Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 61 (9041 total)
122 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 121 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Post Volume: Total: 885,920 Year: 3,566/14,102 Month: 186/321 Week: 2/44 Day: 2/5 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2519
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


(1)
Message 196 of 1385 (849759)
03-20-2019 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by Dredge
03-20-2019 3:27 AM


Dredge writes:

Tanypteryx writes:

I have never thought UCA was a "unifying concept" or a fact or essential scientific information


Really? Haven't you ever heard rhis: "Evolution is the unifying theory of biology"! Where have you been?

Really? You continue to mistakenly think UCA and the Theory of Evolution are the same thing. No matter how many time you try this you are wrong.

Dredge writes:

So most biologist believe biology can do without the theory of evolution? Ya coulda fooled me! LIttle do they know that ToE is just a useless story and that biologists really can do without it.

You really are confused.

Dredge writes:

Biologists haven't been brainwashed by ToE ... that's so funny!

We agree. I also think it's funny that biologists haven't been brainwashed by the ToE.

Dredge writes:

Tanypteryx writes:

and I did not say anything about UCA or claim any value


Okay, so when you said "Someone sees value in what we are learning", you were referring to discoveries in genetics? Golly gee, no kidding?

Yep.

Dredge writes:

Tanypteryx writes:

Rare is the creationist who realizes that this is creationist bullshit


It is really? In that case, please explain which observable fact or principle of biology would not exist without the theory of evolution?

What? You are so confused.

Observable facts and principals of biology is what the Theory of Evolution is based on.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 3:27 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2519
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


(4)
Message 197 of 1385 (849762)
03-20-2019 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by Dredge
03-20-2019 3:31 AM


Dredge writes:

Tanypteryx writes:

Well, one benefit is it sure makes you insecure.


Nice try, but no cigar - evolution doesn't rule out the existence of God.

And there we have it, the only reason for your pathetic attempt here is because you clearly believe it really does rule out the existence of your god.

Your insecurity is showing.

I think I'm done. Your redundancy is pointless.

Edited by Tanypteryx, : No reason given.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 3:31 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Dredge, posted 03-22-2019 12:47 AM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 198 of 1385 (849769)
03-20-2019 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Dredge
03-20-2019 1:50 AM


1. Straw man.

Just following your line of reasoning.

2. When a theoretical biologist comes up with something important to say (as opposed to useless pseudo-scientific stories), wake me up.

Important to you? You jest.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 1:50 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 199 of 1385 (849770)
03-20-2019 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Dredge
03-20-2019 1:52 AM


Re: Name one.
What?

That was a question.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 1:52 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(1)
Message 200 of 1385 (849771)
03-20-2019 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by Dredge
03-20-2019 1:55 AM


Re: Name one.
I'm simply asking if anyone can give me an example of a practical use for evolutionary theory. It looks like you've got nothing to offer.

So, I have nothing to offer regarding your pointless question. Sue me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 1:55 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by Dredge, posted 03-23-2019 3:15 AM edge has responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(3)
Message 201 of 1385 (849772)
03-20-2019 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Dredge
03-20-2019 1:20 AM


The "theory of evolution that explains those fossils"?

The fossil record, yes.

There is no such thing as science is incapable of explaining the fossil record.

According to whom?

And if you are talking about explaining the fossil record to you ... well, that would be hopeless in any case.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 1:20 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5838
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


(2)
Message 202 of 1385 (849776)
03-20-2019 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Dredge
03-20-2019 3:47 AM


Re: Name one.
YET ANOTHER God-phobic, mouth-foaming rant

I hope you weren't expecting otherwise.

after which I think I can safely assume that you can't provide an example of a practical use for evolutionary theory

I recall Tanypteryx saying something nice I would like to mimic.

The best use of the Theory of Evolution is seeing how pissed off you get.

... a bitter pill for you to swallow.

Yes, it is, realizing so many people can be so intellectually challenged as to believe the crazy carpola you spout.

I was hoping for better from my species.

Bitter pill, indeed.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 3:47 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Dredge, posted 03-23-2019 3:19 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 6 days)
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 203 of 1385 (849787)
03-21-2019 3:10 AM
Reply to: Message 183 by Tangle
03-20-2019 3:08 AM


Tangle writes:

I see, so all this huffing and puffing about UCA is utterly irrelevant as the actual problem you have is your inability to accept the established scientific theory that predicts it (or something like it).
Let me guess, it contradicts your religious beliefs?


Evolution doesn't contradict the existence of God. I doubt if ToE reflects reality as, for starters, it does a very poor job of explaining the many gaps, distinct lack of transitiionals and sudden appearances of fully-formed organisms that are evident in the fossil record.

it need have no practical value at all to be never-the-less true.

I agree.

Knowledge has no obligation to be practiical.

But knowledge is obliged to be demonstrably factual. Therefore a mere theory is not knowledge, as scientific theories come and go, as you well know.
The fossil record is knowledge, but the theory of evolution that attempts to explain the fossil record is not knowledge.

And a belief, no matter how strongly held, is not necessarily knowledge. You may be 110% convinced that all life on earth evolved from UCA, but that doesn't qualify it as knowledge, as no one can demonstrate that it is the truth.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Tangle, posted 03-20-2019 3:08 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Tangle, posted 03-21-2019 3:50 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 208 by edge, posted 03-21-2019 11:05 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 217 by Tanypteryx, posted 03-22-2019 1:24 PM Dredge has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8169
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 204 of 1385 (849789)
03-21-2019 3:50 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Dredge
03-21-2019 3:10 AM


Dredge writes:

Evolution doesn't contradict the existence of God

As I said, nothing contradicts the possible existence of god. But that wasn't the question I asked. This was what I asked. Why are you evading the question?

“Let me guess, it contradicts your religious beliefs?“

But knowledge is obliged to be demonstrably factual. Therefore a mere theory is not knowledge, as scientific theories come and go, as you well know.

This is a demonstration of total ignorance about what a scientific theory is and does. A scientific theory is not an idea, a hunch and an hoc explanation, it's a expanation of all known facts. As such, it's status is higher than pure facts. The ToE has stood for 150 years. Not only is it the best explanation of the facts, it's the only naturalistic explanation of them. I have also given you practical uses for it. Which, of course, you've also ducked.

The fossil record is knowledge, but the theory of evolution that attempts to explain the fossil record is not knowledge.

Liar, liar pants on fire!

And a belief, no matter how strongly held, is not necessarily knowledge.

For once you got something right.

You may be 110% convinced that all life on earth evolved from UCA, but that doesn't qualify it as knowledge, as no one can demonstrate that it is the truth.

What's really, really odd is that as far as I know, no-one believes 100% that all life on earth evolved from a UCA nor cares much. It's simply one possible prediction of the ToE. It could have done; equally life could have evolved from more than a single source and/or merged, interbred, gone exinct etc etc. We don't know and probably will never know. BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER.

You've built a straw man that no one gives a damn about anyway. Your beef is with the ToE itself and it's only for religious reasons isn't it?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Dredge, posted 03-21-2019 3:10 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 242 by Dredge, posted 03-24-2019 2:50 AM Tangle has responded

  
Dredge
Member (Idle past 6 days)
Posts: 1295
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 205 of 1385 (849790)
03-21-2019 4:11 AM
Reply to: Message 183 by Tangle
03-20-2019 3:08 AM


Tangle writes:

As it happens a 5 second google and google scholar search produces thousands of results for practical applications for the theory of evolution. Here's the first that popped up ....

Abstract
Evolutionary principles are now routinely incorporated into medicine and agriculture. Examples include the design of treatments that slow the evolution of resistance by weeds, pests, and pathogens, and the design of breeding programs that maximize crop yield or quality.
Evolutionary principles are also increasingly incorporated into conservation biology, natural resource management, and environmental science. Examples include the protection of small and isolated populations from inbreeding depression, the identification of key traits involved in adaptation to climate change, the design of harvesting regimes that minimize unwanted life-history evolution, and the setting of conservation priorities based on populations, species, or communities that harbor the greatest evolutionary diversity and potential.
The adoption of evolutionary principles has proceeded somewhat independently in these different fields, even though the underlying fundamental concepts are the same. We explore these fundamental concepts under four main themes: variation, selection, connectivity, and eco-evolutionary dynamics. Within each theme, we present several key evolutionary principles and illustrate their use in addressing applied problems.

Er, no ... you're wrong - a google search does not produce "thousands of results for practical applications for the theory of evolution." In fact, the number is ZERO. Take the quotes you supplied, for example: NONE of them say they are "practical uses for the theory of evolution" - if you read the text they are referred to as practical uses for "EVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES".

But like any good brainwashed evolutionist, you probably think "evolutionary principles" and "evolutionary theory" are the same thing. In which case you'd be wrong again, because if you opened your eyes a little and thought about it a little deeper you'd realize that any practically useful "evolutionary principle" exists REGARDLESS of the theory of evolution.

For example, consider the following two "evolutionary principles" that have proven useful in applied biology:
1.. Natural selection.
2. Benefical mutations are passed from parent to offspring, which may lead to changes in gene frequency within a population.

These two principles describe observable, demonstrable, repeatable facts and therefore the theory of evolution (ie, Darwin's concept of UCA) has contributed absolutely nothing to their existence. These two principles (ie, facts) exist and hold true for everyone - regardless of whether they accept the theory of evolution or not. They hold true and exist even for YECs. These principles would exist if no one had ever heard of the theory of evolution.

The moral of the story is, whenever you are reading scientific literature and come across any "evolutionary principle" that has proven useful in applied science, remember that it is simply a principle of biology, and doesn't equate to or owe its existence to "evolutionary theory".

These principles of biology have been misleadingly and ubiquitously dubbed "evolutionary principles" by the scientific community because it believes the fantasy that "evolution is the unifying theory of all biology". These deluded Darwinist fanatics actually believe that the principles of biological science need the theory of evolution!

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by Tangle, posted 03-20-2019 3:08 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Tangle, posted 03-21-2019 4:50 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 207 by edge, posted 03-21-2019 10:49 AM Dredge has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8169
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.6


(3)
Message 206 of 1385 (849791)
03-21-2019 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Dredge
03-21-2019 4:11 AM


Dredge writes:

NONE of them say they are "practical uses for the theory of evolution" - if you read the text they are referred to as practical uses for "EVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES".

My word you're getting desperate.

The principles of evolution are derived from the theory of evolution; they're not some seperate thing dissociated from it.

And of course, there are thousands of result for practical uses of evolution. For god's sake this is not an obscure area of work.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_evolution

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Dredge, posted 03-21-2019 4:11 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Dredge, posted 03-22-2019 1:34 AM Tangle has responded
 Message 245 by Dredge, posted 03-24-2019 3:11 AM Tangle has responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 207 of 1385 (849794)
03-21-2019 10:49 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Dredge
03-21-2019 4:11 AM


Er, no ... you're wrong - a google search does not produce "thousands of results for practical applications for the theory of evolution." In fact, the number is ZERO. Take the quotes you supplied, for example: NONE of them say they are "practical uses for the theory of evolution" - if you read the text they are referred to as practical uses for "EVOLUTIONARY PRINCIPLES".

So, let me get this straight.

You don't think that the theory of evolution was useful in developing various 'principles of evolution', which ARE useful.

Is that correct?

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Dredge, posted 03-21-2019 4:11 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Dredge, posted 03-23-2019 1:49 AM edge has responded

  
edge
Member (Idle past 638 days)
Posts: 4696
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002


(2)
Message 208 of 1385 (849795)
03-21-2019 11:05 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by Dredge
03-21-2019 3:10 AM


Evolution doesn't contradict the existence of God.

I think you've repeated this a few times now.

I doubt if ToE reflects reality ...

You doubt the ToE?

Well, that changes everything! Why didn't you say so in the first place? Where do I sign up?

What was all this nonsense about 'no practical purpose in practical biology for the UCA'? Why the smokescreen?

... as, for starters, it does a very poor job of explaining the many gaps, ...

You got this straight from your favorite YEC websites, yes?

... distinct lack of transitiionals ...

Despite the documentation of hundreds of transitional fossils...

... and sudden appearances of fully-formed organisms that are evident in the fossil record.

Only to a YEC can millions of years be 'sudden'.

So, it all comes back to the tired old YEC mantras despite your pseudo-intellectual argument about usefulness and practicality of the UCA. Nothing new under the YEC sun.

Edited by edge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Dredge, posted 03-21-2019 3:10 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by AZPaul3, posted 03-21-2019 4:05 PM edge has not yet responded
 Message 243 by Dredge, posted 03-24-2019 3:01 AM edge has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5838
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 209 of 1385 (849799)
03-21-2019 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 208 by edge
03-21-2019 11:05 AM


Only to a YEC can millions of years be 'sudden'.

I had a friend at UT Austin, geology prof, has what he calls his "geologist's watch" on his desk.

It's one of those snow-globe-type things filled with sand, mud and a goodly amount of small green plastic pieces of fern leafs. The trick is the stuff is all weighted to fall into layers with the green stuff in the middle.

So he shakes it up sets it down and announces that when the layer of green turns into oil it's time for lunch. Geologist can't tell time either.

That is his explanation for why he and others in the field consider the Cambrian explosion as a mere 10-30 million year "overnight" event. That's where Dredge, or rather as you point out, his favorite YEC websites, get this "sudden appearances" tripe.

Yep. It's all the geologists' fault.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 208 by edge, posted 03-21-2019 11:05 AM edge has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8482
Joined: 03-06-2009


(1)
Message 210 of 1385 (849800)
03-21-2019 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Dredge
03-20-2019 1:28 AM


Re: Name one.
Dredge writes:

It's got nothing to do with "Typicial creationist BS". I simply asked you to provide an example of a practical use for evolutionary theory, but you repllied with a completely irrelevant, anti-theist rant. In other words, you've got nothing. Therefore you would agree with me that evolutionary theory has provided no practical uses at all in applied science ... no?

The practical use for the theory of evolution is in explaining how species changed over time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Dredge, posted 03-20-2019 1:28 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 244 by Dredge, posted 03-24-2019 3:05 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021