|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,470 Year: 3,727/9,624 Month: 598/974 Week: 211/276 Day: 51/34 Hour: 1/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Chimpanzee-human genetic gap | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Why don't you explain why we only see homeostasis in sufficiently large populations? Because genuine non-Darwinian macroevolution is a fact within kinds. These large populations have never been breached. Darwinists come along and assert their macro must be true based upon whatever degree of micro occurring within the kind. What is your evidence (other than an atheistic need) as to how the barrier is breached ? Answer: the entirely assumed and made up god called Random Mutation. Here are some macro-kinds: mankind, birds, quadrupeds, and reptiles.
If it doesn't apply in some situations, how can it be your speciation-proof genetic barrier? Because, literally, hundreds and hundreds of artificial animal and plant breeders have never once been able to penetrate the barrier. Darwin knew the barrier existed and immediately withdrew bears morphing into whales in all editions of "Origin" after the first. This left absoulutely no ***reason for being*** evidence that his theory necessitates: transitional, neither an example, and we know he never claimed any evidence of NS. 70 years later Darwinists scrambling to still figure out how nature operates HAD to adopt NS - and I bet at this late date you and most Darwinists have no idea how much actual evidence existed for NS ? I do and I will humiliate evos with this fact in my forth-coming paper. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Because genuine non-Darwinian macroevolution is a fact within kinds. These large populations have never been breached. Darwinists come along and assert their macro must be true based upon whatever degree of micro occurring within the kind. What is your evidence (other than an atheistic need) as to how the barrier is breached ? Answer: the entirely assumed and made up god called Random Mutation. Here are some macro-kinds: mankind, birds, quadrupeds, and reptiles. If you didn't understand the question, it would be better for you to say so, rather than cut and paste some ridiculous screed instead of answering my question. I repeat:
quote: Because, literally, hundreds and hundreds of artificial animal and plant breeders have never once been able to penetrate the barrier. I just told you that the "barrier" is easily penetrated in small populations. So, assertions that the "barrier has never been penetrated" aren't answers to the question I asked, which I've repeated above. Why don't you answer my question instead of cutting and pasting nonsense?
I do and I will humiliate evos with this fact in my forth-coming paper. Ah, one more "forth-coming paper" that's going to leave us quaking in our boots, sundered by your intellect. Lysmachus had one of those, too. We've kinda stopped hearing from him. Is it too much to dream that the same be true of you? By all means, hit us with this "paper."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
mankind, birds, quadrupeds, and reptiles. I don't get it. What humans, birds, or reptiles do you think exist that aren't quadrupeds? All humans, birds, and "reptiles" (itself not even a real taxon, much less a "kind") are quadrupeds. The indication of that would be the four limbs that each of these groups of creatures posess. Can't wait for your "upcoming paper." Like in Calvin and Hobbes I expect you to try to convince us that bats are bugs, or some such.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
I understand everything you listed Ray. Its perfectly simple and entirely irrelevant. After 750 posts in an EvC forum, you'd think I'd have a rough idea on the basics of the debate wouldn't you? We aren't debating what the debate is about. We are trying to agree what each 'side's' conclusion is regarding the chimpanzee-human genetic gap. My preceding post was my conclusion. You still don't get it even though you claim to.
The first thing we need to find agreement on is the meaning of the chimpanzee human genetic gap. THAT is what is in debate. It means hominid evolution is ridiculous. 5 million years ! The Biblical penalty MUST be true - how could you even entertain this nonsense ? Answer: your atheistic needs.
At this point there is no debate about 'macroevolution'. We are examining what it means to evolutionists. It means evos have no choice because Creationism is not an option. Therefore Lewontin's "we take the side of science....absurd constructs" kicks in. IOW, invoking science grants license to accept and create absurdities since the end (falsifying the Creator) justify's the means (absurd constructs). Lewontin is also a Marxist, which means he believes in lying to achieve his atheistic purposes.
As such we start with our assumption that all species share a common ancestor. Ordinary atheist philosophy. The assumption predetermines the conclusion and insulates the conclusion from falsification. This is called arguing in a circle; your mind is already made up. Facts cannot ever jeopardize your belief. In reality, you, like Lewontin, have nothing to do with science as all honest and intelligent people already know. Darwinism is a religion - the bad element of science called Scientism; equivalent to the bad element in religion called the Fundamentalists.
Given this assumption we should be able to learn of relatedness by shared characteristics. A fairly simple idea. Do you agree that IF all species were related THEN we should be able to detected relatedness based on cladistics. Ray in previous post writes: http://EvC Forum: Chimpanzee-human genetic gap -->EvC Forum: Chimpanzee-human genetic gap We can identify relatedness and commonality between species ad nauseum. None of this is in dispute. Ray This message has been edited by Herepton, 01-28-2006 11:06 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
If you didn't understand the question, it would be better for you to say so, rather than cut and paste some ridiculous screed instead of answering my question. Those are my own words from my own mind. You are accusing me of plagiarism. Produce your evidence or withdraw.
I just told you that the "barrier" is easily penetrated in small populations. So, assertions that the "barrier has never been penetrated" aren't answers to the question I asked, which I've repeated above. Why don't you answer my question instead of cutting and pasting nonsense? Produce your "cut and paste" plagiarism charge or withdraw. It is apparent you are upset in a irrational manner caused by the inability to refute or engage.
Ah, one more "forth-coming paper" that's going to leave us quaking in our boots, sundered by your intellect. Lysmachus had one of those, too. We've kinda stopped hearing from him. Is it too much to dream that the same be true of you? By all means, hit us with this "paper." Atheist rant. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
What humans, birds, or reptiles do you think exist that aren't quadrupeds? All humans, birds, and "reptiles" (itself not even a real taxon, much less a "kind") are quadrupeds. Absurd nonsense from a confused mind made necessary from the knowledge and backdrop of modern DNA evidence falsfying traditional evolutionary ancestry claims by Darwinian "scientists". Also tantamount to asserting mankind are apes since there is no credible and objective evidence that everyone can plainly see for the most extraordinary claim of all time. http://news.independent.co.uk/...ddle_east/article338230.ece Since we are apes I guess Darwinian "science" must conclude these "apes" were not selected to live ? Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coragyps Member (Idle past 756 days) Posts: 5553 From: Snyder, Texas, USA Joined: |
Absurd nonsense from a confused mind made necessary from the knowledge and backdrop of modern DNA evidence falsfying traditional evolutionary ancestry claims by Darwinian "scientists". Ray, if you'll look, I think you'll find that Linneaus classified all those as quadrupeds, based on their skeletons, about a century before Darwin published. And your link and comments are positively bizarre in this context.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Those are my own words from my own mind. You are accusing me of plagiarism. I'm accusing you of not answering my question. For the third time, and then we're done:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Absurd nonsense from a confused mind made necessary from the knowledge and backdrop of modern DNA evidence falsfying traditional evolutionary ancestry claims by Darwinian "scientists". How many limbs does a human have? How many limbs does a bird have? How many limbs does a reptile have? (Even snakes have the vestigal skeletal structures of limbs.) What does the word "quadruped" mean? If you're not talking about birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals, then what organisms are you talking about with this term?
Since we are apes I guess Darwinian "science" must conclude these "apes" were not selected to live ? From what basis do you conclude that your article represents a selectivly meaningful event? Even in evolution, organisms get struck by lightning.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1366 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
How many limbs does a human have? How many limbs does a bird have? How many limbs does a reptile have? (Even snakes have the vestigal skeletal structures of limbs.) What does the word "quadruped" mean? If you're not talking about birds, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals, then what organisms are you talking about with this term? the word you're looking for is "tetrapod." tetrapods are all animals that have four limbs, other than prehensile extensions of the spinal column. quadrupeds are animals that WALK on four legs. humans are bipeds, not quadrupeds. technically, the two literally mean the same thing, "four feet." but they are used differently (even in scientific context).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1489 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
the word you're looking for is "tetrapod." Interesting. Thank you. God only knows what Ray is talking about, of course.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1366 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
*shrug*
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
wj Inactive Member |
From message #181,
Herepton writes: Here are some macro-kinds: mankind, birds, quadrupeds, and reptiles. Could we have a bit of clarification on these "macro-kinds"? What is the full listing of vertebrate "macro-kinds"? The list above does raise the question of why reptiles aren't quadrupeds. Do amphibians get a mention? Are kangaroos quadrapeds in this system? Where do snakes fit in? Perhaps then such classifications could be tested against the fossil record.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
tetrapods are all animals that have four limbs, other than prehensile extensions of the spinal column. quadrupeds are animals that WALK on four legs. humans are bipeds, not quadrupeds. technically, the two literally mean the same thing, "four feet." but they are used differently (even in scientific context). And Crashfrog didn't know this ? This is why I referred to his initial reply as "absurd nonsense" http://EvC Forum: Chimpanzee-human genetic gap -->EvC Forum: Chimpanzee-human genetic gap Ray This message has been edited by Herepton, 01-28-2006 02:57 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3070 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Why don't you explain why we only see homeostasis in sufficiently large populations? Why have you evaded my previous answer ? What you call "large populations" the Bible calls "kinds". Ray
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024