Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 824 of 1311 (814971)
07-14-2017 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 822 by dwise1
07-14-2017 12:31 AM


Re: Funny -- not really
dwise1 writes:
Cut the bullshit!!
That's not a very nice thing to say.
Why do you consider it atheistic? Be very specific in giving your reasons.
Well, ToE is actually an invention of Satan; but it is transmitted to the world at large by atheists. Out of the Enlightenment came a tsunami of atheism. It's was only a matter of time before a pseudo-scientific creation story came along to make all these atheists feel "intellectually fulfilled". It's so obvious. Why can't you see it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 822 by dwise1, posted 07-14-2017 12:31 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 838 by dwise1, posted 07-14-2017 3:16 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 825 of 1311 (814974)
07-14-2017 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 819 by dwise1
07-14-2017 12:13 AM


Re: Please Learn How to Use the Codes
Thanks for the tip.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 819 by dwise1, posted 07-14-2017 12:13 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 843 of 1311 (815076)
07-15-2017 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 767 by CRR
07-12-2017 10:40 PM


Re: Insecticide resistance
CRR writes:
‘ resistance to poisons is rarely a free ride for either insects or other organisms, because the selective trade-offs imposed by pleiotropy often maintain polymorphism either within or between populations of a species. Some populations of Norway rats, for example, have evolved resistance to the rat poison warfarin. Where the poison is in widespread use, homozygotes for the allele that confers resistance are common. But that allele also lowers rats’ ability to synthesize vitamin K, a compound essential in allowing blood to clot, and they bleed more easily. For that reason, in places where warfarin is not used, individuals homozygous for this allele are at as much as a 54 percent selective disadvantage compared to wild-type rats, and the allele is far less common. The same sort of phenomenon has been demonstrated for the alleles that confer resistance to DDT and to dieldrin in mosquitoes.’
Levine, J. and Miller, K., Biology: Discovering Life, D.C. Heath, Lexington, p. 257, 1994.
Notice how the article says some rats have "evolved" resistance to warfarin. I was involved with rats and their poisoning in a former life, and no one in that sphere uses that terminology - only evolutionary biologists do. Everyone else says the rats "developed" resistance. The purpose of using "evolved" is to promote their cult of evolution's theology that says, if evolution happens in real time, it is an irrefutable fact, and therefore all life on earth shares a common ancestor. Surprise, surprise, one of the authors of the article is Kenneth Miller, a "Catholic" who thinks millions of years of evolution is compatible with the Bible. (Catholics who worship Scientism and give lip service to Holy Scripture aren't true Catholics, imo).
Evolution cultists use the same "loaded" terminology when discussing antibiotic resistance: the medical profession says bacteria "develop" resistance, but evolutionary biologists say bacteria "evolve" resistance. In their bizarre cult of voodoo science, natural selection is "evolution".
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 767 by CRR, posted 07-12-2017 10:40 PM CRR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 854 by NoNukes, posted 07-16-2017 12:18 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 857 by CRR, posted 07-16-2017 6:19 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 858 by JonF, posted 07-16-2017 6:29 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 868 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:11 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 844 of 1311 (815077)
07-15-2017 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 772 by dwise1
07-13-2017 2:37 AM


Re: Interesting question...
dwise1 writes:
Understanding how something works is never useless, whereas ignorance of how it works is never useful.
I agree. But thinking you understand something when in fact you don't is never useful. Hence, the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor is useless to applied science.
Please note that "goddidit" is an extremely poor answer in science because it does absolutely nothing towards answering the question of how things work
Please note that "evolutiondidit" is an extremely poor answer that has contributed absolutely nothing to the advancement of science. Kettle, meet pot.
What about Einsteinian relativity? Pure theory, right? Useless according to you, right? ...Relativity is a theory. You would proclaim it to be useless.
What on God's good earth are you talking about? I stated that the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor is useless to applied science ... and you have somehow come to the conclusion that I therefore consider ALL scientific theories to be useless! No wonder you find it easy to accept ToE - extrapolating wildly to arrive at an absurd conclusion comes naturally to you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 772 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 2:37 AM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 851 by dwise1, posted 07-15-2017 10:11 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 855 by NoNukes, posted 07-16-2017 12:20 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 871 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:14 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 845 of 1311 (815078)
07-15-2017 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 808 by dwise1
07-13-2017 10:44 PM


Re: Interesting question...
dwise1 writes:
So, genetics actually support evolution.
Evolutionary scientists read into the evidence whatever they want to see - this quackery is applied to everything from the the fossil record to geology to embryology to genetics, etc, etc. These snake-oil merchants fool a lot of people, but they don't fool me or millions of other creationists.
Even when the inevitable arrives and genetics nails the the lid shut on evolution's coffin, there will be many atheists who won't accept the evidence. Why? Because, as Jack Nicholson's character said in A Few Good Men, "You can't handle the truth!"
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 808 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 10:44 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 849 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-15-2017 7:31 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 846 of 1311 (815080)
07-15-2017 7:07 PM
Reply to: Message 730 by ringo
07-11-2017 12:13 PM


Re: define "species"
ringo writes:
Your task in rejecting evolution is to show why a subset of those possibilities would be fixed. For example, if the alphabet is your set of possibilities, you need to show why the combination AB is possible but the combination AC is not.
Oh, I get you ... as in, why did AC/DC appear and not AB/AC? Or why ABBA and not BAAB? This is a fascinating subject and I'm glad you brought it up.
Here is another thought: If you check the bass tabs of popular songs played by professional bass players, you find that notes are very rarely played higher than the twelfth fret. Yet you cannot find an bass guitar built that has less than twenty frets. Why all these extra frets if they're rarely used? The answer is, the "junk" frets (13-20/24) are vestigial; remants of a bygone era - perhaps billions of years ago - when all frets were used equally (not by humans , of course, but by some kind of musical monkey-man). Evolution is fascinating, n'est-ce pas?
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 730 by ringo, posted 07-11-2017 12:13 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 856 by ringo, posted 07-16-2017 2:08 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 847 of 1311 (815081)
07-15-2017 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 792 by dwise1
07-13-2017 2:47 PM


Re: Funny
dwise1 writes:
"God is not what you imagine, or what you think you understand. For if you understand, you have failed." (Augustine of Hippo)
This is excellent advice that every atheist should consider.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 792 by dwise1, posted 07-13-2017 2:47 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 852 by dwise1, posted 07-15-2017 10:21 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 848 of 1311 (815084)
07-15-2017 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 827 by Taq
07-14-2017 11:02 AM


Re: Peppered Moth
Taq writes:
The accumulation of mutations like the one that produced new coloration in moths is exactly the pathway that results in massive biological change.
Dredge writes:
Thank you for providing this example of you arriving at what you think is a scientific conclusion, but is in fact an absurd extrapolation.
Taq writes:
You haven't shown that there is any extrapolation or anything absurd.
I've used this analogy before, but evidentlyit has been ignored: Your reasoning is no different to claiming that since humans are running the 100m sprint faster than they were twenty years ago, eventually humans will run the 100m in one second. That is too say, since a small change is observed, this means a massive change is possible - this amounts to an absurd extrapolation. In case you haven't noticed, ToE is dependant on an absurd extrapolation.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 827 by Taq, posted 07-14-2017 11:02 AM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 853 by dwise1, posted 07-15-2017 11:19 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 850 of 1311 (815087)
07-15-2017 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 809 by Dredge
07-13-2017 11:29 PM


Re: define "species"
Dredge writes:
In the wild, 99.9999% of budgerigars are coloured green and yellow. But breeders have produced budgies in many different colours, including white, blue, green, yellow, grey, violet and Pied. The potential for these "new" colours always existed.
Notice that breeders have not managed to produce black or red budgies - and I predict they never will, because there are limits to variation. Due to these genetic limitations, macroevolution is impossible and ToE is nonsense.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 809 by Dredge, posted 07-13-2017 11:29 PM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 873 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:26 PM Dredge has seen this message but not replied
 Message 883 by Pressie, posted 07-18-2017 5:50 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 859 of 1311 (815159)
07-16-2017 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 855 by NoNukes
07-16-2017 12:20 AM


Re: Interesting question...
NoNukes writes:
Dredge writes:
I stated that the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor is useless to applied science
Seriously Dredge. Haven't you already acknowledged that this is a hypothesis? How about making the same claim about the theory of evolution?
The theory that all life shares a common ancestor is the theory of evolution. I don't understand why one is described as a hypothesis and the other is described as a theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 855 by NoNukes, posted 07-16-2017 12:20 AM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 861 by RAZD, posted 07-17-2017 6:38 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 863 by Pressie, posted 07-17-2017 7:27 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 869 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:11 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 860 of 1311 (815160)
07-16-2017 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 854 by NoNukes
07-16-2017 12:18 AM


Re: Insecticide resistance
Doctors don't care about theories about origins and tales about rodents turning into whales or apes turning into humans. They care about the science of here and now and what works and what doesn't work. ToE is useless to them, hence their terminilogy is different to that employed by the atheist cult of Darwinism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 854 by NoNukes, posted 07-16-2017 12:18 AM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 870 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:12 PM Dredge has not replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 878 of 1311 (815252)
07-18-2017 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 871 by Taq
07-17-2017 3:14 PM


Re: Interesting question...
Taq writes:
Dredge writes:
I agree. But thinking you understand something when in fact you don't is never useful. Hence, the theory that all life on earth shares a common ancestor is useless to applied science.
I already showed you that this is false with the example of SIFTER. Why do you keep lying about this?
Please explain how SIFTER makes use of the theory that all life shares a common ancestor.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 871 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:14 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 897 by Taq, posted 07-18-2017 11:19 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 879 of 1311 (815253)
07-18-2017 12:58 AM
Reply to: Message 869 by Taq
07-17-2017 3:11 PM


Re: Interesting question...
Taq writes:
False. Universal Common Ancestry is a conclusion, not a theory. How many times have we gone over this?
Forget Darwinism for a sec. The general theory of evolution says all life on earth evolved from a common ancestor. This is a theory of universal common ancestry, isn't it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 869 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:11 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 888 by Pressie, posted 07-18-2017 6:08 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 892 by Pressie, posted 07-18-2017 8:35 AM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 880 of 1311 (815254)
07-18-2017 1:06 AM
Reply to: Message 868 by Taq
07-17-2017 3:11 PM


Re: Insecticide resistance
Taq writes:
I have always found it fascinating that creationists try so hard to make evolution look like a religion. Why is that?
I would call Darwinism a cult, rather than a religion; but I like to refer to evolution science as "atheist theology", because it is the equivalent of theology to theists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 868 by Taq, posted 07-17-2017 3:11 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 895 by Coyote, posted 07-18-2017 10:17 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 896 by jar, posted 07-18-2017 10:57 AM Dredge has replied
 Message 899 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-18-2017 12:20 PM Dredge has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 881 of 1311 (815255)
07-18-2017 1:12 AM
Reply to: Message 875 by New Cat's Eye
07-17-2017 3:48 PM


Re: Insecticide resistance
NewCatsEye writes:
Apparently, being a religion is the worst insult they can come up with.
Or the whole: "See, evolution takes faith!" arguments, as if they see faith as some kind of bad thing - which makes you wonder...
Religion requires faith, but shouldn't science - eg, evolution - be confined to evidence? It's interesting that you seem to think faith has a place in science.
Imagine if engineers relied on faith when building bridges!
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 875 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-17-2017 3:48 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 882 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-18-2017 1:53 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 893 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-18-2017 8:43 AM Dredge has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024