|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationists acknowledge evolution makes sense | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
I don't know if everyone saw this on another thread. At first, I thought it was a joke by CobraSnake. Then I read more of his/her posts and realized he/she is a creationist. I asked a creationist to define the barrier for evolution (i.e. what limits 'micro' evolution from 'macro'). Here is the response (I still don't know if this is a serious response or a joke):
quote: In other words, according to creationists a bacteria may, or may not be descended from the same original created kind. I can't tell you how many creationists have lamented that evolution is a 'bacteria to man' myth. When pressed for the limits on what evolution can accomplish, they reach the same exact conclusion. Is this really the definition creationists are touting as the limits to evolution. I still think someone is yanking my chain. Cheers Joe Meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7910 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
what the hell joe? thats all i can say... what the hell?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cobra_snake Inactive Member |
quote: Sorry, this was a pretty crappy post. It was late at night and I wasn't really reading very carefully. Creationists are touting that kinds are the limit to evolution. I don't think creationists are close to coming up with a definitive answer, but they are at least trying. (The reason that the hybridization only works one way is that mutations could cause the original created kind to not be able to hybridize, despite being from the same created kind.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM:Actually, your definition is something i've seen before from creationists. They have the same escape clause for 'baramins' (created kind=bara min) as you have for hybrids. It's hilarious because it includes the possibility of exactly what they claim as impossible (eg bacteria to man)! cheers joe meert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5059 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Joe,
In all respect, I do not use the word (baramin) or any term in science for that matter, merely for a lexical escape given your grammer, but I use it to extend the written expression of evolution thinking, into a textual space that evolutionists so far a wont to go but with use may find that, (text) says something in any biology afterall. This is because cladistics and phenetics with community of phylogeneticists have made some points between biometricians and mendelists impossible to express grammetological in any other differANCE for the genetic difference not any different no matter the C/E. But that you would class my posts less classy as Derridian would be a mistake even though the New Zelanders may so associate the same English for a time, till a Journal of Panbiogeography be formed and USA work therethrough be accounted in or out the generalized track. As far as I am aware, and this comes from a constraint, from HM MOrris, it, is only necessary for good science to clearly keep the biology and the math seperate. Croizat did a good job of combining things while Wright can be used as seperationist if one is needed in the human realm ABOVE the Cebu level. Good luck with the difference of projective geometry and affine transforms.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: BRAD McFall is a bot.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
quote: Que? Me no understand I come from Barcelona....(Manuel from Fawlty Towers) He`s a bot how? I thought he was just either a)crazy or b)doing a real good job of pretending to be crazy...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7910 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
i think hes a crazy bot with intentions of world domination. i have not understood any of his posts. im not sure if anyone has.
------------------"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Joe Meert Member (Idle past 5707 days) Posts: 913 From: Gainesville Joined: |
quote: JM: Like I said, if you think you start to understand him, check yourself into a hospital immediately. Cheers Joe MEert
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
KingPenguin Member (Idle past 7910 days) Posts: 286 From: Freeland, Mi USA Joined: |
lol. your a funny guy, joe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1903 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Joe,
The original response that you quoted is a near verbatim quote from creationist Don Batten. It is exactly why what they are doing is not scientific. The very type of evidence (genetic) that Don and pals accept for placing various species into one 'baramin' is flatly rejected when the same type of evidence places humans in the same group as apes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: How can they honestly be attempting to understand the issue if they can't even define the word "kind"? Please tell me how I can tell one "kind" from another. What methodology is used, and what criterion? Why do all cats, from a Bengal tiger to my housecat, tend to be classified as the same "kind", yet humans and chimps are never considered to be the same "kind"? What is the scientific rationale for this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5059 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
A presented a testable effect.
You can dis by missing it, so look below before you cause me to read more about Croizat and Cebu but good look any way
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brad McFall Member (Idle past 5059 days) Posts: 3428 From: Ithaca,NY, USA Joined: |
Don't say I didn't "tell" you.
Wed 13 The use of Clausius' work to side with Einstein and not Dirac nor Feynaman whether a theorem or equation as far as potential goes unless some qusi- isolated system, say by electrotonic dissection of a fish modulus of angles between histogeny and morphogeny (in which case the probabalistic nature of thermodynamics would have been better undersood) does not affect the question as to whether seeds fall to the Earth of Sun or some place else? because the immigration pressure can always be re-current when or if not re-entrant currently bioentropically or not as to adaptive understanding of whatever molecular adapations be; the logical constant that that work would represent need not "homogenously" approach the same definite vaule especially if fundamental series materialized posses ... materiality (as per iobservation in flame spectra, say) larger than w (first actual infinity#) but due as in meristic data based to repetitions of this instantiation no matter the implementation> as per specification (Ernst Mayr thought this had to final cause be of Aristotle, it does not and Dr. Mayr was polemically mistaken)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Brad, please do not reply to my posts any more. I grow weary of your complete and utter full of crap-ness.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024