Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-23-2019 4:16 AM
24 online now:
Tangle, vimesey (2 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 851,885 Year: 6,921/19,786 Month: 1,462/1,581 Week: 284/393 Day: 8/99 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
6566
67
68697071Next
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1508
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 991 of 1064 (852548)
05-13-2019 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 739 by Dredge
05-05-2019 8:14 PM


HBD writes:

But you think that adding "God did it" anywhere there are gaps in our knowledge improves our ability to explain things scientifically?

Dredge writes:

Don' t be silly.

OK... so what do you think adding "God did it" does for our ability to explain the fossil record?

You say "Don't be silly" to my question and then go on to say this:

The best scientific explanation for the history of life is that aliens performed feats of genetic engineering.

Who's being silly?

Apart from the fact that there is no evidence of aliens, that explanation hardly provides a suitable explanation. So what are you thinking? Did these aliens tinker around for millions of years manipulating the DNA of a species until they came up with something they liked... that was just a little bit different than the previous version? Because genomes are a mess. There is no obvious organization or methodical restructuring to genomes, they are put together chaotically, disorganized and lack any indication that they have been systematically engineered.

To you, it may seem plausible. We find a fossil of Thrinaxodon from 230 mya, then Probainognathus from 210 mya, and then Morganonucodon from 200 mya and we can observe the changes in the shape of bones in the jaw and to you it may seem that genetic engineering aliens is as good an explanation as any (since we don't have a fossil example from every single generation between those three creatures). But it's really no explanation at all, unless you can point to some reason other than you don't want it to be evolution.

The Darwinist explanation is a nineteenth-century idea that is inadequate and outdated.

That's why modern evolutionary biologists don't use Darwinist explanations. We have moved on since then to more modern theories and explanations. We now know how DNA and inheritance works for one thing. Why do anti-evolutionists always harp on Darwin? It's not like we worship him - any more than Pasteur, or Francis and Crick, or Wallace, or Mayr, or Haldane, or Einstein, or Galileo, etc. They are scientists who have made significant contributions to our understanding of our natural world. That's it.

HBD writes:

How could you possibly know if all members of a genus shared a common ancestor? How could you know if several genera shared a common ancestor. For example: in the cat family, Felidae, there are at least 14 extant genera. Are each of these separate creations? or is each of the 8 lineages a separate creation? Or is the whole family descended from a common ancestor - as most creationists claim? What is your criteria for determining the answer?

Dredge writes:

Why would I need to answer these questions?

Well, I guess you wouldn't, seeing as how you are not a biologist and do not study biology or biological systems. If you did... these ARE questions you would want to know the answer to.

What are you talking about? Why the hell would I want to you stop using "what has been proven to work"?

Oh... I must have misunderstood. I thought you said the ToE was a failed theory and your theory about genetic engineering aliens was the best scientific explanation. Oh wait!! You did say that...

All I want you to do is explain why is it necessary to "root" a plant you are studying to some extinct "ancestor" that supposedly existed millions of years ago - because this sounds like a complete waste of time to me.

Well, judging by how you asked the question, you really have no clue as to what you are talking about even though you seem quite confident that you are right.

If you don't know what the ancestral state of a character is, how can you determine what the derived state is? How would you determine what traits were locally adapted? How would you determine how selection is affecting the character?

The idea that all life shares a common ancestor is central to biological studies. Of course, if I am studying a family of plants, the idea that those plants share a common ancestor with an elephant is pretty much irrelevant. However, if two organisms share a common ancestor, we can assume they will have similar genomes except where evolution has cause modifications. These modifications are clues as to adaptive traits. It is this framework that provides context within which to view biological organisms.

With genetic engineering aliens, all bets are off. We would have no context within which to put the genome differences.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 739 by Dredge, posted 05-05-2019 8:14 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 993 by JonF, posted 05-13-2019 4:52 PM herebedragons has not yet responded
 Message 1027 by Dredge, posted 05-21-2019 10:02 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3949
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


(1)
Message 992 of 1064 (852553)
05-13-2019 4:43 PM


This video (YouTube) is from the American Museum of Natural History.

Without an understanding of a UCA and the genetic bush that sprang from it, this stuff would be meaningless.

Very interesting science at 3 min. And I like the philosophy to the end.

Here


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 4729
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 993 of 1064 (852554)
05-13-2019 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 991 by herebedragons
05-13-2019 2:43 PM


Creationists need a guru. Darwin is that. They can't conceive of anyone believing anything without one.

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 991 by herebedragons, posted 05-13-2019 2:43 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 994 of 1064 (852555)
05-13-2019 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 672 by dwise1
05-02-2019 7:20 PM


Re: Just to interject the YEC floodist view
dwise1 writes:

"The physicist has an idea, he said. The more he thinks it through, the more sense it makes to him. He goes to the scientific literature, and the more he reads, the more promising the idea seems. Thus prepared, he devises an experiment to test the idea. The experiment is painstaking. Many possibilities are eliminated or taken into account; the accuracy of the measurement is refined. At the end of all this work, the experiment is completed and ... the idea is shown to be worthless. The physicist then discards the idea, frees his mind (as I was saying a moment ago) from the clutter of error, and moves on to something else." (reportedly from an essay by Carl Sagan)


What a pity the theory of common descent can't be tested using the aforementioned method ... or any other method. A theory that can't be tested doesn't even qualify as science.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 672 by dwise1, posted 05-02-2019 7:20 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 999 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 8:58 PM Dredge has responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 995 of 1064 (852556)
05-13-2019 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 855 by Tangle
05-08-2019 5:37 PM


Re: Restating the question
Tangle writes:

If chimps have somewhere around 95-98% human DNA


I'm glad you said "If", because I think you are talking nonsense - my understanding is, only about 2% of the human genome shares 95-89% DNA with chimps.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 855 by Tangle, posted 05-08-2019 5:37 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 996 by JonF, posted 05-13-2019 8:39 PM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 1017 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 11:10 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
JonF
Member
Posts: 4729
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 996 of 1064 (852557)
05-13-2019 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 995 by Dredge
05-13-2019 8:29 PM


Re: Restating the question
Your "understanding" is nonsense.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 995 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 8:29 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 997 of 1064 (852558)
05-13-2019 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 904 by RAZD
05-09-2019 8:31 AM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
RAZD writes:

... except that each fossil currently valides the ToE when it fits into the temporal/spatial matrix and the explanation provided by the ToE for getting from one spcies to another via known mechanisms of evolution.


I fear you're talking rubbish. Fossils confirm that life-forms on earth have changed over time, but fossils can't confirm or validate the cause of those changes. Fossils don't validate ToE and its mechanisms anymore than they validate my "aliens" theory and its mechanism of genetic engineering.

Neither aliens nor "progressive creation" provide as complete an explanation of all facets of the evidence.

And ToE does? You're dreaming.

[qs]

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 904 by RAZD, posted 05-09-2019 8:31 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1024 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2019 4:31 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 998 of 1064 (852559)
05-13-2019 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 904 by RAZD
05-09-2019 8:31 AM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
RAZD writes:

Curious that aliens and gods only created evidence that completely mimics what the process of evolution would produce and only what the ToE predicts would occur.


Curious that you ignore all the evidence that contradicts ToE - where is the evidence for the evolutionary ancestors of trilobites, fish and insects? Where are the missing links between the Ediacaran fauna all the novel phyla that appeared during the Cambrian explosion? The evidence for these "ancestors" doesn't exist!

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 904 by RAZD, posted 05-09-2019 8:31 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1000 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-13-2019 9:05 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 1015 by edge, posted 05-13-2019 10:36 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 1022 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2019 12:05 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3949
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 999 of 1064 (852560)
05-13-2019 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 994 by Dredge
05-13-2019 8:19 PM


Re: Just to interject the YEC floodist view

What a pity the theory of common descent can't be tested using the aforementioned method ...

The aforementioned method of looking at the facts and making inferences from the logic behind them? We got that.

And testing? Every new fossil found is another test.

You've heard of tiktaalik, right? Then you know that its discovery was a product of prediction from ToE.

Hard facts, libraries of data, frequent and rigorous testing, predictive capability and predictive success.

That qualifies as scientific theory on any planet. And on this planet this ToE is especially productive and accurate. I mean, look at this place. Pond scum growing up everywhere. In just over 3.5+-bnys its taken over the whole damn planet and is making internet, Häagen-Dazs Chocolate Ice Cream and is reaching for the moon.

And you got what, again?


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 994 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 8:19 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1028 by Dredge, posted 05-21-2019 10:12 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2147
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 1000 of 1064 (852561)
05-13-2019 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 998 by Dredge
05-13-2019 8:50 PM


Re: Progressive Creation and Aliens (oh my) - no predictive ability - take 2
Dredge writes:

Curious that you ignore all the evidence that contradicts ToE - where is the evidence for the evolutionary ancestors of trilobites, fish and insects? Where are the missing links between the Ediacaran fauna all the novel phyla that appeared during the Cambrian explosion? The evidence for these "ancestors" doesn't exist!

Curious that all this is incorrect. You have presented no evidence that contradicts the ToE. Which "novel" phyla?

Curious beyond belief that a creationist knows the evidence that contradicts the ToE, but none of us know about it...

Edited by Tanypteryx, : No reason given.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 998 by Dredge, posted 05-13-2019 8:50 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1029 by Dredge, posted 05-21-2019 10:16 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1001 of 1064 (852562)
05-13-2019 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 907 by Taq
05-09-2019 11:40 AM


Re: Progressive Creation - no predictive ability - take 2
Taq writes:

It can be confirmed by both the pattern of physical differences and similarities and the same for genetic differences and similarities. We find a correlation between the nested hierarchies in both sets of data which confirms the mechanisms of vertical inheritance and random mutations.


You're dreaming. It's impossible for fossils to "confirm" anything about random mutations or any other mechanism of evolution or any aspect of genetics.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 907 by Taq, posted 05-09-2019 11:40 AM Taq has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1002 of 1064 (852563)
05-13-2019 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 932 by Stile
05-10-2019 11:43 AM


Stile writes:

Applied biology in medicine may not have "consider UCA theory" as part of it's checklist


"may not have"? ... more like, "has no need at all to" - UCA is useless.

but that checklist wouldn't be what it is without that driving, originating principle.

Prove this nonsense claim. Supply a scientific article or paper that demonstrates that a practical use in any applied science is predicated on the concept of UCA.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 932 by Stile, posted 05-10-2019 11:43 AM Stile has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1008 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 10:01 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1003 of 1064 (852564)
05-13-2019 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 965 by RAZD
05-12-2019 2:19 PM


Re: does a species from one genus evolve into a species from another genus ... yes
RAZD writes:

Dredge writes:

On the contrary, the fossil record shows abundant evidence of "outside tampering".

Please provide. preferably documented in a scientific journal. I know of none.


Ever heard of the fossil record?

Mostly because producing a new genus was not the intent of artificial selection.

For thousands of years, humans have tried to alter the characteristics of dogs, for example, in all sorts of ways using every trick in nature's toolbox - even resorting to unnatural methods such as inbreeding - but no one has managed to produce anything but more dogs. Obviously, there are genetic limits to how much organisms can change.
It was only when genetic engineering came along that the potential for producing radically different organisms was realised. Compared to genetic engineering, the mechanisms of evolution have been observed to produced only very limited and puny changes with a population. The claim that these evolutionary mechanisms can change a dinosaur into a bird (for example) are absurd and an embarrassment to science.

And yet the ToE still explains all the known evidence.

... like fish and insects appearing out of nowhere in the fossil record!

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 965 by RAZD, posted 05-12-2019 2:19 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1013 by edge, posted 05-13-2019 10:28 PM Dredge has responded
 Message 1023 by RAZD, posted 05-15-2019 1:01 PM Dredge has responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1004 of 1064 (852565)
05-13-2019 9:36 PM
Reply to: Message 971 by AZPaul3
05-12-2019 8:39 PM


Re: NO evidence of aliens
AZPaul3 writes:

We have the rodents in the Cretaceous through pretty much the entire radiation of mammals extent today as our example of microevolution resulting in a wide deep spread of macroevolution. We even have cow-like hippo things turning into fish-like whale things.


And fossils confirm nothing at all about what caused these changes.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 971 by AZPaul3, posted 05-12-2019 8:39 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1009 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 10:16 PM Dredge has responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 1016
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 1005 of 1064 (852566)
05-13-2019 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 974 by AZPaul3
05-12-2019 8:51 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
AZPaul3 writes:

Dredge writes:

my aluminium hat is shaped like a radar dish. I haven't received any transmissions yet

You might want to try the Fedora style. I understand the folds are more conducive to the alien communication waveform.


Thanks, I'll try it. If it doesn't improve things, I expect you to pay for the aluminium foil I wasted.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 974 by AZPaul3, posted 05-12-2019 8:51 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 1011 by AZPaul3, posted 05-13-2019 10:24 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
6566
67
68697071Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019