Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
86 online now:
jar (1 member, 85 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,327 Year: 4,439/6,534 Month: 653/900 Week: 177/182 Day: 10/47 Hour: 0/2

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   evolution vs. creationism: evolution wins
xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 256 of 310 (180489)
01-25-2005 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by pink sasquatch
01-25-2005 3:26 PM


Re: quote mining
I was just supporting my conclusions with those of people who you might respect. How is it that equally qualified scientists can come to different conclusions when studying the same evidence?

Why is it if I quote someone I'm quote mining? Does that mean that the quote is any less valid?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 3:26 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 262 by CK, posted 01-25-2005 3:48 PM xevolutionist has taken no action
 Message 263 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 3:49 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8968
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 257 of 310 (180490)
01-25-2005 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by pink sasquatch
01-25-2005 3:33 PM


Existing at the same time
I don't know PS, when he says "...time as horses" does he mean modern Equus where he says "horses"?

In which case, your explanation doesn't touch the issue.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 3:33 PM pink sasquatch has taken no action

xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 258 of 310 (180491)
01-25-2005 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 255 by pink sasquatch
01-25-2005 3:33 PM


Re: still walking on misconceptions
If there were actual evidence that they were horse precursors, your argument would be valid. I have seen many of these charts, they are not backed up by actual fossil evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 3:33 PM pink sasquatch has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Loudmouth, posted 01-25-2005 3:47 PM xevolutionist has replied
 Message 270 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 4:02 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 259 of 310 (180492)
01-25-2005 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:23 PM


Re: Fossil record
And on page 26, Raup writes

Now with regard to the fossil record, we certainly see change. If any of us were to be put down in the Cretaceous landscape we would immediately recognize the difference. Some of the plants and animals would be familiar but most would have changed and some of the types would be totally different from those living today. . . This record of change pretty clearly demonstrates that evolution has occurred if we define evolution simply as change; but it does not tell us how this change too place, and that is really the question. If we allow that natural selection works, as we almost have to do, the fossil record doesn't tell us whether it was responsible for 90 percent of the change we see or 9 percent, or .9 percent

xevolutionist, do you still agree with Raup? Raup was asking a very simple question, "can natural selection cause the changes we see in the fossil record". The answer is NO, speciation causes the changes we see in the fossil record, which explains why very few transitions between species are seen.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:23 PM xevolutionist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:53 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 260 of 310 (180493)
01-25-2005 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by CK
01-25-2005 3:33 PM


Re: Fossil record
Which misquote did you have in mind? Are you saying that Darwin never bemoaned the fact that no transitional forms were found in his lifetime? Or postulated that if his theory were true, there would be an abundance of them? Or are you saying that no evolutionists will admit to the fact that there are none.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by CK, posted 01-25-2005 3:33 PM CK has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Loudmouth, posted 01-25-2005 3:49 PM xevolutionist has replied

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 261 of 310 (180494)
01-25-2005 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:42 PM


Re: still walking on misconceptions
quote:
If there were actual evidence that they were horse precursors, your argument would be valid. I have seen many of these charts, they are not backed up by actual fossil evidence.

What would a real horse ancestor look like, if these aren't it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:42 PM xevolutionist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:56 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

CK
Member (Idle past 3367 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 262 of 310 (180495)
01-25-2005 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:38 PM


Re: quote mining
quote:
I was just supporting my conclusions with those of people who you might respect. How is it that equally qualified scientists can come to different conclusions when studying the same evidence?

So you read the paper, understand the content of the quote and it's place in the discourse?

Right?

You haven't just cut and paste it straight from some nutty creationist site?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:38 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 5262 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 263 of 310 (180496)
01-25-2005 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 256 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:38 PM


Re: quote mining
I was just supporting my conclusions with those of people who you might respect.

Use evidence instead of others' conclusions, especially conclusions taken out of context.

How is it that equally qualified scientists can come to different conclusions when studying the same evidence?

Wait a moment - a few pages ago you were arguing that all scientists blindly support without question any evidence that supports evolutionary theory. Now you state that scientists have different views. Which is it?

Your argument seems to be this:
Scientists agree, which makes their conclusions suspect.
Scientists disagree, which makes their conclusions suspect.

In other words, you find all scientific conclusions suspect.

Why is it if I quote someone I'm quote mining?

The quote is taken out of context to imply something the writer did not intend. See loudmouth's explanation of your first quote for an example of why what you did was "quote-mining" and not "quoting".

Does that mean that the quote is any less valid?

Yes. It is taken out of context to mislead.

Quotes should not be used as evidence in a scientific debate anyway, except perhaps to define historical context.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:38 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 264 of 310 (180497)
01-25-2005 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 260 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:47 PM


Re: Fossil record
quote:
Which misquote did you have in mind? Are you saying that Darwin never bemoaned the fact that no transitional forms were found in his lifetime?

He bemoaned that we there weren't more. Archaeopteryx, the transition between reptile and bird, was found in Darwin's lifetime.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:47 PM xevolutionist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:59 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 265 of 310 (180501)
01-25-2005 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 259 by Loudmouth
01-25-2005 3:46 PM


Re: Fossil record
New sub species have appeared, not new species. If you evolutionists redefine terms every time there is a new development that exposes your past errors, it's hard for anyone to keep up. No wonder there is little agreement in evolutionist circles, other than it must have happened.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Loudmouth, posted 01-25-2005 3:46 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by crashfrog, posted 01-25-2005 4:00 PM xevolutionist has replied
 Message 273 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 4:13 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 266 of 310 (180502)
01-25-2005 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by Loudmouth
01-25-2005 3:47 PM


Re: still walking on misconceptions
A real horse ancestor would be a horse, of course. Evolution didn't take place or there would be real, not speculative, evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by Loudmouth, posted 01-25-2005 3:47 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by pink sasquatch, posted 01-25-2005 4:09 PM xevolutionist has replied

xevolutionist
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 189
From: Salem, Oregon, US
Joined: 01-13-2005


Message 267 of 310 (180503)
01-25-2005 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by Loudmouth
01-25-2005 3:49 PM


Re: Fossil record
Archaeopteryx has been shown to be a true bird, and a true bird fossil has been found predating arch. by 50 million years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Loudmouth, posted 01-25-2005 3:49 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by crashfrog, posted 01-25-2005 4:01 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 706 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 268 of 310 (180504)
01-25-2005 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:53 PM


New sub species have appeared, not new species.

How would you tell the difference between two populations that are subspecies of the same species, and two populations that are different species?

If you evolutionists redefine terms every time there is a new development that exposes your past errors, it's hard for anyone to keep up.

Get caught up with this: species essentialism died in the 1800's. "Species" means "reproductive community."

This message has been edited by crashfrog, 01-25-2005 16:00 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:53 PM xevolutionist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 4:10 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 706 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 269 of 310 (180505)
01-25-2005 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:59 PM


Archaeopteryx has been shown to be a true bird

"True bird"? Please. It doesn't even have a beak!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:59 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

pink sasquatch
Member (Idle past 5262 days)
Posts: 1567
Joined: 06-10-2004


Message 270 of 310 (180507)
01-25-2005 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by xevolutionist
01-25-2005 3:42 PM


Re: still walking on misconceptions
If there were actual evidence that they were horse precursors, your argument would be valid.

What would you expect a horse precursor to look like?

I have seen many of these charts, they are not backed up by actual fossil evidence.

This seems to be your MO. You demand fossil evidence and then ignore or dismiss it when presented to you.

You demand to see an "intermediate" fossil. When presented to you, you call it a "subspecies", then again demand to see an "intermediate."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by xevolutionist, posted 01-25-2005 3:42 PM xevolutionist has taken no action

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022