|
Author
|
Topic: Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 535 of 752 (599060)
01-04-2011 7:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 531 by shadow71
01-04-2011 7:17 PM
|
|
shadow71 writes: jar writes: If you wish to present some problem with evolution, doing a copy-n-paste of some philosophic ramblings about an old man's opinions carries no weight. If you wish to claim that there was some planning or intervention in this specific incident then you need to bring the planner in and sit him on the table to be examined and for him to demonstrate the method used to intervene. That is really a silly answer. I have presented what I believe are problems with Darwinian & neo-Darwinian theory that were raised by scientists, and you just want to say, produce proof of God. I have already stated I can't produce God. By the way Anthony Flew was probaobly the first spokesman for atheism, adored and glorfied by Dawkins and Dennett. When he follows the evidence he is just an old man. Philosophy is, if you didn't know, a very respected and productive discpline that has enriched many men and womens lives. Take a little time to read some Philosophy, broaden your horizons. LOL As if I have not read philosophy, and yes, philosophy is often fun; so is fantasy. The issue is evolution though, and we are dealing with science. That has absolutely nothing to do with God or Christianity. To introduce religious beliefs is simply irrelevant,
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 531 by shadow71, posted 01-04-2011 7:17 PM | | shadow71 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 536 of 752 (599061)
01-04-2011 7:41 PM
|
Reply to: Message 533 by shadow71
01-04-2011 7:25 PM
|
|
shadow71 writes: Well if there is no natural mechanism and something exists, can one not consider a supernatural? No, one cannot. Do you have proof for that statement? Of course and you have even explained why we cannot speculate on the supernatural; it is simply a waste of time and and end to learning. You have said you cannot produce God and that you have no model of how the supernatural intervenes in the process.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 533 by shadow71, posted 01-04-2011 7:25 PM | | shadow71 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 553 of 752 (599424)
01-07-2011 11:59 AM
|
Reply to: Message 550 by shadow71
01-07-2011 11:45 AM
|
|
of course God can be tested...
Of course God can be tested as soon as some evidence is presented that shows there is a God and a model that suggests how that God intervenes. Until then there is nothing worth testing.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 550 by shadow71, posted 01-07-2011 11:45 AM | | shadow71 has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 556 of 752 (599436)
01-07-2011 12:53 PM
|
Reply to: Message 545 by shadow71
01-06-2011 7:56 PM
|
|
shadow71 writes: I'll stand on my conclusion that God created the universe and all we know is a scientific conclusion. How did God do it?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 545 by shadow71, posted 01-06-2011 7:56 PM | | shadow71 has seen this message but not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 572 of 752 (606957)
03-01-2011 10:00 AM
|
Reply to: Message 571 by havoc
03-01-2011 9:52 AM
|
|
Re: Cows
havoc writes: What is "something else?" - what do you mean here, Do you mean another variety (among the already evolved vast number of existing varieties) of cow, where one variety is visibly different from another? Do you mean another species of bovine? I mean something other than a cow. Like a dino then a bird. There are limits on selection. A cow will always produce a cow, a dion a dino a bird a bird an ape an ape and a human a human. you can get tall ones short ones hary ones bald ones fast and slow ones but they will allways remain what they came from. Birds seem to still be dinos, just one of the species of dinos. Humans seem to still be primates, just one of the species of primates. Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Primates Family: Hominidae Genus: Homo Species: H. sapiens Subspecies: H. s. sapiens
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 571 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 9:52 AM | | havoc has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 575 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 10:15 AM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 579 of 752 (606967)
03-01-2011 10:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 575 by havoc
03-01-2011 10:15 AM
|
|
Re: Cows
havoc writes: Birds seem to still be dinos, just one of the species of dinos. Humans seem to still be primates, just one of the species of primates. Then everything that exists is still some rna replicating bacteria. U all refuse to have the dscussion. Biology text books will say that Dinos evolved into birds, flat out and unequivocally. Seems like the question as to what mech and how long should be easy to answer. Instead we get semantics. You all propose a nice neat package that has the answers. How about answering some basic foundational questions. . Did you look at the information I supplied for the classification of Homo sapiens sapiens? Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Primates Family: Hominidae Genus: Homo Species: H. sapiens Subspecies: H. s. sapiens Learn what that means. What does Animalia tell us about humans? What does Chordata tell us? What does Mammalia say about humans? What does Primates tell us about ourselves? Biology textbooks, depending on what age and educational level they were written for, will say something like "the evidence so far shows that birds evolved from dinos". The mechanisms are pretty easy and we can even give some rough ideas about the time it took, basically it took a long, long time, millions and millions of years, and it is still going on, they are still evolving. The package is not neat, and in fact, the more we learn the more complex it seems to become. That's how learning works. What basic foundational questions would you like answered?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 575 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 10:15 AM | | havoc has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 584 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 10:39 AM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 589 of 752 (606979)
03-01-2011 10:51 AM
|
Reply to: Message 584 by havoc
03-01-2011 10:39 AM
|
|
Re: Cows
havoc writes: jar writes: Did you look at the information I supplied for the classification of Homo sapiens sapiens? Classifications are a human creation and they really tell us nothing about facts. What they do however allow is for uncritical evolutionists to draw inference that supports there theory. Very circular. The theory supports the classification the classification proves the theory. HUH? Classifications are a human construct of course, just as names are a human construct. Do you understand what those classifications tell us about FACTS? What does Animalia tell us about humans? What does Chordata tell us? What does Mammalia say about humans? What does Primates tell us about ourselves? Each of those classifications tells us about facts.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 584 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 10:39 AM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 604 of 752 (606998)
03-01-2011 11:44 AM
|
Reply to: Message 596 by havoc
03-01-2011 11:18 AM
|
|
More basics
havoc writes: Did you have a point, or are you just whining? My point is that I offerd a couple critical points about your beloved theory and you assume I am such and such. DOGMA Desent must be destroyed. Not sure what you meant by that but it could just be that English is not your native language so let's try to figure it out. If you meant dissent, then again you are simply wrong to claim science discourages dissent. You do understand that one of the basics of science is that it not only encourages but mandates that scientists publish all their data so that others can challenge any conclusions? If you meant descent, then again you are wrong. If we destroyed descent then there would be no one left. If you meant decent then I cannot see how it relates in anyway to the topic being discussed.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 596 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 11:18 AM | | havoc has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 609 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 12:06 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 611 of 752 (607005)
03-01-2011 12:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 609 by havoc
03-01-2011 12:06 PM
|
|
Re: More basics
havoc writes: dissent dissent dissent. I meant to say dissent. Sory tat mi bed splang prvs evo is tru.
If you meant dissent, then again you are simply wrong to claim science discourages dissent. Well all I did was make some critical points on this website and with a few exceptions I was attacked. Not my points but me. Sounds like people who are afraid to support their ideas so they seek to impugn the other sides motives. No one has attacked you that I can see, but Creationism is a really dumb idea and so deserves derision.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 609 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 12:06 PM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 623 of 752 (607018)
03-01-2011 12:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 620 by havoc
03-01-2011 12:42 PM
|
|
Re: Cows
havoc writes: So the millions of mutations that separate humans and chimps are not responsible for the differences between humans and chimps? Really? nice to here a evolutionist admit the vast difference in the genetic code between the chimps and us chumps. mutations lead to loss of function. wingless beatles etc. they can be advantagious but are inverably in the opposite direction of your theory. Try your examle from before in reverse. Take two poodles add and a bunch of genereations and I'll even through in an intellegence in the breader and see if you can ever get back to the wolf. once the genetic information is lost it is gone chance and time will never bring it back. HUH? What genetic loss of information? Maybe it is a language problem again. Do you think the difference between a wolf and a puppy doggie is that the puppy doggie somehow lost some genetic information that was in a wolf? Are you thinking about the creationist nonsense of some super genome or that things devolved from some perfect state?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 620 by havoc, posted 03-01-2011 12:42 PM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 642 of 752 (607130)
03-02-2011 9:00 AM
|
Reply to: Message 640 by havoc
03-02-2011 8:53 AM
|
|
Re: my karma ran over your dogma
havoc writes: How come there are no animals with entirely different DNA? That would falsify common descent. The reason you don't is because of the vast evidence for common descent, not because it can't be falsified. I admit that certain evidence is consistant with common ancestor, such as DNA. This however is also consistant with a common designer. Curiously I think if we did find some organism that used a different system than dna I don’t think you all would abandon your Darwinist ideas. Once again it is not falsifiable because it is dogma not science. Of course there is evidence that ancestors exist but no evidence that the designer does.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 640 by havoc, posted 03-02-2011 8:53 AM | | havoc has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 646 by havoc, posted 03-02-2011 9:35 AM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 648 of 752 (607140)
03-02-2011 9:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 646 by havoc
03-02-2011 9:35 AM
|
|
Re: my karma ran over your dogma
havoc writes: Of course there is evidence that ancestors exist but no evidence that the designer does. There is plenty of evidence consistent with a designer. Much we would agree upon, Homology, DNA etc. It’s really more a world view question than evidence based; I mean we all look at the same fossils and draw different inferences. From my personal point of view design is self evident. There cannot be a code without a code maker. Creation is evidence of a creator. You find an arrow head in the desert you know it had a maker even if you know nothing else of the maker. Science is evidence based and not dependent on worldview. If you have evidence of a designer, bring the critter in and place it on the lab table and we will take a look. If you even have a model of how that imaginary designer influences things in this universe, present it and we will test it.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 646 by havoc, posted 03-02-2011 9:35 AM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 688 of 752 (607234)
03-02-2011 4:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 672 by havoc
03-02-2011 1:25 PM
|
|
More very basics
havoc writes:
First let me ask you to admit that you are making a theological statement here. That you know how a designer would design. Utter bullshit. We do know how a designer SHOULD design because we have lots of designers we can look at and test. It is not a matter of theology; the claim it is theology is another falsehood pushed by the Christian Cult of Ignorance; it is a conclusion based on the evidence. The problem is that the life we see around us does NOT show the characteristics found in designed things and there is no evidence of some "DESIGNER" and no model for the "DESIGNER" to influence the design. Edited by jar, : fix subtitle
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 672 by havoc, posted 03-02-2011 1:25 PM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 710 of 752 (607346)
03-03-2011 9:32 AM
|
Reply to: Message 704 by havoc
03-03-2011 8:41 AM
|
|
Re: Address posts please
havoc writes: Eliminate regularity resulting from natural law ie: crystal structure or a pulsar wave. Eliminate randomness which is the result of chance. What you are left with is design. HUH? I'm sorry but I can't believe that even Dembski was silly enough to make such a statement. Why would what is left be the result of design?
havoc writes: A question for you, do you doubt that specified complexity exists or do you just reject it because it is not as easily measured as Shannon’s bits? I think specific complexity exists only in the minds of the snake-oil salesmen.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 704 by havoc, posted 03-03-2011 8:41 AM | | havoc has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 415 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 722 of 752 (607414)
03-03-2011 4:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 719 by havoc
03-03-2011 3:47 PM
|
|
Really stupid assertions
havoc writes: To quote Dembski: Events of fleetingly small possibility do not occur by chance. Dembski does make some really stupid statements doesn't he. What are the odds of lightning striking a particular leaf in a field?
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 719 by havoc, posted 03-03-2011 3:47 PM | | havoc has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 727 by havoc, posted 03-03-2011 4:28 PM | | jar has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2