Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
35 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,488 Year: 18,524/19,786 Month: 944/1,705 Week: 196/518 Day: 20/50 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   On Transitional Species (SUMMATION MESSAGES ONLY)
Huntard
Member (Idle past 580 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 257 of 314 (608403)
03-10-2011 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:02 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
Robert Byers writes:

evolution relys a great deal on the fossil record. Without it evolution fails.


Wrong. To paraphrase Francis Collins (who is a Christian, by the way):

"Even without the fossil record, the genetic evidence alone is enough to prove evolution".

I don't see evolution being greatly based on biological research.
I mean by biology actual research of living life.

That's because you don't know alot about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:02 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

    
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 2653 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 258 of 314 (608404)
03-10-2011 5:12 AM
Reply to: Message 245 by Taq
03-08-2011 11:41 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
no lie.
you think your doing biological connections in studying fossils but your not.
All your doing is studying casts of former creatures. Then after a geological presumption is accepted that they are from many different ages you then claim that evolution over these ages shows a succession from a-B.
All it shows is a bunch of creatures. If they were buried all at once and simply there was segregation in the burying from different water flows then all ones looking at is a diversity like in the amazon or amongst the cichlid fishes.
The biological conclusions of the fossil record are in fact geological ones. There is no biology going on . Biology is about the biology of a living being. A cast of one is bad enough. but conclusions based on a succession of casts is simply not worthy of the prestige of biological research.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 245 by Taq, posted 03-08-2011 11:41 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Taq, posted 03-10-2011 11:18 AM Robert Byers has responded
 Message 271 by Tanypteryx, posted 03-10-2011 2:01 PM Robert Byers has not yet responded
 Message 272 by bluescat48, posted 03-11-2011 2:07 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

    
Robert Byers
Member (Idle past 2653 days)
Posts: 640
From: Toronto,canada
Joined: 02-06-2004


Message 259 of 314 (608405)
03-10-2011 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by Taq
03-08-2011 11:42 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
Taq writes:

I understand the radar genes for both dolphins and bats is the same.

It isn't. Dolphins use a fatty melon to focus soundwaves. Bats do not. Also, radar uses electromagnetic frequencies. Bats and dolphins use sound waves.

further bats is rightly in the bird section as it is only about a flying division.

Are house flies in the same section?

It made the news about the genes for sonar being the same for bats/dolphins.
Flies fly but really are just ground creatures. All insects are.
The author of scripture expects one to understand that being defined by flight is the division. Its not about kinds however.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by Taq, posted 03-08-2011 11:42 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by Wounded King, posted 03-10-2011 6:04 AM Robert Byers has responded
 Message 268 by Taq, posted 03-10-2011 11:22 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

    
Huntard
Member (Idle past 580 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 260 of 314 (608406)
03-10-2011 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 4:59 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
Robert Byers writes:

I just found out on wiki even people have trained their brains to use radar by noise for blindness. no big deal. no time needed.


Then you understood it wrong. First of all, if it uses sound, it's not radar, it's sonar, and second, no, blind people do not use sonar.

Diversity in bats is just a quick adaptation after the flood. Within a century all there ever were in types had arrived.

Evidence for this?

no evolution as such.

Dude, if what you say is what happened, then that is super-evolution. Evolution so fast as to be deemed virtually impossible by biologists.

creatures are limited by their kinds.

Evidence?

its not common creationist opinion but its demanding and reasonable.

No, it is bat shit crazy. You say evolution cannot happen, yet you propose some sort of super-evolution. Remember when I asked you to stop contradicting yourself? You are doing it again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 4:59 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Percy, posted 03-10-2011 9:19 AM Huntard has responded

    
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2379 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 261 of 314 (608409)
03-10-2011 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:15 AM


Prestin -changeo
It made the news about the genes for sonar being the same for bats/dolphins.

And this is why one shouldn't get one's information on biology from the news. As has already been mentioned the gene in question, prestin, is involved in cochlear development and mutations in it can affect frequency sensitivity. What bats and dolphins share is some amino acid substitutions that give them a higher sensitivity to high frequency sounds. As has been pointed out, the systems by which the sounds are produced are vastly different between bats and dolphins.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:15 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Robert Byers, posted 03-16-2011 2:28 AM Wounded King has responded

    
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 389 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 262 of 314 (608411)
03-10-2011 7:18 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 4:59 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
Robert Byers writes:

I just found out on wiki even people have trained their brains to use radar by noise for blindness. no big deal. no time needed.

It's sonar not radar! They're radically different things!

Humans can be trained to make a clicking noise with their tongue and discern their environments from the sound bounced back. While this is an impressive technique it does not remotely compare to the high resolution sonar of bats, nor the remarkable physical adaptations they have to it. No human could ever be trained to follow the flight of a moth by sonar.

And humans have huge, highly plastic, brains capable of learning remarkable skills. Bats have far smaller, less plastic, brains. It's stretching credulity to pretend they simply learn echolocation, and it does nothing to explain the physical adaptations of bats or the genetic differences you recognise in your own posts.

And you still haven't dealt with flight.

Diversity in bats is just a quick adaptation after the flood. Within a century all there ever were in types had arrived.

Over a thousand species, crossing a wide diversity of size scales and diet types. Some very highly specialised - such as vampire bats. All arising from a single ancestor within a century.

You believe this is possible, yet you blithely deny that it's possible over 50 million years.

no evolution as such.

Speciation and the development of novel morphological, physical and behavioural traits occur, but there's "no evolution as such"?!?

Edited by Mr Jack, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 4:59 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 274 by Robert Byers, posted 03-16-2011 2:33 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 389 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 263 of 314 (608412)
03-10-2011 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:02 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
Robert Byers writes:

evolution relys a great deal on the fossil record. Without it evolution fails.

Again. Not true. You see, unlike you, I've actually studied evolution, and while the fossil record is used it is far from the major source of evidence. About the only exception to that I can think of is the bird-dinosaur link.

I don't see evolution being greatly based on biological research.
I mean by biology actual research of living life.

That can only be because you haven't looked. There has been a very large amount of research looking at confirming and analysising the theoretical side of Evolution by experimental biology; and vast amounts of work establishing the evolutionary relationships between organisms based on their genetics. This is, in fact, now the primary way of doing so; replacing the previous method based on morphology (which also looked at living organisms primarily).

Even Darwin's Origin - where modern evolutionary theory began - barely draws on fossils as evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:02 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Robert Byers, posted 03-16-2011 2:42 AM Dr Jack has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18871
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 264 of 314 (608417)
03-10-2011 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 260 by Huntard
03-10-2011 5:15 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
Huntard writes:

Then you understood it wrong. First of all, if it uses sound, it's not radar, it's sonar, and second, no, blind people do not use sonar.

About blind people and sound, while I guess it couldn't be considered sonar because the sound isn't necessarily self-generated, you can learn a great deal about your surroundings from sound, especially reflected sound. A long, long time ago after I'd been playing racket ball for a couple years I discovered I could get my racket on the ball a fair amount of the time with my eyes closed, the sound, both reflected and direct, apparently providing sufficient cues.

I don't think the ability to navigate sonically is very unusual among animals, but rather that in bats and dolphins it is unique in its degree of specialization and sophistication.

Note to creationists in the Your EvC Debate Dream Team - Fantasy Debating thread: I'm expressing disagreement with Huntard.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 260 by Huntard, posted 03-10-2011 5:15 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by Dr Jack, posted 03-10-2011 9:33 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 266 by Huntard, posted 03-10-2011 10:03 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Dr Jack
Member (Idle past 389 days)
Posts: 3507
From: Leicester, England
Joined: 07-14-2003


Message 265 of 314 (608420)
03-10-2011 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Percy
03-10-2011 9:19 AM


Blind boy does use sonar
I believe Mr. Byers is referring to this news story.

I'd be quite willing to describe the boys ability as 'echolocation' or 'sonar'.

Edited by Mr Jack, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Percy, posted 03-10-2011 9:19 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 580 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 266 of 314 (608425)
03-10-2011 10:03 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Percy
03-10-2011 9:19 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
Percy writes:

About blind people and sound, while I guess it couldn't be considered sonar because the sound isn't necessarily self-generated, you can learn a great deal about your surroundings from sound, especially reflected sound. A long, long time ago after I'd been playing racket ball for a couple years I discovered I could get my racket on the ball a fair amount of the time with my eyes closed, the sound, both reflected and direct, apparently providing sufficient cues.


I wouldn't call this sonar though, I'd call it "hearing". Perhaps a radical idea, but I think it fits best.

I don't think the ability to navigate sonically is very unusual among animals, but rather that in bats and dolphins it is unique in its degree of specialization and sophistication.

Which is what I was getting at.

Note to creationists in the Your EvC Debate Dream Team - Fantasy Debating thread: I'm expressing disagreement with Huntard.

Well of course you are. This was decided at the last meeting of evil atheists and evolutionists. It was decided that we should have minor quarrels amongst ourselves to take another argument away from those creationists we all hate so much... Wait... I wasn't suppose to divulge that, was I?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Percy, posted 03-10-2011 9:19 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 267 of 314 (608441)
03-10-2011 11:18 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:12 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
no lie.

Yes it is Robert. Comparing the anatomy of different species is biology. To get my zoology degree I had to take a class called Comparative Vertebrate Anatomy.

you think your doing biological connections in studying fossils but your not.

We are directly testing the theory of evolution, as I have pointed out multiple times now. Testing a theory within biology with biological observations is called DOING BIOLOGY.

Then after a geological presumption is accepted that they are from many different ages you then claim that evolution over these ages shows a succession from a-B.

The mixture of features in fossils is not determined by their age. Archaeopteryx, for example, is transitional because it has dinosaur features not found in modern birds and bird features not found in dinosaurs. This statement is NOT BASED ON ANY GEOLOGIC "PRESUMPTIONS".

If they were buried all at once and simply there was segregation in the burying from different water flows then all ones looking at is a diversity like in the amazon or amongst the cichlid fishes.

Instead of inventing fantasies why don't you actually provide evidence for your claims.

Biology is about the biology of a living being.

You are aware that fossils were once alive, aren't you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:12 AM Robert Byers has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 276 by Robert Byers, posted 03-16-2011 2:56 AM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 268 of 314 (608442)
03-10-2011 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:15 AM


Re: Exceptio Probat Regulam
It made the news about the genes for sonar being the same for bats/dolphins.

As we have shown, the genes are not the same.

Flies fly but really are just ground creatures.

That screaching you hear is the goal posts being moved.

The author of scripture expects one to understand that being defined by flight is the division. Its not about kinds however.

The divisions seem to be whatever you think up at the moment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:15 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 269 of 314 (608443)
03-10-2011 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:02 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
evolution relys a great deal on the fossil record.

False. The genetic evidence is overwhelming. The fossil evidence is just the icing on the cake.

I don't see evolution being greatly based on biological research.

Then remove the blinders, go to www.pubmed.com, and do a search for "evolution".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:02 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8087
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 270 of 314 (608444)
03-10-2011 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 4:53 AM


Re: Bats filling an empty niche after flood?
No evolution by selection/mutation but instead instead adaptation with biological triggers had to be the way.

Evidence please.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 4:53 AM Robert Byers has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2322
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 7.2


(1)
Message 271 of 314 (608456)
03-10-2011 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 258 by Robert Byers
03-10-2011 5:12 AM


Re: Kind of The Point ....
Robert Byers writes:

There is no biology going on . Biology is about the biology of a living being. A cast of one is bad enough. but conclusions based on a succession of casts is simply not worthy of the prestige of biological research.

Emphasis mine.

This is a joke, right?

So far, in every one of your posts that I have read, you have shown that you have no clue what biology is, or for that matter what evolution is.

This is a science forum. You are expected to provide evidence for your assertions and to show that you have at least some understanding of the subjects you are addressing.

Your assertions are simply not worthy of the prestige of arguments. What are you trying to accomplish here and who are you trying (and failing) to convince?


Tactimatically speaking, the molecubes are out of alignment. -- S.Valley

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by Robert Byers, posted 03-10-2011 5:12 AM Robert Byers 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 © 2019