Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2019 5:52 AM
25 online now:
PaulK, Porkncheese, Pressie, vimesey (4 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,657 Year: 3,694/19,786 Month: 689/1,087 Week: 58/221 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
4Next
Author Topic:   Hello
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 60 (567570)
07-01-2010 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by nwr
07-01-2010 4:49 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
Oh... yeah, I didn't get that either.

But, c'mon... Its Moose!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by nwr, posted 07-01-2010 4:49 PM nwr has acknowledged this reply

  
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 32 of 60 (567578)
07-01-2010 6:37 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by PaulK
07-01-2010 2:48 PM


Re: Where do new species come from ?
Since you reject speciation by evolution, where do all the species come from, especially all the new species that have arisen throughout the history of the Earth ?

Actually that depends on your definition of species, which varies and means different things depending on its use and context in biology.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by PaulK, posted 07-01-2010 2:48 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by PaulK, posted 07-02-2010 1:43 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 33 of 60 (567582)
07-01-2010 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by Huntard
07-01-2010 2:42 PM


Re: About Me
Yeah, that's not how we do things around here. If you'd like to discuss the evidence for the evolution of that stuff, pick one (yes, just one) subject and propose a new thread. Nobody is going to tackle all of that at once.

Well when asked a question I'll post why I have said position, was not attempting to have to delve this deep into my beliefs in an introductory thread, LOL.

Like?

Unexplained Phenomena:

The Placebo Effect
The Sixth Sense
Near Death Experience
UFO's/USO's - Unidentified Flying/Submerged Objects
Déjà Vu (Memory illusion)
The Big Bang (Origin of the Universe)
Singularity
Mammatus Clouds
Non-aqueous Rain
St Elmo’s Fire
Ghosts
Spontaneous Human Combustion
Unexplained Disappearances
Bermuda Triangle
The Hum
Psychic Phenomena (esp, remote viewing, telepathy, clairvoyance or telekinesis)
Naga Fireballs
Blue Jets and Red Sprites
Earthquake Lights
Relationship between brain and body
Capacity (psychic and spiritual)
Electronic Voice Phenomenon
The Sirius Mystery (as well as other ancient cosmology knowledge not visible from Earth)
Tunguska Explosion
Charles E. Peck (Chatsworth crash)

Would you like me to go on?



This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Huntard, posted 07-01-2010 2:42 PM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Huntard, posted 07-02-2010 1:45 AM Practical Prodigy has responded
 Message 47 by Larni, posted 07-02-2010 5:54 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 55 by Theodoric, posted 07-02-2010 10:28 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 34 of 60 (567590)
07-01-2010 8:07 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by New Cat's Eye
07-01-2010 3:09 PM


Re: About Me
A lot? Like what, in general in your own words? Just one.

I posted in my own word below excerpt I posted.

Its always a good ideo to provide links when you quote outside material. I found the article here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17439608

Sorry meant to do that totally forgot until you reminded me, wont happen again

I didn't quite get that from the article. Can you explain in your own words how the article says that? What is the limit? How is it based on genetic information available?

The limit imposed on evolvabilty is the variance of mutations. Mutations do not add new genetic information just recombine genetic material in a varied fashion. This does not explain how genetic information will mutate in the exact set of genes to allow a new complex expression. In other words, the convergence of abundant variation occuring at same time and strong selection influences. This happens when a single gene influences multiple phenotypic traits. A new mutation in the gene may have an effect on some or all traits simultaneously. This can become a problem when selection on one trait favors one specific version of the gene (allele), while the selection on the other trait favors another allele. Hope I covered what you meant and didnt go off on a tangent ;P

Well I'm not going to go through all those here. Some of them can be explained, some of them I don't know about.

But a currently unexplained phenomenon doesn't falsify the theory, nor is any of those showing how a bunch of micros are prevented from being a macro.

Perhaps in another thread then. These are the adaptations I could not find any non-theoritical explaination for. But like I said I'll makes another thread soon and show you how little is known about these adaptations.

Like what?

In above post, but I'll repost so its clear :

Unexplained Phenomena:

The Placebo Effect
The Sixth Sense
Near Death Experience
UFO's/USO's - Unidentified Flying/Submerged Objects
Déjà Vu (Memory illusion)
The Big Bang (Origin of the Universe)
Singularity
Mammatus Clouds
Non-aqueous Rain
St Elmo’s Fire
Ghosts
Spontaneous Human Combustion
Unexplained Disappearances
Bermuda Triangle
The Hum
Psychic Phenomena (esp, remote viewing, telepathy, clairvoyance or telekinesis)
Naga Fireballs
Blue Jets and Red Sprites
Earthquake Lights
Relationship between brain and body
Capacity (psychic and spiritual)
Electronic Voice Phenomenon
The Sirius Mystery (as well as other ancient cosmology knowledge not visible from Earth)
Tunguska Explosion
Charles E. Peck (Chatsworth crash)

Sure, but even the Theory of Evolution does not say that god has nothing to do with it.

I guess that is one way of looking at it, but I think a vast majority of naturalist evolutionists would beg to differ for some reason on that one ;P

How so?

I explained this due to its focus on observable processes, focus on theories and hypothesis, etc. Cant make it much clearer than that read my other posts.

Well I haven't seen any of it.

Thats like saying since you cant see Andromeda that it doesnt exist. I dont understand how thats a reply to my post.

Supernatural implies that there can never be a scientific explanation while paranormal allows for one to be discovered in the future.

Thats a semantic position, not a logical one. They mean the exact same thing maybe try looking up their proper definitions or would you like me to post them here?

Philisophical Naturalism is an idea. It deals with ontology, what exists and what doesn't. Methodological Naturalism is a process. It deals with epistemology, how can we acquire knowledge about the world. They are not the same thing.

Applying Methodological Naturalism is not assuming Philisophical Naturalism. That's why I can perform chemistry expirements without considering whether god is in the test tube or not all the while taking no position on god's existence. The same goes with the Theory of Evolution... seeking a natural explanation for the diversity of life on Earth is not saying that god had no role whatsoever.

Ontology is the reference point from which epistemology is observed. To say otherwise is quite an interesting position. Something has to first pass through the application of ontology before it can have epistemology applied to it unless you learn about things in ways different than every other human I know of.

Ontology breaks down all observances into categories of being, from which an observance is anaylyzed using epistemological notions such as truth, belief, and justification.
Both actually focus on what is considered to be truth, belief, and justification. This is one of the basic concepts in Forensics ;P

Give me just one example of something that falsifies the Theory of Evolution. Please.

Cambrian Explosion. I could provide more if you would like.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-01-2010 3:09 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Blue Jay, posted 07-01-2010 11:47 PM Practical Prodigy has responded
 Message 57 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2010 11:49 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 35 of 60 (567597)
07-01-2010 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by nwr
07-01-2010 3:53 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
Thanks I never expected to get grilled for simply posting my views, has turned into a life of its own a bit outside the scope of why I started thread to begin with
This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by nwr, posted 07-01-2010 3:53 PM nwr has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by DBlevins, posted 07-01-2010 9:53 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 37 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2010 11:09 PM Practical Prodigy has responded

    
DBlevins
Member (Idle past 1856 days)
Posts: 652
From: Puyallup, WA.
Joined: 02-04-2003


Message 36 of 60 (567607)
07-01-2010 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 9:07 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
Welcome Prodigy!

I don't think you were grilled. It just happens to make the debate go smoother when a debate on evolution is not embedded within the main topic of the post, ie. your 'hello!' post.

I thought your message #23 would be a good place for such a discussion to start. It would help the forum if you would create a new post and maybe(?) cut and paste message #23 onto it. It seemed like a good place to start imho.

Anywho, welcome aboard.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 9:07 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3815
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 37 of 60 (567613)
07-01-2010 11:09 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 9:07 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
I never expected to get grilled for simply posting my views, has turned into a life of its own a bit outside the scope of why I started thread to begin with

Don't sweat it, man ... or woman, whatever.

Just stop responding and this abortion of a thread will just fade away, maybe, unless, as usually happens, some topic creep enters into the picture and an argument, totally unrelated to you, your views or your intro to the forum, ensues, in which case you can ignore this thread knowing full well you did not cause this mess.

Please don't be inhibited by the preponderance of evolutionists on this forum. We can be a hard lot and sometimes a bit, shall we say, rough on those we are sure are demented enough to quote scripture at length while denying the facts staring them right in the #&*@% face. We have a tendency to run them off.

We have some good theistic evolutionists here along with a number of dyed-in-wool YECs and even a few certifiable religious nutcakes. By the same token we have some nice agnostic evolutionists along with a bunch of hard core no-nonsense scientists and quite a few atheists (yours truly) and some rampaging baby eating anti-theists as well.

It's a fun place.

We can alway use some fresh theistic views around here. Some fresh blood, if you will. Some fresh meat to sink our fangs into while tearing off chunks of flesh.

Forget this thread. Stick around.

By the way, what is your muscle tone like? I'm trying to cut down on fats.

Edited by AZPaul3, : Missed some vitally important words that if left out would surely alter the meaning of this message beyond my intent.

Edited by AZPaul3, : some more


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 9:07 PM Practical Prodigy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 11:21 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 38 of 60 (567614)
07-01-2010 11:21 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by AZPaul3
07-01-2010 11:09 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
I'm a state champion swimmer so I might be a nice change of diet although I wont be such easy prey



This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2010 11:09 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by AZPaul3, posted 07-01-2010 11:29 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3815
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 39 of 60 (567617)
07-01-2010 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 11:21 PM


Re: A personal opinion about this thread
I'm a state champion swimmer so I might be a nice change of diet although I wont be such easy prey

Spirit. Excellent.

See you on the pitch.

Welcome and have fun.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 11:21 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 40 of 60 (567621)
07-01-2010 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 8:07 PM


Re: About Me
Hi, Prodigy.

Welcome to EvC!

For the sake of full disclosure, I also call myself a theistic evolutionist, although, in practice, I’m generally a naturalistic evolutionist.

A theistic evolutionist is an evolutionist. The only difference between a theistic evolutionist and a naturalistic evolutions is that the theistic evolutionist inserts God in some places or at least leaves room for Him. A person who accepts “micro-evolution,” but not “macro-evolution,” is not a theistic evolutionist. Your views on the subject do not fit the common understanding of the term “theistic evolutionist.”

Prodigy writes:

Mutations do not add new genetic information just recombine genetic material in a varied fashion.

This is probably a topic for another thread, but let me make a brief comment here. If you would like to continue the discussion, you can probably use the search function to search for “information,” and you’ll likely find a couple open threads appropriate for this topic (or, you could start a new one in the “Proposed New Topics” forum).

Mutations, by definition, add genetic information. Take a sequence:

AACTGGTGT

Enter mutation:

AACTGGGGT

You now have a new sequence that you didn’t have before. New information has been added to the gene pool.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 8:07 PM Practical Prodigy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-02-2010 12:22 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 41 of 60 (567627)
07-02-2010 12:22 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Blue Jay
07-01-2010 11:47 PM


Re: About Me
Perhaps I worded it wrong lol, a parent can not pass down traits or genetic information it does not carry. Once you factor in the fact that most gene control more than one expressed trait and you have quite a minefield evolution must survive to be viable. I'm not going to even bring up the issues that exist and have been proven in domestication. Even using selective breeding you can not turn a dog into a cat or different organism besides a different version of same organism. Perhaps that is a better explaination. There are limits to genetic variance such as, hybridization barriers, reproductive isolation, etc.

I dont dispute macro-evolution in the sense that an organism can speciate greatly. What I dispute is the fact that one genus of organism can change into another. If anything animals devolve and lose genetic information, fitness, etc usually. This is the reason animals were much larger in the past, even the primate brain has been proven to be bigger in earlier primates.

I would not fit into any version of creationism due to my belief in convergence, speciation, etc. I also only believe in a allagory translation of Genesis, not literal which would also put me in the theistic evolutionist camp. Really like I said the only dispute I have with evolution is genus or higher level than species changes in an organism.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Blue Jay, posted 07-01-2010 11:47 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Jumped Up Chimpanzee, posted 07-02-2010 4:53 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 49 by cavediver, posted 07-02-2010 7:13 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Granny Magda, posted 07-02-2010 8:37 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 58 by Coyote, posted 07-02-2010 11:53 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 60 by Blue Jay, posted 07-05-2010 10:05 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14753
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 1.8


Message 42 of 60 (567631)
07-02-2010 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 6:37 PM


Re: Where do new species come from ?
quote:

Actually that depends on your definition of species, which varies and means different things depending on its use and context in biology.

Alright, if you propose more than one mechanism to replace evolution as the agent of speciation perhaps you could at least list those that you believe in. Your present answer tells me nothing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 6:37 PM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 375 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 43 of 60 (567632)
07-02-2010 1:45 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Practical Prodigy
07-01-2010 7:24 PM


Re: About Me
Practical Prodigy writes:

Well when asked a question I'll post why I have said position, was not attempting to have to delve this deep into my beliefs in an introductory thread, LOL.


Fair enough. When you want to discuss any of those things, I guess you know what to do.

Unexplained Phenomena:

The Placebo Effect


Isn't really unexplained.

The Sixth Sense

Doesn't exist.

Near Death Experience

Is explained.

UFO's/USO's - Unidentified Flying/Submerged Objects

Explained/not what people say they are.

Déjà Vu (Memory illusion)

Explained.

The Big Bang (Origin of the Universe)

Has multiple explanations for it. We don't know the right one yet.

Singularity

I'm sorry, you need to explain what you mean by this in more detail.

Mammatus Clouds

Explained.

Non-aqueous Rain

Hypotheses (explanations) exist. There have not been much studies into this.

St Elmo’s Fire

Explained.

Ghosts

Don't exist.

Spontaneous Human Combustion

Doesn't exist.

Unexplained Disappearances

You've got to be kidding me. Nobody can be kidnapped without someone noticing. I'd like to draw your attention to Natascha Kampusch, who was abducted and kept in a basement for 8 years. Her disappearance wasn't explained until she ultimately escaped.

Bermuda Triangle

Doesn't exist.

The Hum

Explained.

Psychic Phenomena (esp, remote viewing, telepathy, clairvoyance or telekinesis)

Don't exist.

Naga Fireballs

Explained.

Blue Jets and Red Sprites

Don't know what these are.

Earthquake Lights

Numerous hypotheses exist. We don't know the correct one yet.

Relationship between brain and body

Explained.

Capacity (psychic and spiritual)

Doesn't exist.

Electronic Voice Phenomenon

Imagination.

The Sirius Mystery (as well as other ancient cosmology knowledge not visible from Earth)

Wishful thinking.

Tunguska Explosion

Meteorite.

Charles E. Peck (Chatsworth crash)

Don't know him, but I assume he survived the crash. This is somehow miraculous to you?

Would you like me to go on?

If they're all just as bad as these, then no, please stop. May I suggest you get your info from other places as "Discovery Channel"?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-01-2010 7:24 PM Practical Prodigy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-02-2010 2:00 AM Huntard has responded

    
Practical Prodigy
Junior Member (Idle past 3094 days)
Posts: 30
From: IN, USA
Joined: 06-30-2010


Message 44 of 60 (567633)
07-02-2010 2:00 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Huntard
07-02-2010 1:45 AM


Re: About Me
Well considering I have researched them please post explaination for the ones you claim are explainable just saying is explained is weak position. The last one maybe you should Google him and find out the story...

The ones you claim dont exist I could provide evidence to the contrary...

Edited by Practical Prodigy, : No reason given.



This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Huntard, posted 07-02-2010 1:45 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Huntard, posted 07-02-2010 2:48 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded
 Message 51 by Larni, posted 07-02-2010 7:32 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 375 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


(1)
Message 45 of 60 (567635)
07-02-2010 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by Practical Prodigy
07-02-2010 2:00 AM


Re: About Me
Practical Prodigy writes:

Well considering I have researched them please post explaination for the ones you claim are explainable just saying is explained is weak position. The last one maybe you should Google him and find out the story...


Like I said, if you want to discuss one, pick one and start a new topic. I'll see what I can do once the topic is promoted.

The ones you claim dont exist I could provide evidence to the contrary...

Not really, no. You could offer anecdotes, wishful thinking and misinterpretation, I'm sure. That's not evidence however.

No, I'm not trying to say you're an idiot. You nkow who used to believe in some if not all of the things you mentioned? Me. Wanna know why I grew out of them? Evidence, or rather the lack thereof.

Now, like I said, if you care to pick one, I'll see what I can do as to giving the explanation. Bear in mind though that I am not a scientist, and have not read every scintific report there is on these subjects. But then again, neither have you (I suspect) and yet you feel comfortable saying there aren't any explanations for them. Think about that one.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Practical Prodigy, posted 07-02-2010 2:00 AM Practical Prodigy has not yet responded

    
Prev12
3
4Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019