Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 122 (8774 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-24-2017 4:45 AM
359 online now:
CRR, Dr Jack, Heathen, PaulK, Pressie (5 members, 354 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tom Larkin
Post Volume:
Total: 814,489 Year: 19,095/21,208 Month: 1,854/3,111 Week: 75/574 Day: 7/68 Hour: 1/3

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
5253
54
5556
...
70NextFF
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1514
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 796 of 1038 (814920)
07-13-2017 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 795 by Faith
07-13-2017 4:54 PM


Re: Funny
C.S. Lewis is a lot smarter than the likes of you.

Maybe so, but that doesn't mean he knows anything more about god than I do, or that he wasn't completely deluded.


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 795 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 4:54 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 797 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 5:01 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 25606
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 797 of 1038 (814921)
07-13-2017 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 796 by Tanypteryx
07-13-2017 4:59 PM


Re: Funny
Well the fact is that he did and you're the deluded one.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 796 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-13-2017 4:59 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1514
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 798 of 1038 (814924)
07-13-2017 5:17 PM
Reply to: Message 792 by dwise1
07-13-2017 2:47 PM


Re: Funny
But the way that creationists and "true Christians" misuse and abuse religion does not mean that religion is worthless. As hugely successful science is at answering questions about the real world, it can only work for a small subset of questions, namely questions about how the real world works.

I agree, but I think that grown-ups believing in imaginary, invisible, all-powerful beings who despite being all powerful cannot communicate with all of us is dangerous.

When it leads believers to deny evidence that everyone can see because it demonstrates that their interpretation of the bible is not true I see as having no positive benefit for humanity.


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 792 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 2:47 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 799 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 9:35 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded
 Message 803 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 10:10 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 25606
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 799 of 1038 (814940)
07-13-2017 9:35 PM
Reply to: Message 798 by Tanypteryx
07-13-2017 5:17 PM


Re: Funny
"...cannot communicate with all of us?" Where do you guys get such stuff?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 798 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-13-2017 5:17 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 800 of 1038 (814942)
07-13-2017 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 783 by Taq
07-13-2017 11:02 AM


Re: Funny
Taq writes:

Science is all about explaining how the universe works, and that is exactly what the theory of evolution does.


Science is overrated and subject to delusion.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 783 by Taq, posted 07-13-2017 11:02 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 802 by Coyote, posted 07-13-2017 10:07 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 807 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 10:31 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 830 by Taq, posted 07-14-2017 11:06 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 835 by ringo, posted 07-14-2017 12:06 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 801 of 1038 (814944)
07-13-2017 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 746 by Taq
07-12-2017 10:50 AM


Re: Interesting question...
Taq writes:

Universal common descent is a conclusion, not a theory.
It is also of practical use, such as the SIFTER algorithm that can predict protein function: ...


SIFTER = Statistical Inference of Function Through Evolutionary Relationships.  

Nice try, but no cigar ... I will bet my bottom dollar that "Evolutionary" refers to principles of microevolution (that all creationists accept) and is not in any way dependent on the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 746 by Taq, posted 07-12-2017 10:50 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 829 by Taq, posted 07-14-2017 11:05 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5904
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 802 of 1038 (814945)
07-13-2017 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 800 by Dredge
07-13-2017 9:47 PM


Re: Funny
Science is overrated and subject to delusion.

Science does quite well for itself. It may make errors but it has mechanisms built in to correct those errors.

Religions, on the other hand, are subject to many delusions (talking snakes, young earth, global flood to name just three) as well as competing beliefs. Religions have no error correcting mechanism, which is why there are so many different religions and denominations--with no way to evaluate competing beliefs, internecine disagreements lead more often to schisms than to agreement.

So don't be badmouthing science until you can do as well or better.


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 800 by Dredge, posted 07-13-2017 9:47 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 818 by Dredge, posted 07-14-2017 12:11 AM Coyote has responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2864
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 803 of 1038 (814946)
07-13-2017 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 798 by Tanypteryx
07-13-2017 5:17 PM


Re: Funny
I agree, but I think that grown-ups believing in imaginary, invisible, all-powerful beings who despite being all powerful cannot communicate with all of us is dangerous.

When it leads believers to deny evidence that everyone can see because it demonstrates that their interpretation of the bible is not true I see as having no positive benefit for humanity.

Yes, those are examples of misusing and abusing religion. When they believe that they have the complete truth and know and understand what "God" is, then they have actually lost their way, just as I had quoted St. Augustine in Message 792:

quote:
"God is not what you imagine, or what you think you understand. For if you understand, you have failed."

Their arrogance blinds them to their own plight. We see that over and over again in Faith's posts.

To question is the answer. But they cannot see that.


"Don't do what the voices tell you to do! They are not your friend!"
Reese to his younger brother, Dewey


This message is a reply to:
 Message 798 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-13-2017 5:17 PM Tanypteryx has acknowledged this reply

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 804 of 1038 (814947)
07-13-2017 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 770 by Coyote
07-12-2017 11:39 PM


Re: Interesting question...
Coyote writes:

What is not useful now may be most useful in a few years.


That's true. Lasers were initially useless. But Darwinism has been useless for more than 150 years. In another 150 years it will still be useless. (Note: The hallmark of a false theory is uselessness.) Actually, within 150 years, the science of genetics will prove that evolution is impossible ... and useless.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 770 by Coyote, posted 07-12-2017 11:39 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 805 by Coyote, posted 07-13-2017 10:26 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 808 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 10:44 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 832 by Taq, posted 07-14-2017 11:09 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 5904
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 4.4


(2)
Message 805 of 1038 (814949)
07-13-2017 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 804 by Dredge
07-13-2017 10:16 PM


Re: Interesting question...
...Darwinism has been useless for more than 150 years. In another 150 years it will still be useless. (Note: The hallmark of a false theory is uselessness.) Actually, within 150 years, the science of genetics will prove that evolution is impossible ... and useless.

For 150 years creationists have been nipping at the heels of evolution like an overzealous Chihuahua, all to no effect.

Science is just getting stronger all the time, while creationist arguments are increasingly tenuous or disproved.

I'm not worried.


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 804 by Dredge, posted 07-13-2017 10:16 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 806 of 1038 (814950)
07-13-2017 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 773 by Tangle
07-13-2017 3:03 AM


Re: Interesting question...
Tangle writes:

As you have now apparently discovered, common descent is not a theory. Progress of sorts.


"Universal common descent is the hypothesis that all known living terrestrial, organisms are genealogically related." - Talk Origins. (emphasis mine).

Anyhow, all these evolution words games is like debating the colour of the Tooth Fairy's hair.

I've been here a few years now and have noticed that the crazier creationists - the real fruitcakes - speak of themselves in this third party way. You need to keep a watch on yourself.

Thank you for your concern, but the team of psychiatrists who look after me assure me that I'm no madder than I was at my last check-up. How did you know my OIR (Official Insanity Rating) is RF (Real Fruitcake)?

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 773 by Tangle, posted 07-13-2017 3:03 AM Tangle has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2864
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 807 of 1038 (814951)
07-13-2017 10:31 PM
Reply to: Message 800 by Dredge
07-13-2017 9:47 PM


Re: Funny
Science is overrated and subject to delusion.

All human endeavors are subject to delusion. Including religion. That is one reason why I can never be a Christian (especially of the fundamentalist variety), because it requires me to believe in human infallibility and that is a camel that is just too impossible for me to swallow.

The thing with science is that its findings can be tested, so if errors creep in as they inevitably must, then those errors can be detected and corrected.

What about religion? When errors creep into religion as they inevitably must, how does religion handle them? It doesn't! Religion has no protocol for testing, error-detection, nor error-correcting. It just careens more and more off-course. Of course, the Protestant way of handling it is to splinter even further and form new churches, but they still carry those theological errors with them, still failing to make the necessary corrections.

Ah, you protest that you have Revelation so your knowledge is perfect. Not so. An online Christian friend once asked me what I believe (I am an atheist and have been for over half a century, but I am not a Christian atheist). I HTML'ized my response and posted it on my site at DWise1's Religion Pages: What I believe. About Revelation I wrote:

quote:
Ah, but what of receiving information about the supernatural through Revelation? I tend to agree with Thomas Paine's observation that Revelation is Revelation only to that one individual who receives it. When he tells another about it, then it becomes hear-say, and when that person tells yet another, then it becomes hear-say upon hear-say, and so forth, many hundreds of times over. But I believe that Paine was too optimistic and understated the situation. Having spent my first seven years of college as a language major (German, French, Spanish, Russian, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, Old English), I understand something about the effects of language on the mind and on the structuring of thought, even on a pre-verbal level. I would correct Paine's statement by saying that Revelation is not even Revelation to that person directly receiving it, but rather it would have become hear-say as soon as he began to think about it, because his mind would have started filtering and interpreting it. Revelation cannot be improved upon; it can only hope to be transmitted perfectly. Perfect transmission of Revelation within the human mind and from one human mind to another is impossible; our minds and our means of information transfer -- eg, language -- are far too imperfect to be up to the job. Therefore, in human hands and minds and through human means, Revelation can only be degraded. The only way I can see for an individual to access Revelation is for that individual to receive It himself, even though even then it would be degraded by his mind and by his cultural filters, including what he has been taught by his religion to expect of Revelation. Ironically, I believe that that would make me something of a mystic.

So then, that is the dilemma for religion. Even if somebody had received perfect Revelation 2000 years ago, every time it got transmitted from one human to another it became degraded, kind of like that party game of "Telegraph" (or "Telephone") where you line everybody up and whisper something into the first person's ear, who then passes it on to the next person and so on until the last person ends up hearing something very different than the original message. Your Holy Ghost story does nothing to help, because everybody that spook helps still ends up getting a different story.

So, to reiterate, how exactly does religion deal with its own delusions and errors?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 800 by Dredge, posted 07-13-2017 9:47 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2864
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 808 of 1038 (814952)
07-13-2017 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 804 by Dredge
07-13-2017 10:16 PM


Re: Interesting question...
Actually, within 150 years, the science of genetics will prove that evolution is impossible ... and useless.

Already happened in the early 20th Century, only to have genetics actually supporting evolution by the 1940's.

Surely you have encountered lists of quotemining of scientists declaring Darwinism to be proven wrong. Checking the dates on those quotes you should have noticed them being from the first half of the 20th century. Well, here's the story on that.

One of the problems that Darwin could not solve was how inheritance worked and how new traits could arise. As a result, he worked out his "pangenetic theory" which ironically dragged him back to a form of Lamarckism. Equally ironic, he had a copy of Mendel's monograph on genetics in his library, but apparently had never gotten around to reading it.

Then around 1900, Mendel's work resurfaced and biologists discovered mutations and started studying them, especially in fruit fly populations because of the short generation times. Well, that resulted in those scientists declaring that Darwin had been disproven, but they were talking about his pangenetic theory, not natural selection, but creationist quoteminers don't care about such distinctions.

Then in the 1930's and 1940's, scientists such as Fischer realized that genetics and mutation were the answer to Darwin's problems with how inheritance worked and out that Grand Synthesis came neo-Darwinism which combined classic Darwinism with genetics and population genetics.

So, genetics actually support evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 804 by Dredge, posted 07-13-2017 10:16 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 811 by Faith, posted 07-13-2017 11:34 PM dwise1 has responded
 Message 845 by Dredge, posted 07-15-2017 6:56 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 809 of 1038 (814954)
07-13-2017 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 777 by NoNukes
07-13-2017 8:53 AM


Re: define "species"
NoNukes writes:

I see that Tangle has provided some additional information. I am curious as to what it would take for you to check your answer before posting. While I am aware of how selection works, I am also aware that mutations occur, and I wouldn't assume without checking that a relatively recent (the early 1800s it turns out) mutation was not involved.
Your peer CRR at least has not made the same mistake.
Everyone should know better than to speak repeatedly from ignorance, yet you do not.


In the wild, 99.9999% of budgerigars are coloured green and yellow.  But breeders have produced budgies in many different colours, including white, blue, green, yellow, grey, violet and Pied.   The potential for these "new" colours always existed.  I suspect that the same potential for different coloured Pepperd Moths always existed.  And Chicko agrees with me.
 
This message is a reply to:
 Message 777 by NoNukes, posted 07-13-2017 8:53 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 826 by NoNukes, posted 07-14-2017 1:36 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 836 by ringo, posted 07-14-2017 12:11 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 850 by Dredge, posted 07-15-2017 7:52 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 522
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 810 of 1038 (814955)
07-13-2017 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 778 by Tangle
07-13-2017 10:34 AM


Re: Peppered Moth
Tangle writes:

So we have a beneficial mutation plus natural selection leading to a change in phenotype in response to a change in the environment.

A perfectly demonstrated example of the predicted components of one form of the evolutionary process.


... otherwise known as natural selection.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 778 by Tangle, posted 07-13-2017 10:34 AM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 831 by Taq, posted 07-14-2017 11:08 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
5253
54
5556
...
70NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017