Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   why creation "science" isn't science
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 250 of 365 (3400)
02-04-2002 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by lbhandli
02-03-2002 7:55 PM


i do not see the point of this topic. can someone explain in laymen's terms for a "young whippersnapper". i did however notice that you are all trying to use others opinions and actions to prove the opposite side's opinion wrong and that doesnt get you anywhere.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by lbhandli, posted 02-03-2002 7:55 PM lbhandli has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by mark24, posted 02-04-2002 7:09 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 252 by lbhandli, posted 02-04-2002 8:33 PM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 264 of 365 (3560)
02-06-2002 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Quetzal
01-26-2002 3:25 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Quetzal:
Okay cobra: You wanted a evolution explained in our own words. Please note that I reject utterly your spurious attempt to link evolution with abiogenesis and cosmogenesis. These latter have no place in evolutionary theory, and efforts to include them is a vain try at erecting a strawman. You have been told repeatedly, in many ways by many posters that Darwinian evolution deals ONLY with biology. Biology is where my theory remains.
First off, there are some very basic statements that, for evolution to be true, must be true. All provide potential pathways for falsification. All lend themselves to development of testable hypotheses. All have (scientifically) predictive value:
1. If all the offspring that organisms can produce were to survive and reproduce, they would soon overrun the earth.
2. As a consequence, there is competition to survive and reproduce, in which only a few individuals succeed in leaving progeny.
3. Organisms show variation in characteristics or traits that influence their success in this struggle for existence. Individuals within a population vary from one another in many traits.
4. Offspring tend to resemble parents, including in characters that influence success in the struggle to survive and reproduce.
5. Parents possessing certain traits that enable them to survive and reproduce will contribute disproportionately to the offspring that make up the next generation.
6. To the extent that offspring resemble their parents, the population in the next generation will consist of a higher proportion of individuals that possess whatever adaptation enabled their parents to survive and reproduce.
Next, you need to understand (and remember) that natural selection leading to evolution is simply the differential reproduction of genotypes. There are two basic assumptions for natural selection to work:
1. There must be heritable variation for some trait. Examples: beak size, color pattern, thickness of skin, fleetness, visual acuity.
2. There must be differential survival and reproduction associated with the possession of that trait.
Graphically:
Heritable variation occurs by mutational changes in an organism’s DNA (any change in the hereditary message — base pair substitution or insertion/deletion of new bases) leading to the creation of new genetic material AND/OR creation of new genetic combinations through transposition (changing the position of a gene changes what it does), recombination (through cross-over during meosis), or genetic reshuffling (through sexual reproduction). Without getting too deep into it, selection can only act on the phenotype. A gene can be present, but not expressed (e.g. a recessive allele). Only homozygous recessives will show the trait and be selected for or against. In addition, selection acts on the whole organism (a conspicuously-colored moth, for ex, can have all sorts of wonderful genes, but if a bird nails that moth, its entire genotype is gone). And finally, selection doesn’t have to cause changes. It also can maintain the status quo.
Therefore, the general predictions of evolution are:
1. Given heritable variation over time, new species can and do arise.
2. Over sufficiently long time periods, due to various mechanisms surviving populations will vary sufficiently from the parent population to constitute new taxa.
And that’s my description of evolution. If you are unable to approach this level of discussion on Creationism, then you truly do NOT have a theory beyond goddidit.
BTW: There are a couple of interesting corollaries to my definition. Basically, the above means that there is no requirement that evolution proceed in a linear fashion. Nor is it necessary that evolution produce either greater complexity, greater perfection or greater information (LOL) for evolution to be true. This is a creationist fallacy.
As an example, it is quite common to have an organism’s DNA contain multiple non-significant (unexpressed) or recessive alleles. Because these alleles serve no immediately useful function for an organism’s individual survival/reproductive success, natural selection simply ignores them. Meaning that if environmental conditions change there are generally individuals in a given population whose traits all of a sudden become important to their survival. This is one of the primary ways bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics: the resistance was already present in the population. All the antibiotics have done is eliminate all the members WHO DID NOT ALREADY HAVE THE TRAIT, increasing the overall frequency of alleles which are resistant within the population.
Another marvelous outgrowth of evolution by natural selection is that often different combinations of genes or even macrostructures that are useful for one thing are found to be ultimately useful for something else, as well. These traits are then co-opted by natural selection to other uses.
Evolution as I’ve described it only requires a single step at a time AND each step needn’t (in fact shouldn’t) be considered in light of any subsequent step — only in comparison to its predecessor. New genes (hence new traits) do not arise because they are needed, and no organism ever made a living as a transitional — all were sufficiently well adapted for their particular niche and lifestyle to reproduce. Otherwise they would have quickly become extinct.

i have a question how do animals know they have to kill eachother to make sure they dont get overpopulated? they would undoubtedly spread like a virus unless an intillegent species such as human was to interfere, which is what we do. were the caretakers of the earth and god gave us the ability rational thought so that all existence wouldnt end. without us the nothing has a chance for survival over an extended amount of time.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Quetzal, posted 01-26-2002 3:25 PM Quetzal has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by gene90, posted 02-06-2002 8:53 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 266 by mark24, posted 02-06-2002 9:07 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 267 by joz, posted 02-07-2002 12:03 AM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 283 of 365 (4037)
02-10-2002 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
01-13-2002 9:22 AM


again this is an example of a general discrimination, a few morons make false statements and incorrect theories and everyone is blamed for their mistakes. God was never a science in the first place, he is beyond it. There is no explanation of him, only an idea and a faith. Einstein himself said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.", i'd like to see any man hold him in contempt and then try to explain any theory plausible. The two need eachother to have a substantial ability of proving anything.
Another einstein quote "All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. All these aspirations are directed toward ennobling man's life, lifting it from the sphere of mere physical existence and leading the individual towards freedom."
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi
[This message has been edited by KingPenguin, 02-10-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 01-13-2002 9:22 AM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:07 PM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 285 of 365 (4039)
02-10-2002 10:13 PM


did you read what i said? creation science is science. there one in the same.

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:14 PM KingPenguin has replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 287 of 365 (4042)
02-10-2002 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by gene90
02-10-2002 10:14 PM


then your not allowed to post theories, opinions or thoughts anymore.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:14 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:24 PM KingPenguin has replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 289 of 365 (4047)
02-10-2002 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by gene90
02-10-2002 10:24 PM


which is why it is needed. theres black and white you need opposites to see anything.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:24 PM gene90 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:30 PM KingPenguin has replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 291 of 365 (4049)
02-10-2002 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by gene90
02-10-2002 10:30 PM


arguable. you still need it to make any assumptions.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:30 PM gene90 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by LudvanB, posted 02-10-2002 10:42 PM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 295 of 365 (4061)
02-10-2002 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by gene90
02-10-2002 10:44 PM


i think its time to turn on the leaders and make sure theyre doing what they should be.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by gene90, posted 02-10-2002 10:44 PM gene90 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by LudvanB, posted 02-10-2002 10:59 PM KingPenguin has replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 298 of 365 (4071)
02-10-2002 11:13 PM
Reply to: Message 297 by LudvanB
02-10-2002 10:59 PM


i wasnt saying anything about the bible. i was just saying that our incompetent leaders need to be more open. along with you atheist evolutionists.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by LudvanB, posted 02-10-2002 10:59 PM LudvanB has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by nator, posted 02-11-2002 11:10 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 308 by toff, posted 02-12-2002 10:08 AM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 344 of 365 (6424)
03-09-2002 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 341 by joz
03-06-2002 11:13 PM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
ToE does not deal with origins of life only how it developed once already around....
If you want to talk about the origin of life abiogenesis is the topic, not ToE........

what evolution doesnt need a beginning now?
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 341 by joz, posted 03-06-2002 11:13 PM joz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 345 by mark24, posted 03-10-2002 11:01 AM KingPenguin has replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 346 of 365 (6512)
03-10-2002 11:58 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by mark24
03-10-2002 11:01 AM


quote:
Originally posted by mark24:
No, the ToE doesn't need a beginning.
Mark

evolution cannot be an explanation for life as we know it if it does not have any where to start, it can however still occur. so you cant as of now hold up evolution as proof against God. Which probably means that evolution and creationism cannot be effectively debated until your willing to give it a beginning and maybe even an end.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by mark24, posted 03-10-2002 11:01 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 347 by joz, posted 03-11-2002 12:13 AM KingPenguin has replied
 Message 348 by LudvanB, posted 03-11-2002 8:18 AM KingPenguin has replied
 Message 355 by mark24, posted 03-12-2002 11:50 AM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 356 by mark24, posted 03-12-2002 11:51 AM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 357 by mark24, posted 03-12-2002 11:54 AM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 349 of 365 (6633)
03-11-2002 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 347 by joz
03-11-2002 12:13 AM


quote:
Originally posted by joz:
What he`s saying is that evolution is a process which acts on any system of self replicators where that replication can contain copying errors....
As such it doesn`t require a begining, it`s just there and acts on any extant system....

lets discuss the beginning then.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by joz, posted 03-11-2002 12:13 AM joz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by joz, posted 03-12-2002 8:20 AM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 353 by joz, posted 03-12-2002 8:21 AM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 354 by joz, posted 03-12-2002 8:40 AM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 358 by mark24, posted 03-12-2002 2:34 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 361 by LudvanB, posted 03-14-2002 9:48 PM KingPenguin has not replied
 Message 362 by LudvanB, posted 03-14-2002 9:48 PM KingPenguin has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 350 of 365 (6634)
03-11-2002 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by LudvanB
03-11-2002 8:18 AM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
KP,i have never seen ANYONE who in their right mind has used evolution as a proof against God. The two are not mutually exclusive.

lets learn about the beginning so we can argue some more, lol.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by LudvanB, posted 03-11-2002 8:18 AM LudvanB has not replied

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 7883 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 351 of 365 (6635)
03-11-2002 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by LudvanB
03-11-2002 8:18 AM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
KP,i have never seen ANYONE who in their right mind has used evolution as a proof against God. The two are not mutually exclusive.

lets learn about the beginning so we can argue some more, lol.
------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by LudvanB, posted 03-11-2002 8:18 AM LudvanB has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024