Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   scientific theories taught as factual
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 151 of 295 (447323)
01-08-2008 8:54 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by Modulous
01-08-2008 5:20 PM


Hi Mod,
Hope you guys having good weather over there. Thanks for the input but we weren't just talking about primates.
Thus, evolution of primates is just variation within the primate family.
We were talking about from the single cell life form to Lucy.
I had to come to the conclusion that according to evolution as has been discussed here that, that cell and everything between it and me are my ancestors.
And I can not find this definition anywhere else.
Therefore I cannot believe in this type of evolution.
I can believe in the one that RAZD has put forth in his definition of Micro-effects and Macro-efects.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Modulous, posted 01-08-2008 5:20 PM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 8:59 PM ICANT has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 152 of 295 (447324)
01-08-2008 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by ICANT
01-08-2008 8:54 PM


We were talking about from the single cell life form to Lucy.
I had to come to the conclusion that according to evolution as has been discussed here that, that cell and everything between it and me are my ancestors.
And I can not find this definition anywhere else.
Therefore I cannot believe in this type of evolution.
What does that have to do with the topic?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 8:54 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 153 of 295 (447325)
01-08-2008 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by NosyNed
01-08-2008 7:09 PM


Re: Sudden Appearances
Hi Ned,
Utterly wrong of course. You may think this because you know little about the scientific facts.
Then I suppose Chen was a liar or did not know what he was talking about when he said:
quote:
the emergence of such a sophisticated creature at so early a date show that modern life forms burst on the scene suddenly, rather than through any gradual process.
Message 123
Take your argument up with him I am just going by what I can find on the subject.
Now if he is a unreliable source and you can present evidence to that then please do so and I will stop quoting him.
Until then,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by NosyNed, posted 01-08-2008 7:09 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 9:20 PM ICANT has not replied
 Message 157 by Percy, posted 01-08-2008 9:45 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 154 of 295 (447326)
01-08-2008 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by jar
01-08-2008 7:28 PM


Re: differentiating between the observation and the theory
Hi jar,
Maybe I am too tired from trying to keep up answering to all those that are giving me attention or asking me questions or something but I could not find any of Chen's findings in the article you pointed too.
A short history of the search for PreCambrian fossils
You did read the article you referenced did you not jar. If you did you would know that no research is referenced after 1965. Chen made his statements in 1998 some 33 years later.
But maybe that does not make any difference.
And I get accused of not debating in good faith.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 7:28 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 9:31 PM ICANT has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 155 of 295 (447327)
01-08-2008 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by ICANT
01-08-2008 9:05 PM


It is not Chen that is the LIAR!
Then I suppose Chen was a liar or did not know what he was talking about when he said:
It is not Chen that is the liar, and that is not a quote from Chen, and that has been pointed out to you several times in this thread.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 9:05 PM ICANT has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 156 of 295 (447329)
01-08-2008 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by ICANT
01-08-2008 9:20 PM


Re: differentiating between the observation and the theory
You did read the article you referenced did you not jar. If you did you would know that no research is referenced after 1965. Chen made his statements in 1998 some 33 years later.
The point is that the newspaper article you quoted is obviously taking things out of content. It's not too unusual for writers to either make mistakes or misrepresent what the actual science is. The point, my friend, is that even 30 years before the news article we were beginning to find the very precursors Chen is talking about. Since then we have found many more including the main thing that Chen was concerned about, examples of bilateral life forms.
For example, in 2004 Chen, the very person mentioned in your news article published his discovery of small bilateral fossils from 40 to 55 Million before the Cambrian.
Note that, just the very things the article said were needed have been found.
That is how science works.
There is no problem.
Now do you ever plan to post something related to the topic?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 9:20 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 10:29 PM jar has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 157 of 295 (447330)
01-08-2008 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by ICANT
01-08-2008 9:05 PM


Re: Sudden Appearances
This is easier to explain if we have the full exchange between you and Ned:
ICANT writes:
NosyNed writes:
ICANT writes:
When all scientific facts point to sudden apperances of life forms.
Utterly wrong of course. You may think this because you know little about the scientific facts.
Then I suppose Chen was a liar or did not know what he was talking about when he said:
quote:
the emergence of such a sophisticated creature at so early a date show that modern life forms burst on the scene suddenly, rather than through any gradual process.
Message 123
So you thought that Chen believes the new body plans of the Cambrian appeared suddenly, and Ned was trying to tell you you're wrong. And you are wrong. Chen is not advocating a sudden appearance of new body plans, and your article clearly says he isn't further on:
Boston Globe Article writes:
And, because his years of examining rocks from before the Cambrian period has not turned up viable ancestors for the Cambrian animal groups, he concludes that their evolution must have happened quickly, within a mere two or three million years.
Two or three million years is not sudden, though it is certainly a much shorter period than the more widely accepted view of around 20 million years.
Your Globe article appeared in May of 2000, and it doesn't appear that Chen's ideas have found much acceptance in the time since then.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 9:05 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 10:09 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 166 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 10:45 PM Percy has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 158 of 295 (447335)
01-08-2008 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by ringo
01-08-2008 7:54 PM


Re: Re-Barrier
Hi Ringo,
ICANT writes:
You want to believe it can be done and it doesn't make any difference what anyone says you are going to believe it can be done.
Ringo writes:
Not at all. I couldn't care less whether evolution is true or false, any more than I could care less whether it's possible to walk from British Columbia to Newfoundland. I don't "want to believe" anything.
You could have fooled me spending as much time as you have trying to convince me as you have.
Ringo writes:
All I'm asking (still) is for any kind of evidence that a walk to the corner store can't be extended to a walk across the country.
I thought I agreed to this in my journey of Nator from her home to california.
But upon further review I have come to the conclusion that there is evidence that it is impossible. For some.
I have a friend that can walk to the corner store with little problem. But if he were to take off on a cross country journey he would die in the trying. You see he has artificial hips and he has to walk with two arm crutches that go up to and around his arm just below the armpit. it also goes around his arm just below his elbow. Now maybe I am wrong and he could make it you decide.
Ringo writes:
All I'm asking is for any kind of evidence that the difference between you and your father can't be extended to the difference between you and Lucy.
This is what you actually asked for:
Ringo writes:
I think I've been pretty clear throughout the thread. Big changes are from single-cell to Lucy or from Lucy to you. Specifically, what barrier prevents that?
Message 117
Would you care to back up the above statement with evidence? I suppose not just a song and dance.
Ringo writes:
If you can produce such evidence, I'll be only too glad to accept it.
You did not ask for evidence.
I gave you my reasons. [msg143]
I can't help it if you will not accept them.
ICANT writes:
Prove it and I will believe it.
Ringo writes:
You're the one who claims such an obstacle exists. The onus is on you to show that it does.
My statement was concerning the evolutionary steps between the single cell life form and Lucy.
You are the one who keeps demanding that I name a barrier why Lucy can't be my ancestor. Which I have not and will not. Because then it would be up to me to prove what the barrier was that is why I gave you my reasons. I do have a barrier but you don't believe the Bible so that one is out.
Since you have taken the affirmitave side that it did happen the onus is not on me but on you to prove that it happened. Just as soon as you do that I will prove to you that it is impossible for Lucy to be my ancestor.
Until then another aspect of the debate.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by ringo, posted 01-08-2008 7:54 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by ringo, posted 01-08-2008 11:14 PM ICANT has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 159 of 295 (447336)
01-08-2008 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by Percy
01-08-2008 9:45 PM


Re: Sudden Appearances
Actually, as I pointed out in Message 156 and others, Chen's opinion has changed as additional data has been found.
jar writes:
For example, in 2004 Chen, the very person mentioned in your news article published his discovery of small bilateral fossils from 40 to 55 Million before the Cambrian.
So even Chen is quoted as showing that the precursors to what we see in the Cambrian goes back at least 40 million years before the Cambrian.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by Percy, posted 01-08-2008 9:45 PM Percy has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 160 of 295 (447337)
01-08-2008 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Percy
01-08-2008 8:24 PM


Re: differentiating between the observation and the theory
Hi Percy,
I think Chen said something about sudden.
Have fun.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 01-08-2008 8:24 PM Percy has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 161 of 295 (447338)
01-08-2008 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by Percy
01-08-2008 8:35 PM


Hi Percy,
Thanks for clearing that up for me.
But one more question if my son had been born with a stub arm just below the elbow that would be a transition?
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Percy, posted 01-08-2008 8:35 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by Percy, posted 01-09-2008 9:35 AM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 162 of 295 (447340)
01-08-2008 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by ringo
01-08-2008 8:52 PM


Re: Re-Transition
Hi Ringo,
I think I've been pretty clear throughout the thread. Big changes are from single-cell to Lucy or from Lucy to you. Specifically, what barrier prevents that?
I have an old saying for this one Hell will freeze over before you get me in that trap.
Or you will prove those great changes from the single cell life form to Lucy.
Whichever comes first.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by ringo, posted 01-08-2008 8:52 PM ringo has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by NosyNed, posted 01-08-2008 10:49 PM ICANT has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 163 of 295 (447343)
01-08-2008 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by jar
01-08-2008 9:31 PM


Re: differentiating between the observation and the theory
Hi jar,
Now do you ever plan to post something related to the topic?
Lets see theory is what many believe happened and is taught.
Observation is what is actual fact.
Chen said something different than what is being taught.
And by the way the article you pointed too in 2004 was just confirmation of his find in 1998. Because they were the same type of animals. Do you think he changed his mind?
Have fun,
By the way if I say something meaningful you won't have anyone to pick on.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 9:31 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by jar, posted 01-08-2008 10:36 PM ICANT has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 164 of 295 (447344)
01-08-2008 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by ICANT
01-08-2008 2:08 AM


Re: God on the lab table - evolution in the present day.
Beautiful 54 million year old picture of something.
See "something"
Enjoy.
(is anyone on topic these days?)

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

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 2:08 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 11:15 PM RAZD has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 165 of 295 (447347)
01-08-2008 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by ICANT
01-08-2008 10:29 PM


Re: differentiating between the observation and the theory
Can you show a scientific theory taught as fact?
Chen is one of the folk that have shown that the precursors of what we see in the Cambrian arose over 40-55 MILLION years. That is NOT a sudden appearance so you can stop making that claim.
Chen is NOT saying something different than is being taught.
Now do you have anything related to the topic?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by ICANT, posted 01-08-2008 10:29 PM ICANT has 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