Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8749 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2017 10:30 AM
361 online now:
Coyote, DrJones*, dwise1, jar, PaulK, ramoss, vimesey (7 members, 354 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Roshankumar1234
Post Volume:
Total: 808,997 Year: 13,603/21,208 Month: 3,085/3,605 Week: 427/933 Day: 16/56 Hour: 1/2

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
11121314
15
16Next
Author Topic:   Debunking the Evolutionary God of 'Selection'
Admin
Director
Posts: 12504
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 211 of 230 (808944)
05-15-2017 7:38 AM


I agree that a new information thread should be proposed. This thread is for Davidjay to debunk selection.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by bluegenes, posted 05-15-2017 7:45 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply
 Message 213 by Davidjay, posted 05-15-2017 8:28 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 3088
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 212 of 230 (808946)
05-15-2017 7:45 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by Admin
05-15-2017 7:38 AM


we will wait, and wait, and wait.....
Admin writes:

This thread is for Davidjay to debunk selection.

And he'll be commencing shortly after hell freezes over.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Admin, posted 05-15-2017 7:38 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 755
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 213 of 230 (808954)
05-15-2017 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by Admin
05-15-2017 7:38 AM


This thread is for all not just for me.
This thread is for Davidjay to debunk selection.

No Percy this thread is not for me only to debunk selection. A thread is for all to discuss, pro and con. As a so called moderator and judge, you should know that. Therefore trying to isolate me as the one and only proponent against the god of selection is your value judgment placed on all readers, so as to promote the god of selection. Why because you Percy were the first person I heard praising selection as if it was divine and alive because of its so called non random selecting process.

You dont just post against me, your evolutionists also post. So it is not me against you or me against all of you... Its a objective debate that I have won because I have demonstarted and proven my case in written form. All can enter in, all can discuss, and all should consider that selection is not alive.

Selection is totally dependant on their being socalled beneficial mutations, and no beneficial mutations have ever been discovered let alone any beneficial mutations ever caused a species to change. Your foolish colour mutations are not mutations just a color switch adaption..... poor deluded evolutionists so desperate in trying to find some evidence somewhere to confirm their theory.

So come on Percy, at least try to appear fair....

I say and have proven your god of selection is dead, because it has no living beneficial mutations to select from.

Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.

Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.


.
The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK.

.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by Admin, posted 05-15-2017 7:38 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 214 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2017 10:23 AM Davidjay has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18467
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 214 of 230 (808979)
05-15-2017 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 213 by Davidjay
05-15-2017 8:28 AM


The score is 32 to 0 so far ... better get started ...
No Percy this thread is not for me only to debunk selection. A thread is for all to discuss, pro and con. ...

But it is your job as the thread author to defend your topic against evidence that invalidates it. Out of curiosity I just went back through the thread and isolated all the posts that presented evidence or typical situations where natural selection occurs -- actually occurs --

  1. Message 7 - Re: Let the readers decide
  2. Message 22 -
  3. Message 23 -
  4. Message 25 - On selection
  5. Message 33 - Re: BACK TO THE TOPIC !
  6. Message 34 - Re: On selection
  7. Message 40 -
  8. Message 48 - Re: Evolutionists cant defend their god of Selection
  9. Message 52 - Re: Evolutionists cant defend their god of Selection
  10. Message 61 - Re: Evolution Selection supposedly sustains life ? ?
  11. Message 80 - How many, I wonder?
  12. Message 88 - No biology yet...
  13. Message 100 - David: "Why are evolutionists so ignorant of genetics"...
  14. Message 104 - When will selection be debunked?
  15. Message 105 - Re: memes are like genes, inheritable and selectable
  16. Message 117 - Start talking about biology.
  17. Message 121 - Peppered moths (Biston betularia) and Natural Selection
  18. Message 122 - Coat Color in Rock Pocket Mice
  19. Message 124 - Of Moths, Mice and Men
  20. Message 133 - A fairly big example of selection
  21. Message 136 - Putting Davidjay back on track ... maybe ...
  22. Message 137 - Re: Color is not a new KIND
  23. Message 140 - Re: Color is not a new KIND, nor is the thread about "NEW KINDs"
  24. Message 143 - Re: Of Moths, Mice and Men
  25. Message 149 - Re: ring species
  26. Message 166 - Re: Lactase and Nylonase
  27. Message 168 - Re: Lactase and Nylonase
  28. Message 173 - Re: NO mutations away from mothers milk..miracle
  29. Message 180 - Re: What changes have their been in new babies from old babies ?
  30. Message 186 - Re: What changes have their been in new babies from old babies ?
  31. Message 189 - Time to start the impossible debunking
  32. Message 210 - Better a bat than batty

-- and the lack of response debate from you means that you are not doing anything to defend your topic against the evidence that invalidates your assertion.

The score is 32 to 0 so far, and you haven't even left the starting gate ... if you are ever going to defend your topic, now looks like a good time to get going.

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 213 by Davidjay, posted 05-15-2017 8:28 AM Davidjay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Davidjay, posted 05-16-2017 10:25 AM RAZD has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6439
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 215 of 230 (808981)
05-15-2017 10:41 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:

Does the theory of evolution require a gain of copious quantities of genetic information?
Yes it does.

That's just a bare assertion. Until you define what information is and show that evolution has to produce genetic information it will remain a bare assertion.

Just so, even if it can't currently be quantified no reasonable person doubts that this genetic information exists.

Your whole schtick is to never define what an increase in information would be so that you can deny any and all evidence. It's not that you can't define genetic information, it's that you won't.

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

The vast, vast majority of species are still microbes, demonstrating that evolution does not have a direction.

Evolution does not require the development of multicellularity, specialized tissues, organs, or complex body plans as demonstrated by the billions of species without those things.

All of the biodiversity we see today only requires the modification of genes and DNA that are already present which you have already disqualified as being new genetic information. Therefore, evolution does not require new genetic information as you define it.


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

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6439
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


(1)
Message 216 of 230 (808983)
05-15-2017 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by CRR
05-14-2017 8:50 PM


Re: Lactase and Nylonase
CRR writes:

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.

Why isn't that new genetic information?

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.

Now you are redefining beneficial mutations as "fine tuning". Such is the worn out strategy of creationist denial.

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.

Mutations in the gene promoter allows the gene to be turned on after weaning. These mutations were selected for in populations with domesticated bovines.

If that is not an increase in genetic information, then evolution doesn't need to produce genetic information in order to produce the biodiversity we see today.

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.

And yet, with all of that activity, they still can't produce a quantitative measure for genetic information?


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

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13023
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 217 of 230 (808989)
05-15-2017 11:42 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:

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


No.

Don't get caught up in the idea of "gaining" information. What happens in evolution is a change in information. The word "cat" and the word "bat" have different meanings but they contain the same amount of information.

Selection just preserves the information that is best suited to survival.


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

Replies to this message:
 Message 218 by jar, posted 05-15-2017 12:00 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28837
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


(2)
Message 218 of 230 (808993)
05-15-2017 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 217 by ringo
05-15-2017 11:42 AM


Re: Does the theory of evolution require a gain of information?
Cat House and House Cat contain the same amount of information yet few except some Latin speakers would question that the two phrases while containing the same words and same letters convey two totally different concepts.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by ringo, posted 05-15-2017 11:42 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12504
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.4


Message 219 of 230 (809071)
05-16-2017 7:29 AM


Moderator Request
Again, it would be better if the discussion on information were moved to a new thread. If someone proposes a new thread over at Proposed New Topics I will review it as quickly as possible. This thread is for Davidjay to defend his propositions against selection.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by Davidjay, posted 05-16-2017 10:33 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 755
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 220 of 230 (809097)
05-16-2017 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by RAZD
05-15-2017 10:23 AM


Re: As mentioned evolutionists never answer questions
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.

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

Do label and explain these beneficial mutations rather than trying to say, mutations are shown by color, because we all know or should know that color is not a mutational change, just a superficial one... evolionists hope we are all different and branching but creationist know we are all the same and EQUAL.

Answer evolutionists answer rather than running and hiding, and getting tripped off.,

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

Notice how they demand answers to their side topics but never answer the questions posed to them.


Evolutyionists are used to forcing their theory on students and scientists. They are not used to answering any questions on this theory, because it is their religion. And as a religion it must be accepted by faith.... It is not science and it is not logical or rational and has no facts behind it. Evolution is a con and a LIE. A big one, but because it is forced on the gullible and on students, they must accept it. This their modus operandi...and so when faced with sane biological opposition, they can only be subjective rather than objective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2017 10:23 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 222 by Taq, posted 05-16-2017 10:35 AM Davidjay has not yet responded
 Message 223 by RAZD, posted 05-17-2017 12:22 AM Davidjay has responded

    
Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 755
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 221 of 230 (809098)
05-16-2017 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 219 by Admin
05-16-2017 7:29 AM


Re: Your wording is against the rules
Thats totally bias, and unjust.

This thread is not about me, its not a subjective thread, its an objective threrad. Percy you are stating that

Again, it would be better if the discussion on information were moved to a new thread. If someone proposes a new thread over at Proposed New Topics I will review it as quickly as possible. This thread is for Davidjay to defend his propositions against selection.

You assume incorrectly that I alone am against your god of selection. You assume as an evolutionists that no one can possibly agree with me, about your god....and her godlike selction of suppposed beneficial mutations that she can non randomly pick out for survival.

That is not what happens in a true OPEN debate, it is not one against all, it is one principle against another principle.... and then all can enter in. Attempting to isolate me is against the rules, against objectivity.

As an evolutionist you should at least try to be objective and try to moderate fairly.

I mean its bad enough when you wont allow the origins of evolution, your Missing treeshrew LINK, or beneficial mutations be discussed by me (and others)


Evolutyionists are used to forcing their theory on students and scientists. They are not used to answering any questions on this theory, because it is their religion. And as a religion it must be accepted by faith.... It is not science and it is not logical or rational and has no facts behind it. Evolution is a con and a LIE. A big one, but because it is forced on the gullible and on students, they must accept it. This their modus operandi...and so when faced with sane biological opposition, they can only be subjective rather than objective.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Admin, posted 05-16-2017 7:29 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 6439
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 222 of 230 (809099)
05-16-2017 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Davidjay
05-16-2017 10:25 AM


Re: As mentioned evolutionists never answer questions
Davidjay writes:

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

Answer our question first, which was asked first.

How do you explain why we see black mice in areas with black rocks and brown mice in areas with brown dirt?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Davidjay, posted 05-16-2017 10:25 AM Davidjay has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18467
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 223 of 230 (809199)
05-17-2017 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Davidjay
05-16-2017 10:25 AM


Re: As mentioned evolutionists never answer questions
This is really pathetic.

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.

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

Yes they are different, different in every generation, because you have mutations your parents did not have. This is measured and documented and it would be dumb and stupid to say otherwise.

Do label and explain these beneficial mutations rather than trying to say, mutations are shown by color, because we all know or should know that color is not a mutational change, just a superficial one... evolionists hope we are all different and branching ...

Curiously they don't all have to be beneficial to be different, so once again you dance around issues instead of being straight-forward. Or even (heaven forfend) attempt to learn something.

More amusingly they don't need to result in branching of species to be different, hence variations in skin tones, eye colors, hair types, height, etc etc etc

... but creationist know we are all the same and EQUAL.

Which is why you can get blood transfusions from anyone, no worries.

And I bet if you try real hard you can come up with something that is even more ignorant and uninformed.

Notice how they demand answers to their side topics but never answer the questions posed to them.

Notice how repeating this after multiple answers are made is just outright lying, a desperate ploy trying to cause a stink rather than deal with any of the multitude of issues raise that invalidate his arguments.

Documented 32 issues raised in response to Davidjay comments and he has not responded in good faith to any of them, instead making posts like this.

Sad. But the first sign of cognitive dissonance is to mock the dissonant information.

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 220 by Davidjay, posted 05-16-2017 10:25 AM Davidjay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 224 by Davidjay, posted 05-17-2017 7:26 PM RAZD has responded

  
Davidjay 
Suspended Member
Posts: 755
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 224 of 230 (809319)
05-17-2017 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by RAZD
05-17-2017 12:22 AM


Re: As mentioned evolutionists never answer questions
Evolutionists are dumber than the bones they worship and fantasize about...... I repeat, color change is not a sign and proof of evolution, its merely a color change adaption the Lord gives moths and even people. Peoples colour does not mean they are mutating into a new improved race or into an inferior race...

Its just a desperate desperate insane attempt to justify the false religion of evolution.

And yet evolutionists in their desperation have no other proofs so cling to their color change as if it is a beneficial change that means organs can evolve and systems can evolve.

How significant that shallow superifical evolutionists cling to their skin deep color change as their proof of their religious unscientific mutational proof.

Its a lie, a blatant deceptive lie. This making evolutionists who say this lie, liars.


Being told to Fuck you I can fucking write whatever I want' by Cats eye to me is against the rules of civil debate, but this board says otherewise and allows evolutionists do write such vulgar comments without punishment.

Evolutionists are used to forcing their theory on students and scientists. They are not used to answering any questions on this theory, because it is their religion. And as a religion it must be accepted by faith.... It is not science and it is not logical or rational and has no facts behind it. Evolution is a con and a LIE. A big one, but because it is forced on the gullible and on students, they must accept it. This their modus operandi...and so when faced with sane biological opposition, they can only be subjective rather than objective.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by RAZD, posted 05-17-2017 12:22 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by RAZD, posted 05-17-2017 8:36 PM Davidjay has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18467
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 225 of 230 (809337)
05-17-2017 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Davidjay
05-17-2017 7:26 PM


Re: As mentioned evolutionists never answer questions
Evolutionists are dumber than the bones they worship and fantasize about......
Its a lie, a blatant deceptive lie. This making evolutionists who say this lie, liars.

Says the person who whines to admin about not being respected, yet this is his SOP.

... I repeat, color change is not a sign and proof of evolution, its merely a color change adaption the Lord gives moths and even people. ...

Color change is due to selection occurring, documented and recorded showing it to be a fact that selection occurs.

This invalidates your base assertion of this thread. You are wrong.

... Peoples colour does not mean they are mutating into a new improved race or into an inferior race...

And nobody said it was.

Black mice are better adapted to living on lava beds
Tan mice are better adapted to living on tan soil
Black mice evolved from tan mice in two separate locations via two different mutations, which allowed black mice to take advantage of the lava bed ecology

You, however, seem to be confused about evolution and selection being racist, but have yet to demonstrate it.

And yet evolutionists in their desperation have no other proofs so cling to their color change as if it is a beneficial change that means organs can evolve and systems can evolve.

Which is it more beneficial to be on lava beds -- black or tan?
Which is it more beneficial to be on tan soils -- black or tan?
Which are "superior" mice -- black or tan?

Inquiring minds want to know. (anyone want to wager on when Davidjay will answer this question already asked several times on this thread?)

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 224 by Davidjay, posted 05-17-2017 7:26 PM Davidjay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Davidjay, posted 05-20-2017 10:52 AM RAZD has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
11121314
15
16Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017