Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8987 total)
48 online now:
CosmicChimp, jar, PaulK (3 members, 45 visitors)
Newest Member: Robert Smith
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 878,008 Year: 9,756/23,288 Month: 771/1,544 Week: 163/322 Day: 17/66 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   $50 to anyone who can prove to me Evolution is a lie.
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 271 of 305 (80461)
01-24-2004 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Loudmouth
01-21-2004 5:00 PM


Re: Your epistemological strategy, please?
Loudmouth,

I'll do it. Give me some time to think it out!

Stephen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Loudmouth, posted 01-21-2004 5:00 PM Loudmouth has not yet responded

Asgara
Member (Idle past 859 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 272 of 305 (80490)
01-24-2004 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by johnfolton
01-22-2004 4:10 AM


Here is the whole story behind the Meert/Brown debate. Perhaps Joe will come here and explain it to you.

http://http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=11&t=98&m=1#1


Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by johnfolton, posted 01-22-2004 4:10 AM johnfolton has not yet responded

Trixie
Member (Idle past 2262 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 273 of 305 (80504)
01-24-2004 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by johnfolton
01-23-2004 6:22 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
OK, Whatever, I've had a look at the site and after reading this little lot, I gave up as it's all so much marsh gas. Sorry. Why did I reach this conclusion? Because he totally contradicts himself within a single hypothesis. He states that mountain ranges can't be formed by land masses pushing against each other because -
Rocks are strong in compression but weak in tension. Therefore, their stretched outer surfaces should easily fracture. Bent rocks, found all over the earth, often look as if they had the consistency of putty when they were compressed. They must have been squeezed and folded soon after the sediments were laid down, but before they hardened chemically.

Then, in support of his pet hypothesis he states
Rock’s slight elasticity gives it springlike characteristics. The deeper the rock, the more weight above, so the more tightly compressed the “spring”—all the way down to the center of the earth....

and also
If compressive forces are great enough, granite deforms (much like putty) on a global scale....

Yet again
Consequently, the compression event at the end of the continental-drift phase easily and continually crushed and thickened each hydroplate for many minutes. Mountains were quickly squeezed up.

And again
Mountains formed and overthrusts occurred as the weaker portions of the hydroplates crushed, thickened, and buckled.

And AGAIN!!!
As mountains buckled up,....

Yet, the first statement I've quoted states that rocks cannot do what he's just said granite does in his hypothesis. Now, if he thinks granite can't behave like this, why oh why does he then include granite behaving like this? It either does or it doesn't. If it does, as he suggests while expounding his theory, then his reasons for throwing out the alternative, accepted theory don't exist. If it doesn't behave like putty, justifying a search for an alternative theory, then he can't include it in his alternative theory.
Now, I'm not a geologist, I don't know very much about rocks, but I do know illogical thought when I see it. And boy, have I just seen it!! Any thoughts about this from the geologists in our midst? Have I misunderstood the alternative theory? Does it really have the contradictions within it that I think it does? I ask this cos I can't believe that a theory could be based on such dodgy thinking and then put on the web for every one to see.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by johnfolton, posted 01-23-2004 6:22 PM johnfolton has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by JonF, posted 01-24-2004 6:10 PM Trixie has not yet responded
 Message 275 by johnfolton, posted 01-24-2004 7:50 PM Trixie has responded

JonF
Member
Posts: 6155
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 274 of 305 (80516)
01-24-2004 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Trixie
01-24-2004 5:03 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
I just noticed you're from Edinburgh. I've visited a few times and love that city.

Now, I'm not a geologist, I don't know very much about rocks, but I do know illogical thought when I see it. And boy, have I just seen it!! Any thoughts about this from the geologists in our midst? Have I misunderstood the alternative theory? Does it really have the contradictions within it that I think it does? I ask this cos I can't believe that a theory could be based on such dodgy thinking and then put on the web for every one to see.

I also am not a geologist, just an amateur. Yes, Walt's theory has all the contradictions within it that you think it does, and you probably haven't even found the all the contradictions. Also, Walt's theory is completely inconsistent with the observations geologists have made over the centuries. Yes, a theory based on just such dodgy thinking is put on the web for everyone to see ... because Walt's a crackpot and very likely believes his fantasies.

He's not the biggest crackpot on the Net by a long shot; take a look at http://www.bearfabrique.org/. Ted's a lot more interesting than Walt, too. Or see http://www.the-electric-universe.info/

Walt's even moderately successful because he appeals to a group of people who claim to believe literally in the Bible (although every one I've ever encountered interprets the Bible without acknowledging that interpretation) and who will swallow any crackpot notion whole if it promises to support their preconceptions. Such as at least one prolific poster on this board.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Trixie, posted 01-24-2004 5:03 PM Trixie has not yet responded

johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4148 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 275 of 305 (80543)
01-24-2004 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Trixie
01-24-2004 5:03 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
Trixie, You must realize that the scientists that have a doctorate degree (Ph D degree)in the sciences are afraid to debate the sciences with Walt, Walt is willing to debate the science's(not drag theology into the debate), has had a standing offer to debate: Does science support creation or evolution?, and for 23 years no scientists have shown enough faith they can show the sciences supports evolution, and not creationism, etc...Walts problem with evolutionists is the same problem with Intelligent Design, is that the evolutionists want to drag religion into the sciences, and that is kind of interesting given the theory of evolution is supposed to believe their theory is based on the sciences, etc...If they actually believed their theory is based on the science, they would of debated Walt, they haven't thus Creation wins by default, etc...

P.S. You seem to be saying, but rock will bend, however, this is not what you see in the natural, the deepest wells ever drilled, and oil wells, are finding fractured rock and water, etc...If rock is suppose to bend, to subduct, then why is all the rocks broken up with water filling the voids, etc...Walts theory makes sense, granite mantles rock rubbing rock would fracture, crumble, and the plates wouldn't of subducted under the continental plates, they would of crushed under the continents, etc...

http://www.geo.uni-bonn.de/members/kuempel/docproj/kolasum.htm
http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF7/725.html


This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Trixie, posted 01-24-2004 5:03 PM Trixie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by AdminAsgara, posted 01-24-2004 7:55 PM johnfolton has not yet responded
 Message 278 by Trixie, posted 01-25-2004 9:14 AM johnfolton has not yet responded
 Message 279 by Trixie, posted 01-25-2004 9:18 AM johnfolton has not yet responded

AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 859 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 276 of 305 (80544)
01-24-2004 7:55 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by johnfolton
01-24-2004 7:50 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
Please take discussion of Walt Brown's debate to a more appropriate forum, such as the one started to discuss the Meert/Brown debate.

http://http://www.evcforum.net/cgi-bin/dm.cgi?action=msg&f=11&t=98&m=1#1


AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by johnfolton, posted 01-24-2004 7:50 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

manfree 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 277 of 305 (80548)
01-24-2004 8:40 PM


THE HUMAN ASKED OF THE THINGS IN THE WORLD, HOW IS IT YOU ARE HERE! DEATH HAS BROUGHT US HERE.THE WORLD ASKED THE HUMAN,HOW IS IT YOU ARE HERE! WE ARE HERE BY DEATH ALSO.ALL THINGS MUST END NOTHING CAN EVOLVE. SURVIVAL BY DECEPTION.

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by Cthulhu, posted 01-25-2004 11:47 AM manfree has not yet responded

Trixie
Member (Idle past 2262 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 278 of 305 (80613)
01-25-2004 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by johnfolton
01-24-2004 7:50 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
OK, Whatever, you say that we never see bent rock. Then how come Walt says that you DO see it? He even has pictures on his website that claim to show bent rock. Then says it must have ha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by johnfolton, posted 01-24-2004 7:50 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Trixie
Member (Idle past 2262 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 279 of 305 (80618)
01-25-2004 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by johnfolton
01-24-2004 7:50 PM


Re: Comprehension bypass
OK, Whatever, you say that we never see bent rock. Then how come Walt says that you DO see it? He even has pictures on his website that claim to show bent rock. Then says it must have happened when the rock was a soft sediment. Then he goes on to say that granite can bend!!! In fact he says that granite HAS to bend for his theory to work!!!! Total contradiction.

As for "doctorate scientists" scared to debate with him, well this particular doctorate scientist thinks that the internal contradictions in his declarations make them not worth debating. There's nothing there to debate. He has himself stated that the conditions required for his theory to work don't happen!!! Therefore he has disproved his theory all by himself, with no help from the "doctoral scientists". Why should the "doctoral scientists" waste the time trying to destroy his theory when he can and has managed that quite spectacularly on his own?

Also, having read the background to this whole "refusal to debate" nonsense, Walt's the one refusing to debate. Whatever, re-read the quotes I put above and see if your incisive thinking can spot the fatal flaws in his theory.

I suggest we now take admin's advice and take this to the other thread. See you there. I've copied this post to it.

Apologies for the problems with the post, a square bracket snuck in somehow and scuppered me!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by johnfolton, posted 01-24-2004 7:50 PM johnfolton has not yet responded

Cthulhu
Member (Idle past 4408 days)
Posts: 273
From: Roe Dyelin
Joined: 09-09-2003


Message 280 of 305 (80630)
01-25-2004 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by manfree
01-24-2004 8:40 PM


wtf?!
What the hell are you talking about?!


Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by manfree, posted 01-24-2004 8:40 PM manfree has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by NosyNed, posted 01-25-2004 1:05 PM Cthulhu has not yet responded

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8933
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 281 of 305 (80646)
01-25-2004 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by Cthulhu
01-25-2004 11:47 AM


interpretation
From my extensive readings in the various biblical interpretation threads here I believe I can interpret what he says. (watch this!)

THE HUMAN ASKED OF THE THINGS IN THE WORLD, HOW IS IT YOU ARE HERE!

Humans have realized that they must look at the nature of the natural world to understand how it is here (the way it is ).

DEATH HAS BROUGHT US HERE.

The natural selection of other things has left what we see. The death of all others left "us here".

THE WORLD ASKED THE HUMAN,HOW IS IT YOU ARE HERE!

Humans being part of the world asked the same question about themselves.

WE ARE HERE BY DEATH ALSO.

The same processes apply to us (humans) as we are part of the natural world and related to all liveing things.

ALL THINGS MUST END NOTHING CAN EVOLVE.

Every individual organism reaches an end. Individual organisms do not evolve, populatons do.

SURVIVAL BY DECEPTION.

A clear reference to the moths of England and their adaptation to soot.

There, see, isn't that easy? I don't know why you couldn't figure it out. Maybe you're not as smart as I am? (or maybe I've been reading some of those threads of Buz's too long )


Common sense isn't

[This message has been edited by NosyNed, 01-25-2004]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Cthulhu, posted 01-25-2004 11:47 AM Cthulhu has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by manfree, posted 01-25-2004 1:35 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

manfree 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 282 of 305 (80655)
01-25-2004 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by NosyNed
01-25-2004 1:05 PM


Re: interpretation
THIS IS THE TRICKY PART,ALL THINGS STOP AT A POINT .IF NOT EVERYTHING WOULD BE A BIG BANG .TO ME MY LIFE IS A REPUTATION OF A SPHERE.DarWinS ALL THE TIME.SO DOE' S THE MAKER.TOUCH ONE TOUCH ALL

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by NosyNed, posted 01-25-2004 1:05 PM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by manfree, posted 01-25-2004 1:57 PM manfree has not yet responded

manfree 
Inactive Suspended Member


Message 283 of 305 (80659)
01-25-2004 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by manfree
01-25-2004 1:35 PM


Re: interpretation
I WAS ONE OF THE UNFORTUNATE STUDENTS.NOT BEENING ABLE TO READ OR WRITE.TRY HARD NOT TO MAKE ERRORS.NEED ALL THE HELP I CAN GET.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by manfree, posted 01-25-2004 1:35 PM manfree has not yet responded

roboto85
Inactive Member


Message 284 of 305 (81267)
01-27-2004 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by crashfrog
08-20-2003 10:23 PM


So you're telling me mutations that cause a different color of fur on a rabbit, first off, 1)change the species and/or 2) Make it so a white rabbit can't or doesn't want to breed with a brown rabbit? And yet, coyotes can breed with common dogs??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by crashfrog, posted 08-20-2003 10:23 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by crashfrog, posted 01-27-2004 10:30 PM roboto85 has not yet responded

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 23 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 285 of 305 (81272)
01-27-2004 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by roboto85
01-27-2004 10:12 PM


So you're telling me mutations that cause a different color of fur on a rabbit, first off, 1)change the species and/or 2) Make it so a white rabbit can't or doesn't want to breed with a brown rabbit?

Well, yes and no. Mutation will evenutally lead to a new species of rabbit. But only under a situation called "reproductive isolation." That's when the population of white rabbits is prevented from mating with the population of brown rabbits for many generations. After generations of that separation, the gene pools are so separate - as a result of accumulating mutation - that those groups would not be able to mate when put together.

And yet, coyotes can breed with common dogs??

They can't always do it. They can't do it with every dog. That's evidence that the populations are on their way to speciation. It's a gradual process.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by roboto85, posted 01-27-2004 10:12 PM roboto85 has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020