Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8790 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-23-2017 3:22 AM
346 online now:
Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (2 members, 344 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Post Volume:
Total: 819,311 Year: 23,917/21,208 Month: 1,882/2,468 Week: 391/822 Day: 1/50 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
22Next
Author Topic:   Debunking the Evolutionary God of 'Selection'
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 196 of 323 (808907)
05-14-2017 8:18 PM


Cross posting?
Should I cross post my two previous messages in "How do you define the word Evolution?" or is that frowned on?
I think they belong in that forum more so than this one.
Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by RAZD, posted 05-14-2017 10:00 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29363
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 197 of 323 (808908)
05-14-2017 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:09 PM


Re: Does the theory of evolution require a gain of information?
CRR writes:

Does the theory of evolution require a gain of copious quantities of genetic information?

No, of course not.

CRR writes:

Both versions believe that the all life on Earth is ascended from primitive ancestors. Darwin lacked the evidence to definitely say only one ancestor but he made it clear that it was his “belief that all animals and plants are descended from some one prototype.” Most proponents of the modern version, on the evidence of DNA, definitely conclude there was a Last Universal Common Ancestor.

Again, simply not true. The theory of evolution says nothing about either the origin of life or any directionality.

CRR writes:

In both versions this common ancestor is envisaged as some simple life form of minimal complexity.

Again, simply not true. The Theory of Evolution says nothing about any common ancestor.

However, REALITY and the evidence does show that the earliest life forms were simple. When life is a single cell critter almost any change MUST be towards greater complexity. Once something more complex than a single cell exists the Theory of Evolution explains how it could evolve to be a single cell critter yet again.

When you begin with three definite falsehoods it most likely that any conclusion you can draw based on those misunderstandings will also be false.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:09 PM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:56 PM jar has responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 198 of 323 (808909)
05-14-2017 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by Tanypteryx
05-12-2017 11:31 AM


Re: Lactase and Nylonase
The population contained one gene and now there are two genes.

You don't seem to understand what is actually happening to the gene, at least in the case of lactase. There is no new gene. At best there is a new allele of the gene.

Even in the case of Nylonase it is not as once proposed a new gene created by a frameshift mutation but only a duplication and fine tuning of an existing gene that already had some activity on nylon.

How is it [adult lactose detrimental] detrimental [where there is n access to dairy products]?

There is a metabolic cost of maintaining production of an enzyme that is no longer being used. That's why it is normal for lactase production to be switched off after weaning.

The theory of evolution does not propose that people evolved from single celled organisms.

Yes it does, as you showed in the next paragraph. It proposes that man evolved from microbes through a long chain of intermediates.

The Discovery Institute is a creationist organization...

No it's not. At best you could characterise it as being theistic evolutionist but the people at Biologos who claim to be theistic evolutionists would probably object to that. DI has many "faiths" in its following including agnostics.

...that performs no scientific research.

Again false, as you can confirm by clicking the Research tab on http://www.discovery.org/id/#
The Biologic Institute is a non-profit research organization founded in 2005.
The Evolutionary Informatics Lab is a group of STEM (science/technology/engineer/math) professionals who focus on the role of information in the modeling and analysis of evolutionary processes and related phenomena.
They also provide research grants and fellowships and publish in peer reviewed scientific publications as well as publishing Bio-Complexity journal.

I understand that you might have swallowed some propaganda against DI but I trust that now you know better you will desist from spreading that propaganda.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-12-2017 11:31 AM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2017 10:18 PM CRR has responded
 Message 204 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-14-2017 11:09 PM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 208 by Tangle, posted 05-15-2017 3:12 AM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 216 by Taq, posted 05-15-2017 10:45 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 199 of 323 (808911)
05-14-2017 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by jar
05-14-2017 8:18 PM


Re: Does the theory of evolution require a gain of information?
According to the time stamps it took you nine minutes to read my post and formulate and type your reply. With such haste I can understand why you got it so wrong. I suggest you try again after some more thought.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by jar, posted 05-14-2017 8:18 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by jar, posted 05-14-2017 9:02 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29363
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 200 of 323 (808912)
05-14-2017 9:02 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:56 PM


Re: Does the theory of evolution require a gain of information?
No matter how long I think about your falsehoods they never change to being true.

The Theory of Evolution does not require a gain of information or complexity or sauerkraut.


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:56 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18968
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 201 of 323 (808913)
05-14-2017 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:09 PM


GIGO and off topic
Does the theory of evolution require a gain of copious quantities of genetic information?

No.

Information is undefined and has no metric to measure whether it is there or not, nor compare from one species to another, therefore it can have no need to be incorporated into any scientific field, to say nothing of theory.

"Information" is useless babble to science. Science operates on what can be measured, what can be quantified and compared empirically.

Conclusion: The Theory of Evolution;
• Has a direction. It is attempting to explain microbes to man, not the reverse
• Requires the development of multicellularity, specialised tissues, organs, and complex body plans
• This development requires the production of new genes and genetic information; in copious quantities

Nope. These are invalid conclusion reached on the basis of a false premise.

The topic is debunking selection not fantasies about made-up parameters

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 194 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:09 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18968
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 202 of 323 (808919)
05-14-2017 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:18 PM


New Thread would be better
Should I cross post my two previous messages in "How do you define the word Evolution?" or is that frowned on?
I think they belong in that forum more so than this one.

If it were me, I would start a whole new thread on the topic of information. Present what you think it is and how it can be measured, and then use these two previous posts as arguments based on the presentation to show how it develops a deeper understanding of the parameter...

Good luck.

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 196 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:18 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5989
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 203 of 323 (808921)
05-14-2017 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:50 PM


Discovery Institute is creationist start to finish
Here's their tax form. Detect any creationist activities there?

http://990s.foundationcenter.org/...911521697_201512_990.pdf

(Note: intelligent design has been determined to be creationism in a federal district court.)

Edited by Coyote, : Spelling


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 198 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:50 PM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 11:21 PM Coyote has responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1578
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 204 of 323 (808922)
05-14-2017 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:50 PM


Re: Lactase and Nylonase
The population contained one gene and now there are two genes.

You don't seem to understand what is actually happening to the gene, at least in the case of lactase. There is no new gene. At best there is a new allele of the gene.

Yeah and now there twice as many alleles of that gene as there were before. This has increased the genome of the population.

This is one of the ways that variation is increased.

This is one of the ways that information, that creationist are so fixated on, increases.

Even in the case of Nylonase it is not as once proposed a new gene created by a frameshift mutation but only a duplication and fine tuning of an existing gene that already had some activity on nylon.

Wow, you are starting to get it. This is one of the well documented ways that new genes are created.

This increases the size of the genome of a population. And this sort of mutation is happening to multiple genes in every generation in many individuals and it adds a tremendous amount of new variation over time.

How is it [adult lactose detrimental] detrimental [where there is n access to dairy products]?

There is a metabolic cost of maintaining production of an enzyme that is no longer being used. That's why it is normal for lactase production to be switched off after weaning.

Really? My understanding is that lactase is not produced until lactose presence triggers a regulatory switch.

The theory of evolution does not propose that people evolved from single celled organisms.

Yes it does, as you showed in the next paragraph. It proposes that man evolved from microbes through a long chain of intermediates.

Yeah, an incredibly long chain of intermediaries and it took a billion years or more.

Leaving all that out of the statement is a classic creationist ploy to try to make the evolution of all life sound as simple minded as the magic poof.

The Discovery Institute is a creationist organization...

No it's not. At best you could characterise it as being theistic evolutionist but the people at Biologos who claim to be theistic evolutionists would probably object to that. DI has many "faiths" in its following including agnostics.

They may have conned you, but if they were doing science they would have convinced the rest of us already.

...that performs no scientific research.

Again false, as you can confirm by clicking the Research tab on http://www.discovery.org/id/#
The Biologic Institute is a non-profit research organization founded in 2005.
The Evolutionary Informatics Lab is a group of STEM (science/technology/engineer/math) professionals who focus on the role of information in the modeling and analysis of evolutionary processes and related phenomena.

Wowee. I have read some of their blogs.

They also provide research grants and fellowships and publish in peer reviewed scientific publications as well as publishing Bio-Complexity journal.

That sounds wonderful. Of course you have to sign a contract that you accept the 'Wedge Document", before you get a grant or a fellowship.

Can you show us some papers by Discovery Institute members, associates, whatever, about Discovery Institutes research published in peer reviewed journals?

Publishing your own journal (Bio-Complexity) has as much scientific credibility as publishing a news letter.

I understand that you might have swallowed some propaganda against DI but I trust that now you know better you will desist from spreading that propaganda.

And I understand that you might have swallowed some propaganda from DI and I don't expect you to ever realize what happened.

DI showed the whole world what they were about during the Dover Trial. I have read their propaganda and it convinced me that they are just creationists who have tried to (unsuccessfully) re-brand themselves.


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 198 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:50 PM CRR has not yet responded

    
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 205 of 323 (808925)
05-14-2017 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Coyote
05-14-2017 10:18 PM


Re: Discovery Institute is creationist start to finish
Where in that 49 pages does it say they are a creationist organisation?

And what Federal Court are you referring to?

Edited by CRR, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Coyote, posted 05-14-2017 10:18 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Coyote, posted 05-15-2017 12:23 AM CRR has responded

  
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5989
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 3.5


(1)
Message 206 of 323 (808927)
05-15-2017 12:23 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by CRR
05-14-2017 11:21 PM


Re: Discovery Institute is creationist start to finish
Where in that 49 pages does it say they are a creationist organisation?

From page 2, describing the Center for Science and Culture (about 60% of their budget):

THE CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND CULTURE PROMOTES RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND DISCUSSION RELATING TO THE SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN THE CENTER'S ACTIVITIES INCLUDE THE SPONSORSHIP OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND WRITING, THE PRODUCTION OF BOOKS, ARTICLES, REPORTS, AND CURRICULA, THE ORGANIZING OF SEMINARS AND CONFERENCES, AND THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF EDUCATIONAL WEBSITES, PODCASTS, AND VIDEOS

See also the Wedge Strategy:

https://ncse.com/creationism/general/wedge-document

And what Federal Court are you referring to?

From Wiki:

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. (400 F. Supp. 2d 707, Docket No. 4cv2688) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design.[1] In October 2004, the Dover Area School District of York County, Pennsylvania, changed its biology teaching curriculum to require that intelligent design be presented as an alternative to evolution theory, and that Of Pandas and People, a textbook advocating intelligent design, was to be used as a reference book.[2] The prominence of this textbook during the trial was such that the case is sometimes referred to as the Dover Panda Trial,[3][4] a name which deliberately recalls the infamous Scopes Monkey Trial in Tennessee, 80 years earlier. The plaintiffs successfully argued that intelligent design is a form of creationism, and that the school board policy violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The judge's decision sparked considerable response from both supporters and critics.

Eleven parents of students in Dover, York County, Pennsylvania, near the city of York, sued the Dover Area School District over the school board requirement that a statement presenting intelligent design as "an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin's view" was to be read aloud in ninth-grade science classes when evolution was taught.[5] The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) and Pepper Hamilton LLP. The National Center for Science Education (NCSE) acted as consultants for the plaintiffs. The defendants were represented by the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC). The Foundation for Thought and Ethics, publisher of Of Pandas and People, tried to join the lawsuit late as a defendant but was denied for multiple reasons.[6]

The suit was brought in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

More

https://en.wikipedia.org/...er_v._Dover_Area_School_District

Another tidbit:

Discovery Institute — An Insider’s Tale

https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/...an-insiders-tale


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 205 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 11:21 PM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by CRR, posted 05-15-2017 2:16 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 207 of 323 (808934)
05-15-2017 2:16 AM
Reply to: Message 206 by Coyote
05-15-2017 12:23 AM


Re: Discovery Institute is creationist start to finish
CRR: Where in that 49 pages does it say they are a creationist organisation?

Coyote: From page 2, describing the Center for Science and Culture (about 60% of their budget):

THE CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND CULTURE PROMOTES RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND DISCUSSION RELATING TO THE SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN THE CENTER'S ACTIVITIES INCLUDE THE SPONSORSHIP OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH AND WRITING, THE PRODUCTION OF BOOKS, ARTICLES, REPORTS, AND CURRICULA, THE ORGANIZING OF SEMINARS AND CONFERENCES, AND THE DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATION OF EDUCATIONAL WEBSITES, PODCASTS, AND VIDEOS

Maybe I need my eyes checked but where in that quote does it say “creation” or any derivative of that word?

Perhaps you could tell me exactly what you think a Creationist believes? Do they, for instance believe that the Earth is billions of years old? or only thousands of years old? That life began as microbial life form that evolved into Humans and other complex organisms, or that God created each Kind separately?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by Coyote, posted 05-15-2017 12:23 AM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5063
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 208 of 323 (808938)
05-15-2017 3:12 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:50 PM


Re: Lactase and Nylonase
CRR writes:

The Discovery Institute is a creationist organization...
No it's not. At best you could characterise it as being theistic evolutionist but the people at Biologos who claim to be theistic evolutionists would probably object to that. DI has many "faiths" in its following including agnostics.

quote:
Governing Goals [of the Discovery Institute]

To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies.
To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God.


https://ncse.com/creationism/general/wedge-document


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:50 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 8 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 209 of 323 (808940)
05-15-2017 5:07 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:09 PM


Re: Does the theory of evolution require a gain of information?
CRR writes:

Conclusion: The Theory of Evolution;
• Has a direction. It is attempting to explain microbes to man, not the reverse
• Requires the development of multicellularity, specialised tissues, organs, and complex body plans
• This development requires the production of new genes and genetic information; in copious quantities

I've already suggested a new information thread at least once. I'm looking forward to it, and finding out the technical reasons you think that evolutionary processes cannot increase information, if that is what you think.

Shall I start it, or will you?

I agree that genetic information would have massively increased since the origin of life, however difficult it is to quantify.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by CRR, posted 05-14-2017 8:09 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 8 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 210 of 323 (808941)
05-15-2017 5:34 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by Davidjay
05-14-2017 10:19 AM


Better a bat than batty

Natural Selection in Bats

quote:

Abstract
Bat flight poses intriguing questions about how flight independently developed in mammals. Flight is among the most energy-consuming activities. Thus, we deduced that changes in energy metabolism must be a primary factor in the origin of flight in bats. The respiratory chain of the mitochondrial produces 95% of the adenosine triphosphate (ATP) needed for locomotion. Because the respiratory chain has a dual genetic foundation, with genes encoded by both the mitochondrial and nuclear genomes, we examined both genomes to gain insights into the evolution of flight within mammals. Evidence for positive selection was detected in 23.08% of the mitochondrial-encoded and 4.90% of nuclear-encoded oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) genes, but in only 2.25% of the nuclear-encoded nonrespiratory genes that function in mitochondria or 1.005% of other nuclear genes in bats. To address the caveat that the two available bat genomes are of only draft quality, we resequenced 77 OXPHOS genes from four species of bats. The analysis of the resequenced gene data are in agreement with our conclusion that a significantly higher proportion of genes involved in energy metabolism, compared with background genes, show evidence of adaptive evolution specific on the common ancestral bat lineage. Both mitochondrial and nuclear-encoded OXPHOS genes display evidence of adaptive evolution along the common ancestral branch of bats, supporting our hypothesis that genes involved in energy metabolism were targets of natural selection and allowed adaptation to the huge change in energy demand that were required during the origin of flight.


Batula

Davidbat writes:

Re:Answer the question, Are babies different now than before..

As per usual, evolutionists run when asked a question, because they know they cant answer it ?

I repeat, Re:Answer the question, Are babies different now than before.

Yes.

Davidbatty writes:

What new beneficial mutations have occured that make us different than our ancestors babies, I mean our human ancestor babies.

Here's a few for you to start with:

Genome-wide detection and characterization of
positive selection in human populations

If you disagree with those researchers on the subject of positive selection in humans, give us the technical reasons why.

Now, when are you going to start "logically and systematically" debunking the obvious reality of selection?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Davidjay, posted 05-14-2017 10:19 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1213
14
1516
...
22Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017