Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Science is Revealed Truth
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 74 of 150 (808259)
05-09-2017 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Coyote
05-09-2017 11:00 AM


Re: Poe?
Poe's Law: Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.
And David's posts are so off the wall they makes detecting a Poe all but impossible.
Spam in, diarrhea out.
See Message 65 for example. The first paragraph is the hook, then the trolling starts, followed by the diarrhea ...
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : example

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 71 by Coyote, posted 05-09-2017 11:00 AM Coyote has not replied

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


(3)
Message 83 of 150 (808389)
05-10-2017 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by Davidjay
05-10-2017 12:01 PM


Re: DJ is educated and experienced
Spiritality is testable, as I mentioned. Jesus is testable as I mentioned, the invisable can be tested.
And evolution can not be tested, only theorised. You can try to make new artistic graphs, and suggest bone A fits into Bone B, but suggestions and quesses are not proofs.
It appears that you don't know what "testable" means in the scientific context, because in the context of science both these statements are false.
The only one being fooled by your statements is you.
You lose again.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 81 by Davidjay, posted 05-10-2017 12:01 PM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 87 of 150 (808864)
05-14-2017 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by Davidjay
05-13-2017 8:52 AM


Revealed truth.... and some dB coding tips
This just goes to page 15 on that thread. People can set page preferences for the number of messages on a page, and thus they would get different results from your preferences.
A better way to refer to a message is to use the grey number in the header, and the message header in question has:
Message 215 of 286 (807084)
This grey number is a unique identifier for that particular message that can be used as follows:
type [mid=807084] and it becomes: Message 215
PS) I apologise sort of to all those that I may have referred to as bat people, when apparrently, bats are our cousins and nephews and not our forefathers. The wierd branching threw me off and your explanations and family tree was way to far fetched for me.
We have a winner, you learned something. You may not fully accept it (yet), but you learned what the argument is and corrected your previous misunderstanding. The cognitive dissonance you were experiencing has been resolved, it seems.
Evolutionists usually say I misunderstand and that only evolutionists understand evolution. But isn;t Coragyp saying that
Eurachonta is our ancestor... but its long extinct and probably has no verification in bones opr fossils, but it was our ancestor.. according to the theory of evolution.
Not just bones and fossils, but also by DNA analysis. Just as DNA analysis can show paternity and descent in living people, comparing DNA between siblings and someone not closely related shows more in common between the siblings than between either one and the outgroup person. This type analysis is also done between species and is another way to check\determine our tree of ancestry for species:
quote:
Euarchontoglires (synonymous with Supraprimates) is a clade and a superorder of mammals, the living members of which belong to one of the five following groups: rodents, lagomorphs, treeshrews, colugos and primates.
The Euarchontoglires clade is based on DNA sequence analyses and retrotransposon markers that combine the clades Glires (Rodentia + Lagomorpha) and Euarchonta (Scandentia + Primates + Dermoptera).[citation needed] So far, few if any anatomical features that support Euarchontoglires have been recognized, nor does any strong evidence from anatomy support alternative hypotheses.
quote:
Laurasiatheria is a superorder of placental mammals that originated on the northern supercontinent of Laurasia 99 million years ago. The superorder includes shrews, pangolins, bats, whales, carnivorans, odd-toed and even-toed ungulates, among others.
Laurasiatheria was discovered on the basis of the similar gene sequences shared by the mammals belonging to it; no anatomical features have yet been found that unite the group. Laurasiatheria is a clade usually discussed without a Linnaean rank, but has been assigned the rank of cohort or magnorder, and superorder. The Laurasiatheria clade is based on DNA sequence analyses and retrotransposon presence/absence data. The name comes from the theory that these mammals evolved on the supercontinent of Laurasia, after it split from Gondwana when Pangaea broke up. It is a sister group to Euarchontoglires (or Supraprimates) with which it forms the clade Boreoeutheria. ...
quote:
Boreoeutheria (synonymous with Boreotheria) (Greek: βόρειο "north" + ευ "good" + θεριό "beast") is a clade (magnorder) of placental mammals that is composed of the sister taxa Laurasiatheria (most hoofed mammals, most pawed carnivores, and several other groups) and Euarchontoglires (Supraprimates). It is now well supported by DNA sequence analyses, as well as retrotransposon presence or absence data.
The earliest known fossils belonging to this group date to about 65 million years ago, shortly after the K-Pg extinction event, though molecular data suggest they may have originated earlier, during the Cretaceous period.[1]
Also see Classification
and Cladogram
So where does Euarchonta fit into this scheme of things?
quote:
The Eurachonta are a proposed grandorder of mammals containing four orders: the Dermoptera or colugos, the Scandentia or treeshrews, the extinct Plesiadapiformes, and the Primates.
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Superorder: Euarchontoglires
Grandorder: Euarchonta

Euarchonta is a subgroup of Euarchontoglires, and hence a subgroup of Boreoeutheria, so recent analysis (March and April 2017) has put our common ancestor (Boreoeutheria) with bats even further back in time.
Revealed by genetic testing rather than bones and fossils (which are in short supply at this point).
I find these explorations into scientific details interesting and exciting, as I am always learning new tidbits along the way, and that is one of the reasons I keep coming back to the forum -- to find new truths that science has revealed.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : .

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 84 by Davidjay, posted 05-13-2017 8:52 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


(2)
Message 98 of 150 (809035)
05-15-2017 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Davidjay
05-15-2017 9:44 AM


Re: Revealed truth.... we came from extinct clade Euarchonta
So I reread the Scientific American Article, Introducing the Treeshrews: They Don't All Live in Trees and They Aren't Close to Shrews, and nowhere in the article did it say that tree shrews were ancestral to primates (and hence to people), so Davidjay's continued assertion to this effect is making the same mistake he made with bats. It's the same pattern of claim and insinuation without any apparent acceptance of corrections.
Treeshrews were suppose to be our primate ancestor, not a cousin or a brother, but a forefather.... all four of you said it, and finally answered what evolution believes in, as our common ancestor.
This statement is clearly false, and was never said by the article he refers to (but doesn't quote) nor any post in any of these threads. Repeating falsehoods aggressively and rejecting correct information is not debate.
What the article says about the descent of tree shrews:
quote:
Treeshrews: where in the placental family tree? Traditionally, treeshrews were regarded as members of Insectivora, this being due both to their highly superficial similarity to shrews, and to the idea that Insectivora should serve as a catch-all group for a poorly defined, amorphous group of placentals that lack the specialisations of other lineages. During the 1920s, Wilfred Le Gros Clark and Albertina Carlsson made it obvious that treeshrews share anatomical characters with Primates (Huxley had also noted this connection in 1872), and this eventually led to the proposal that they should be removed from Insectivora and placed within that group (Simpson 1945, Sargis 2004).
However, treeshrews are so different from classic primates — and so obviously outside the clade that includes all ‘true’ primates fossil and living — that the idea of distinct, ordinal status became increasingly popular from the 1960s onwards (Van Valen 1965, McKenna 1966, Szalay 1968). Today they are universally identified as the isolated group Scandentia*. Bony features used to unite Scandentia mostly concern details of braincase vasculature but fusion of the scaphoid and lunate in the wrist also appears distinctive (Silcox et al. 2005).
Current molecular consensus for euarchontans and kin.
Other phylogenetic hypotheses are available.
Treeshrews might not be part of Primates, but they do share anatomical characters (in the skeleton and in numerous organ systems) with primates as well as with the so-called flying lemurs (Dermoptera). The idea that they’re part of the placental group Euarchonta is therefore universally accepted more or less (read on). Some molecular studies suggest an especially close relationship between treeshrews and flying lemurs (Murphy et al. 2001, Olson et al. 2005, Springer et al. 2007, Prasad et al. 2008, Asher et al. 2009). This hypothesis has become quite popular and the clade that contains the two has been termed Sundatheria (Olson et al. 2005) or Paraprimates (Springer et al. 2007). ‘Sundatheria’ refers to the idea that these mammals are strongly associated with Sundaland, the biogeographical region that incorporates Borneo, Sumatra, peninsula Malaysia and the adjacent continental shelf region that would have been exposed during times of low sea level. ...
It is hard to see how anyone doing even a cursory reading of the article could come to the conclusion that it says treeshrews are ancestral to humans, particularly when that picture show a clear and unambiguous cladogram with primates and Scandentia evolving separately from their Euarconta common ancestor.
Euarconta is neither Primate nor Scandentia, but ancestral to both.
Only a loser would try to beat people over the head with demonstrably false information.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 93 by Davidjay, posted 05-15-2017 9:44 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 100 of 150 (809063)
05-16-2017 5:37 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Dr Adequate
05-15-2017 4:35 PM


Re: Revealed truth.... we came from extinct clade Euarchonta
So this mysterious non existant clade of Euarchonta... is suppose to be our ancestor.......
No. Euarchonta contains over 400 living species. It is not extinct. Nor is it "supposed to be our ancestor".
He's talking about the first, parent population common ancestor to all currently living descendants, and apparently still doesn't understand how clades work.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-15-2017 4:35 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-16-2017 10:12 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

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


(1)
Message 106 of 150 (809162)
05-16-2017 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Taq
05-16-2017 10:42 AM


Re: Revealed truth.... we came from oldest (parent population of the clade Euarchonta
Quote?
So he's doing the same thing he did with bats, making false assertions about what people are telling him.
Tree shrews and humans share a common ancestor that was neither human nor tree shrew, just the oldest (parent) population of the clade Euarchonta.
Even the article he posted shows the cladogram with this picture in it (see Windsor castle):
Current molecular consensus for euarchontans and kin.
Other phylogenetic hypotheses are available.
It is hard to see how anyone doing even a cursory reading of the article could come to the conclusion that it says treeshrews are ancestral to humans, particularly when that picture show a clear and unambiguous cladogram with primates and Scandentia evolving separately from their Euarcontan common ancestor.
The oldest (parent) population of the clade Euarchonta is neither Primate nor Scandentia, but ancestral to both.
Only a loser would try to beat people over the head with demonstrably false information.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 103 by Taq, posted 05-16-2017 10:42 AM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Diomedes, posted 05-16-2017 3:43 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

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


(2)
Message 109 of 150 (809751)
05-20-2017 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Davidjay
05-20-2017 11:54 AM


Which thread do you want this answered on? Updated
You've posted exactly the same thing on FIVE threads (so far anyway), which is spamming and a troll trait.
This one
Evolution is a racist doctrine Message 347
A good summary of so called human evolution. Message 127
The story of Bones and Dogs and Humans Message 8
and
Debunking the Evolutionary God of 'Selection' Message 228
See A good summary of so called human evolution. Message 131 for reply
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 108 by Davidjay, posted 05-20-2017 11:54 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 111 of 150 (809793)
05-21-2017 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Diomedes
05-04-2017 1:22 PM


Re: Real Scientists test out Jesus !
Science is independent of scientists:
That's why truths\facts\reality will be revealed through science ...
Enjoy
Excerpted from Dark Science #76 – The Epistemological Impasse – Dresden Codak

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 50 by Diomedes, posted 05-04-2017 1:22 PM Diomedes has not replied

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


Message 127 of 150 (811111)
06-05-2017 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 126 by xongsmith
06-04-2017 5:26 PM


Re: Jay having coffee.... and revealing truths
Perhaps you might want to read an old thread here:
At first I thought you were going to revive a thread of one of our deceased members, robinrohan
Comments on EvC Forum: A Play (although that was about drinking stuff a little more intoxicating than coffee).
the bluegenes Challenge (bluegenes and RAZD only), that old humorous discussion revolving around the fact that religion cannot be evaluated scientifically, because it can not be proven nor disproven, it cannot be tested.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 126 by xongsmith, posted 06-04-2017 5:26 PM xongsmith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by Davidjay, posted 06-05-2017 10:07 AM RAZD has replied

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


(4)
Message 130 of 150 (811161)
06-05-2017 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Davidjay
06-05-2017 10:07 AM


Re: Jay having coffee.... and lying about truths and trolling again
What you have said that is relevant to the discussion is ...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Is a lot of hot air signifying nothing.
Assertions are not evidence, opinion is not evidence, ego is not evidence.
Lies are not evidence. Trolling is not debate.
When you have something of substance to say post it and then we will see.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 129 by Davidjay, posted 06-05-2017 10:07 AM Davidjay has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by Davidjay, posted 06-05-2017 10:01 PM RAZD has replied

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


Message 136 of 150 (811242)
06-06-2017 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Davidjay
06-05-2017 10:01 PM


Jay trolling again !
On topic, and a complete answer.
No, off topic and completely irrelevant. This thread is about Science and the truths that are revealed by the scientific method, not about any other revealed truths (especially those of questionable veracity).
And NO, thats not spamming, ...
And YES, it is spamming - things you have repeated in virtually every post of yours on every thread you have infected regardless of the topic of the thread is spamming.
Once again the content you have posted that is related to the topic is the sound of one hand clapping in a secluded wood.
There is more scientific evidence in the frass of ants in Antarctica than in your posts.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 131 by Davidjay, posted 06-05-2017 10:01 PM Davidjay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Phat, posted 06-06-2017 9:58 AM RAZD 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