|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How do you define the word Evolution? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
I don't know how to quantify genetic information ... yet. Would you like me to ask Chicko how he does it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes:
That's not a very nice thing to say.
Idiocy. That's all really, just 100% stupid.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Darwinsim can't be separated from the theory of common descent. "Evolution" in biology can't be separared from Darwinism.
Think of the science of biology as being covered by a big blanket with "Darwinism .... evolution ... common descent" written all over it. If you pull the blanket away you will find true biology, alive and well. If you won't listen to me, will you listen to Chicko?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes: Care to give an example? The fossil record.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
If you want to learn more about the fossil record, read creationist science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
In graduate school, all you'll get is the fossil record according to the atheist cult of Darwinism.
Pierre-P. Grasse: "Assuming that the Darwinian hypothesis ... [paleontologists then] interpret fossil data according to it .... The error in their method is obvious."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Coyote writes: Grasse died in 1895 Er, no; you got that slightly wrong ... he was born in 1895! He died in 1985. Pierre-Paul was a zoologist and was highly esteemed by his peers. He was at one point President of the French Academy of Sciences, was the author of over 300 publications and received many official honours for his contributions to science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes: You mine-quoted a guy that died in the nineteenth century? Wrong (see post # 673). And you've obviously missed the irony here - your messiah, Charles Darwin, died in the nineteenth century, yet you see no problem in quoting him! The pot just called the kettle, black.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
NewCat's Eye writes:
Fuzzy enuf for Darwinist charlatans to play silly-buggers with.
Biology IS fuzzy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
NewCat'sEye writes:
That's not a very nice thing to say.
Are you retarded?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Lenski's E-coli are often cited as an example of evolution, but I've noticed that biologists consider it to be some kind of no-no to cite same as evidence that supports the theory that all life shares a common ancestor. Why? Dredge's fraglie egg-shell mind is confused.
Help ... me ... help ... Dredge ... not waving ... drowning ... Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes: No biologist doubts common descent. I don't doubt "common descent" either ... or "evolution". But I don't accept that humans and chimps share a common ancestor.
wikipedia writes:
... which makes perfect sense if all life was created by the same Creator.
All known forms of life are based on the same fundamental biochemical organisation
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Ringo writes: There's nothing unimaginative about using it ONCE. What's unimaginative is doing the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over again.Which is the more sensible approach? ... invent a different system for each one of the millions of species of organisms on earth, or use the same system for each one? Well, of course real designers DO develop those things using different methods: flight can be lighter-than-air, heavier-than air, fixed-wing, rotary-wing, etc. Echolocation can be by sound, by radio waves, by lasers, etc. oShow me a biological zeppelin.
But on the other hand, humans have a long history of borrowing ideas from nature to build stuff. Would humans have ever thought of flight if they hadn't seen birds doing it? Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tangle writes:
Dunno. Could be a few years ... or millions ... or billions. How old is the earth? --------------------------------- I accept that a sheep dog descended from a wolf - this is common descent. I accept that some bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics - this is evolution. But I don't accept that humans and chimps share a common ancestor - this is an atheist myth. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
RAZD writes:
1. Humans descending from a microbe is evolution.
Dredge writes:
It's not a no-no so much as a non-sequitur. The experiments show different lines of anagenesis all starting with one cloned organism and then dividing the offspring of following generation. Lenski's E-coli are often cited as an example of evolution, but I've noticed that biologists consider it to be some kind of no-no to cite same as evidence that supports the theory that all life shares a common ancestor. Why? ... Why would it be evidence for "the theory that all life shares a common ancestor" Dredge?2.Lenski's E-coli demonstated evolution. There must be a connection between 1 and 2. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024