Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biological classification vs 'Kind'
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 373 of 385 (567338)
06-30-2010 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 372 by Granny Magda
06-30-2010 1:00 PM


Granny you're awesome. But I gotta ask you to elaborate on this part (especially as I am going through some specific review of this point on another site):
... If the ToE were false, there would be no reason for this pattern to emerge, but it does. ...
You are essentially saying, "Ignoring the obvious cause for this pattern, there is no currently known reason for it."
To me nested hierarchy implies imperfect inheritance or incomplete duplication. But how is it to be distinguished from a deity poofing a series of creatures into existence based upon what they say is common design or modular design or whatever else they say it is.
My problem is that I do not see the difference between poofology which produces incomplete duplication, or ToE which does it equally indistinguishably.
The discovery institute evidently did a good job of expressing that "god did it" because I can't find the seems anywhere. Occam's razor is to me the only way I've been able to discern.
Essentially their argument is common design implies common designer, which is itself an explanation for nested hierarchy. There must be a foolproof rebuttal.

My mind keeps trying to copy itself. Try as I might to stop it, almost everything I do seems to be some sort of a crude attempt at making copies. Gawd, what an egomaniac.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by Granny Magda, posted 06-30-2010 1:00 PM Granny Magda has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by Huntard, posted 06-30-2010 4:50 PM CosmicChimp has replied
 Message 375 by crashfrog, posted 06-30-2010 4:52 PM CosmicChimp has replied
 Message 381 by Granny Magda, posted 07-01-2010 5:27 PM CosmicChimp has replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 376 of 385 (567348)
06-30-2010 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by Huntard
06-30-2010 4:50 PM


Ah the spark for my question
Yes it is exactly this video that got me into trying to figure it out. Thx Huntard

My mind keeps trying to copy itself. Try as I might to stop it, almost everything I do seems to be some sort of a crude attempt at making copies. Gawd, what an egomaniac.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by Huntard, posted 06-30-2010 4:50 PM Huntard has not replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 377 of 385 (567349)
06-30-2010 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 375 by crashfrog
06-30-2010 4:52 PM


Re: Last Thursdayism
This is a great rebuttal. I'm glad to see that the best I have is something similar to what you say. It might be interesting to look beyond the shouts of "God did it!" and "Nature did it!"

My mind keeps trying to copy itself. Try as I might to stop it, almost everything I do seems to be some sort of a crude attempt at making copies. Gawd, what an egomaniac.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 375 by crashfrog, posted 06-30-2010 4:52 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 382 of 385 (567609)
07-01-2010 9:57 PM
Reply to: Message 381 by Granny Magda
07-01-2010 5:27 PM


Thanks GM, this is great affirmation I really needed to know this. I kept seeing titles and arguments for this specific debate and could never really see the claim as correct from the evolution side. Through my own work, I had isolated the ideas down to the creationists proclaiming at the core of it "god did it" but I now see how and why that if god did it then he is a trickster. This is ultimately as you have also conveyed the entire EvC debate wrapped up into a few sentences.
I think I can remember there being a tiny part in the video Huntard linked to where this too is stated, I need to review it again as this is then the culmination of the entire video. If I can find it then I would like to commend the maker for his thoroughness. But thanks for yours and huntard's and CF's work in every case.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 381 by Granny Magda, posted 07-01-2010 5:27 PM Granny Magda 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