Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 89 (8876 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-10-2018 5:46 AM
200 online now:
PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (3 members, 197 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Bill Holbert
Post Volume:
Total: 843,739 Year: 18,562/29,783 Month: 507/2,043 Week: 59/386 Day: 9/50 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
8485
86
878889Next
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1276 of 1321 (843577)
11-19-2018 1:50 PM
Reply to: Message 1275 by AZPaul3
11-17-2018 4:48 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
What was left here does not tell us what nature existed. Noah was left. Yet he looked the same more or less I assume. What could you tell if you had dissected Noah about the former nature???

People looked the same after the nature change, they just started to live a lot less years.

Since we do not have DNA from early man we can't use that. So what DO you have??


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1275 by AZPaul3, posted 11-17-2018 4:48 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1278 by AZPaul3, posted 11-19-2018 6:49 PM creation has responded
 Message 1280 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-19-2018 11:16 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1277 of 1321 (843579)
11-19-2018 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 1274 by RAZD
11-17-2018 8:11 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Mutations occur now. That is what is observed. The way evolution happened in the former days we do not know.

Nor do we know what the created kinds were from which all adapting/evolving started. Nor do we know aout nature in the far past, and how creatures would have quickly evolved/adapted to that. Nor do we know that any possibility existed in that former nature for them to be able to leave fossil remains! So the fossils we do see could and probebly do only represent a small small small small fraction of what variety of life LIVED and existed also when those creatures that became the fossils we do have died!!!

Science assumes the fossil record represents a good cross section/sampling of life on earth at the time of the fossil creation..no?

Sorry, stop pushing your religion on kids.

Edited by creation, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1274 by RAZD, posted 11-17-2018 8:11 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1279 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-19-2018 11:09 PM creation has responded
 Message 1284 by RAZD, posted 11-20-2018 7:21 AM creation has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3518
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 1278 of 1321 (843646)
11-19-2018 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1276 by creation
11-19-2018 1:50 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
So what DO you have??

I have a poster who spouts inanity without any evidence or reason.

What was left here does not tell us what nature existed.

What makes you think this "nature" was any different from today? or 200,000 years ago? or 200 million years ago?

People looked the same after the nature change, they just started to live a lot less years.

And your evidence for this is what?

Since we do not have DNA from early man we can't use that.

You ever hear about Minnesota Woman or Kennewick Man or The Anzick boy? Considerably older then Noah, DNA and all.

I know, I know, scientists couldn't possibly sequence their DNA because YOU can't comprehend the science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1276 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:50 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1283 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:45 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1893
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 1279 of 1321 (843651)
11-19-2018 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1277 by creation
11-19-2018 1:56 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Science assumes the fossil record represents a good cross section/sampling of life on earth at the time of the fossil creation..no?

Incorrect. That is not an assumption of scientists.

Scientists do know that the fossils that have been discovered were once part of the biota of that ancient world. Science correctly assumes that only a small portion of the species living at any given time will end up fossilized.

Stop pushing your religion on kids.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1277 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:56 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1282 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:43 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1893
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 1280 of 1321 (843652)
11-19-2018 11:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1276 by creation
11-19-2018 1:50 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Since we do not have DNA from early man we can't use that. So what DO you have??

We DO have DNA from early humans and we have learned all sorts of things from it. And we can tell a lot about ancient humans and ancient animals by looking at the DNA of living humans and animals.

What do you have besides ignorance, fantasies and fiction? 466 posts from you and nothing but BS.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1276 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:50 PM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1281 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:41 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1281 of 1321 (843660)
11-20-2018 1:41 AM
Reply to: Message 1280 by Tanypteryx
11-19-2018 11:16 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Wrong. You have NONE from the pre flood or even early post flood era at all! The misdated (by your beliefs) remains of men you have are all post nature change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1280 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-19-2018 11:16 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1287 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-20-2018 12:25 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1282 of 1321 (843661)
11-20-2018 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 1279 by Tanypteryx
11-19-2018 11:09 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
False. They admit the fossils are a small portion of life that existed, but they also believe it represents the basic sort of life that lived then. For example, there are precambrian fossils, and they think that they represent what lived!!!!!!!! Cambrian...etc etc.

Be honest.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1279 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-19-2018 11:09 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1288 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-20-2018 12:57 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1283 of 1321 (843662)
11-20-2018 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 1278 by AZPaul3
11-19-2018 6:49 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Yes I know there are remains of mankind from long ago. The issue is HOW long ago. The dates they assign to remains are faith based nonsense. ALL remains of humans are post flood.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1278 by AZPaul3, posted 11-19-2018 6:49 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1285 by AZPaul3, posted 11-20-2018 7:40 AM creation has not yet responded
 Message 1286 by RAZD, posted 11-20-2018 9:26 AM creation has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19719
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 1284 of 1321 (843686)
11-20-2018 7:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1277 by creation
11-19-2018 1:56 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Mutations occur now. That is what is observed. The way evolution happened in the former days we do not know.

We conclude the past behavior of life, the universe, etc. is similar to what we see today, because the evidence is consistent with a consistent nature, ... AND there is no evidence of it being any different "in the former days" -- you certainly have not presented any.

Nor do we know what the created kinds were from which all adapting/evolving started. ...

What is a "kind" -- please define and provide examples.

... Nor do we know aout nature in the far past, and how creatures would have quickly evolved/adapted to that. ...

Again, we conclude the past behavior of life, the universe, etc. is similar to what we see today, because the evidence is consistent with such a consistent nature, ... AND there is no evidence of it being any different "in the former days" -- you certainly have not presented any.

Your use of "former nature" does not rest on evidence or anything but personal fantasy, and as such is no argument of any kind of value.

... Nor do we know that any possibility existed in that former nature for them to be able to leave fossil remains! So the fossils we do see could and probebly do only represent a small small small small fraction of what variety of life LIVED and existed also when those creatures that became the fossils we do have died!!!

It is accepted in science that the fossils only represent a small proportion of the amount of life that has existed on this planet, and new varieties are being found constantly. Curiously they all fit into the nested hierarchies predicted by evolution.

It is always good to teach multiple lines of inquiry as a way to explore the validity of ideas. Another aspect of the fossil record is the space-time matrix of where they are found. This is discussed in Alfred Russel Wallace and Biogeography:

quote:
On the Law Which Has Regulated the Introduction of New Species

This is the paper where Wallace first published his "Sarawak Law" that he developed from his pursuit of biogeographical and geological relationships:

quote:
The following propositions in Organic Geography and Geology give the main facts on which the hypothesis is founded.

Geography.

1. Large groups, such as classes and orders, are generally spread over the whole earth, while smaller ones, such as families and genera, are frequently confined to one portion, often to a very limited district.

2. In widely distributed families the genera are often limited in range; in widely distributed genera, well-marked groups of species are peculiar to each geographical district.

3. When a group is confined to one district, and is rich in species, it is almost invariably the case that the most closely allied species are found in the same locality or in closely adjoining localities, and that therefore the natural sequence of the species by affinity is also geographical.

4. In countries of a similar climate, but separated by a wide sea or lofty mountains, the families, genera and species of the [[p. 186] one are often represented by closely allied families, genera and species peculiar to the other.

Geology.

5. The distribution of the organic world in time is very similar to its present distribution in space.

6. Most of the larger and some small groups extend through several geological periods.

7. In each period, however, there are peculiar groups, found nowhere else, and extending through one or several formations.

8. Species of one genus, or genera of one family occurring in the same geological time are more closely allied than those separated in time.

9. As generally in geography no species or genus occurs in two very distant localities without being also found in intermediate places, so in geology the life of a species or genus has not been interrupted. In other words, no group or species has come into existence twice.

10. The following law may be deduced from these facts:--Every species has come into existence coincident both in space and time with a pre-existing closely allied species.

This law agrees with, explains and illustrates all the facts connected with the following branches of the subject:--1st. The system of natural affinities. 2nd. The distribution of animals and plants in space. 3rd. The same in time, including all the phnomena of representative groups, and those which Professor Forbes supposed to manifest polarity. 4th. The phnomena of rudimentary organs. We will briefly endeavour to show its bearing upon each of these.


color and bold added: this is known as "The Law of Sarawak" and this formulation is an important step in his development of a theory of evolution.

He goes on to discusses how this law results in nested hierarchies of relationships between living and extinct groups:

quote:
If the law above enunciated be true, it follows that the natural series of affinities will also represent the order in which the several species came into existence, each one having had for its immediate antitype a closely allied species existing at the time of its origin. It is evidently possible that two or three distinct species may have had a common antitype, and that each of these may again have become the antitypes from which other closely allied species were created. The effect of this would be, that so long as each species has had but one new species formed on its model, the line of affinities will be simple, and may be represented by placing the several species in direct succession in a straight line. But if two or more species have been independently formed on the plan of a common antitype, then the series of affinities will be compound, and can only be represented by a forked or many-branched line. ....

Here "antitype" (antetype) is used where today we would use "common ancestor" for the ancestral population, and "affinity" is used where today we would use homology.

This is 3 years before he (or Darwin) ties the population dynamics of Malthus together with natural selection, but it shows that he had developed the basis for the theory of evolution.

This also shows the basis for biogeography that is his legacy.


These simple observations and the correlations of fossils in time and space provide strong evidence that the fossil record is best explained by evolution.

WE also have the evidence from DNA that also shows life falling into the nested hierarchies predicted by evolution, and amazingly those nested hierarchies generally match the ones from the fossil record.

There have been some minor anomalies, but they have been resolved. If they were not resolvable then that would be a problem.

I know you don't really understand the value of correlations as very strong supporting evidence of scientific findings, but this is another such correlation of results from two entirely separate fields of study, one that did not need to occur ... unless both are documenting the same thing, the actual pattern of evolution in the past of life as we know it.

Science assumes the fossil record represents a good cross section/sampling of life on earth at the time of the fossil creation..no?

Science concludes and accepts that the fossil record is a cross section/sampling of some of the life on earth and that there are some unknowns, missing evidence, in actual lineal descent. We talk about cousins species as more accurate to the patterns of descent from common populations.

So far the best explanation we have of the diversity in the fossil record is evolution. This is tested by each new fossil. It is also tested by each new genome developed from DNA. So far evolution remains the best explanation of the diversity in the fossil record.

Your "we can't know the past" is not an explanation. It is also worthless for education, it teaches nothing and only fosters ignorance.

Your "things may have been different in the past" is not an explanation. It is also worthless for education, it teaches nothing and only fosters ignorance.

Teaching that pigs may have flown in an entirely made up different past is actually teaching ignorant falsehoods. Maybe suitable for a course on mythology and silly things some people believe, but it certainly is not history or science.

Sorry, stop pushing your religion on kids.

Says the one pushing personal fantasy without any basis on evidence.

Science is not religion, it's fact based conclusions and validated theory that is based on evidence to explain it, subject to change when the evidence shows anomalous or unexpected results to tests predicted by the theories developed to explain the evidence.

Show me a religion ready and prepared to change if the evidence invalidates it, and that is actively seeking such evidence.

We have a choice when it comes to school history and science classes: Do we teach hid-bound blind religious dogma, or do we teach flexible thinking (that constantly adapts to new evidence) and how to find testable answers to questions.

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 1277 by creation, posted 11-19-2018 1:56 PM creation has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3518
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 1285 of 1321 (843690)
11-20-2018 7:40 AM
Reply to: Message 1283 by creation
11-20-2018 1:45 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
ALL remains of humans are post flood.

And your evidence for this is what?

The dates they assign to remains are faith based nonsense.

You have no idea how these datings (multiple datings from multiple lines of inquiry) are achieved, do you. You do not know the science involved but it doesn't matter. The datings knock your crackpot conjectures into the trashcan and so must be wrong. Problem is, creation, you haven't ANY evidence against the datings that would challenge the multiple lines of independent scientific evidence FOR the datings. You are left with pissing into the wind. Got some on your leg there, buddy.

quote:
So you actually believe that there were no processes in the past that left any evidence of their workings in the present? That if any of the physical constants were significantly different in the recent past (geologically speaking) we could not see those differences in what they left behind?

Care to actually answer the questions?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1283 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:45 AM creation has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19719
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 1286 of 1321 (843700)
11-20-2018 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 1283 by creation
11-20-2018 1:45 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
... ALL remains of humans are post flood.

Let's now have a lesson on the continued failings of creationist claims:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/hominids.html

Where do you draw the line for human among these skulls? Other than "A" (chimpanzee) the skulls are arranged by their space-time matrix, so what is pre-flood and what is post-flood and how can we tell?

Evolution explains these skulls, creationism doesn't.

In school we should teach what works, not what fails.

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 1283 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:45 AM creation has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1893
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 1287 of 1321 (843723)
11-20-2018 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1281 by creation
11-20-2018 1:41 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Wrong. You have NONE from the pre flood or even early post flood era at all!

Gosh, you are so misinformed. We have a bunch and they are far more famous than you are.

The misdated (by your beliefs) remains of men you have are all post nature change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well the clues that are used to date fossils are reported when the fossils are described and when new dating methods are discovered they are published and used to check the dating on known fossils.

all post nature change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In all of history no one has shown any evidence of "nature change!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and besides we all know you just made that up. The extra exclamations are a dead giveaway that this is your imaginary, fictional fantasy.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1281 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:41 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1289 by creation, posted 11-25-2018 3:34 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1893
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 1288 of 1321 (843729)
11-20-2018 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1282 by creation
11-20-2018 1:43 AM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
False.

Says the guy who has never read a science book.

They admit the fossils are a small portion of life that existed,

Yes, they conclude that most individual organisms do not become fossils and that many species do not become fossils.

but they also believe it represents the basic sort of life that lived then.

Incorrect. Scientists conclude that obviously the organisms that fossilized lived at that time and in that place. They also know that the fossils they find at any site represent an unknown fraction of the total number of organisms and species that lived there.

When fossil beds are discovered it is noted that the assemblages of species include species that are found at other sites as well as new unique species. This is exactly the same pattern that we see when observing living organisms in different modern habitats.

For example, there are precambrian fossils, and they think that they represent what lived!!!!!!!!

Yes they know the fossils represent some of the species that lived, but they also know that they do not represent ALL the species that lived then and there.

Be honest.

You have mis-characterized what science concludes from the fossil evidence, so I have corrected your ignorance, though I doubt you will get it.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1282 by creation, posted 11-20-2018 1:43 AM creation has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1290 by creation, posted 11-25-2018 3:36 AM Tanypteryx has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1289 of 1321 (844086)
11-25-2018 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1287 by Tanypteryx
11-20-2018 12:25 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
I daresay I think you have NO remains of any man before the flood, or even shortly after it. Your dates are wrong.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1287 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-20-2018 12:25 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1291 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-25-2018 12:15 PM creation has responded
 Message 1293 by RAZD, posted 11-25-2018 3:29 PM creation has responded

    
creation
Member
Posts: 654
Joined: 01-22-2017


Message 1290 of 1321 (844087)
11-25-2018 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 1288 by Tanypteryx
11-20-2018 12:57 PM


Re: Conclusion vs Assumption, Belief, teach the difference
Not true. When pictures are drawn, for example of the Cambrian world, we do not see lions and man and birds...etc etc. Face it. Those things lived at the time. Be honest about the sick models science posits of the past!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1288 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-20-2018 12:57 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1292 by Tanypteryx, posted 11-25-2018 12:29 PM creation has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
8485
86
878889Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018