Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Truth About Evolution and Religion
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 237 of 419 (561310)
05-19-2010 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by dkroemer
05-19-2010 4:09 PM


Re: But we do know of other factors
dkroemer writes:
If the question was so stupid, why didn't they answer by accusations:
Perhaps they consider you to be a John A. Davisonesque crank, as I do. Have you ever run for governor of Vermont?
Edited by subbie, : Tyop

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by dkroemer, posted 05-19-2010 4:09 PM dkroemer has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 283 of 419 (561503)
05-20-2010 11:59 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by dkroemer
05-20-2010 11:46 PM


Re: Amazingly, evolution STILL explains the diversity of life including complexity
It stands to reason there were processes, but the process could not be natural selection.
Daughter populations have different genetic material from parent populations. This differential has an effect on how well different members of the daughter population compete for limited resources. Any competitive advantage that a portion of the daughter population enjoys will tend to be expressed in greater percentage in the next daughter population. This process will continue for each succeeding generation.
Please tell me, in detail, exactly why this process cannot create the world we see today. Don't tell me about someone else's quote. If you want someone else to speak, bring them here. If you cannot do that, explain in your own words why the process I described cannot account for what we observe today.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by dkroemer, posted 05-20-2010 11:46 PM dkroemer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by dkroemer, posted 05-21-2010 7:16 AM subbie has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 299 of 419 (561551)
05-21-2010 9:04 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by dkroemer
05-21-2010 7:16 AM


Your calculation is meaningless
I'll explain again without citing authorities that Darwinism is hogwash.
***
This calculation is crude for two reasons. It ignores natural selection....
You intend to disprove "Darwinism" by ignoring natural selection.
*blink*
*blink*
Well, I'm going to debunk the Shroud of Turin. I'll begin by assuming that Christ never existed.
Your calculation is meaningless for at least two reasons, both of which have been pointed out to you in this thread and one of which you seem to acknowledge.
First, if that number means anything, it is the odds of all 26 amino acids that you mention coming together all at once in one fell swoop. It ignores the possibility of them coming together slowly, bit by bit, over time. You know, the way science believes they did. You understand this fact, yet account for it only by admitting that your number is "crude." It seems to me that this flaw renders your number not crude, but empty.
Second, your number assumes that those 26 amino acids were a target that the process was trying to reach. You need to prove that is the case and I don't think you can.
Look at it this way. The odds of anyone getting 13 spades in bridge in a random deal are approximately 1 in 650,000,000,000. Does this mean that it's virtually impossible for anyone to make a contract of 7 spades?
So far as I know, this calculation has only been done for short sequences, for example, "to be or not to be."
As far as I know, your "calculation" hasn't been done for even that sequence, at least not by anyone who knows anything about evolution. It would be irrelevant. If you can find a place where a scientist has done this calculation, I'd be interested in seeing it.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by dkroemer, posted 05-21-2010 7:16 AM dkroemer has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 310 of 419 (561749)
05-22-2010 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 306 by dkroemer
05-22-2010 11:13 PM


Re: Amazingly, evolution STILL explains the diversity of life including complexity
The second law of thermodynamics states that nature tends towards a state of greater disorder, that is, less complexity.
The 2LoT says absolutely nothing of the sort. How anyone with a Ph.D. in any area of science could make this claim is completely behind me, and futher bolsters my suspicion that you are some sort of Davisonesque crank.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by dkroemer, posted 05-22-2010 11:13 PM dkroemer has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(2)
Message 324 of 419 (561859)
05-23-2010 11:06 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by dkroemer
05-23-2010 11:00 PM


Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics
He says that, not always, but when he is interested in misleading non-biologists, that the second law of thermodynamics is not inconsistent with Darwinism. He says the argument from the second law is used only by creationists and is not part of the science of evolution.
And he's entirely correct when he says that. If you were to provide an accurate statement of the 2LoT, you'd understand why it's no impediment. There are at least three distinct reasons.
First, the 2LoT only applies to thermodynamically closed systems. The Eart is not thermodynamically closed.
Second, the 2LoT only speaks to overall entropy in a system. Nothing prevents isolated local decreases in entropy so long as the total entropy in a system increases.
Third, and most importantly, entropy as used in the 2LoT and "complexity," whatever you mean by that, are not the same thing.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by dkroemer, posted 05-23-2010 11:00 PM dkroemer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by dkroemer, posted 05-24-2010 4:55 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 334 of 419 (561894)
05-24-2010 8:23 AM
Reply to: Message 331 by dkroemer
05-24-2010 7:23 AM


Re: Evolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics
I estimate that the odds of a Ph.D. in physics having such a gross misunderstanding of the 2LoT are 1 in 10^7. I further estimate that the odds of a Ph.D. not being able to spell the word origin are 1 in 10^5. Thus, I estimate the odds that you are actually the holder of a Ph.D. are roughly 1 in 10^12.
What is wrong with my argument?
All available evidence demonstrates that you are unable to understand the answer to this question, given the multiple times that it has been explained to you in this thread by multiple participants. The only real question now is why anyone should continue the attempt, other than their own mental masturbation.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 331 by dkroemer, posted 05-24-2010 7:23 AM dkroemer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 340 by Peepul, posted 05-24-2010 11:45 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 363 of 419 (561974)
05-24-2010 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 362 by Theodoric
05-24-2010 9:32 PM


Re: misunderstanding or misrepresentation?
I'm telling you, he's channeling John A. Davison.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by Theodoric, posted 05-24-2010 9:32 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 366 of 419 (561981)
05-24-2010 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 364 by dkroemer
05-24-2010 9:49 PM


Re: misunderstanding or misrepresentation?
Modern biology is faced with two ideas which seem to me to be quite incompatible with each other.
Given the inordinate and egregious errors you make in your claimed field of expertise, why in the world should anyone care how something "seems to [you]" in a field in which you are not educated?
If life really depends on each gene being as unique as it appears to be,...
Of course, the fact that it appears that way to you is of little interest and even less evidentiary value. Apparently you didn't learn in your claimed years of education that science doesn't rest on assumptions but on evidence. You are chock full of the former but bereft of the latter.
too unique
Usage fail.
I'm not normally a grammar Nazi, I make my own share of mistakes. But this particular one is a pet peeve of mine, and the staggering depth of your misinformation inspired me to go ahead and pile on.
There will be nothing for natural selection to act upon.
This, of course, assumes that natural selection acts only upon genes. I'd ask for evidence to support this assumption, but given your near perfect track record of failing to respond to requests for evidence, instead I'll just draw a pretty picture of a flower.
@-----`---,-----------
It's a rose.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 364 by dkroemer, posted 05-24-2010 9:49 PM dkroemer 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