Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9176 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: sirs
Post Volume: Total: 917,655 Year: 4,912/9,624 Month: 260/427 Week: 6/64 Day: 2/2 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Question Evolution!
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4510 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 151 of 235 (647506)
01-10-2012 3:50 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by RAZD
01-09-2012 8:32 PM


Re: bad definitions again
Hey Zen,
Your research pretty much demolishes the majority of the questions on that brochure.
I wonder if your longer answers are what Chuck77 was looking for?
Kudos for going the extra mile!
I have a debate with some street preachers this saturday where I will be using your findings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by RAZD, posted 01-09-2012 8:32 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Larni, posted 01-10-2012 7:16 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 152 of 235 (647522)
01-10-2012 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 151 by Butterflytyrant
01-10-2012 3:50 AM


Re: bad definitions again
I have a debate with some street preachers this saturday..*snip*
Can't you just kick 'em inna nuts?

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong.
Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Butterflytyrant, posted 01-10-2012 3:50 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Panda, posted 01-10-2012 8:25 AM Larni has not replied
 Message 154 by Butterflytyrant, posted 01-10-2012 9:28 AM Larni has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3801 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 153 of 235 (647538)
01-10-2012 8:25 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Larni
01-10-2012 7:16 AM


Re: bad definitions again
Larni writes:
Can't you just kick 'em inna nuts?
It is only legal to do that to politicians.

If I were you
And I wish that I were you
All the things I'd do
To make myself turn blue

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Larni, posted 01-10-2012 7:16 AM Larni has not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4510 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


Message 154 of 235 (647547)
01-10-2012 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Larni
01-10-2012 7:16 AM


Re: bad definitions again
Hey Larni,
Sometimes I would like to but I doubt that would help our position.
The funniest thing is that there are two groups that preach in the same part of the mall.
One on Friday night, the other on Saturday night.
Each of the groups refuses to debate any points brough up by the other because the other group is wrong.
They are both fundamentalist christian groups. I noticed that one of the guys I was talking to recently had the same fucking bible as one of the guys the night before.
So, same god, same religion, same holy book (same fucking brand even!), yet the botgh thought that the other group are all going to burn in hell.
This makes it a bit hard for us because we have to have a different playbook for each group. We have to argue against two individual versions of the truth with one set of facts.
I suggested that they both show up on a saturday and work out the truth. I doubt that this will be happening any time soon.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
2011 leading candidate for the EvC Forum Don Quixote award

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Larni, posted 01-10-2012 7:16 AM Larni has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2195 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 155 of 235 (647714)
01-10-2012 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Anel Vadren
01-06-2012 12:57 AM


So where did little Jimmy go?
My name is Jimmy Stephens and I am very excited to be a part of Christian Ministries International's new grass roots movement, Question Evolution! It is a bold campaign seeking to rid our schools, media, and politics of evolutionist indoctrination and spread the 15 questions which evolutionists can not adequately answer.
Sorry, they have lied to you.
As you must be gathering by now, if you have read any of the responses, your "15 questions" are not the magic bullets to slay evolution that you hoped they would be. They lied to you and to thousands of others. That's all they have, as they can't come up with meaningful questions to oppose the theory of evolution.
Let me guess: you are young, just starting out in the real world after an upbringing which was steeped in fundamentalism. You are trying out your early learning in the real world of ideas--of all kind--where those ideas have to compete with one another. And you are finding out that some of what you were taught does not compute... Some of what you were taught is flatly contradicted by empirical evidence.
You can try to hide in the cover of CMI's "campaign to refute the falsehoods of evolution" or you can judge the evidence for yourself, after folks out there (and here) have provided some of it to you. If what CMI has been telling you is correct you should have no problem defending it here. It it is incorrect you might actually learn something useful. In either case, you might just stick around here and see what happens.
Hopefully, you too will join CMI's campaign to refute the falsehoods of evolution. Please found out more at creation.com/question-evolution and discover the promising efforts against the pseudoscience of evolution.
Nice propaganda, but can you back any of that up with real-world evidence?
Also, please check out the Question Evolution! blog and keep up-to-date about the creation versus evolution debate, the Question Evolution! movement, and the lies of evolution.
If you want to keep up with the theory of evolution and closely related fields, the place to start is your local library--if it is large enough. Here are the research articles in the latest issue of American Journal of Physical Anthropology:

Population genetic structure of Guizhou snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus brelichi) as inferred from mitochondrial control region sequences, and comparison with R. roxellana and R. bieti
Growth and the development of sexual size dimorphism in lorises and galagos
Evaluating ring-tailed lemurs (Lemur catta) from southwestern Madagascar for a genetic population bottleneck
Association of the FTO rs9939609 polymorphism with obesity in Roma/Gypsy population
Mitochondrial haplogroup C4c: A rare lineage entering America through the ice-free corridor?
Maxillary changes and occlusal traits in crania with artificial fronto-occipital deformation
From parasite encounter to infection: Multiple-scale drivers of parasite richness in a wild social primate population
Lumbar lordosis of extinct hominins
A melting pot of multicontinental mtDNA lineages in admixed Venezuelans
A new pliopithecid genus (primates: pliopithecoidea) from castell de barber (valls-peneds basin, catalonia, spain)
The use of biocultural data in interpreting sex differences in body proportions among rural Amazonians
Are you prepared to debate any of those topics? Or even to read and understand them?
A lot of these articles are free at this link:
Just a moment...
Give it a try. You might actually learn something.
And you should also consider that a number of us here at this site are familiar with this journal, and many others like it. (I first started subscribing to it about 30 years ago.)
To impress us you will have to do a bit of studying and stop relying on creationist websites that are lying to you.
Edited by Coyote, : No reason given.
Edited by Coyote, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Anel Vadren, posted 01-06-2012 12:57 AM Anel Vadren has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Butterflytyrant, posted 01-11-2012 1:13 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied
 Message 158 by herebedragons, posted 01-11-2012 7:48 AM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4510 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 156 of 235 (647725)
01-11-2012 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Coyote
01-10-2012 11:00 PM


Re: So where did little Jimmy go?
Hey Coyote,
I have sent the open challenge letter to CMI advising that we can and will answer the questions.
I am awaiting a reply...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 01-10-2012 11:00 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4510 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(2)
Message 157 of 235 (647729)
01-11-2012 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Anel Vadren
01-06-2012 12:57 AM


Another campaign has started
Looks like another group has started a campaign.
It is called - Question Gravity - 15 Questions for Gravitationists.
Here is the brochure - Question Gravity | PDF
Here is the vid promoting the campaign - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjiFjIlAk1g
The Question Gravity campaign has as much validity as the Question Evolution Campaign.

I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong
Butterfly, AKA, mallethead - Dawn Bertot
"Superstitions and nonsense from the past should not prevent us from making progress. If we hold ourselves back, we admit that our fears are more powerful than our abilities." Hunters of Dune Herbert & Anderson
2011 leading candidate for the EvC Forum Don Quixote award

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Anel Vadren, posted 01-06-2012 12:57 AM Anel Vadren has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 946 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(2)
Message 158 of 235 (647754)
01-11-2012 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by Coyote
01-10-2012 11:00 PM


Re: So where did little Jimmy go?
Nice response, but I think you are wasting your time. It was obvious from the beginning he had no intention of debating or learning. I came on here a year or so ago "questioning evolution", but I came to find out what people actually believed and why people believed evolution to be true. And I learned. I still question evolution, but more from the perspective of understanding and learning. There are still things about the ToE I don't completely buy into, but I take them piece by piece and found out what the evidence truly tells me.
Obviously little Jimmy has no such intent. It is just so hard and takes a lot of time to actually read and understand scientific journals such as you listed. Easier to just get your information prepackaged to say what you want it to say.
HBD

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by Coyote, posted 01-10-2012 11:00 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-11-2012 4:37 PM herebedragons has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 159 of 235 (647865)
01-11-2012 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by herebedragons
01-11-2012 7:48 AM


Re: So where did little Jimmy go?
There are still things about the ToE I don't completely buy into
Start a New Topic!
We'll set you straight

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by herebedragons, posted 01-11-2012 7:48 AM herebedragons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2012 5:39 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied
 Message 165 by herebedragons, posted 01-12-2012 2:48 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1493 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 160 of 235 (647886)
01-11-2012 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by New Cat's Eye
01-11-2012 4:37 PM


Re: So where did little Jimmy go?
Hi herebedragons and Catholic Scientist
There are still things about the ToE I don't completely buy into
Start a New Topic!
Indeed. Several here will be happy to participate. The biggest problem may be the number of responses, so I would keep it simple at the start: one question at a time.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-11-2012 4:37 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

  
Chuck77
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 161 of 235 (647935)
01-12-2012 4:43 AM
Reply to: Message 134 by crashfrog
01-08-2012 9:57 AM


Oh well
crashfrog writes:
Let me echo Dr. A's point, and ask: what have you done to deserve that much work from the rest of us? I mean, you didn't even come up with the questions, Chuck - you just copied and pasted what somebody else wrote. You're asking us to do quite a bit of research, writing, and very patient explaining of very complicated scientific concepts for you, and for what?
I mean, it's not like you're going to be convinced, right? We could do exactly what you say - answer each question in excruciating detail with supporting evidence, and you're just going to claim that our evidence is manufactured, because you believe that evolution is a lie and that all evolutionists are therefore liars. So why should we even bother? It's been months since anybody thought that you were someone who took discussion seriously. You're a troll and you're trolling us with copypasta. That's, like, the lowest possible form of trolling. What on Earth have you ever done to deserve what you're asking for? None of us give a shit whether you believe in evolution or not. It's real and it doesn't need your permission to happen and we don't need your permission to study it.
Sorry crashfrog. I didn't know this was such a sore point for you, and for that matter everyone. Questioning evolution. I also wasn't aware that I am considered a "troll" for questioning evolution. That's really wierd. Especially when this is a debate site for evolution/creation. I suppose the same would apply for evolutionists questioning creationism? Also wierd.
I guess I could take your comments as uttlery arrogant for calling me a troll because I questionied evolution on a evolution/creation debate site and simply was wondering what people's answers were for the 15 questions.
I also and amazed it takes so much explaining. You say "quite a bit of research" and cavediver says (IIRC) should he explain the thousands of papers on the subject.
I hadn't realized evolution was so darn complicated. You would think with "a common anscestor" things wouldn't be so complicated that you would have to call me a troll on debating site because I had the audacity to question evolution.
Evidence crashfrog is all I was really asking for. It seems it's not that simple apperantly.
Everyones answers are really great and I would love to submit them to CMI to show that this is a fine campaingn as evidenced by this thread.
Even tho it's not my thread I think it's a huge success thus far.
Sorry to have bothered everyone here. It wasn't my intention to "(troll)?" this thread at all. That's so wierd to call me that for questioning evolution. I must not really know what a troll is.
Maybe crashfrog you can start a thread on what a troll is and support it with definitions and explanations. Something you couldn't do on this thread.
Thanks to everyone else who gave a detailed explanation to the answers or gave an answer to why they think the questions aren't relevant.
I'm not even close to understanding evolution the way most of you are. It seems it's not easy based on a lot of your answers.
That being said I wonder why I was called a troll for not knowing that, if most of you cannot even explain it "without quite a bit of research".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by crashfrog, posted 01-08-2012 9:57 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by crashfrog, posted 01-12-2012 7:57 AM Chuck77 has not replied
 Message 163 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-12-2012 10:45 AM Chuck77 has not replied
 Message 164 by Taq, posted 01-12-2012 11:58 AM Chuck77 has replied
 Message 167 by Butterflytyrant, posted 01-12-2012 6:57 PM Chuck77 has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1555 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 162 of 235 (647950)
01-12-2012 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Chuck77
01-12-2012 4:43 AM


Re: Oh well
I didn't know this was such a sore point for you, and for that matter everyone.
The sore point is only that you're asking - demanding, actually - that we do a great deal to convince you, but you don't give any indication of actually being convince-able. So why should we bother?
I also wasn't aware that I am considered a "troll" for questioning evolution.
That's what I'm getting at - you're not questioning anything. You're just copying and pasting somebody else's questions.
Especially when this is a debate site for evolution/creation.
It is a debate site, which is why we're all expressing exasperation that you don't seem to want to have anything to do with an actual debate. You just want to phone in someone else's questions and not even make an effort to defend them.
It's super-boring to talk to someone like that, so why should we bother? We gave you a chance, Chuck, but the most you're willing to bring to the table is copypasta. Why bother with you until you're willing to do more work?
I hadn't realized evolution was so darn complicated.
Of course it's complicated, Chuck. Evolution is the scientific history of more than a billion years of life on Earth; it's a story that it's taken twenty thousand scientists working full-time more than 200 years to elucidate. Life is an unbelievably complex phenomenon so why would you expect the study of it to be something that would fit neatly into 250 words?
I'm not even close to understanding evolution the way most of you are.
Are you going to try to do the work to get closer? Or are you just going to copy and paste other people's questions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Chuck77, posted 01-12-2012 4:43 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(6)
Message 163 of 235 (647966)
01-12-2012 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Chuck77
01-12-2012 4:43 AM


Re: Oh well
I hadn't realized evolution was so darn complicated.
Its kinda like that game, Othello:
Their slogan is:
quote:
A moment to learn, a lifetime to master.
Evolution is, simply, random mutation plus natural selection. That's the basic concept that is fairly easy to learn. The unimaginable results that that simple process can unfold gets really complicated and can take many man-hours to fully explain.
Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Chuck77, posted 01-12-2012 4:43 AM Chuck77 has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.5


(4)
Message 164 of 235 (647974)
01-12-2012 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by Chuck77
01-12-2012 4:43 AM


Re: Oh well
Sorry crashfrog. I didn't know this was such a sore point for you, and for that matter everyone. Questioning evolution.
The sore point is loaded questions. For example, they ask why living fossils are identical to their fossilized bretheren. They aren't. Even then, the theory of evolution does not insist that every species MUST change, only that they can. When you have some honest questions that you are willing to discuss then we will be happy to have a discussion.
I also and amazed it takes so much explaining. You say "quite a bit of research" and cavediver says (IIRC) should he explain the thousands of papers on the subject.
Yes, science is a bit more complicated than "God did it". Get used to it.
Everyones answers are really great and I would love to submit them to CMI to show that this is a fine campaingn as evidenced by this thread.
Even tho it's not my thread I think it's a huge success thus far.
So I see that you support the dishonesty over at CMI. That's too bad.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Chuck77, posted 01-12-2012 4:43 AM Chuck77 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Chuck77, posted 01-13-2012 2:53 AM Taq has replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 946 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 165 of 235 (647996)
01-12-2012 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by New Cat's Eye
01-11-2012 4:37 PM


Re: So where did little Jimmy go?
Start a New Topic!
Ok.
Message 1
and
Message 43
We'll set you straight
Not so much "set me straight" as I am not arguing against evolution. I am just trying to make sense of some things that just don't seem straight forward to me. In the posts I linked above I am trying to apply what I have learned about how observed evolution works to the fossil record of evolution. Unfortunately, not a whole lot of response (not as active a topic as little Jimmy's). Maybe you can provide some insight to my questions?
HBD

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-11-2012 4:37 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-12-2012 3:05 PM herebedragons has seen this message but 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