Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 361 of 1311 (810052)
05-23-2017 5:39 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by Dredge
05-22-2017 8:47 PM


self-serving definitions and analogies don't change reality
RAZD writes:
Can you define what you think "macroevolution" is?
macroevolution = microevolution + millions of years.
Why not say billions or trillions of years? You want to make it impossible by definition after all.
Biologists measure evolution time in generations rather than years, because different species have different generation time lengths, and evolution is observed from generation to generation -- the population evolves, not the individuals. In some cases that means macroevolution = microevolution + tens of years. See how that changes the possibilities?
But life on earth is only 5778 years old ...
So you are a Gap Creationist - old earth, young life. Well you can participate on Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 then, because the first 35,987 years are based on evidence left by life -- tree rings and diatoms -- and those are fully developed life forms.
... not enuf time for macroevolution to occur (assuming it occurs at all).
Only because you arbitrarily defined it that way to fit your opinion first.
Microevolution might be compared to a merry-go-round - there is motion and change, but it doesn't actually go anywhere.
Which again is only because you false analogy traps your thinking. Evolution is like a drunken walk, it staggers about and ends up in different places. See how that changes the possibilities?
Sadly, for you, like opinions, self-serving definitions and analogies don't change reality.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by Dredge, posted 05-22-2017 8:47 PM Dredge has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 362 of 1311 (810053)
05-23-2017 7:01 AM
Reply to: Message 348 by Faith
05-23-2017 12:50 AM


We do get to define what is science.
Faith writes:
Is the Bible evidence for the virgin birth?
For the resurrection of Christ?
For the miracles of Christ?
Or in the OT for the parting of the Red Sea?
For the miracles of Elijah?
For the supernatural preservation of Daniel and his friends?
If it is evidence for those things how about for the worldwide Flood? Does it SAY it covered the whole world?
Is it evidence for there being no death in the world before the Fall? BY one man death entered...
Yes, the Bible says that the flood covered the whole Earth.
No that is not evidence that there was a Biblical flood.
And the answer for each of the other things you mention is a resounding "No, it is NOT evidence!"
Faith writes:
You have no right to tell YECs we can't base our SCIENTIFIC thinking on the Bible's CLEAR EVIDENCE because it's GOD'S WORD.
We not only have every right to tell you you cannot base SCIENTIFIC thinking on what you believe is God's word. Sorry Faith but that is the fact. Science does not start with any conclusion.
Faith writes:
That's tiresome and unfair because we do base our scientific thinking on the Bible and we're not going to stop. The Bible is our basic starting point. I hardly ever mention it in my arguments but it's there underneath my arguments for the Flood and against the ToE.
And that is why there can never be an honest Creation Scientist.
Faith writes:
So I could not care less what YOU believe, but don't tell US what to believe and accuse us of not addressing evidence that you think should be put before the Bible. I don't and YECs don't and it isn't for you to dictate to us and call us unscientific.
You are not scientific or doing science or have a clue what science is.
Sorry that bothers you but it is simply TRUTH.
Edited by jar, : fix sub-title

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 12:50 AM Faith has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 363 of 1311 (810054)
05-23-2017 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 348 by Faith
05-23-2017 12:50 AM


Re: You don't get to define science for YECs
Is the Bible evidence for the virgin birth?
For the resurrection of Christ?
For the miracles of Christ?
Or in the OT for the parting of the Red Sea?
For the miracles of Elijah?
For the supernatural preservation of Daniel and his friends?
If it is evidence for those things how about for the worldwide Flood? Does it SAY it covered the whole world?
Is it evidence for there being no death in the world before the Fall? BY one man death entered...
It becomes circular reasoning if you consider those evidences to be self-evident. In reality, those statements are the premises, they can't then be evidence of themselves.
Jesus Christ is risen! is the premise. What is the evidence of that? He lives in me. He is active in my life. Of course, that evidence is not "scientific" but so what, I am convinced it's true... He has changed me. Thousands of people who have accepted Christ as their savior are convinced that HE lives in them. To pretend that evidence is scientific or that there IS scientific evidence of any of that simply cheapens the faith, and in fact is no faith at all.
Believe what you want but don't lecture us with your theistic assumptions.
You're the one lecturing me.
The problems I have with creationists, and YEC in particular, are two fold:
1) By their insistence that the Bible is absolutely, literally true, they actually make God's word out to be a lie. Statements that not only require the first 11 chapters of Genesis to be literally true but also require all the extraneous "scientific" claims about it to be true as well (such as the flood laid down the entire geological column in less than one year) - in order for the rest of the Bible to be true, in order for the message to be true, in order for God to be real, do nothing but cause people to unnecessarily reject the entirety of the Bible as untrue. I am so glad I was convinced of God's power in my life and the reality of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ before I began investigating young earth creationist claims. YEC destroys people's faith, it almost destroyed mine (because of point #2)
2) Creationist use misrepresentations and falsehoods, almost exclusively, to support their position. Creationist literature is chocked full of deceptive and dishonest material. If the Bible is indeed literally true, there should be no reason to misrepresent the facts and present the facts in dishonest ways. This is what almost destroyed my faith... almost destroyed my confidence in the Word of God. Should we tell lies to in order to defend the Bible??? God forbid! I WILL NOT do it. I will not use arguments that I know to be false to defend the truth of the Bible. And what I have learned in the last 7 years of study is that the vast majority of creationist claims are either flat out false or blatant misrepresentations. For the sake of TRUTH, I had, had, HAD to abandon young earth creationism. For the SAKE of truth! There was really no choice for me, I chose truth. So this is not about rejecting the Bible - it's about rejecting creationISM.
I know you don't care about the opinions of "worthless" people (which is anyone who disagrees with you), but I am just trying to explain why I have come to the conclusion I have come to. I don't need or want your judgement. I only ask for understanding.
I don't and YECs don't and it isn't for you to dictate to us and call us unscientific.
Science has a very specific meaning and that meaning involves a very specific process of investigating the natural world. I (we) have every right to call you out when the process you use does not fit that specific definition. You have every right to argue the things you argue, and often they present interesting perspectives, but when the process involves stating your premise as the evidence that the premise is true, that is unscientific. When the details of an argument indicate that your position is wrong (I know, I know... no one has EVER shown any of your ideas to be wrong), it is unscientific to ignore those details. When the mechanisms involved in your explanation are unrealistic or go against know physical laws, it is unscientific to insist those explanations are right none-the-less.
At best, you are trying to provide natural explanations for supernatural phenomenon. But that's not exactly science.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 12:50 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 9:25 AM herebedragons has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 364 of 1311 (810055)
05-23-2017 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 356 by Tangle
05-23-2017 2:26 AM


Re: You don't get to define science for YECs
Tangle writes:
Faith writes:
THERE IS NOTHING UNSCIENTIFIC ABOUT STARTING FROM A KNOWN FACT.
That's true, but first a consensus has to be formed from multiple observation and tests to establish what those facts are.
But there is one other VERY important condition and that is to honestly do science you must be willing to abandon even "Known Facts" when evidence shows those facts were incorrect.
That is why Creationism will always fail. That is why Calvinism will always fail. That is why Fundamentalism will always fail.
They are not willing to admit that the Bible is shown to be wrong, contradictory, written by humans and without any overriding direction or subject.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by Tangle, posted 05-23-2017 2:26 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 365 of 1311 (810057)
05-23-2017 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 363 by herebedragons
05-23-2017 8:45 AM


Re: You don't get to define science for YECs
You are wrong. The Bible is evidence of the things I listed. It's our only source of the information aboutr those things. Written documents, witness evidence, is evidence.
NO I AM NOT GIVING NATURAL EXPLASNATIONS FOR SUPE$RNATURAL EVENTS.
I'm not interested in your reasoning or your conclusions. I don't care why you believe what you believe. Just stop telling YECs that we aren't doing science because it doesn't fit with your conclusions.
Or maybe I should just epeak for myself. STOP TELLING ME I'M NOT BEING SCIENTIFIC WHEN I KNOW I AM.
And I've never said any person is worthless, "which is anybody who disageresz with me? Liar liar liar liar liar. But that some opinions are worthless, and yours on this subject are.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by herebedragons, posted 05-23-2017 8:45 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 366 by herebedragons, posted 05-23-2017 9:49 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 376 by jar, posted 05-23-2017 10:55 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 380 by PaulK, posted 05-23-2017 12:13 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 381 by ringo, posted 05-23-2017 12:18 PM Faith has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 366 of 1311 (810059)
05-23-2017 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 365 by Faith
05-23-2017 9:25 AM


Re: You don't get to define science for YECs
My, what a lovely person you are this morning...
NO I AM NOT GIVING NATURAL EXPLASNATIONS FOR SUPE$RNATURAL EVENTS.
True. None of your explanations are natural. They are imaginary.
STOP TELLING ME I'M NOT BEING SCIENTIFIC WHEN I KNOW I AM.
Think you could do the same?
If you notice, I didn't direct my original comment to you, it was to Dredge. I have been trying to avoid direct conversations with you since they are so entirely fruitless.
I'm not interested in your reasoning or your conclusions....
I don't care why you believe what you believe...
But that some opinions are worthless, and yours on this subject are...
Yes, thank you for valuing me so highly.
Liar liar liar liar liar.
So angry... So emotional. You expect me to take you serious as a model Christian?
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 9:25 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 367 of 1311 (810062)
05-23-2017 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 359 by Dr Adequate
05-23-2017 2:55 AM


Re: You don't get to define science for YECs
But there is something unscientific about declaring something to be a known fact when you lack scientific evidence for it.
No there isn't. Evidence is evidence, truth is truth. And I'm not asking you to accept it, just accept that it's the basis for YEC reasoning and if you can't accept that this whole debate is a sham. Which I knew anyway but it's getting to me again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 359 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-23-2017 2:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 379 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 11:24 AM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 368 of 1311 (810063)
05-23-2017 10:33 AM
Reply to: Message 323 by CRR
05-22-2017 6:45 PM


Re: Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
CRR writes:
The Y chromosome. 20% of the genes have no homologue anywhere in the chimp genome.
How could that difference not be produced by an accumulation of microevolutionary events?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by CRR, posted 05-22-2017 6:45 PM CRR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 10:40 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 369 of 1311 (810065)
05-23-2017 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 328 by Dredge
05-22-2017 8:47 PM


Dredge writes:
But life on earth is only 5778 years old . . .
That would be a tacit admission that if life did evolve over millions of years then the accumulation of microevolutionary events does add up to macroevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 328 by Dredge, posted 05-22-2017 8:47 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12995
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 370 of 1311 (810066)
05-23-2017 10:36 AM


Moderator On Duty
This is a science thread, so please only consider evidence from the natural world and leave religion out of the discussion.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 371 of 1311 (810067)
05-23-2017 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 368 by Taq
05-23-2017 10:33 AM


Re: Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
Taq writes:
CRR writes:
The Y chromosome. 20% of the genes have no homologue anywhere in the chimp genome.
How could that difference not be produced by an accumulation of microevolutionary events?
Talk about magic! Talk about believing six impossible things before breakfast! It's this kind of nonsense the ToE is made of, and you call it Science. It's just impossible fantasies.
But microevolution eats information, and that's another big reason it can't happen.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 10:33 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 373 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 10:51 AM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 372 of 1311 (810069)
05-23-2017 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 330 by Dredge
05-22-2017 8:53 PM


Re: maybe we should cholera a new vaccine ...
Dredge writes:
I agree - but there's no need to believe in any of that useless stuff about humans and apes having a common ancestor,
I already did show that there was a need for accepting common ancestry between humans and apes in post 17. You need common ancestry and evolution to explain the distribution and divergence of ERVs in hominidae genomes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by Dredge, posted 05-22-2017 8:53 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 373 of 1311 (810070)
05-23-2017 10:51 AM
Reply to: Message 371 by Faith
05-23-2017 10:40 AM


Re: Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
Faith writes:
Talk about magic! Talk about believing six impossible things before breakfast! It's this kind of nonsense the ToE is made of, and you call it Science. It's just impossible fantasies.
But microevolution eats information, and that's another big reason it can't happen.
So you are saying that all of the genetic differences between the human and chimp genomes "eats information"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by Faith, posted 05-23-2017 10:40 AM Faith has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 374 of 1311 (810071)
05-23-2017 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 335 by Dredge
05-22-2017 9:10 PM


Dredge writes:
It would be pointless because I'm not qualified to understand that level of biology. Chicko's explanation (via psychomosis) failed for the same reason. I would have to spend four years at university getting a degree in biology to understand what you're on about, I suspect.
And yet you think you are qualified to tell hundreds of thousands of scientists who do understand the evidence that they are all wrong. Go figure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by Dredge, posted 05-22-2017 9:10 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 389 by Dredge, posted 05-23-2017 8:48 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 375 of 1311 (810074)
05-23-2017 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 342 by Faith
05-22-2017 9:39 PM


Re: maybe we should cholera a new vaccine ...
Faith writes:
The EVIDENCE for a genuine Christian is WHAT GOD SAYS.
Then that rules out the Bible since the Bible is what humans say.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by Faith, posted 05-22-2017 9:39 PM Faith 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