|
Author
|
Topic: Oh those clever evolutionists: Question-begging abiogenesis
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
Message 8 of 301 (248113)
10-02-2005 6:29 AM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
10-02-2005 2:17 AM
|
|
Re: Probabilities?
Faith,
Is anybody but a creationist going to see why this is hilarious? I fail to see the hilarity, if there is evidence that a mathematical model has been misapplied, then we need to look for a new one, right? Once you've stopped laughing, of course!  Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by Faith, posted 10-02-2005 2:17 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 55 of 301 (248426)
10-03-2005 5:08 AM
|
Reply to: Message 43 by Faith
10-02-2005 9:51 PM
|
|
Re: No, that's not what he said
Faith,
It doesn't matter. The probability problem is a problem for evolutionists, not for creationists, and should be conceded. What is the probability then, that is such a conundrum for evolutionary theory? What are the numbers/variables that we plug into the model? You mean to say you don't know? Then it's not a problem for evo's at all, then, is it? Your problem is akin to, measure the paramaters of something you don't know, multiply that by another number you don't know, & square root that by another number you don't know. Ha! Evolution is dead  . When we have known variables to plug into a model then you can tell us we have a problem, until then your pissing in the wind. Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 43 by Faith, posted 10-02-2005 9:51 PM | | Faith has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 57 of 301 (248446)
10-03-2005 8:05 AM
|
Reply to: Message 56 by Phat
10-03-2005 5:58 AM
|
|
Re: Discussion: Philosophy,Math,and my own musings
Phat,
I AM asserting that some things can be theoretically true. Fine & dandy, but are they actually true, & how do you tell? Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 56 by Phat, posted 10-03-2005 5:58 AM | | Phat has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 76 by Phat, posted 10-03-2005 3:15 PM | | mark24 has replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 65 of 301 (248501)
10-03-2005 10:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 60 by Faith
10-03-2005 10:03 AM
|
|
Faith,
Intuitively the odds are against abiogenesis and evolution itself to some astronomical degree, but since intuition isn't math you can just let the creationists go on knowing it's true Bullpuckey. You don't intuitively know anything. You only know things by ultimately observing things. Therefore, if you don't know the numbers to plug into a mathematical model, then you are deluding yourself that you intuitively know the answer in spite of not having accurate numbers. It doesn't get more intellectually bankrupt than this. Why on earth would you go to the trouble of forming a mathematical model just to ignore it when the flaws are pointed out to you, & declare that you know the answer anyway? Why not skip the math & pretend you know it all to begin with? Know matter how much you want the probability argument to be a problem for evolution, until you have halfway accurate figures then as I've said before, you're pissing in the wind. Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 60 by Faith, posted 10-03-2005 10:03 AM | | Faith has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 78 of 301 (248600)
10-03-2005 3:42 PM
|
Reply to: Message 76 by Phat
10-03-2005 3:15 PM
|
|
Re: Discussion: Philosophy,Math,and my own musings
Phat, Irrelevant. How do you tell something as being actually true from something that is theory? In other words, how do you determine your "theoretical truth" is actually true? Given you can't possibly know something to be true without some form of observation, something that is purely theory cannot have the word "truth" tagged onto it. Mark This message has been edited by mark24, 10-03-2005 03:45 PM
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 76 by Phat, posted 10-03-2005 3:15 PM | | Phat has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 80 by Phat, posted 10-03-2005 5:26 PM | | mark24 has replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 85 of 301 (248694)
10-03-2005 7:15 PM
|
Reply to: Message 80 by Phat
10-03-2005 5:26 PM
|
|
Re: Discussion: Philosophy,Math,and my own musings
Phat,
So I need an observer around all the time to verify any encounters with the miraculous? Again, irrelevant. You said you maintained that "theoretical truth" existed. If you don't have evidence of a miracle, then your "theory" has the same evidential veracity as the existence of unicorns. It may be true, but you have no business claiming it is without evidence. Put another way, something that is purely theoretical may be true or false, you don't know which, so for all practical purposes "theoretical truth" is a meaningless term. Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 80 by Phat, posted 10-03-2005 5:26 PM | | Phat has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 270 of 301 (249445)
10-06-2005 10:25 AM
|
Reply to: Message 269 by DorfMan
10-06-2005 10:23 AM
|
|
Re: First ingredient
Dorfman,
I am specific. First ingredient is the one you don't have, from which all matter flows. Which is what? Given I have to ask the question is indicative that you were somewhat less than specific. Mark
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 269 by DorfMan, posted 10-06-2005 10:23 AM | | DorfMan has not replied |
|
mark24
Member (Idle past 5226 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: 12-01-2001
|
|
|
Message 274 of 301 (249450)
10-06-2005 10:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 272 by DorfMan
10-06-2005 10:27 AM
|
|
Re: First ingredient
Dorfman,
Elements need a first ingredient, and you don't have it. They're called electrons, protons & neutrons. But this is irrelevant. How the elements got there is neither here nor there for abiogenesis to occur. You just argued yourself out of a point. But since were on the subject, creationism needs a god, & you don't have one. Mark This message has been edited by mark24, 10-06-2005 10:33 AM
There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 272 by DorfMan, posted 10-06-2005 10:27 AM | | DorfMan has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2
