Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9073 total)
74 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, AZPaul3, dwise1, jar, Tanypteryx (5 members, 69 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,345 Year: 4,457/6,534 Month: 671/900 Week: 195/182 Day: 28/47 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Death Knell for ID?
idscience
Member (Idle past 3645 days)
Posts: 40
Joined: 03-01-2012


Message 86 of 102 (654450)
03-01-2012 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by nwr
01-26-2012 10:52 PM


Dover "death knell". One local judge? There is a hopefull monster for ya. Did Scopes conviction kill evolution?

Edited by idscience, : No reason given.

Edited by idscience, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by nwr, posted 01-26-2012 10:52 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 5:23 PM idscience has replied
 Message 88 by RAZD, posted 03-01-2012 5:38 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 98 by nwr, posted 03-01-2012 8:25 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 99 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-01-2012 9:09 PM idscience has taken no action

  
idscience
Member (Idle past 3645 days)
Posts: 40
Joined: 03-01-2012


Message 89 of 102 (654459)
03-01-2012 7:03 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Theodoric
03-01-2012 5:23 PM


wow, little bitter are we Theodor?

What, no welcome to the forum?

The middle discrict court means nothing. Macro-evolutions foundation is inference from similarities. A dog and a human have a similar limb therefore they are related? inference not testable, yet ID critics as I am assuming you are denounce ID because it is apparently not testable. The phylogentic tree is a mess and some say it needs to be discarded. Macro is also a product of slow step by step selected mutaional advantage passed down from generation to generation. Then comes Horizontal Gene Transfer. Now co-opted by evolution as an important evolutionary process.
How many generations of e-coli have been grown over the last decades with no appreciable changes. Most if not all are changes involving loss of information not gain. Broken bridges not new ones. The fruit fly experiments were dismal too. What else does macro stand on? Speciation, the fruit flies "evolved" I say experience some variation, into new species and could not breed together anymore, then it was discovered, not so fast, yes they could.
Darwin's famous finches. The headliner for evolution, again, just variation, was proven a net gain as their beaks returned to normal after the drought ended. Funny, that isn't in any of the
If there was not a crisis, censorship and personal attacks like the one that began this reply, would not be needed. Letters to congress to stifle ID would not be needed. Firing people just for publishing Id peer reviewed papers would not be needed. Look what happened over at "Preceedings" for publishing Meyers paper. The Sternburg was roasted by his own people. It is pathetic in my opinion, the lengths evolution politics goes. I won't even get into the "Quest for the missing links" promotions. All signs of a hypothesis in need of validation. From Neanderthols interbreeding with humans to DNA pointing to one branch while RNA points to an entirely diferent one, to areas of the human genome more in common with Orangutans than chimps and on and on.
I am not saying there isn't a case for investigation, I am tired of the "its a fact" rant all over the place, like if it is said enough times it will come true.
Tell me, outside of fossil inference and genome inference (which is just as likely to be inferred common design) What is there? finch beaks and moths? anti-biotic resistance? new evidence points to horizontal gene transfer for that not selection. So, what is there? What ya got?

Edited by idscience, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 5:23 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 7:13 PM idscience has replied
 Message 91 by Panda, posted 03-01-2012 7:13 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 92 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 7:17 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 94 by jar, posted 03-01-2012 7:39 PM idscience has taken no action

  
idscience
Member (Idle past 3645 days)
Posts: 40
Joined: 03-01-2012


Message 95 of 102 (654470)
03-01-2012 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Theodoric
03-01-2012 7:13 PM


Re: More assertions
What is it with you guys and your speling. That is hilarious.

Miss statement on Sternberg. Smythsonian tried to force him out not standing guard and censoring Meyers paper. Apauling behaviour for so called scientists.
http://www.richardsternberg.com/smithsonian.php?page=summary
http://www.scribd.com/...Discredited-Souder-Sternberg-Report

Darwin's finches:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/6/l_016_01.html

Now, I am not going to write a book for you. I am sure you are aware of the issues I am talking about. If not, do a little more of your "research" and get back to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 7:13 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2012 7:53 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 100 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-01-2012 9:17 PM idscience has taken no action
 Message 101 by Taq, posted 03-02-2012 12:39 PM idscience has taken no action

  
idscience
Member (Idle past 3645 days)
Posts: 40
Joined: 03-01-2012


Message 96 of 102 (654472)
03-01-2012 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Admin
03-01-2012 7:22 PM


Re: Please Stay On Topic
Thanks, I will follow up on any more at that link. Cheers,

Edited by idscience, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Admin, posted 03-01-2012 7:22 PM Admin has seen this message

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022