|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How do you define the word Evolution? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Nobel was a war merchant, who started a Peace prize !!! ?????
Its winners are usually losers. Did not Obama get a peace prize for continuing in more and more wars ? Evolutionists winning a peace prize or any prize had to be by luck and chance ... or pure folly.. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 285 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Nobel was a war merchant, who started a Peace prize !!! ????? Its winners are usually losers. Did not Obama get a peace prize for continuing in more and more wars ? Evolutionists winning a peace prize or any prize had to be by luck and chance ... or pure folly. Hello, earth to David? The 72 scientists in question all got their prizes in either physics, chemistry, or medicine. As you could have found out by clicking on the link. Try to be less of a damn fool, would you? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Davidjay writes:
First, I asked for two or three hundred. You're short by 189. Sure... I can name real Christian Scientists who discovered the laws of our Creator.. Second, I asked for real scientists who don't accept evolution. The first five on your list died before evolution was ever explained so they clearly don't follow. Did anybody on your list actually reject evolution? You could have just said, no, you can't name real scientists who reject evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
First, I asked for two or three hundred. You're short by 189 The case for putting Einstein on the list is notoriously poor. Whatever you want to make of Einstein's remarks about God not playing dice, about the last thing you could call him is a Christian Scientist. For one thing, Einstein was Jewish. Secondly, to my amusement, this fool claims that Mendelson could have offset the eugenics favored by Galton. Of course, that is not possible as Mendelson's work is fully supported of the feasibility of eugenics. This argument is moronic. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1025 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
I see. Interesting. Of course it DOESN"T arise from mutations, the alternative forms of the genes are built in; and of course although natural selection is sometimes the cause of the elimination of some variations to favor others, it happens more often from the new gene frequencies brought about by the simple splitting of a population into two or more subpopulations, and especially in the smaller population, with reproductive isolation. As pointed out on another thread, this is impossible within your model of history. Some genes have literally thousands of different alleles in the modern human population. One individual human can carry no more than two. If humanity originiated from two people; or from a few people after the flood, then mutation is required to account for existing genetic diversity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CRR Member (Idle past 2243 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: |
Good Morning Davidjay. More on luck and chance.
I can think of one type of evolution that does not rely on luck and chance. That is plant and animal breeding, which is a form of MICROevolution. This has been practiced for thousands of years and is mentioned in the Bible with Jacob’s goat breeding. Breeders don’t need to know anything of genetics but by selecting for desirable characteristics and against undesired ones they produce a change in allele frequencies in the population over time. A consequence of this is that the purebred population will usually have less genetic diversity than the original population. Undesirable alleles have been eliminated by the breeder, so in a sense this could be regarded as devolution rather than evolution. We have accidental done this with antibiotics to produce resistant strains of bacteria and it’s worth looking at this more closely. Frozen samples from the Franklin Expedition have shown that even long before Penicillin was isolated bacteria had a very small proportion that was antibiotic resistant. Antibiotic use then could select for this trait rapidly producing resistant strains by microevolution. But where did these resistant individuals come from? They were probably produced by mutations that, in the absence of antibiotics, were detrimental. This is chance and luck. This is why they were in such small numbers since natural selection would have constantly weeded them out. Only when antibiotics came into use did these defects provide a net benefit. This is also why when an antibiotic is discontinued the bacteria population will gradually lose resistance. Say the antibiotic requires a certain binding site to be effective. Bacteria with a defect in this site will be resistant, but it is still a defect rather than an evolutionary advance, hence devolution. [edit] Here for example is a recent study on "Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide" which is consistent with the above.Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide - PMC Edited by CRR, : Added reference provided by Dr Adequate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 285 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
I can think of one type of evolution that does not rely on luck and chance. That is plant and animal breeding, which is a form of MICROevolution. This has been practiced for thousands of years and is mentioned in the Bible with Jacob’s goat breeding. Thus far, creationists have been unable to reproduce Jacob's results, probably because the person who wrote Genesis knew bugger-all about genetics.
Say the antibiotic requires a certain binding site to be effective. Bacteria with a defect in this site will be resistant, but it is still a defect rather than an evolutionary advance, hence devolution. Y'mean like humans are devolved defective monkeys?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
He did a lot of work on biblical numerology, and, though aspects of his beliefs were not orthodox, he thought theology very important. I appreciate your honesty. However biblical numerology is total BS. This is not helping your case. Einstein was not Christian. If you are able to pigeon hole his beliefs in any way, surely you'd have to start with him being Jewish. Copernicus avoided any persecution by the Catholic church the old fashioned way; he published when he was about 75 years old and died soon after. Folks tried to get him to publish early, but he knew that he would have been persecuted. So claiming that there was no threat of persecution is completely disingenuous. Why did you make that claim?
Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, he saw his system as concerning the issue of how the Bible should be interpreted. Galileo said that "The bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go". That's a far cry from your BS summary which acknowledges that the Bible describes something different from what Galileo himself discovered. No mention here of Galileo's persecution. That lack is quite funny given your remarks that the Catholic Church tolerated both Kepler and his protestant views. About Descartes:
. What he really wanted was to see his philosophy adopted as standard Catholic teaching. How did that work out for him? Here is what wikipedia says about Ren:
quote: Yes there are scientists who were also religious. What should we make of that.Isaac Newton was perhaps the greatest physicist of all time. Yet he practice alchemy and investigated the field of optics by sticking needles behind his own eyeballs, and was by all accounts a jealous, vengeful, and often petty human being. How much of that should we attach to the fact that Isaac Newton was also Christian? The biggest question I would ask is whether the science of the rest of these folks brought them into any conflict with the Church at all. Apparently in cases where it did, folks were reasonably wary of the Church, but in cases like those involving Faraday, Maxwell, Plank, and Boyle, what conflict could have existed in any case? Kelvin is a borderline case only because Bible inerrancy had not developed to the point of being anti-old age earth. Which of course brings us to actual biologists. Where is the biologists who claims that we ought not look beyond Genesis when studying the origins of life and species? Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Name any evolutionists that has discovered any law or new law, or anything that has helped mankind.
Mine were great famous Christian Scientists, you have none. But go ahead name some and tell us what laws they advanced. Jesus is the Great Scientist, Mathematician and Creator, not dumb luck and chance evolutionists. But thanks for admitting I meet your challenge and won... won again. Much appreciated. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Yes Jacob learned his lesson and stopped being a con artist and a trickster. And had to serve under a greater liar and trickster than himself. Jacobs evil father in law... employer . .. wouldnt pay for his weeks service. (Week equalling seven years) so Jacob made a deal with him for all the so called blemished sheep, and then used his knowledge of direct on the field experience to change colour of newborns. Thats not a mutation, thats a color change, an external
physical trait like our racial colours and yet we remain brothers and the same KIND. ((Evolution is such a racist doctrine anyway) Stupid evolutionists also get so desperate to think dogs mutate when manipulative humans inbreed them for certain variable traits creating new (ever so weak) breeds of new dogs. Again absolutely not mutational change just inbreeding. Evolutionists do not know genetics and never have shown any hope of learning some. Why because they are so desperate to find one piece of evidence concerning a beneficial mutational change. Anyway, read the story of Jacob and the blemished sheep Mandrakes is a very interesting subject..... Ha, but its only for the mature.. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses. Theories do not grow up to be laws. Theories explain laws. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity. Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Davidjay  Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days) Posts: 1026 From: B.C Canada Joined: |
Yes, evolution is not provable.
Evolution and evolutionary scientists have discovered no new laws. Agreed evolution has no mathematical basis. Yes evolution did not create any laws, nor did any law evolve from another law. Yes the laws of thermodynamics absolutely refute the foolishness and unscientific theory and fantasy of evolution. Remember Issac Newton was a CHRISTIAN SCIENTIST. Christ wins again, evolutionists lose again. Coyote you have to get some rest, I told you chasing that road runner, was going to be the end of you. You just aren't fast enough and smart enough. And you cant wait for a billion years for some beneficial mutations to make you faster and smarter. Agreed ?. The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK. .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
It's my understanding that mutations are a result of pure, blind chance. Am I mistaken?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Please consider this scenario: Some aliens want to invade earth and colonise it, but first they need to eradicate all the humans, so they spray a toxin around that's designed to kill humans. All the humans die except for people with red hair - it so happens that redheads have some lucky variation in their genetic make-up that allows them to withstand the toxin, and they survive.
Over time, the redheads multiply in number to the point where the aliens feel the need to re-apply the toxin. But to the aliens dismay, the second application of the toxin has no effect - because the redheads are immune to the toxin. The aliens conclude that the humans have become "resistant" to the toxin, which is a bit of a misnomer because the redheads didn't "become" resistant to the toxin - they were always resistant to the toxin. Is this an example of (human) evolution?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
"This theory (evolution) has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless".
- (the late) Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum,later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024