|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
RAZD writes:
Oh, please elaborate! This sounds like a classical case of Darwinist dreaming.
To me, personally, evolutionary theory has helped me on how to predict the quality and quantity of Gondwana coal and where that coal would be found underground.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
herebedragons writes: Do you work in a biological science? I do, as do several others here. I am sure we would all agree that common ancestry has added incredible value to biological science. It provides much of the basis for everything we do. Maybe we don't think on the scale of microbes to man evolution in our everyday work, the principles involved are solid and the Theory of Evolution is absolutely foundational and the unifying theory in biology. Nonsense. Your Darwinist rhetoric and sophistry don't fool me. Common descent is a conclusion, based on certain scientific facts. It is those facts that are useful to applied biology, not said conclusion. Perhaps you are too brainwashed or too deluded to recognise the difference. The truth is, the conclusion of common ancestry is a scientific irrelevance and is utterly useless in any practical sense. Therefore, contrary to your claim, the concept of common descent has contributed nothing to the advancement of science. It is for this reason that someone who completely rejects common descent (a creationist Christian, for example) can be just as competent in the field of applied biology as someone who believes that all life on earth evolved from microbes. Applied biology relies on facts and reality, not useless tales from ancient history.
Of course we can't absolutely demonstrate that it DID happen. Of course we can't do an experiment in the lab to show beyond a doubt that it did happen. But we have consistent evidence that supports the hypothesis. It seems to me that you can't tell the difference between evidence and an assumption (delusion tends to have this effect on the mind). All you have is an assumption - that a piece of a reptile's jawbone evolved into the bones of a mammal's inner ear. But you can't demonstrate that any piece of any jawbone has ever evolved into the bones of any inner ear - ever. Since when do assumptions add up to "evidence"? This isn't science, it's just story-telling. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
dwise1 writes:
I think you must be confusing me with someone else.
You fucking evil hypocrite! your false religion
Catholicism is not a false religion. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
RAZD writes: What is "happening all around us" are the processes of evolution -- anagenesis and cladogenesis. Okay,- anagenesis is lineal change within a species and therefore has nothing to do with macroevolutionary changes. - cladogenesis is speciation. I fail to see how Green Warblers speciating into more Green Warblers is evidence that they are on there way to evolving into eagles or pelicans or whatever. Green Warblers speciating into more Green Warblers will form a nested hierarchy, no doubt, but only of Green Warblers. So your answer doesn't help me understand what is "happening all around us" that provides evidence of macroevolution.
The theory of evolution has contributed to the advancement of medicine and breeding of pets, livestock and food plants.
None of which depends one iota on accepting the conclusion of common descent. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
You can't prove that a piece of a reptile's jaw bone evolved into the inner ear bones of a mammal - you can't even prove that such a thing is possible. So all you have is a story based on endless assumptions and blind faith. Only in the fake science of evolution do assumptions and blind faith carry the same weight as empirical evidence.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
dwise1 writes:
I only have one religion - Catholicism. Catholics who accept evolution are not practising true Catholicism.
Why are you dragging Catholicism into this? I didn't say anything about Catholicism, but rather I was talking about your false religion: creationism based on "creation science".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
ringo writes: And even if the Green Party candidate gets 80% of those 0.033 % of the votes, we can safely predict that he isn't going to be President - because of the other evidence. Don't mention the Green Party ever again; they're demonic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Percy writes:
Okay. It's been a very long time since I studied statistics but it seems weird to me that these predictions can be made without knowing the totlal size of the electorate. My fragile, egg-shell mind has a great of trouble dealing with that. Someone somewhere better be able to provide a mathematical proof for such a freaky fact, otherwise there's going to be hell to pay. I know it might seem that way, but as long as the sample is random you only need a sample size of 1700 to 1800 to achieve a confidence factor of 95%. The size of the electorate does not matter as long as the sampling is random. Predicting elections has other sources of error, such as making sure the sample is random and determining who is likely to vote, but the statistical math behind what I’m telling you is solid. Anyhow, I would imagine a statistical analysis of fossils would be much more complicated and prone to uncertainties than the statistical analysis of an election.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
RAZD writes:
My fragile, egg-shell mind is having trouble dealing with this question. Please don't ask it again.
Care to give us your definition of macroevolution so that we can talk about it the same way? What is macroevolution?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
DrAdequate writes: Does that include the Pope? Of course it does. You can't expect much from a Jesuit. The Jesuits are the most corrupted order in a very corrupted Church.
But perhaps we are digressing from the topic, which is how we have the fossils, and win.
What do you "win"? Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Your questions are too deep for my shallow, fragile, egg-shell mind. Please do not ask them again.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
If you have won the argument that all life on earth evolved from microbes, then you have won nothing - it is completely useless information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
The conclusion/hypothesis that all life evolved from microbes is "nice to know" for atheists, but to science , it's "useless to know". So for all intents and purposes, it's a philosophical/psychological argument, not a scientific one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
The evolutionists who says, "We have the fossils - we win" is the like the believer in aliens who says, "We have the crop circles - we win."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
No, I'm not saying you did. Dredge said I have a shallow, fragile, egg-shell mind.
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