Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8846 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-21-2018 5:32 AM
250 online now:
Faith, PaulK (2 members, 248 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: MrTim
Upcoming Birthdays: anglagard
Post Volume:
Total: 835,405 Year: 10,228/29,783 Month: 892/1,583 Week: 361/291 Day: 10/59 Hour: 3/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4041
42
4344
...
193NextFF
Author Topic:   Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win.
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19524
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 616 of 2886 (826208)
12-25-2017 7:53 PM
Reply to: Message 610 by Coyote
12-24-2017 11:58 AM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
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.

So, what you're saying is that scientific knowledge which explains things about the natural world is "useless" if it contradicts someone's religious beliefs?

No, it's useless for people that avoid science.

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 610 by Coyote, posted 12-24-2017 11:58 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 55 days)
Posts: 703
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 617 of 2886 (826210)
12-25-2017 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 608 by LamarkNewAge
12-24-2017 12:26 AM


Re: Christians should be able to allow for God using agencies. Like Evolution to make man
No, I'm not saying you did. Dredge said I have a shallow, fragile, egg-shell mind.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 608 by LamarkNewAge, posted 12-24-2017 12:26 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member (Idle past 55 days)
Posts: 703
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 618 of 2886 (826211)
12-26-2017 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 610 by Coyote
12-24-2017 11:58 AM


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

So, what you're saying is that scientific knowledge which explains things about the natural world is "useless" if it contradicts someone's religious beliefs?


No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is, regardless of any religious beliefs, the theory that all ilfe on earth evolved from microbes is useless to science. So since that's what the argument is about, winning it is an irrelevance to the real world. It's like winning the argument that the Tooth Fairy wears a pink dress, and not a green one.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by Coyote, posted 12-24-2017 11:58 AM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 620 by Coyote, posted 12-26-2017 12:39 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 621 by edge, posted 12-26-2017 12:38 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 625 by jar, posted 12-27-2017 6:55 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 627 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-27-2017 10:48 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member (Idle past 55 days)
Posts: 703
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 619 of 2886 (826217)
12-26-2017 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 590 by RAZD
12-15-2017 10:14 AM


Re: theory and the scientific process
RAZD writes:

In fact there are many in the fossil record that show a progression over time from the reptilian jaw/ear structure (where the single ear bone is attached to the three bone jaw) to the mammalian jaw/ear structure (where the three bone ear is separated from the single jaw bone). This includes several species with double jointed jaws (the original reptilian joint and the new mammalian joint). Others show differences in the sizes of these bones as they change over time, adapting to the new structure.


I will investigate this ridiculous claim. My expectation is that it is based on a vast amount of wishful thinking and vivid imagination, that is in turn is the product of an a priori commitment to the atheist belief that all life on earth evolved from microbes.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 590 by RAZD, posted 12-15-2017 10:14 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 624 by RAZD, posted 12-26-2017 5:12 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 626 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-27-2017 10:46 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 620 of 2886 (826219)
12-26-2017 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:05 AM


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

So, what you're saying is that scientific knowledge which explains things about the natural world is "useless" if it contradicts someone's religious beliefs?


No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is, regardless of any religious beliefs, the theory that all ilfe on earth evolved from microbes is useless to science. So since that's what the argument is about, winning it is an irrelevance to the real world. It's like winning the argument that the Tooth Fairy wears a pink dress, and not a green one.

But that is what you're saying! You and many other creationists alike.

You find that science disproves some of your beliefs so rather than just accept that, or change your beliefs, you do your best to denigrate science for having the nerve to disprove your beliefs.

Your attempt to claim that evolution from microbes is useless is just a subset of the overall creationist attack on science.

"Were you there?" is another such attack on science, attempting (falsely) to separate science into two types.

"It's just a theory" is still another such attack on science.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:05 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4392
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 621 of 2886 (826228)
12-26-2017 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:05 AM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is, regardless of any religious beliefs, the theory that all ilfe on earth evolved from microbes is useless to science.

And you have shown this somehow?

Please tell us what you think a theory is supposed to do.

So since that's what the argument is about, ...

According to you...

... winning it is an irrelevance to the real world.

Well, who ever said that a debate is the real world.

Why should we take your word that the theory of evolution is useless?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:05 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10739
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 622 of 2886 (826230)
12-26-2017 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 601 by Dredge
12-22-2017 10:35 PM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
If you have won the argument that all life on earth evolved from microbes, then you have won nothing - it is completely useless information.

That may be the case. The number of people for whom this information is relevant is surely quite small, and it is probably also the case that the practical applications for which the difference between not evolving for microbes and evolving from microbes matters for mammals, actually makes a difference may well be zero.

However, what does that matter? Isn't it the common ancestry of mankind with even the closest available living ape really the idea that you have a hard time with? And there is no question that such information is useful. For that matter the fact of our common ancestry with pigs and mice is significant. And any one of those is a more significant refutation of special creation that is common descent with microbes.

You are basically picking a fight of little consequence. You are welcome to whatever solace that small victory gives you.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I was thinking as long as I have my hands up theyre not going to shoot me. This is what Im thinking theyre not going to shoot me. Wow, was I wrong. -- Charles Kinsey

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 601 by Dredge, posted 12-22-2017 10:35 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19524
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 623 of 2886 (826232)
12-26-2017 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 601 by Dredge
12-22-2017 10:35 PM


Who won, what was lost ...
If you have won the argument that all life on earth evolved from microbes, then you have won nothing - it is completely useless information.

Is it?

What it means is that creation did not play a part, no matter what all the various religious beliefs pretend happened, and we can stop indoctrinating children with false information.

We can stop lumbering our education with misinformation about evolution and reality.

We can teach science unencumbered by delusions.

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 601 by Dredge, posted 12-22-2017 10:35 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19524
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 624 of 2886 (826234)
12-26-2017 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 619 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:35 AM


Re: theory and the scientific process
RAZD writes:

In fact there are many in the fossil record that show a progression over time from the reptilian jaw/ear structure (where the single ear bone is attached to the three bone jaw) to the mammalian jaw/ear structure (where the three bone ear is separated from the single jaw bone). This includes several species with double jointed jaws (the original reptilian joint and the new mammalian joint). Others show differences in the sizes of these bones as they change over time, adapting to the new structure.


I will investigate this ridiculous claim. My expectation is that it is based on a vast amount of wishful thinking and vivid imagination, that is in turn is the product of an a priori commitment to the atheist belief that all life on earth evolved from microbes.

Whether or not you are honest in undertaking this endeavor I suggest you engage with a librarian to help you find the material.

For an introduction to the fossil record that pertains to the progression of jaw/ear bones I can suggest you start with:

quote:
THE THERAPSID--MAMMAL TRANSITIONAL SERIES

... The fossil transition from reptile to mammal is one of the most extensive and well-studied of all the transitions, and detailed series of fossils demonstrate how this transition was accomplished. ...

The mammals are believed to have evolved from a class of Permian and Triassic reptiles known as therapsids. Taxonomically, mammals are distinguished by a number of features, the most obvious of which are hair (even such aquatic mammals as whales and dolphins still retain bristly hairs in their skin), and the presence of mammary glands which secrete milk, used to nourish the young. Neither of these structures is preserved in the fossil record, but fortunately, mammals can also be distinguished by a number of skeletal characteristics (particularly in the skull and teeth). In particular, mammals are distinguished from reptiles by a number of skeletal traits. Reptiles have a much larger number of individual bones in their skulls than do mammals. In reptiles, the teeth are all of the same shape, and although they vary slightly in size, they all have the same simple cone-shaped form. Mammals, however, possess a number of different types of teeth in their jaws, from the flat, multi-cusped molar teeth to the sharp cone-shaped canines. In reptiles, the lower jaw is made up of a number of different bones, and the jaw joint is formed between the quadrate bone in the skull and the angular bone in the jaw. In mammals, by contrast, the lower jaw is made up of a single bone, the dentary, which articulates with the squamosal bone in the skull to form the jaw joint. Reptiles also have a single bone in the middle ear, the stapes. In mammals, there are three bones in the middle ear, the malleus, incus and stapes (also known as the hammer, anvil and stirrup). At the top of the skull, reptiles have a small hole through which the pineal body, or "third eye", extends--this is absent in mammals. Finally, the reptilian skull is attached to the spine by a single point of contact, the occipital condyle. In mammals, the occipital condyle is double-faced.

Paleontologists point out that the therapsids possessed many of the characteristics of both reptiles and mammals:

"In advanced forms, the skull was intermediate in type between that of a primitive reptile and a mammal; many of the bones absent in mammals were on their way toward reduction or were already lost. A small third eye was still generally present in the top of the skull, but its opening was a tiny one." (Romer, 1967, p. 226)

"The differentiation of the teeth progressed in the therapsids to high levels of development, with the advanced genera showing sharply contrasted incisors, canines, and cheek teeth, which in some of these reptiles were of complex form, often with accessory cusps or broad crowns. In many therapsids, the occipital condyle became double, as in the mammals." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, p. 118)

"In many respect, the tritylodont skull was very mammalian in its features. Certainly, because of the advanced nature of the zygomatic arches, the secondary palate and the specialized teeth, these animals had feeding habits that were close to those of some mammals . . . . Yet, in spite of these advances, the tritylodonts still retained the reptilian joint between the quadrate bone of the skull and the articular bone of the lower jaw. It is true that these bones were very much reduced, so that the squamosal bone of the skull and the dentary bone of the lower jaw (the two bones involved in the mammalian jaw articulation) were on the point of touching each other." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, p. 127)

The reptiles, as we have noted, have one bone in the middle ear and several bones in the lower jaw, and mammals have three bones in the middle ear and only one bone in the lower jaw. On the other hand, the jaw joints in the reptile are formed from different bones than they are in the mammalian skull. Thus, it is apparent that, during the evolutionary transition from reptile to mammal, the jaw joints must have shifted from one bone to another, freeing up the rest of these bones to form the auditory ossicles in the mammalian middle ear. (In fact, in most modern reptiles, the jawbones in question actually function in transmitting sound waves to the inner ear, so the transformation postulated above is not a functional change, merely an improvement in a fnction that these bones already had). As Arthur N. Strahler puts it, "A transitional form must have had two joints in operation simultaneously (as in the modern rattlesnake), and this phase was followed by a fusion of the lower joint." (Strahler 1987, p. 414) The creationists find this process to be impossible to conceive, and claim there is no fossil evidence for it:

"The two most distinguishable osteological differences between reptiles and mammals, however, have never been bridged by a transitional series. All mammals, living or fossil, have a single bone, the dentary, on each side of the lower jaw, and all mammals, living or fossil, have three auditory ossicles or ear bones, the malleus, incus and stapes. In some fossil reptiles the number and size of the lower jaw bones are reduced compared to living reptiles. Every reptile, living or fossil, however, has at least four bones in the lower jaw and only one auditory ossicle, the stapes. . . There are no transitional fossil forms showing, for instance, three or two jawbones, or two ear bones. No one has explained yet, for that matter, how the transitional form would have managed to chew while his jaw was being unhinged and rearticulated, or how he would hear while dragging two of his jaw bones up into his ear." (Gish, 1978, p. 80)

"Mammals also have three bones in their ears, while reptiles have only one. Where did the two 'extras' come from? Evolutionary theory attempts to explain it as follows: Reptiles have at least four bones in the lower jaw, whereas mammals have only one; so, when reptiles became mammals, there was supposedly a reshuffling of bones; some from the reptile's lower jaw moved to the mammal's middle ear to make the three bones there and, in the process, left only one for the mammal's lower jaw. However, the problem with this line of reasoning is that there is no fossil evidence whatsoever to support it. It is merely wishful conjecture." (Watchtower and Bible Tract Society, 1985, p. 81)

Not only is this explanation not "merely wishful conjecture", but it can be clearly seen in a remarkable series of fossils from the Triassic therapsids. The earliest therapsids show the typical reptilian type of jaw joint, with the articular bone in the jaw firmly attached to the quadrate bone in the skull. In later fossils from the same group, however, the quadrate-articular bones have become smaller, and the dentary and squamosal bones have become larger and moved closer together. This trend reaches its apex in a group of therapsids known as cynodonts, of which the genus Probainognathus is a representative. Probainognathus possessed characteristics of both reptile and mammal, and this transitional aspect was shown most clearly by the fact that it had TWO jaw joints--one reptilian, one mammalian:

"Probainognathus, a small cynodont reptile from the Triassic sediments of Argentina, shows characters in the skull and jaws far advanced toward the mammalian condition. Thus it had teeth differentiated into incisors, a canine and postcanines, a double occipital condyle and a well-developed secondary palate, all features typical of the mammals, but most significantly the articulation between the skull and the lower jaw was on the very threshhold between the reptilian and mammalian condition. The two bones forming the articulation between skull and mandible in the reptiles, the quadrate and articular respectively, were still present but were very small, and loosely joined to the bones that constituted the mammalian joint . . . Therefore in Probainognathus there was a double articulation between skull and jaw, and of particular interest, the quadrate bone, so small and so loosely joined to the squamosal, was intimately articulated with the stapes bone of the middle ear. It quite obviously was well on its way towards being the incus bone of the three-bone complex that characterizes the mammalian middle ear." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, pp. 228-229)

In a slightly later group, known as the ictidosaurians, the mammalian part of the double jaw joint seen in Probainognathus was strengthened, while the old reptilian part was beginning to become reduced in size. In describing a member of this group known as Diarthrognathus, paleontologists Colbert and Morales point out: "The most interesting and fascinating point in the morphology of the ictidosaurians (at least, as seen in Diarthrognathus) was the double jaw articulation. In this animal, not only was the ancient reptilian joint between a reduced quadrate and articular still present, but also the new mammalian joint between the squamosal and dentary bones had come into functional being. Thus, Diarthrognathus was truly at the dividing line between reptile and mammal in so far as this important diagnostic feature is concerned." (Colbert and Morales, 1991, p. 128)

The therapsid-mammal transition was completed with the appearence of the Morganucodonts in the late Triassic. This group is described by paleontologist T.S. Kemp:

"The axes of the two jaw hinges, dentary-squamosal and articular-quadrate, coincide along a lateral-medial line, and therefore the double jaw articulation of the most advanced cynodonts is still present . . . The secondary dentary-squamosal jaw hinge had enlarged (in the Morganucodonts) and took a greater proportion if not all of the stresses at the jaw articulation. The articular-quadrate hinge was free to function solely in sound conduction." (Strahler, 1987, p. 419)

Thus, the fossil record demonstrates, during the transition from therapsid reptile to mammal, various bones in the skull slowly migrated together to form a second functional jaw joint, and the now-superfluous original jaw bones were reduced in size until they formed the three bones in the mammalian middle ear. The reptilian quadrate bone became the mammalian incus, while the articular bone became the malleus. The entire process had taken nearly the whole length of the Triassic period to complete, a time span of approximately 40 million years. Since the determining characteristic of a mammal in the fossil record is the structure of the jaw bone and joint, all of the therapsids up to the Morganucodonts are classified as reptiles, and all those after that are considered to be mammals. As Romer puts it, "We arbitrarily group the therapsids as reptiles (we have to draw a line somewhere) but were they alive, a typical therapsid probably would seem to us an odd cross between a lizard and a dog, a transitional type between the two great groups of backboned animals." (Romer, 1967, p. 227)


There's more in the article. Unfortunately they don't identify their references, but a good reference librarian should be able to sort them out.

The fossils mentioned are only the hightlights of the transition, as there are many more that fill in around them.

Another resource is http://palaeos.com/vertebrates/therapsida/index.html - it is an interactive presentation of the nested hierarchy and the various intermediate forms.

You can click on any of the groups to get more information, and if you click on Cynodontia you get the next page and:

quote:
In the unbroken evolutionary sequence from reptile to mammal, the cynodonts are intermediate between earlier and more primitive theriodont therapsids and the earliest mammals. These highly successful animals first appear in the late Permian, radiate quickly into a number of different forms (including both terrestrial and semi-aquatic) before the end of the period, reach their maximum diversity in the Early Triassic, and become increasingly mammal-like as the Triassic progresses, giving rise to true mammals in the later Triassic. By the start of the Jurassic, only the insectivore-like tritheledonts and rodent-like tritylodonts remained; the latter continuing alongside true mammals throughout the Jurassic and even into the early Cretaceous.

In cladistic nomenclature, the term "cynodont" is also used to include mammals, which evolved from cynodonts and hence are, phylogenetically speaking, derived cynodonts.


Hurray we are derived cynodonts.

The link at the end of the cynodonts dendrogram is broken, it should link to this Mammaliformes page, and at the bottom of this dendrogram portion is Mammalia.

We are also derived mammaliforms. Keep going and you can get to primates and Primate cladogram evolution

Another teaching moment brought 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 619 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:35 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 631 by Dredge, posted 12-28-2017 11:35 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30504
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 625 of 2886 (826241)
12-27-2017 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:05 AM


Yet another learning moment brought to you by the class clown.
Dredge writes:

What I'm saying is, regardless of any religious beliefs, the theory that all ilfe on earth evolved from microbes is useless to science. So since that's what the argument is about, winning it is an irrelevance to the real world.

No Dredge, that is not what the argument is about.

The argument is about whether reality and facts trump religious dogma.

I understand that it is often necessary to repeat facts before you seem to be able to understand them and so we will go over it yet again.

There is no theory that all life on earth evolved from microbes.

There has never been such a theory in the field known as Science.

There is the conclusion based on all the evidence ever found that the earliest forms of life on the Earth were microbial.

It is the real world that actually is relevant and not Biblical stories.

Understanding reality is what Science is all about.

Understanding that reality shows that on the Earth the earliest living things were microbes is a win.

Edited by jar, : known has two of them


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:05 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16025
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 626 of 2886 (826244)
12-27-2017 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 619 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:35 AM


Re: theory and the scientific process
I will investigate this ridiculous claim. My expectation is that it is based on a vast amount of wishful thinking and vivid imagination, that is in turn is the product of an a priori commitment to the atheist belief that all life on earth evolved from microbes.

And as usual you are wrong.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 619 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:35 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16025
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


(2)
Message 627 of 2886 (826245)
12-27-2017 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dredge
12-26-2017 12:05 AM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is, regardless of any religious beliefs, the theory that all ilfe on earth evolved from microbes is useless to science. So since that's what the argument is about, winning it is an irrelevance to the real world.

Makes you wonder why all those creationists are so sore about losing it, huh? Go explain to them why it doesn't matter. Why, there are even some creationists who debate evolution, as though that was worth spending their time on when it doesn't matter one way or the other. Such silly chaps they are.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dredge, posted 12-26-2017 12:05 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Aussie
Member
Posts: 178
From: Sanford, FL USA
Joined: 10-02-2006


Message 628 of 2886 (826255)
12-27-2017 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 600 by Dredge
12-22-2017 10:32 PM


Re: Christians should be able to allow for God using agencies. Like Evolution to make man
Your questions are too deep for my shallow, fragile, egg-shell mind. Please do not ask them again.

Then sit still and listen while the grown-ups talk.

After you learn something you might be able to make a meaningful contribution.


"...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 600 by Dredge, posted 12-22-2017 10:32 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 14774
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.8


(2)
Message 629 of 2886 (826261)
12-27-2017 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 606 by Dredge
12-23-2017 11:29 PM


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

The conclusion/hypothesis that all life evolved from microbes is "nice to know" for atheists, but to science , it's "useless to know".


Science picks up a lot of information that's "nice to know", just like you see a lot of things that are "nice to see" on your way to wherever you're going. Who knows when some of that information might be important?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 606 by Dredge, posted 12-23-2017 11:29 PM Dredge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 630 by edge, posted 12-27-2017 6:18 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
edge
Member
Posts: 4392
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 2.1


(2)
Message 630 of 2886 (826282)
12-27-2017 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 629 by ringo
12-27-2017 2:41 PM


Re: what a pathetic God/World/Univers Dredge markets
Science picks up a lot of information that's "nice to know", just like you see a lot of things that are "nice to see" on your way to wherever you're going. Who knows when some of that information might be important?

Heh, heh ...

Obviously, YECs are good at judging things.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 629 by ringo, posted 12-27-2017 2:41 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 632 by Dredge, posted 12-28-2017 11:38 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 633 by RAZD, posted 12-29-2017 7:31 AM edge has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
4041
42
4344
...
193NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018