|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Thank you for your concern and your kind advice. Much appreciated. You're such a good friend.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Ain't I tho?
Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
AZPaul3 writes:
BSE! those god-meat crackers are not good for you. They screw up your brain"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
He thinks like a cow anyway, so it fits.
Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes: No contradiction. According to taxonomy and physiology, humans are obviously more closely "related" to other mammals than they are tonon-mammals like mollusks and fish ... regardless of being "related" according to the theory of UCD. ID/creationists still can't seem to wrap their heads around the completely non-necessity of phylogenies for functional organisms. If ID/creationism is true, why couldn't chickens and humans have nearly identical insulin and insulin receptor genes while humans and pigs have very different insulin genes? Or why couldn't pigs have an entirely different way of regulating blood sugar other than insulin since they were created separately from humans? There is absolutely no biological reason why we should see more similar insulin genes between humans and pigs than between humans and chickens OTHER THAN SHARED ANCESTRY AND EVOLUTION. The only explanation that will necessarily produce the nested hierarchy that we observe is shared ancestry and evolution. There is no reason why we would expect this pattern from ID/creationism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
I can sort of understand why a scientist, having lost an argument to the village-idiot, would resort to pulling out the "troll" card in a desperate attempt to save face.
And there we have undisputable proof that you are just a pathetic troll
A drowning man clutching at straws.
All the discoveries we have made in biology, including the evolution and relatedness of life on this planet are part of our arsenals of tools that can be utilized by medical science.
It's true that "evolution" - as in, inherited traits of populations through successive generations - is indeed utilized by medical science.As for the "relatedness of life" ... yes, but only in the sense that there are genetic similarities between species. But if by "relatedness of life", you mean the theory of UCD ... no, that theory is irrelevant and useless to medicine.
Interestingly, something we never see is creationism, ID, or prayer being useful tools in the medical science toolkit. Faith healers are not replacing neurosurgeons.
Interestingly, you're strawmaning again.
We are all carrying on using our knowledge to learn more new things and you have no influence over the tools we choose to use.
Medicine has learnt nothing from the theory of UCD; neither does medicine utilize UCD as a "tool" - medicine works but utilizing facts, not useless stories about the days of yore like UCD. For some strange reason, you seem incapable of separating useful facts from a useless theory that attempts to explain why those facts exist. It's as if, once upon a time, someone told you that "nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of UCD" and you believed it, never stopping to consider the veracity of that Darwinist doctrine. Isn't it fascinating that even highly intelligent folks, such as scientists, are not immune from brainwashing and episodes of cognitive dissonance?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
I'm telling you, Altar Boy, those meat crackers screw with your mind.
As for the "relatedness of life" ... yes, but only in the sense that there are genetic similarities between species. But if by "relatedness of life", you mean the theory of UCD ... no, that theory is irrelevant and useless to medicine. Now ask yourself, Dredge, why are there so many genetic similarities between very disparate species? Seems those DNA similarities would be inherited from a common ancestor. Do you know there are genes older than your god? They have been very highly conserved over the eons of millennia. Like the genes that create and manage the krebs cycles which no life, no single cell, on this planet can live without. The krebs cycle is life and we inherited those genes from ... guess who? The original organisms that found the original krebs cycles ... the UCA. Now aren't you embarrassed at your lack of analytical abilities? I'm telling you, Dredge, those meat crackers are screwing with your head.
Isn't it fascinating that even highly intelligent folks, such as scientists, are not immune from brainwashing and episodes of cognitive dissonance? When did that black kettle come in, asked the pot.Edited by AZPaul3, : booboo Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
751/50
Dredge writes:
Which "job" in the field of medicine has been made "a lot easier" by the theory of UCD?Stile writes:
Please explain how the theory that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) has contibuted to the development of a vaccines and medicines.
Pretty much all of them.But coming up with new vaccines and medicines, as already listed a few times for you, is a good one. Dredge writes:
Evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency within a population. So please explain how "UCD is the nail-gun of evolution". Stile writes:
A change in allele frequency within a population is explained by mechanisms such as natural, artificial and sexual selection, mutations, genetic drift, recombination.
UCD is the best tool we have for explaining the change in allele frequency within a population.
The theory that that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) is not necessary to explain change in allele frequency within a population. Please explain how UCD is necessary to explain the evolution of different beaks in Galapagos fiches, for example.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Please explain how UCD is necessary to explain the evolution of different beaks in Galapagos fiches, for example. The UCA does not specifically explain why a certain trait appears. What UCA does, Dredge, is give us the ability to understand HOW it happened. The same ingredients are necessary, and the understanding of how those ingredients work together starts with UCA. This information is all available for anyone to study and learn. Why do you not? Are evolution, the UCA, whale tails that much of a threat to your existence? Why do you pursue these lines of BS? Are you just an ignorant catholic or is trolling meeting some deep psychological need in your meat-cracker rattled brain?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
How does denying the theory of universal common descent prevent "useful medical research"?ringo writes:
It does matter "how". In Message 736 you claimed that "Creationists' rejection of common descent has prevented them from doing any useful medical research."
It doesn't matter "how".
So please cite an example of how creationists' rejection of the theory of UCD "prevented them from doing any useful medical research" ... lest your claim be filed under "bullshit".
The fact is that creationists DON'T do any useful medical research.
You're strawmaning. Whether creationists have done any useful medical research or not is irrelevant to the question of whether or not UCD has proven useful in medicine.
If you think it isn't because they deny science, go ahead and propose an alternative reason. Dredge writes:
I don't recall denying universal common descent. My position is, I neither deny UCD nor accept it.
You might as well say you neither deny gravity nor accept it.
More strawmaning.
It's a foolish position to take. You are not educated enough to question science
No matter the level of education, no one can prove/ demonstrate/confirm that UCD is a fact ... which sounds like a perfectly good reason to neither deny nor accept the theory of UCD. Friendly Reminder: Believing that UCD is a fact doesn't make it a fact.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
dwise1 writes:
I learnt long ago to never ho out in public without adult supevision ... and I always wear my protective helmet. What we expect from you is for you to put your protective helmet back on and crawl back into your crib for your mommy (or gov't designated care-giver) to keep you safe. You should not go out in public without adult supervision. (Btw, how did you know that I have to wear a protective helmet?)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined:
|
Dredge writes: Please explain how the theory that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) has contibuted to the development of a vaccines and medicines. Understanding how viruses evolve and how they affect humans and other species (due to UCD) leads to knowledge that guides us into efficiently creating vaccines and medicines.
A change in allele frequency within a population is explained by mechanisms such as natural, artificial and sexual selection, mutations, genetic drift, recombination. Exactly: UCD.
The theory that that all life on earth descended from a common ancestor (UCD) is not necessary to explain change in allele frequency within a population. Of course it is. Without UCD, changed in allele frequencies would not happen. Why would they change if they didn't mutate from their ancestors during reproduction?When everyone changes from their ancestors... and it all follows back... it all comes down to UCD. It's all part of the same theory. Please explain how UCD is necessary to explain the evolution of different beaks in Galapagos fiches, for example. Different beaks in Galapagos finches wouldn't exist if it weren't for UCD... the fact that living creatures evolve from their ancestors and that we're all related (some more so than others.) What other theory describes such evolution? Only UCD.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Dredge writes:
How would the village idiot know that? Show us a dozen examples of medical researchers telling us that.
But if by "relatedness of life", you mean the theory of UCD ... no, that theory is irrelevant and useless to medicine. Dredge writes:
You seem to be incapable of understanding that we have a vast network of facts, all inter-connected. You can't accept one from here and one from there and reject some others that you don't like. If A is connected to B and B is connected to C and so on down the line, then you can't claim that A is not connected to Z. For some strange reason, you seem incapable of separating useful facts from a useless theory that attempts to explain why those facts exist."Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Been there; done that. Creationists have not produced any vaccines. It doesn't matter "why" they haven't. All that matters is results. They have failed to produce any medical advances because they reject science. It doesn't even matter what science they reject. Rejecting ANY science will always be a stumbling block for them.
So please cite an example of how creationists' rejection of the theory of UCD "prevented them from doing any useful medical research" ... Dredge writes:
I'm not worried about that. I couldn't care less where YOU file it, Mr. Bullshit.
... lest your claim be filed under "bullshit". Dredge writes:
And the fact that flat-earthers have never walked on the moon has nothing to do with their rejection of science? There seems to be a gap (i.e. a vast gaping chasm) in your logic.
Whether creationists have done any useful medical research or not is irrelevant to the question of whether or not UCD has proven useful in medicine. Dredge writes:
But it HAS been demonstrated/confirmed to the satisfaction of anybody who is intelligent enough to understand. If one dimwit (you) is too dopey to understand, that doesn't demolish the understanding of everybody else.
No matter the level of education, no one can prove/ demonstrate/confirm that UCD is a fact ... which sounds like a perfectly good reason to neither deny nor accept the theory of UCD. Dredge writes:
There's no belief involved. Believing that UCD is a fact doesn't make it a fact."Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg. What's going on? Where are all the friends I had? It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong. Give me back, give me back my Leningrad." -- Leningrad Cowboys
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Dredge writes:
But if by "relatedness of life", you mean the theory of UCD ... no, that theory is irrelevant and useless to medicine.
Wrong.
quote: quote: quote: quote: Edited by Taq, .
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024