraudulent nonsense. So anyway that's one place I'd go to prove the ToE false. Knowing it's a lost cause, again, because it IS all nothing but a mental construct and you can't fight a mental construct that is shared by a whole scientific community, it can be rationalized ad infinitum. THERE's the real unfalsifiability of the ToE.
Nope we actually look at the fossils and come to the conclusion they haveto be related. We see what you call microevolution between 2 fossils, but we see more "microevolution" between the younger one and a still younger one, and more "microevolution" between the still younger one and the dammn young one ......

http://www.blog.gurukpo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/kankal.jpg
[/img]-->
So is this micro evolution or macro and if you dont see either its because you dont want to.
Originally there was a stack of layers above that layer, which you can see on diagrams of the Grand Staircase to the north, and a butte that remains to the south of the Grand Canyon, ten or more layers to another mile or so of depth over that same vast expanse. That's a LOT of material that got eroded away to leave that fairly flat surface of the Kaibab Plateau.
And the problem is?? do you know how much material had to be eroded so Australia is relatively flat?
It strikes me as humorous that the Kaibab limestone represents a TIME PERIOD, the PERMIAN time period. How did all the time periods below it stay parallel and those above it get washed away on OE geo theory? I'm curious because I can't think of a normal geological method that would accomplish that denuding of the layer of limestone, and I wonder if it's ever even been addressed somewhere. Looks to me like anywhere you bored through it you'd discover all the same layers that we see in the Grand Canyon to a great distance north and south, all remaining continuous and parallel with the Kaibab while the upper layers are long since gone.
It takes time to erode something that is 300 feet thick yea 300 feet of dead very small critters compacted i might add. And whats with the parallel thing again of course all layers are going to be relatively parallel to each other, do you expect that one layr will deform a bit and the next one will be deposited completely flat leaving a grate big hole where the bottom one deformed?
How did all those "time periods" accumulate in their order over their supposed millions upon millions of years, all the way up to the uppermost layer in the Grand Staircase, and THEN and not sooner, just get eroded down to the Kaibab along with the eroding of the cliffs of the staircase and the faulting of the whole area here and there and the cutting of the canyons and the spilling of the lava here and there and so on, AFTER all those aeons of accumulated time. I've brought this up many times before and you all just shrug it off but it's a very very strange phenomenon to try to explain on the OE theory of time periods. IF you actually think about it, but of course that's the problem, normally it probably doesn't even get thought about, you just see that expanse of the limestone around the GC and you say Oh the Kaibab Plateau and don't ask Why are we seeing the surface of the Permian era here?
Um have you ever thought about it though where does limestone form? Under the ocean, tiny little critters die and their shells become the limestone. So it was under water for a long time and the lower layers show signs of erosion they just dint get eroded all the way before a new layer started to form on top of them. And once the area got pushed upwards, water started to dig out a channel once it dug a channel to drain all the water out the upper layers dint get effected as much by erosion as only tiny amounts of water passed over them but in the channel all those tiny amounts added up to a grate river i think it still removes 400 tones of stuff a day even though its dammed to a near crawl.
So how did all that get eroded away leaving such a nice flat plateau. Oh I know you can come up with a rationalization, I expect there will be lots of that of course rather than a real recognition of the actual implication. Just more mental conjurings to support all the other mental conjurings.
The actual implications being that the only explanation is a 900 year old man built a boat stuffed all the animals on board then god turned on the hose and watched the world drown, then when everything was dead all the animals went back home the polar bares to the pole, the koalas to Australia well Noah had time to drive them all the way on his boat, then the animals ate the magic trees and magic grass that survived the flood, and the meat eaters too cause they couldn't eat meat until there was some exrta. Noah and his family repopulated the human race, naturally meaning that we are all inbreed rednecs, cause their children had only cousins to choose from.
Or it could be flat because the Colorado river is cutting in to a rising plateau. And not eroding already established mountains to form the normal V shapped valley.
To my mind there is nothing substantial to the OE or the ToE, it's all clearly fantasy without a shred of reality to it. And again, THAT is why it is so "UNCONTROVERSIAL," it's unanswerable, unfalsifiable, unreal, just a shared delusion.
Yea but your mind does not accept any facts contradicting your established beliefs. It just gets deleted or stored in the not real files. But sorry that is not how humanity gains knowledge. Any theory, the toe, or the theory of gravity, or germ theory has to account for all the facts. Its the reason we have advanced to the computer age. Before you dint have to account for all the facts, as long as it was aright with the local religion it was probably true. And when you used facts to show your local religion has it wrong you where imprisoned, hanged, burned tortured to recant ....
But now we live in an era where knowledge is gathered by science, and the scientific method and if your ideas dint follow those procedures they go to the fantasy shelf of the library right along with Zeus, the cracken the giant turtle on with our world sits ....
So see you are allowed to your opinion, but your beliefs will still remain on the fantasy shelf. While evolution, geology, and all other theories and facts and hypothesies have their own section, because they follow da rulz
Formulation of a question
Hypothesis
Prediction
Testing
Analysis
Replication
External review
Data recording and sharing
What creationists do is skip the first 7 and demmand the 8 step.
If they folowed the procedures they would go:
Formulate a question what is responsible for al the strata layers?
Hypothesis: A giant flood layed them down
Prediction: If A giant flood deposited the lyers in that order then we should see other floods depositing similar layers in similar orders.
Testing: Taking a sample of materials from all the layers depositing them all in a giant barrel randomly, adding water and saking it up
prediction proved wrong back to the drawing board.
But if you cant see how silly your flood explanation is there is no hope for you, you poke at evolution and that's ok if evolution is true it should only make the theory stronger, but don't look at your own silly explanations . Do you really think if tomorrow we find a bunny rabbit in the proterozoic and evolution is proven to be wrong we would all jump to creationism, no we would look for an explanation using the scientific method if it where to lead us to the creation "theory" fine if not also fine.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Faith, posted 04-16-2014 2:58 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 288 of 969 (724428)
04-17-2014 5:38 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Faith
04-16-2014 8:23 PM


Re: The "Geologic Timescale" does not exist
What utter nonsense to think the ocean floor rises and falls. You guys can't even tolerate the idea of one Flood but you've got risings and fallings of land and sea to accommodate whatever scenario you think is required to fulfill your idiotic Geologic Timetable and all the rest of the Evofantasy. One layer has stuff that lives on dry land so you postulate a dry climate for that "era" but the one above it has stuff that forms normally in water, so you assume the sea rose so that that stuff could form,. THIS IS CRAZINESS.
Damnn that crazy GPS nonsense right those silly scientists measured the rise of the new Zealand Alps, to be 5 millimetres a year. Their gps must be faulty and even if its not this clearly shows the grand canyon couldn't have rose up that high in 6000 years and we all know the earth is 6000 years old. Silly scientists.
Measurement of Mountains' Rise is a First | Live Science

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Faith, posted 04-16-2014 8:23 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by Pressie, posted 04-17-2014 7:07 AM frako has not replied
 Message 308 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 3:14 PM frako has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 289 of 969 (724429)
04-17-2014 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by Faith
04-17-2014 12:39 AM


Re: The "Geologic Timescale" does not exist
I KNOW sediments are still forming, and I ALREADY SAID SO. They do not form on anything like the scale of the Geologic Column and there is no REASON FOR THEM TO HAVE STOPPED FORMING THAT COLUMN EITHER ON YOUR THEORY. They stopped because the Flood stopped.
Sure they do you are just thinking on a 6000 year time-scale, while the actual time-scale is a bit bigger, so they have way much more time to form.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 12:39 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Pressie, posted 04-17-2014 6:28 AM frako has replied
 Message 309 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 3:17 PM frako has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 290 of 969 (724430)
04-17-2014 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 265 by Faith
04-17-2014 12:29 AM


Re: The "Geologic Timescale" does not exist
AND I DON'T DOUBT THAT THERE ARE LAYERS AT THE BOTTOMN OF THE SEA SINCE I KNOW LAYERS FORM IN WATER. What I doubt is that they are like the Geo Column and that there is any way they would ever become part of the continents. AND THIS IS WHY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM, see cores, see descriptions, see exactly what they really are, what life forms if any they contain and so on. AND THEN I'D ALSO LIKE YOU TO EXPLAIN how the ocean bed is going to rise while the continents fall.
Well one giant plate pushes under the other one when they collide so the one on the bottom gets pushed down the other one up. And yes they are still going the plates move a few centimetres a year not much on a 6000 year time-scale but that time-scale is silly anyway. But on the real time-scale it makes perfect sense.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 12:29 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 311 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 3:24 PM frako has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 292 of 969 (724432)
04-17-2014 6:51 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Pressie
04-17-2014 6:28 AM


Re: The "Geologic Timescale" does not exist
um the Kalahari Basin link goes to some Nobel prize winning protocell
Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Pressie, posted 04-17-2014 6:28 AM Pressie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Pressie, posted 04-17-2014 7:08 AM frako has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 328 of 969 (724493)
04-17-2014 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by Faith
04-17-2014 3:14 PM


Re: The "Geologic Timescale" does not exist
In the Grand Canyon walls we have rocks supposedly formed in deep water over rocks supposedly formed on dry land and rocks supposedly formed in shallow water, implying a LOT of risings and fallings of either the land or the sea. Yeah that does strike me as silly.
How Crustal Plates Move: Plate Tectonics - dummies - plate tectonics for dummies
And some visual references of how the plates moved and what was going on
and a more in-depth video on how we figured this all out.
I know it strikes you as silly because all this coudlent have happened in 6000 years. but your problem is we have a lot more time to play with

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by Faith, posted 04-17-2014 3:14 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 399 of 969 (724656)
04-19-2014 4:40 AM
Reply to: Message 391 by Faith
04-18-2014 9:06 PM


Re: granite schist and basalt
Since the only "evidence" YOU have is your unreliable easily disrupted radiometric dating
What about Fluorine absorption dating, sure its just a relative dating method ie telling ou if something is older or younger then something. But it comformes nicely with radiometric dating methods, even though its using completely different principles.
Or what about optically stimulated luminescence, workes on minerals, well technically it tells us when something was buried (had no access to sunlight anymore), also conformes nicely with radiometric dating methods, even though its using completely different principles.
or Rehydroxylation dating, it tells us when the clay thingy was last wet, But it comformes nicely with radiometric dating methods, even though its using completely different principles.
Thermoluminescence dating simmilar to optically stimulated luminescence you just heat the stuff up instead of shining a birth light at it, But it comformes nicely with radiometric dating methods, even though its using completely different principles
Or any of the other 40 or so dating methods that all conform, saddly we dont have a dating method that says the earth is 6000 years old. Accept a bronze age book.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 391 by Faith, posted 04-18-2014 9:06 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 460 of 969 (724771)
04-20-2014 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 450 by Faith
04-20-2014 2:03 PM


Re: Percy bogusity from message 400 and 412
By the time we get to the Permian, a mile above the Precambrian in the GC area anyway, we have a deep water formation according to a website about the GC that I suppose I can dig up if I have to. So at that level the ocean has risen to an enormous depth, even deeper than the Flood rose I would guess, which means it has done so all over the globe of course, but this doesn't bother anybody for some reason.
Um have you considered that the landmass dropped under the sea instead of the sea rising above it.
I think the highest sea levels where some 500 million years ago about 400 meters above today's levels.
p.s. i know why you are having trouble with the rising and falling of landmass'es and continents, the time issue you need to cram it all in a period of 6000 years even though
Dendrochronology
Human Y-chromosomal ancestry
Oxidizable Carbon Ratio dating
Rock varnish
Thermoluminescence dating
say its more then 10 000 years minimum.
Coral
Fission track dating
Ice layering
Lack of DNA in fossils
Permafrost
Weathering rinds
Say its 100 000 years old minimum
Amino acid racemization
Baptistina asteroid family
Continental drift
Cosmogenic nuclide dating
Erosion
Geomagnetic reversals
Impact craters
Iron-manganese nodules
Length of the prehistoric day
Naica megacrystals
Nitrogen in diamonds
Petrified wood
Relativistic jets
Sedimentary varves
Stalactites
Space weathering
Push the minimal age of the earth to 1 000 000 years
Distant starlight
Helioseismology
Lunar retreat
Radioactive decay
push the date to a minimum of 1 000 000 000 years.
But they always complain that the Flood couldn't have done that even once, and where would that water have gone anyway?
If you want to make the claim that the flood deposited the strata layers you haveto come up with a reason how the flood could layer the strata the way its layered.
Normally when you mix different stuff in water it layers itself from the heaviest on the bottom to the lightest on top. We don't see this pattern anywhere on earth why??
the top layers in the grand canyon:
kg/m3
Limestone 2371
gypsum 2787
sandstone 2323
shale 2675
If it where deposited by a giant flood i would expect to see them in this order
sandstone
limestone
shale
gypsum
If there was a flood why did it not produce this pattern?

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Faith, posted 04-20-2014 2:03 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(3)
Message 479 of 969 (724839)
04-21-2014 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 476 by Faith
04-21-2014 12:44 PM


Re: The order of deposition beneath the Tapeats
they're just the usual Old Earth assumptions
And what evidence do you have for a young earth?? Or do you just assume its young, cause it fits your biblical world view.
Dendrochronology the study of tree rings can push the date of the earth back to a little over 11000 years.
European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA) has an ice core that goes back 740 000 years, 3270 meters of layered ice (light ice dark ice, ie winter summer).
But you don't care because you assume the bible is the word of god, And if you count how long the people lived and add it up it was 6000 years ago when Adam was talked in to eating an apple by a talking (also walking at the time) snake. And you have the nerve to claim we are making unbased assumptions.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 476 by Faith, posted 04-21-2014 12:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 489 by Faith, posted 04-21-2014 10:45 PM frako has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 493 of 969 (724889)
04-22-2014 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 489 by Faith
04-21-2014 10:45 PM


Re: There are scientific arguments against evolution
've made case after case based on various observations of such things as the strata,
Witch clearly supports an old earth.
the fossils and the decrease in genetic diversity that is the necessary result of microevolution.
Yea the fossils show a clear evolutionary pattern, and the whole microevolution thing yea i understand a little change over a little time can never become a lot of change over a lot of time sure.
I grant that both of these phenomena appear to support an Old Earth, at least an older Earth than the Biblical Young Earth. There are phenomena on both sides of the question it seems to me.
Um sure what phenomena supports a young earth?? Is there anything one can look objectivity and say hmm looks like the earth is only 6000 years old.
I SHOWED that some are making unbased assumptions.
Yea i saw you demonstrate how to make unbased assumptions, now can you start making evidence based ones.
And I KNOW the Bible is the word of God.
See this is where you get blinded, even a scientist testing gravity dosent know that gravity works the way it does, sure he might expect it to, but in order to find "truth" you have to have an open mind open to all possibilities, one of the possibilities being that the bible is just a bronze age fantasy book.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 489 by Faith, posted 04-21-2014 10:45 PM Faith has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 826 of 969 (740329)
11-04-2014 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 823 by zaius137
11-03-2014 9:43 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
and 20 years per generation
The problem is where?
how do you know the average generation is 20 years? chimps live for 35 years in the wild and reproduce at 12 years. And we don't know what the life cycles of our extinct ancestors where.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 823 by zaius137, posted 11-03-2014 9:43 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 843 by zaius137, posted 11-04-2014 1:06 PM frako has not replied
 Message 846 by Dr Jack, posted 11-04-2014 1:17 PM frako has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 961 of 969 (741409)
11-12-2014 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 960 by Percy
11-12-2014 7:56 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
i think its just the way their brain evolved differently to say remember the positions of all the fruit on the tree and the order easiest to get to all of them.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 960 by Percy, posted 11-12-2014 7:56 AM Percy has seen this message but 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