Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 586 of 1385 (851544)
04-28-2019 2:42 AM
Reply to: Message 562 by Stile
04-24-2019 8:23 AM


Stile writes:
Fifth time: "medicine."
You keep repeating this claim, but hitherto have failed to explain how the theory of common descent (ie, the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor) has provided a practical use in medical science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 562 by Stile, posted 04-24-2019 8:23 AM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 602 by Stile, posted 04-29-2019 8:37 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 604 of 1385 (851641)
04-30-2019 12:00 AM
Reply to: Message 574 by dwise1
04-24-2019 2:09 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
dwise1 writes:
Now, if you want to see a historical genealogy, look to the complete genealogy of the Japanese Emperor which traces his ancestry directly all the way back to Amaterasu, the Sun Goddess. Every single ancestor in that line, generation after generation, is written down. Therefore, by your own logic, Shinto is the One True Faith, you barbarian heathen.
That genealogy goes back only to about 800 BC, which doesn't do much for your theory that humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years. 800 BC is in line with the much shorter Biblical time-frame.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 574 by dwise1, posted 04-24-2019 2:09 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 605 by dwise1, posted 04-30-2019 1:24 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 612 of 1385 (851695)
05-01-2019 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 561 by Tangle
04-24-2019 3:36 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Tangle writes:
It's hard to unpick this mess but it strikes me that you must therefore think that Adam and Eve were real and Noah and his Flood happened. So all modern animals evolved in the last 4,000 years? And all humans came from Noah's family? And all those human fossils and descendants are imaginary?
Of course Adam and Eve were real!
I believe Noah's flood is an historical fact, but I also believe it wasn't global.
Did all humanity descended from Noah's family? I think so.
No modern animals evolved in last 4000 years - all animals were created, beginning billions of years ago.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 561 by Tangle, posted 04-24-2019 3:36 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 613 of 1385 (851696)
05-01-2019 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 565 by FLRW
04-24-2019 9:23 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
FLRW writes:
Recent research suggests that the period prior to the Cambrian explosion saw the gradual evolution of a "genetic tool kit" of genes that govern developmental processes
"Recent research"? You mean just another untestable theoretical fantasy dreamed up by atheists who can't accept the implications of the non-existence of fossil ancestors leading up to the Cambrian explosion. An untestable theory doesn't even qualify as science - it's just a worthless story.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 565 by FLRW, posted 04-24-2019 9:23 AM FLRW has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 620 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:44 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 631 by FLRW, posted 05-01-2019 12:28 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 614 of 1385 (851697)
05-01-2019 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 568 by edge
04-24-2019 9:49 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
edge writes:
Except that even Darwin had an explanation a century and a half ago. That basic explanation still stands.
Oh dear ... if this is your best defence, you're in trouble. As time goes by, the "incomplete fossil record" argument gets weaker and weaker. The Chinese Cambrian fossil beds did evolutionary theory no favours at all - more soft-bodies fossils were found but no evolutionary links between the Ediacaran and the Cambrian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 568 by edge, posted 04-24-2019 9:49 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 617 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:32 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 615 of 1385 (851698)
05-01-2019 1:15 AM
Reply to: Message 570 by dwise1
04-24-2019 11:27 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
dwise1 writes:
Since he's now come out explicitly as a YEC, I'm waiting for him to make that standard bunny-blunder claim. I'm sure that he'll revert to standard YEC behavior and avoid presenting any evidence to support YEC.
Deary, deary me. Another mistake of embarrassing proportions. Apparently I'm a "YEC" who accepts the scientific evidence that life on earth could have started billions of years ago - hilarious!
Listen, this is how it works: “YEC” stands for Young Earth Creationist. Please note the part that says “Young Earth”. I don’t believe in a “Young Earth” - in fact, I accept that scientific evidence that suggests the earth (and life on earth) could be billions of years old. I accept the same fossil record and time-frame as you do. Therefore, I cannot be a Young Earth Creationist.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 570 by dwise1, posted 04-24-2019 11:27 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 616 of 1385 (851699)
05-01-2019 1:17 AM
Reply to: Message 571 by Tanypteryx
04-24-2019 11:33 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
Tanypteryx writes:
So, you've got nothing, that's what I figured. You are stuck in 1859. Most fossils have been discovered since then.
Where are the fossils that demonstrate the evolutionary links between the sponges, worms and barnacles of the pre-Cambrian and the fish of the Cambrian? What are the evolutionary ancestors of insects?
I note you didn't answer any of my questions from Message 510.
Your questions are unscientific in nature and not relevant to the thread.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 571 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-24-2019 11:33 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 618 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:38 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 625 by caffeine, posted 05-01-2019 5:45 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 629 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-01-2019 11:57 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 619 of 1385 (851702)
05-01-2019 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 572 by AZPaul3
04-24-2019 11:46 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
AZPaul3 writes:
Yes, there are pre-cambrian fossils. Look 'em up. Here, I'll help get you started.
Of course there are - I never said there weren't. But unfortunately for your evolution belief system, there are no fossils that show evolutionary links between pre-Cambrian life-forms and all the novel phyla that appeared during the Cambrian explosion.
And note that a lot of these begatters were 700, 800, 900 years old.
Please be advised that, by any standard, the Bible qualifies an authentic, historical document.
No wonder you see your god as so pissed at the humans. According to you the whole population was begat into existence by a bunch of really way-old faggots.
I'm sure your homophobic language does not please the Great False god of Equality that you atheists invented.
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 572 by AZPaul3, posted 04-24-2019 11:46 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 621 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:50 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 626 by Theodoric, posted 05-01-2019 8:05 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 630 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-01-2019 12:10 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 622 of 1385 (851705)
05-01-2019 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 605 by dwise1
04-30-2019 1:24 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
RAZD writes:
The complete genealogy from the Sun Goddess, Amaterasu, to the modern-day Emperor has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years.
Why is it “superior” to the Biblical genealogies? Wait . is it because it claims men descended from gods and that Japanese Emperors are gods? If so, Yes, you make a very valid point - genealogies based on such fantasies are completely trustworthy!
Stop your stupid lying and just answer the fucking question!
I’ve already answered that question.
If you are so terrified of simple direct questions, then there is something very seriously wrong with your position. And it's not just you; every creationist acts the same way. If all you have to offer are lies and deception and you are so terrified of simple direct questions, then you very seriously need to do some self-evaluation. You are just like your puny frightened impotent little "God of the Gaps" who has to hide in the shadows in absolute terror of knowledge and the light. How absolutely pitiful!
You’re so funny sometimes! Laughter is the best medicine.
"God of the Gaps"
The reality is, only God can fill the gaps. Take the Cambrian explosion, for example - your evolution story is hopeless at explaining the total lack of pre-Cambrian ancestral links.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 605 by dwise1, posted 04-30-2019 1:24 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 624 by dwise1, posted 05-01-2019 3:43 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 628 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 9:19 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 623 of 1385 (851706)
05-01-2019 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 564 by JonF
04-24-2019 8:34 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
JohF writes:
And, given that soft bodies don't fossilize well, so what?
So organisms went from soft-bodies to hard-bodied with no fossil evidence? Dream on.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 564 by JonF, posted 04-24-2019 8:34 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 627 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 9:09 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 674 of 1385 (851832)
05-03-2019 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 617 by edge
05-01-2019 1:32 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
Stile writes:
Who says the fossil record must be “complete”?
Beats me. We will never know when the fossil record is complete.
The point is that we have an explanation and you do not.
I’m glad you mentioned this, as I have recently adopted a scientific explanation for the fossil record (which I will preface by saying, science cannot explain the fossil record and I don’t believe in aliens): The history of life on earth is the result of genetic engineering performed by aliens. This explanation seems to me to be at least as scientifically valid as Darwinian evolution, but one that makes a lot more sense. (Science cannot rule out the existence of intelligent aliens who could perform such feats of creative daring-do.)
Please document the fossils you are talking about.
I can’t document fossils that don’t exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 617 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:32 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 684 by edge, posted 05-03-2019 8:28 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 675 of 1385 (851833)
05-03-2019 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by edge
05-01-2019 1:38 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
edge writes:
What 'barnacles, worms and sponges' of the Precambrian are you talking about? Please document. You keep spouting this stuff like you know something about them.
Just google “Ediacaran life-forms” . any mug can do it. Btw, there will be a question on this subject in the final exam - you have been warned.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:38 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 683 by edge, posted 05-03-2019 8:24 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 676 of 1385 (851834)
05-03-2019 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 620 by edge
05-01-2019 1:44 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
edge writes:
There was precursor life to the Cambrian species. They were the link between earlier life and Cambrian forms.
The Ediacaran fossils were a “precursor“ to the Cambrian, but they can hardly be described as a “link” - there are no fossil links between E and C. For example, where are the links between the Ediacaran organisms (worms, sponges, barnacles, jelly fish) and the fish that appeared in the Cambrian? Ditto for Ediacaran life-forms and insects. My scientific explanation is that aliens took the Ediacaran creatures, seriously fiddled with their DNA and voila!... welcome to new and improved creatures of the Cambrian!
"BSTs (Burgess Shale Types) from the latest Ediacaran Period (eg, Miaohe biota, 550 Ma) are abundantly fossiliferous with algae but completely lack animals, which are also missing from other Ediacaran windows, such as phosphate deposits (eg, Doushantuo, 560 Ma)" - Daley AC, Antcliffe JB, Drage HB, Pates S 2018. Early fossil record of Euarthropoda and the Cambrian Explosion. PNAS, 9 pp.
Except that it is tested virtually every day in paleontological research. And it is supported by new fossil discoveries.
It’s interesting how you’ve conflated “testing a theory” and “finding evidence for a theory”. I think of a “test” as confirming or proving something. Hence, there is no way to test what happened between Fossil A and Fossil B. All you’ve got is a gap between two different fossils, which you fill in with blind faith in evolution. My “aliens did it” explanation can’t be tested either (although it remains the best scientific explanation).
"To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion" Henry Gee, Nature (magazine), 1999.
According to someone who has literally no background in science, yes?
“It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favoured by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test” - Colin Patterson, from a letter to Luther Sunderland, 1979.
"To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bed-time story - amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific." Henry Gee, Nature (magazine), 1999.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 620 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:44 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 682 by caffeine, posted 05-03-2019 4:17 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 685 by edge, posted 05-03-2019 8:48 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 677 of 1385 (851835)
05-03-2019 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 610 by Stile
04-30-2019 12:23 PM


Stile writes:
No need to discuss his IQ (12)
Oh, if only that were true! My IQ has been evaluated at 9 . which I’m told is “above average” for someone with a fragile, eggshell mind. But I would dearly love to move my IQ into double-digits - 12 would be great.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 610 by Stile, posted 04-30-2019 12:23 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 678 of 1385 (851836)
05-03-2019 3:43 AM
Reply to: Message 621 by edge
05-01-2019 1:50 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
edge writes:
And there is an explanation for this
There are several so-called explanations, none of which can be tested, for course. My favorite is the “Oxygen” explanation - apparently, an increase in oxygen in the environment can turn a sponge or a worm into a fish . and in a very short period of time!
Imo, my “aliens did it” explanation trumps all the insipid evolutionary explanations.
There are in fact several lines of evidence explaining why this happened, along with the condition of the fossil record of over half a billion years ago.
If I were an evolutionist confronted by the Cambrian explosion, I would stick my head in the sand of wishful thinking, pseudo-science and denial too. Please consider adopting my “aliens did it” explanation - it explains the evidence so much better than dumb ol’ evolution, which is about 150 years out-of-date.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 621 by edge, posted 05-01-2019 1:50 AM edge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 686 by edge, posted 05-03-2019 8:49 AM Dredge 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