Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-11-2017 2:08 PM
336 online now:
caffeine, jar, Joe T, JonF, Modulous (AdminModulous), PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (8 members, 328 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,025 Year: 28,631/21,208 Month: 697/1,847 Week: 72/475 Day: 19/53 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
3435363738
39
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3027
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 571 of 580 (824910)
12-05-2017 3:44 AM
Reply to: Message 566 by Dredge
12-04-2017 7:16 PM


Obviously, the bigger the sample size the more likely it is to be accurate, but samples of public opinion are limited by available resources, such as time and money.

There's an old quote that even I use on one of my pages. I think it was attributed to Mark Twain, but also to Disraeli. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

However, it is at that point that ignorance intercedes. Now in that context, statistics refers to the individual data points individually. In order to make any sense of those individual data points, you need to perform statistical analysis.

Dredge, how much of statistical analysis do you understand? Percy was talking about statistical analysis. Do you have any knowledge at all about the mathematics involved? Or, like everything else you have pontificated about, are you yet again abysmally ignorant?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 566 by Dredge, posted 12-04-2017 7:16 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13965
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 572 of 580 (824931)
12-05-2017 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 565 by Dredge
12-04-2017 7:09 PM


Dredge writes:

If we have collected one million fossils so far, this might represent only 0.033% of all fossils, which is hardly a statistically significant sample size.


On the contrary, "all of the fossils we have" is a sample size of 100%. All of the fossils we have point to the same conclusions, and they're also the same conclusions pointed to by other completely independent areas such as DNA, dating methods, etc.

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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 565 by Dredge, posted 12-04-2017 7:09 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 676
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 573 of 580 (824972)
12-05-2017 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 559 by herebedragons
12-03-2017 9:15 PM


Re: why bother?
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 559 by herebedragons, posted 12-03-2017 9:15 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 577 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-05-2017 11:20 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 579 by dwise1, posted 12-06-2017 1:52 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 676
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 574 of 580 (824973)
12-05-2017 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 562 by dwise1
12-04-2017 1:37 AM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
dwise1 writes:

You fucking evil hypocrite!


I think you must be confusing me with someone else.

your false religion

Catholicism is not a false religion.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 562 by dwise1, posted 12-04-2017 1:37 AM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 578 by dwise1, posted 12-06-2017 1:32 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 676
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 575 of 580 (824975)
12-05-2017 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 561 by RAZD
12-03-2017 11:37 PM


Re: Fossils are a falsification tests
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.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 561 by RAZD, posted 12-03-2017 11:37 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 576 by jar, posted 12-05-2017 7:11 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 580 by RAZD, posted 12-06-2017 9:57 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29749
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 576 of 580 (824976)
12-05-2017 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 575 by Dredge
12-05-2017 6:29 PM


We have the fossils, the theory and reality: we win
Dredge writes:

So your answer doesn't help me understand what is "happening all around us" that provides evidence of macroevolution.

No one really cares whether or not you understand but you do provide a handy foil that allows us to address those who might be reading this and other threads.

We have the fossils. We win.

We have reality. We win.

We have the Theory that explains the fact of evolution. We win.

It really is that simple.

We have and you do not have.

Edited by jar, : fix sub-title


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 575 by Dredge, posted 12-05-2017 6:29 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15984
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 577 of 580 (824980)
12-05-2017 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 573 by Dredge
12-05-2017 6:11 PM


Re: why bother?
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"?

You seem to have missed the bit where we have the fossils, and win.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by Dredge, posted 12-05-2017 6:11 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3027
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 578 of 580 (824983)
12-06-2017 1:32 AM
Reply to: Message 574 by Dredge
12-05-2017 6:17 PM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
I think you must be confusing me with someone else.

Nope. You were positively ID'd.

DWise1 writes:

your false religion

Catholicism is not a false religion.

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". The one for which you must keep yourself willfully ignorant. The one which has turned you into a mindless troll. The one that leads you to lie. The one which, according to Christian doctrine, has you serving Satan.

You are wicked fruit and what your religion has done to you is wicked fruit. That makes your religion wicked and false. But then that's what Jesus says and when have creationists and fundamentalists ever paid attention to what Jesus said?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 574 by Dredge, posted 12-05-2017 6:17 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3027
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 579 of 580 (824984)
12-06-2017 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 573 by Dredge
12-05-2017 6:11 PM


Re: why bother?
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.

Really? We've already gone over that and you still have absolutely no clue? Why do you insist on being such an idiot?

Marcus Lycus (played on film by Phil Silvers) had your number:

quote:
Lycus: If I've told you once, I've told you a hundred times; do not fan the girls when they're wet! But you'll never learn, you'll be a eunuch all your life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 573 by Dredge, posted 12-05-2017 6:11 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19295
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


(2)
Message 580 of 580 (824988)
12-06-2017 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 575 by Dredge
12-05-2017 6:29 PM


what is macroevolution
Okay,
- anagenesis is lineal change within a species ...

Microevolution over many generations.

It appears we can agree on that.

ALL evolution occurs "within a species" ... there are no other mechanisms than the processes of evolution "within a species" -- so this should be no surprise to anyone knowledgeable about evolution.

- cladogenesis is speciation. ...

Microevolution in reproductively isolated populations, each population undergoing anagenesis, each one accumulating different changes from the other/s (and the parent population), until they are different species. Each population is evolving via lineal change within a species, and the results for each branch viewed alone would look identical to anagenesis.

It is only because there are multiple lineages from a common ancestor that we can see differences between the populations accumulating until they are different species, and yes, this IS speciation.

It appears we can agree on that.

... . Green Warblers speciating into more Green Warblers will form a nested hierarchy, no doubt, but only of Green Warblers.

And dogs will always be dogs, but hey, kudos on seeing how nested hierarchies form, and recognizing that all descendants within a nested hierarchy will always be descendants of the original parent population. The names\labels may change, but those are just arbitrary designations used by humans to improve communication, nature doesn't care how we label things.

First there is a single species population of greenish warblers. Then it becomes a species population of greenish warblers with relatively isolated population with reduce gene flow, resulting in multiple (5) varieties of greenish warbler. Then the isolation increases and you end up with a genus of greenish warblers rather than just a species (the name is changing), now with several species as the varieties become different species (via speciation). Then each of these new species could then undergo the same division into varieties that over time become new species, and they each become a genus and original "greenish warbler" designation becomes a family (again the name\label is changing).

The names may change, but those are just arbitrary designations used by humans to improve communication, nature doesn't care how we name or label things.

... and therefore has nothing to do with macroevolutionary changes.

... 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. ...

So your answer doesn't help me understand what is "happening all around us" that provides evidence of macroevolution.

Perhaps the problem is with the term "macroevolution" and your understanding of it's meaning versus the one used in science.

Care to give us your definition of macroevolution so that we can talk about it the same way? What is macroevolution?

In science macroevolution is defined as anagenesis plus cladogenesis, which you seem to agree occurs around us. What else do you expect to occur?

Let us know and we can proceed with this latest teachable moment bought to us by Dredge.

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 575 by Dredge, posted 12-05-2017 6:29 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
3435363738
39
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017