|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
It's a long story. My first avatar was Lee Van Cleef because I'm quick on the draw. Then, for reasons that I don't entirely remember myself, I affected a gender-unspecific persona for a while (not that it was really different from my usual persona). Sharon Stone in The Quick and the Dead seemed like a more suitable avatar - and it was quite popular. Then, for other reasons that are lost to history, I switched to Sean Connery (Marko Ramius, the Vilnius Schoolmaster, from The Hunt for Red October). That's closer to what I look like in real life. Finally, I realized that I still had the Sharon Stone graphic, so I switched back. Why are you using my girlfriend's image as your avatar?"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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Finally, I realized that I still had the Sharon Stone graphic, so I switched back. Yeah, switch it up, keep it interesting. Like River Song talking about the lovers she had taken (before recognizing who the Twelfth Doctor was). One was from the Nestene Consciousness but she made sure that he had a few different heads just to keep it interesting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Why are you using my girlfriend's image as your avatar? Girlfriend? Really? I've been taking you for an incel (involuntary celibate), the type of guy who gets bent out of shape because girls won't have anything to do with them (and for good reason -- your troll characteristics would most definitely be a turn-off leading any female to seek all possible exits). I was thinking that it's a very good thing for that Kindergarten down the street from you that Australia has gun control laws. Are you one of those guys who is genuinely surprised to find that girls don't have staples in their navel? Or have I spoiled the surprise? Sorry. Spoilers!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
So your best scientific explanation for how a venomous snake came to have hollow fangs is ... wait for it (drum roll) ... "billions of years done it"? Oh, you went there! To one of the absolutely stupidest creationist "arguments". Classically, it goes something like:
quote: castle2 did something similar (don't want to waste my time hunting it down again) that went something like: "How long does my bicycle need to wait to become a mountain motorbike?" It's not just time, you fucking idiot! But rather that what actually happens requires time, time which you insist on eliminating. A simpler response would be baking a cake. We mix the ingredients together and put them into a cake pan or form (I'd been making Pineapple Upside Down Cake, so it was my skillet, though my earlier Apfelkuchen would use a pie pan). Put all that into an oven and take it out immediately and expect a cake. Instead, you have uncooked batter. What went wrong? Oh! As a creationist you eliminated time. It takes time for a cake to bake. But what about just mixing everything together and give it time by waiting an hour? Why didn't that work, Atheist!? Sigh! You need both the proper heat (ie, properly heated oven) and time. But still it does take time! Not convinced? OK, I've been thinking about another analogy, one that more closely fits your own misrepresentations of evolution. Hope you enjoy the ride, because it's a road trip from Sydney to Perth (or Perth to Sydney in case there's some cultural thingee with you). According to Google Maps, the distance from Sydney to Perth (or vice versa) is 3932 km (2442.23153 miles) along National Highway 1 and National Highway A1 and the entire journey by car will take 41 hours (so then, average speed of 95.9 kph, or 60 mph). Assuming driving 8 to 12 hours per day, the entire trip should last 5 to three and a half days. OK according to your various messages here, you reject the idea that that journey would be anything but instantaneous (eg, all evolutionary change must occur within a single generation). So your car is parked in Perth, you get into it, close the door, then open the door and get out and expect to be in Sydney. And because you don't find yourself in Sydney, you declare that travel from Perth to Sydney is impossible! OK, it takes 3.5 to 5 days to get there from here (old Maine joke ("Ye can't get the'a from he'a!")). So you get in your car and sit there for 41 hours (or 3.5 to 5 days), get out and you're still in Perth?. Well that proves that it's impossible! Uh, Dude, you gotta start the car. OK, you repeat the experiment and start the car. But the experiment fails when you run out of petrol (AKA gasoline, AKA gas, AKA Benzin) the first day as you sat there still parked in Perth with your engine running. Oh! That definitely proves that it's impossible! Uh, Dude, you gotta actually drive there. I mean, that's how it works, ... Dude. That kind of complete and utter stupidity is exactly what we see you doing with this BS nonsense. And you wonder why we have so little patience with your willful stupidity and trollness? The entire evolutionary process of generation after generation reproducing, each generation being very similar to yet slightly different from the previous, the way that they have to survive mutating slowly over each generation, the more beneficial mutations becoming more predominant in the population because the parents with those beneficial mutations produced more offspring and hence became more represented in the next population, etc, etc, etc over many subsequent generations. Each generation takes a finite amount of time, so many generations take many such amounts of time. Time is not the agent, but rather time is the enabler of many generations of life doing what life does, the net result of which is the best definition for evolution that I can think of. When you get a response of "lots of time", what they are actually saying is "lots of generations" -- lots of generations are needed and lots of generations do require lots of time. And a helluva lot of can happen in that many generations. Remember the actual probabilities. It is very unlikely for something to happen for one individual in one generation, [i]but for it to be unable to happen for the entire population for generation after generation after generation becomes so unlikely as to be virtually impossible, so the inverse, that it could happen at least once, becomes inevitable. And once it happens, it can be inherited and then spread throughout the population from there. I'm still waiting for you to follow up on your mention of the vertebrate eye (OK, you said the human eye, but we did inherit that fully formed from other mammals). It should prove to be ineresting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
xongsmith Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: Member Rating: 7.0 |
more Dredge:
1. Why would the "flatter toothed individuals die before they can reproduce"? 2. Even if a snake somehow evolved hollow fangs, how would hollow fangs per se confer a survival advantage? flat teeth would break more often trying to pierce the food covering.hollow teeth would succeed more often trying to pierce the food covering. "I'm the Grim Reaper now, Mitch. Step aside." Death to #TzarVladimirtheCondemned! Enjoy every sandwich! - xongsmith, 5.7dawkins scale
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4
|
Also, flatter tooth snakes did not all die out without reproducing. They became different species.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Yeah, it's a numbers game. For a new trait to outcompete the old trait does not require those with the old trait to die out because they were unable to survive (though I have no doubt that that is part of creationists' misunderstanding of evolution, as in "Then why are there still monkeys?"). Rather, a larger and growing part of the population would have the new trait and a shrinking part the old trait. From there, if the older trait subpopulation became separated then they could form a new species, but I would think a more likely outcome would be that all members of the population would eventually have the new trait.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
dwise1 writes:
A similar joke that applies to Dredge, candle2, Kleinman, et al.:
(old Maine joke ("Ye can't get the'a from he'a!")) A travelling salesman stops at a farm to ask for directions: Salesman: "Do you know how to get to the city from here?"Farmer: "Uh, nope." Salesman: "Do you know how to get to the highway from here?" Farmer: "Uh, nope." Salesman: "Do you know where this road goes?" Farmer: "Uh, nope." Salesman: Well, you don't know much, do you?" Farmer: "Mebbe not... but I ain't the one that's lost." "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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Percy writes:
"There's no other way⁶ it could have gotten there⁶"? It means that it's not impossible that you could have inadvertently cut-n-pasted a superscript into the textbox, but there's no doubt that you did cut-n-paste it in. There's no other way it could have gotten there. Really⁶? I'm no computer expert⁶ and with all⁶ due respect⁶, I have⁶ my doubts⁶ about that⁶. Are you sure⁶⁶⁶⁶?
There's nothing in the software, no glitch, that would do that because the superscript is a unicode character, and there's nothing in the software for representing unicode characters. If you copy unicode characters into a textbox then the software will pass them on when it writes the message to the database, but it can't itself put unicode characters in a textbox. Your superscript "6" takes three bytes to represent ...
"There's nothing⁸ in the software²¹, no glitch, that would do that²³"? Really⁷⁸? Are you sure³⁰ about that⁵⁶⁸?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Yes, you cut and paste from an outside source just as Percy said. Thank you for the confirmation.
Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
I don't⁶ know what you⁴⁵ mean by that⁴³⁹. Confusion⁰ here now⁴³⁵⁷
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Maybe there's a glitch in the system.ringo writes:
That's a⁷ terrible thing⁴ to say⁹⁰ to a friend⁶²³.
More likely there's a glitch in you. For future reference, failing to provide a citation for a quote is a lesser offense than lying about it. The cover-up is often worse than the original crime. Ask Nixon.
I'm not⁶ trying to cover it up⁷. I didn't know² how that little "6" got there⁵ at the time⁹ ... and I now know³ it wasn't a glitch⁷⁷ in the system¹.I can assure you ⁴⁵ it was not a remnant⁵ from a quote⁶⁷ and you should⁴ now know⁸⁸⁹ that I wasn't lying⁶ about it⁵⁴⁷³.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 442 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Your assurance means nothing.
I can assure you ⁴⁵ it was not a remnant⁵ from a quote⁶⁷.... Dredge writes:
I have no reason to think you're not lying. ...and you should⁴ now know⁸⁸⁹ that I wasn't lying⁶ about it⁵⁴⁷³."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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 104 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
ringo writes:
Do the⁴ superscript numbers⁷⁸ in this sentence⁹ mean part² of this sentence⁴ was taken from a quote⁵ made by someone⁸⁹ else?
Your assurance means nothing. I have no reason to think you're not lying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
How are you making them?
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024