Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Parable of the candle - should million/billion year dating be taught as fact?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 16 of 98 (432907)
11-09-2007 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Hyroglyphx
11-08-2007 4:35 PM


Re: The philosophy of science
The only convincing argument in defense of macroevolution, in my opinion, is shared genetic mistakes.
Well ... what about all those intermediate forms?
Its subjective because at some point, one organism will always appear more closely related to another. That does not necessarily mean one is related.
But evolution predicts which organisms will be most closely related by genetic criteria. We knew, before we had the tools to test it, that birds should be genetically closer to crocodiles than to anything else, and that lobe-finned fish should be closer to, for example, mice, than to ray-finned fish. And we were right. "Subjective" doesn't come into it.
Evolution doesn't just predict that there should be genetic similarities between species, it predicts which similarities, and the predictions are rather startling ... I mean, birds and crocodiles? Or ... whales and ungulates? Or ... coelacanths and mice? These are really startling, outrageous predictions. And the predictions always turn out to be correct.
Like every creationist, you have confused the interpretation of nature that we can make once we're certain that evolution is real with the predictions we can make from evolution to test it if we want to find out if it's real. Evolution doesn't just tell us that birds should be genetically similar to something, it tells us that they should be genetically similar to crocodiles. Which turns out to be the case.
Sorry, complete derail. Back to the fairytale about the candle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Hyroglyphx, posted 11-08-2007 4:35 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:06 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 17 of 98 (433566)
11-12-2007 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Macuahuitl
11-07-2007 9:00 PM


Canyon
Well, the candle parable is good, but there's another one that actually take into consideration one of the things that evolutionists use to date: the Grand Canyon.
A class was taking a field trip through a small desert to learn about the Grand Canyon, a few miles away from the school. However, the bus broke down next to a smaller canyon, about fifty feet deep. Seeing this as an opportunity, the teacher stood up in front of the bus and said, "Class, do you see this canyon. How many years do you think it took that small stream to carve it out?"
Nobody had a good answer, so he asked a passing man who happened to live nearby. "I'd say about three days," the man said.
"Three days," the teacher yelled. "That stream could only carve out that canyon in a minimum of two thousand years, at the rate it's going."
"Well," said the man calmly, "three years ago a flash flood went through this area. That canyon was carved out by the runoff. I can tell you're smart, but there's one thing I have over you in this case. You weren't here when it happened."
I think that the old age dates should be taught as an 'intelligent guess', not 'fact'. Nothing that happened before writings can be considered 'fact', and not even some writings. I think that kids should know that the best scientists could do is the 'couple million years' guess.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Macuahuitl, posted 11-07-2007 9:00 PM Macuahuitl has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 11-12-2007 3:50 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
 Message 45 by Rrhain, posted 11-12-2007 7:14 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 18 of 98 (433578)
11-12-2007 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 3:19 PM


Re: Canyon
I think that the old age dates should be taught as an 'intelligent guess', not 'fact'.
Well, in essence, that is in fact what is taught in science classes.
A defining characteristic of science is that all findings are tentative. Everything is subject to revision if new evidence comes to light, or someone develops a better theory to explain our observations.
Every time a scientist says something, by definition it includes the caveat, "As far as we can tell right now."
This is perhaps the most significant factor of science that distinguishes it from creationism. Creos begin and end with certain beliefs and hold those beliefs beyond the scope of questioning. A scientist will question anything, given an adequate quantum of evidence suggesting that the conclusion is wrong.
If from time to time someone teaching science omits the phrase "As far as we can tell right now," perhaps they can be forgiven because of the overwhelming weight of evidence in support of a given proposition and a complete absence of evidence suggesting the proposition is in error. However, if you ever hear anyone teaching that any proposition in a science class as an absolute truth, no longer subject to doubt, there's nothing wrong with pointing out to them that all of science is tentative. If they don't understand that most basic fact, they ought not be teaching science.

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 3:19 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:00 PM subbie has not replied

  
aviator79
Junior Member (Idle past 5981 days)
Posts: 17
From: Chandler, AZ
Joined: 05-15-2007


Message 19 of 98 (433579)
11-12-2007 3:51 PM


Maybe Zeus Farted the candle... and the canyon.
The "you weren't there to see it, so you can't know" argument, if we accept it, refutes ANY explanation of how the world came to be in its present state including religious explanations. You can beleive in a 6000 year old earth because your book says that's true, but I can easily refute it by claiming that a mischievious leprechaun on a pink pony wrote that book to deliberately mislead you.
...Not that I'm willing to make any bets as to the existance of leprechauns.
Edited by aviator79, : No reason given.

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 20 of 98 (433584)
11-12-2007 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Dr Jack
11-08-2007 9:55 AM


God made all things mature. Adam wasn't a baby. Maybe he made the earth mature, too!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Dr Jack, posted 11-08-2007 9:55 AM Dr Jack has not replied

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 21 of 98 (433585)
11-12-2007 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by subbie
11-12-2007 3:50 PM


Re: Canyon
But people walk around stating evolution as fact.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 11-12-2007 3:50 PM subbie has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Phat, posted 11-12-2007 4:06 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
 Message 25 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:37 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
 Message 48 by Rrhain, posted 11-12-2007 7:23 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 22 of 98 (433589)
11-12-2007 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by Dr Adequate
11-09-2007 1:30 AM


Re: The philosophy of science
Yes, it may predict which is closer to which, but what about in-transition macro evolution? A horse has generally the same limb bones as a human, but they have hoofs. Where are the half-foot, half-hoofs now, if evolution existed/still exists? Where are the half-man, half-apes? How come we don't see things with three eyes (if eyes came from freckles). How come all things have eyes on their heads, when people get freckles on their arms. How come things don't have legs on their legs, when people get warts on their legs?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-09-2007 1:30 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2007 4:12 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
 Message 26 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:40 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
 Message 54 by Rrhain, posted 11-12-2007 7:42 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 23 of 98 (433590)
11-12-2007 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:00 PM


Just the facts, Ma'am
Aqualegia writes:
But people walk around stating evolution as fact.
so....whats a fact? How do we know that God spoke? How do we know that Biblical Creationism has any merit?
Websters writes:
fact \fakt\ n 1 : deed; esp : crime 2 : the quality of being actual 3 : something that exists or occurs 4 : a piece of information

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:00 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1406 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 24 of 98 (433594)
11-12-2007 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:06 PM


Re: The philosophy of science
The topic is the (silly creationist PRATT) "Parable of the candle" - and whether million/billion year dating be taught as fact.
Given that the age of the earth IS fact it should be taught as such.
If you want to talk about evolution, horse hooves and the like, try starting a new thread. Go to Proposed New Topics to post new topics.
Welcome to the fray.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:06 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied

  
aviator79
Junior Member (Idle past 5981 days)
Posts: 17
From: Chandler, AZ
Joined: 05-15-2007


Message 25 of 98 (433607)
11-12-2007 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:00 PM


Re: Canyon
quote:
But people walk around stating evolution as fact.
Evolution is taught as valid theory. In the mind of a scientist, this is the same thing as fact. However, when you say fact, it seems you mean absolute truth.
If you mean "should we teach evolution as absolute truth?" I say no. We should teach it and all other scientific theories as theories which are subject to revision in the light of new evidence. But we should definitely be teaching evolution as the process by which all the current plants and animals have arrived in their current forms.
The parable of the candle does nothing to discredit evolution any more than it discredits the biblical creation fairytale. The difference is that evolution has a HUGE body of supporting evidence and biblical creation has none.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:00 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:43 PM aviator79 has replied
 Message 34 by mike the wiz, posted 11-12-2007 5:12 PM aviator79 has replied

  
aviator79
Junior Member (Idle past 5981 days)
Posts: 17
From: Chandler, AZ
Joined: 05-15-2007


Message 26 of 98 (433611)
11-12-2007 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:06 PM


Re: The philosophy of science
quote:
A horse has generally the same limb bones as a human, but they have hoofs. Where are the half-foot, half-hoofs now, if evolution existed/still exists? Where are the half-man, half-apes? How come we don't see things with three eyes (if eyes came from freckles). How come all things have eyes on their heads, when people get freckles on their arms. How come things don't have legs on their legs, when people get warts on their legs?
Have you thought about or researched these questions? Because the answers are readily available to anyone who looks for them. I'll refrain from going off topic here. If you're interested in the answers (I suspect you aren't) Then start a thread in an appropriate forum.
Edited by aviator79, : Added quote for clarity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:06 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:50 PM aviator79 has replied

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 27 of 98 (433615)
11-12-2007 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by aviator79
11-12-2007 4:37 PM


Re: Canyon
Yes, it is a widely accepted theory, but creationism is a widely accepted religion. Most, if not all, of the world's religions have creationism in it. Most, if not all, have a story of a world-wide flood. How is it that around the world, people get the same ideas when they had absolutely now way of communicating through the vast distances?
I think that both evolution and creationism should be taught in school. Then, kids could choose which they wanted to believe. As for the evidence, it has the Bible (and any other ancient writings based on religion). Sure, it may be false, but people thought Homer's Iliad was false, until Troy was found.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:37 PM aviator79 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:53 PM Aquilegia753 has replied
 Message 30 by Chiroptera, posted 11-12-2007 4:55 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
 Message 32 by RAZD, posted 11-12-2007 4:59 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied
 Message 33 by subbie, posted 11-12-2007 5:00 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied

  
Aquilegia753
Member (Idle past 5901 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 11-08-2007


Message 28 of 98 (433617)
11-12-2007 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by aviator79
11-12-2007 4:40 PM


Re: The philosophy of science
Why do you suspect I'm not wanting answers? I'm open to opposition, but I will not deviate from my beliefs. Not to deviate, but I do want answers. Back to the topic...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:40 PM aviator79 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by aviator79, posted 11-12-2007 4:56 PM Aquilegia753 has not replied

  
aviator79
Junior Member (Idle past 5981 days)
Posts: 17
From: Chandler, AZ
Joined: 05-15-2007


Message 29 of 98 (433620)
11-12-2007 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:43 PM


Re: Canyon
quote:
I think that both evolution and creationism should be taught in school. Then, kids could choose which they wanted to believe. As for the evidence, it has the Bible (and any other ancient writings based on religion). Sure, it may be false, but people thought Homer's Iliad was false, until Troy was found.
Yes, it is a widely accepted theory, but creationism is a widely accepted religion. Most, if not all, of the world's religions have creationism in it. Most, if not all, have a story of a world-wide flood. How is it that around the world, people get the same ideas when they had absolutely now way of communicating through the vast distances?
I think that both evolution and creationism should be taught in school. Then, kids could choose which they wanted to believe. As for the evidence, it has the Bible (and any other ancient writings based on religion). Sure, it may be false, but people thought Homer's Iliad was false, until Troy was found.
Again off topic, I'd love to reply in an appropriate forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:43 PM Aquilegia753 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 5:57 PM aviator79 has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 98 (433623)
11-12-2007 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Aquilegia753
11-12-2007 4:43 PM


Re: Canyon
Sure, it may be false, but people thought Homer's Iliad was false, until Troy was found.
Huh? Are you saying that you think that Zeus and Apollo and Athena are all real gods?
Man, I can never keep my creationists straight!

Computers have cut-and-paste functions. So does right-wing historical memory. -- Rick Perlstein

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Aquilegia753, posted 11-12-2007 4:43 PM Aquilegia753 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