Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-27-2019 7:41 AM
27 online now:
caffeine, Pressie, vimesey (3 members, 24 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,111 Year: 7,147/19,786 Month: 1,688/1,581 Week: 67/443 Day: 7/60 Hour: 4/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
6768
69
707172Next
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 1021 of 1074 (852673)
05-15-2019 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 966 by Dredge
05-12-2019 7:52 PM


Re: NO evidence of aliens
see reply to Message 997

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 966 by Dredge, posted 05-12-2019 7:52 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 1022 of 1074 (852675)
05-15-2019 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 998 by Dredge
05-13-2019 8:50 PM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
see response to Message 1003

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 998 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 8:50 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


(3)
Message 1023 of 1074 (852680)
05-15-2019 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1003 by Dredge
05-13-2019 9:30 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
Message 966

RAZD writes:

With no evidence of aliens, nor of any mechanism by which the insert their "genetic engineering" during observed processes of evolution, there is no basis for making this assumption.


If you can push ToE without producing any observable macroevolution then I can push my "aliens did it" theory without producing an observable alien. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Except that there is evidence for macroevolution via known evolutionary processes, you just don't accept them. See 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution
The Scientific Case for Common Descent
for some known as of 2012.

RAZD writes:

Particularly as the ToE does explain it without the use of aliens (Occam's wicked razor). This is why the ToE has been validated and the "alien genetic experiment" concept has not.


It will take time for scientists to get used to my new theory. I predict that in ten years time, my "aliens did it" theory will have largely replaced the outdated and childishly inadequate theory of Darwinian evolution. So I suggest that the sooner you wake up and grow up out the nineteenth century, the better.

It will take forever without objective empirical evidence substantiating it. All you appear to have is anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking pretending to be science.

Message 997

RAZD writes:

... except that each fossil currently valides the ToE when it fits into the temporal/spatial matrix and the explanation provided by the ToE for getting from one spcies to another via known mechanisms of evolution.

I fear you're talking rubbish. Fossils confirm that life-forms on earth have changed over time, but fossils can't confirm or validate the cause of those changes. Fossils don't validate ToE and its mechanisms anymore than they validate my "aliens" theory and its mechanism of genetic engineering.

Sadly - for you - you are (still) wrong again. The changes documented in the fossil record show the pattern of proximity in space/time and in degree of evolution predicted by the ToE, and that are actually seen and documented in living species today: this is sufficient to say they are explained by the ToE. This what validation looks like.

Neither aliens nor "progressive creation" provide as complete an explanation of all facets of the evidence.

And ToE does? You're dreaming.

Nope, it is accepted by overwhelming majority of biological scientists (because ... see previous comment), and it is also confirmed by the independent analysis of genetic analysis and genome comparisons. Objective empirical evidence, unlike anecdotal evidence which you appear to rely on.

Message 998

RAZD writes:

Curious that aliens and gods only created evidence that completely mimics what the process of evolution would produce and only what the ToE predicts would occur.

Curious that you ignore all the evidence that contradicts ToE - where is the evidence for the evolutionary ancestors of trilobites, fish and insects? Where are the missing links between the Ediacaran fauna all the novel phyla that appeared during the Cambrian explosion? The evidence for these "ancestors" doesn't exist!

Curiously, missing information is not contradictory. That's called a swing and a miss:

Message 1003

RAZD writes:

Dredge writes:

On the contrary, the fossil record shows abundant evidence of "outside tampering".

Please provide. preferably documented in a scientific journal. I know of none.


Ever heard of the fossil record?

Citing the fossil record is not sufficient to claim evidence for "outside tampering" -- you have to show what tampering was involved and why it supports your claim. Objective empirical evidence ... that you are missing

Mostly because producing a new genus was not the intent of artificial selection.

For thousands of years, humans have tried to alter the characteristics of dogs, for example, in all sorts of ways using every trick in nature's toolbox - even resorting to unnatural methods such as inbreeding - but no one has managed to produce anything but more dogs. Obviously, there are genetic limits to how much organisms can change.
It was only when genetic engineering came along that the potential for producing radically different organisms was realised. Compared to genetic engineering, the mechanisms of evolution have been observed to produced only very limited and puny changes with a population. The claim that these evolutionary mechanisms can change a dinosaur into a bird (for example) are absurd and an embarrassment to science.

And curiously, (micro)evolutionary change is still what the evidence shows: limited changes from generation to generation, within the temporal/spacial matrix limitations. The preponderance of evidence of dinosaur to flightless feathered dinosaur to bird increases every year. Plus bone types and breating system. Another case of a "missing link" being filled in by later objective empirical evidence.

This hasn't been affected by progress in the relatively new field of genetic engineering. What genetic analysis has done is improve the evidence of evolutionary change explaning the known objective empirical evidence.

And yet the ToE still explains all the known evidence.

... like fish and insects appearing out of nowhere in the fossil record!

Yes. It provides the best explanation provided by science, based on objective empirical evidence rather than fantasy, anecdotal evidence, denial of science and wishful thinking.

... "out of nowhere" is really meaningless hyperbole in terms of the fossil record ... as it could be said of every fossil, which makes it redundant, tautological and banal, like most of your posts.

It is amusing the lengths you've gone to in order to argue for an alien conspiracy theory instead of a fact based analysis ... because reality challenges your cherished strongly held beliefs (resulting in cognitive dissonance and resulting denial).

quote:
TIP Sheet
CONSPIRACY THEORY & CONSPIRACISM

You say you believe the government is hiding something at Area 51–captured alien spacecraft, perhaps? The conjectures and rumors surrounding Area 51 comprise a revered conspiracy theory (many theories, actually). Do you believe the aliens among us are the hidden driving force in human history? ...

Test your favorite conspiracy against the following components typical of conspiracism and conspiracy theories:

  1. THEY (the conspirators) are a relatively small group, but powerful and corrupt. They are evil, or at least selfish, acting in their own interest and against the public interest. They have great foresight, patience, and deviousness. Nevertheless, they are not all-powerful or even that smart, really, since WE have figured them out.
  2. WE are a small, dedicated group of freedom fighters and freethinkers. We are soldiers, rebels in the fight for good against evil.
  3. YOU are clueless. Why can't you see what's going on here? (Conspiracy theorists place most people in this group.)
  4. THEY have hidden or destroyed all the evidence that would implicate them and have manufactured false evidence that exculpates them.
  5. YOU are close-minded. In fact, you are probably one of THEM.

The comfort of conspiracy theory is that it provides a well-defined enemy and a sense of control (or at least structure) in the face of upheaval and disempowerment; the tendency to perceive conspiracy is more common in groups experiencing social isolation or political marginalization. ...

Conspiracy theories and conspiracism share three problems:

  • Unfalsifiability
  • Fallacy
  • Naivete

Unfalsifiability

The main problem with any particular conspiracy theory is not that it's wrong, but that it's inarguable; not that it's false, but that it is unfalsifiable. Because it is unfalsifiable, a conspiracy theory is not provable or disprovable.

A theory is falsifiable if it is possible to test it against evidence to discover if it is true. To test a scientific theory, for example, a scientist would examine a body of evidence to formulate a general theory, which she, in turn, would test against more evidence to try to determine whether her theory might be true. Conspiracy theory is untestable because it invariably proposes that the evidence has been tampered with. ...

Fallacy

In addition to being unfalsifiable, conspiracy theories fall into a variety of fallacies. For example, the insufficiency of evidence leads to the fallacy of hasty conclusion. The tendency to demonize the conspirators falls into the ad hominem fallacy. Circular reasoning or special pleading emerges when, while the freedom fighters agree in principle that claims should be substantiated by evidence, in the special case of this conspiracy, evidence has been lost/altered/fabricated/destroyed. ...

Naivete

... Philosophy professor Jerry Goodenough at the University of East Anglia, U.K., points out in his article "Critical Thinking About Conspiracy Theories" (www.uea.ac.uk/~j097/CONSP01.htm) that "believers" often fail to take a sufficiently critical look at the quality of evidence, such as it is. Objective evidence for conspiracy theories is typically sketchy or absent. Eyewitness evidence, then, is the mainstay, even though study after study demonstrates the inaccuracy of most eyewitness accounts. ...


Sounds a lot like all the evolution disbelievers, from fundamentalist YEC to apologist OEC, IDologist, and science denialists. People who want reality to match their belief instead of belief matching reality.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .

Edited by RAZD, : ..


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 1003 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 9:30 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1034 by Dredge, posted 05-21-2019 11:12 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 1035 by Dredge, posted 05-21-2019 11:32 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19845
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 1024 of 1074 (852690)
05-15-2019 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 997 by Dredge
05-13-2019 8:43 PM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
See response to Message 1022

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 997 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 8:43 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1025 of 1074 (853039)
05-21-2019 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 988 by JonF
05-13-2019 9:03 AM


Re: Progressive Creation
I'm not a YEC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 988 by JonF, posted 05-13-2019 9:03 AM JonF has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1042 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2019 10:36 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1026 of 1074 (853040)
05-21-2019 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 990 by Taq
05-13-2019 12:56 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Taq writes:

Dredge writes:


My aliens are as invisible as your macroevolution.

Macroevolution is seen in every comparison of genomes:


Thousands of people have claimed to have seen UFOs - on the other hand, ZERO people have claimed to have seen macroevolution.

You're getting ahead of yourself - fossils show that macroevolution has occurred, but fossils don't tell us HOW it occurred. Your Darwinist explanation is merely one possible explanation ... which is supported by fossil evidence, but isn't CONFIRMED by fossil evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 990 by Taq, posted 05-13-2019 12:56 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1058 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2019 3:17 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1027 of 1074 (853041)
05-21-2019 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 991 by herebedragons
05-13-2019 2:43 PM


herebedragons writes:

How could you possibly know if all members of a genus shared a common ancestor? How could you know if several genera shared a common ancestor. For example: in the cat family, Felidae, there are at least 14 extant genera. Are each of these separate creations? or is each of the 8 lineages a separate creation? Or is the whole family descended from a common ancestor - as most creationists claim? What is your criteria for determining the answer?

Dredge writes:


Why would I need to answer these questions?

Well, I guess you wouldn't, seeing as how you are not a biologist and do not study biology or biological systems. If you did... these ARE questions you would want to know the answer to.


I didn't ask why "you would WANT to know the answer to" such questions. I asked why I - or more to the point - why a biologist would NEED to ask such questions. Why do you as a biologist NEED to link an extant organism you are studying to some distant ancestor that lived millions of years ago? I contend that doing so achieves nothing of any practical benefit - in other words, it's a useless exercise and a waste of time.

If you don't know what the ancestral state of a character is, how can you determine what the derived state is? How would you determine what traits were locally adapted? How would you determine how selection is affecting the character?

By "ancestral state" I take it you mean the ancestral state of an extant organism. But that's not what I'm talking about - obviously. You haven't yet explained to me how the theory of common descent is useful in your work. (Note: For Pete's sake don't confuse the "theory of common descent" with "common descent" - the latter is obviously useful in a practical sense.)

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 991 by herebedragons, posted 05-13-2019 2:43 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1028 of 1074 (853042)
05-21-2019 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 999 by AZPaul3
05-13-2019 8:58 PM


Re: Just to interject the YEC floodist view
AZPaul3 writes:

And testing? Every new fossil found is another test.


Fossils reveal that "evolution" has occurred, but fossils don't confirm any explanation for that "evolution".

You've heard of tiktaalik, right? Then you know that its discovery was a product of prediction from ToE.

One find in scientific terms is regarded as no more than luck - oh, except in evolutionary "science", in which the accepted norms of statistics are ignored when convenient.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 999 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 8:58 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1029 of 1074 (853043)
05-21-2019 10:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1000 by Tanypteryx
05-13-2019 9:05 PM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
Tanyptyerx writes:

Curious that all this is incorrect. You have presented no evidence that contradicts the ToE. Which "novel" phyla?


What the evolutionary ancestors of a trilobite? Algae? Bacteria?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1000 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-13-2019 9:05 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1038 by edge, posted 05-22-2019 12:15 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1040 by Pressie, posted 05-22-2019 6:17 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1044 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2019 10:53 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1030 of 1074 (853044)
05-21-2019 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 1009 by AZPaul3
05-13-2019 10:16 PM


Re: NO evidence of aliens
AZPaul3 writes:

Fossils give us great big clues to what happened and when


I agree - but fossils don't tell us HOW.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1009 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 10:16 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1041 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2019 10:28 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1046 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2019 11:24 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1031 of 1074 (853045)
05-21-2019 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 1013 by edge
05-13-2019 10:28 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
edge writes:

What are your criteria for determining 'outside tampering'.


Inexplicable gaps and sudden appearances of novel creatures in the fossil record - insects, for example.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1013 by edge, posted 05-13-2019 10:28 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1036 by edge, posted 05-22-2019 12:07 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1055 by JonF, posted 05-22-2019 1:31 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1032 of 1074 (853046)
05-21-2019 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1015 by edge
05-13-2019 10:36 PM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
edge writes:

Dredge writes:

Where are the missing links between the Ediacaran fauna all the novel phyla that appeared during the Cambrian explosion? The evidence for these "ancestors" doesn't exist!

The progression is the evidence that evolution occurred.


Ah yes, but fossils don't confirm that Darwinian evolution is responsible for that progression. And insects appearing out of nowhere, for example, is hardly evidence of Darwinian evolution. Other huge gaps in the fossil record don't support Darwinism - they contradict it.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1015 by edge, posted 05-13-2019 10:36 PM edge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1037 by edge, posted 05-22-2019 12:11 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1047 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2019 11:45 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1033 of 1074 (853047)
05-21-2019 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1019 by Taq
05-14-2019 6:14 PM


Re: Progressive Creation
Taq writes:

You need to know more than that. You need to explain the following, and this is just a good start:

1. The twin nested hierarchies of morphology and genetics.

2. The difference in divergence between exons and introns.

3. The pattern of transition, transversion, and CpG substitution mutations.

4. Orthologous endogenous retroviruses and transposon insertions, and the pattern of divergence between the LTR's of a single ERV.


1. Aliens manipulated DNA to produce nested hierarchies. That capability is evident in the ancestral patterns of extant creatures.

As for 1-4, all these phenomena (which any Grade 7 student would be familiar with) are explained by 1. above - they are legacies of genetic engineering performed by aliens over millions of years.

Dredge writes:

Believing that your puny mechanisms of evolutionary can turn a rodent into a whale is grand delusion.

Only people who lack scientific evidence to support their claims stoop to calling people deluded. If you had evidence you would present it.


Consider this scenario:
One group of scientists is given the task of producing a whale from a rodent using the principles of mutations and artificial selection.
Another group of scientists is given the task of producing a whale from a rodent using the principles of genetics engineering.

Given that thousands of years of humans using mutations and artificial selection has failed to produce anything even close to macroevolution in any plants or animals, which group of scientists do you think is going to have the most success? (You don't have to be Einstein to come up with the correct answer!)

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 1019 by Taq, posted 05-14-2019 6:14 PM Taq has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1034 of 1074 (853048)
05-21-2019 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1023 by RAZD
05-15-2019 1:01 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
RAZD writes:

there is evidence for macroevolution via known evolutionary processes


Nonsense - "known evolutionary processes" demonstrate nothing more "known evolutionary process". You are conflating wishful thinking and science.

sadly - for you - you are (still) wrong again. The changes documented in the fossil record show the pattern of proximity in space/time and in degree of evolution predicted by the ToE, and that are actually seen and documented in living species today: this is sufficient to say they are explained by the ToE. This what validation looks like.

Oh, and I suppose all those gaps and sudden appearances in the fossil record are predicted by ToE as well! Your quack theory relies on cheery-picking the evidence.

Curiously, missing information is not contradictory.

The "incomplete fossil record" excuse is running out of puff - Gunter Bechly considers the fossil record to be "saturated" - meaning, we have enough fossil evidence now to conclude that the record is complete in a general sense. That is to say, the gaps and sudden appearances will always be gaps and sudden appearances.

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 1023 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2019 1:01 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1039 by edge, posted 05-22-2019 12:25 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1053 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2019 12:26 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1057 by RAZD, posted 05-22-2019 3:14 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1068 by Taq, posted 05-23-2019 1:02 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1020
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1035 of 1074 (853049)
05-21-2019 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 1023 by RAZD
05-15-2019 1:01 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
RAZD writes:

And curiously, (micro)evolutionary change is still what the evidence shows


Yeah, right ... and this is why Gould described the fossil record as an "embarrassment" to Darwinian gradualism! Not even the reptile-jaw to mammalian-inner-ear fossil sequence demonstrates microevolutionary changes.
And apparently insects appearing out of nowhere demonstrates microevolutionary changes - hilarious!

out of nowhere" is really meaningless hyperbole in terms of the fossil record

Tell that to Gunter Bechly. Deny the evidence, if that's the best you can do.

It is amusing the lengths you've gone to in order to argue for an alien conspiracy theory instead of a fact based analysis ... because reality challenges your cherished strongly held beliefs (resulting in cognitive dissonance and resulting denial).

It amusing the lengths you've gone to in order to deny that my "aliens" theory is light years ahead of your simplistic, still-stuck-in-the-nineteenth-century Neo-Darwinism (a horse-drawn cart with new wheels is still a horse-drawn cart).
The history of science is littered with the remains of mediocre, conservative thinkers who couldn't adapt to change.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1023 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2019 1:01 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1051 by edge, posted 05-22-2019 12:20 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1059 by RAZD, posted 05-22-2019 3:21 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
6768
69
707172Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019