Darwinism in schools?

[rossum]

That is adaptation. No one is arguing it.

Adaptation is sometimes evolution as well, when the genetics of the population changes. Loss of eyes in cave fish is a genetic change, and so is evolution.

We have to agree to the Universal Probability Bound (or something we both agree moves us beyond chance and into design) Do you accept it?

Not in the sense you do. Shuffle three packs of cards together. The chances of you getting exactly that order are 1.3e-276, well beyond the UPB, yet it happened. Things beyond the UPB happen all the time.

The other problem is the (name removed by moderator)ut into the calculation. The probabilities of a shuffled pack of cards are well understood. Abiogenesis is much less well understood. Exactly how many possible ways are there to form a just-about-alive proto-cell? Unless you know how big the target is, it is very difficult to calculate the chances of hitting that target.

rossum

 

[rossum]

So early life did not have an ATP Synthase Motor? Source?

Much of modern life does not have an ATP synthase motor, for example amoebae do not have a flagellum.

Since we know life can exist without flagella, then there is no reason to assume the presence of flagella initially. Unless you have evidence to the contrary.

rossum

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Compare a current strand and set it to 1. Look at one in the past. Is it 1? less than, more than? .

I have no idea what you are counting.

 

[buffalo]

You probably said before, but how is adaptation different from evolution? I suppose small changes are adaptation and large changes are evolution, right? But how large is too large to considered adaptation?

adding novel features or becoming a new species. Bacteria adapting are still bacteria.

 

[johnnyjones]

So dinosaurs were created out of thin air? And redwoods and humans too? It is not possible that they branched off from a parent species? I want to understand your beliefs.

Assume that species did branch off from other species. What would adequate proof be for you to accept this?

In which case we too can know from observation and experience that evolution is true or false. Direct personal experience does not tell us G or the movement of celestial bodies, observation does.

Dinosaurs simply died off by Gods plan. Levithan and Behemoth appear in scripture which may imply creatures now unknown where living with man. Not necessarily dinosaurs.

 

[buffalo]

So dinosaurs were created out of thin air? And redwoods and humans too? It is not possible that they branched off from a parent species? I want to understand your beliefs.

Assume that species did branch off from other species. What would adequate proof be for you to accept this?

In which case we too can know from observation and experience that evolution is true or false. Direct personal experience does not tell us G or the movement of celestial bodies, observation does.

I believe the clear answer will be found in the genetic blueprint of creatures. The tree of life has fallen and is now a bush, mostly due to HGT. In other words let’s look at the genetic piano.

abcd keys played is species 1
dcba keys playes is species 2
cbdc… 3

egbdfa …4

and so on. Now these tunes can be cranked out pretty fast, and if I have two pianos, simultaneously, etc…

We do not have direct observation at the OOL or early life at all. We cannot observe the past, that is why evolution is philosophy.

The Thread is Darwinism in schools. I submit only empirical science in the science classroom, that is observable, repeatable and predictable (gravity qualifies). ID and evolution philosophies in the mandatory philosophy class.

 

[Farsight001]

adding novel features or becoming a new species. Bacteria adapting are still bacteria.

Bacteria adapating are still bacteria, sure, but they’re a DIFFERENT SPECIES of bacteria. Bacteria is a domain, under it being Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and then Species.

You wanted a new species. You got a new species. Now you simply deny that it is so by saying “It’s still bacteria!” in ignorance.

 

[Farsight001]

Dinosaurs simply died off by Gods plan. Levithan and Behemoth appear in scripture which may imply creatures now unknown where living with man. Not necessarily dinosaurs.

Or they were elephants and rhinos and such.

 

[johnnyjones]

Then let me be more blunt. If you can’t read, I can’t help you. I’m so tired of you guys twisting my words and lying about what I said. It is not the behavior of a Christian, but of a pawn of satan. So I say to you begone. When you’ve figured out who to treat someone who thinks differently from you with basic human respect, then come back.

Actually, more often than not I am spoken to by evolutionists in a very rigid, narrow minded way. Little civility. Denying Genesis, interpteting it as a poem, or putting gap theorys in to fit the evolutionary mindset is reaching to me. Take a look at your posts directed at me, and then a look in the mirror. I vehemently refute your “pawn of satan” comment.

 

[Farsight001]

I believe the clear answer will be found in the genetic blueprint of creatures. The tree of life has fallen and is now a bush, mostly due to HGT. In other words let’s look at the genetic piano.

abcd keys played is species 1
dcba keys playes is species 2
cbdc… 3

egbdfa …4

and so on. Now these tunes can be cranked out pretty fast, and if I have two pianos, simultaneously, etc…

We do not have direct observation at the OOL or early life at all. We cannot observe the past, that is why evolution is philosophy.

The Thread is Darwinism in schools. I submit only empirical science in the science classroom, that is observable, repeatable and predictable (gravity qualifies). ID and evolution philosophies in the mandatory philosophy class.

You should probably look up what “observable” means in a scientific context, because it most certainly does not suggest the necessity for a person to physically witness anything. You’re only shooting yourself in the foot here.

 

[Farsight001]

Actually, more often than not I am spoken to by evolutionists in a very rigid, narrow minded way. Little civility. Denying Genesis, interpteting it as a poem, or putting gap theorys in to fit the evolutionary mindset is reaching to me. Take a look at your posts directed at me, and then a look in the mirror. I vehemently refute your “pawn of satan” comment.

So because other evolutionists have been rigid and uncivil, I must be wrong and rude? Great logic. No wonder you don’t understand.

 

[johnnyjones]

Or they were elephants and rhinos and such.

Only problem with that is Behemoth had “a tail the size of a cedar tree.”

 

[buffalo]

Much of modern life does not have an ATP synthase motor, for example amoebae do not have a flagellum.

Since we know life can exist without flagella, then there is no reason to assume the presence of flagella initially. Unless you have evidence to the contrary.

rossum

??? The ATP synthase motor is different than the flagellar motor, it is energy producer of the cell.

I will key too birds with one stone with this link - someone objected to my protein folding claim.

The Case Against a Darwinian Origin of Protein Folds -

…Life likewise crucially depends on many such devises, one of
which provides highly efficient energetic coupling of the above
two processes. This coupler, the proton-translocating ATP synthase,
is a rotary engine built from eight or more protein types,
some of which are used multiple times to form symmetric substructures
(Figure 3). Various versions of this ingenious device
are found in all forms of life.

 

[Farsight001]

Only problem with that is Behemoth had “a tail the size of a cedar tree.”

No it didn’t. Read your bible. It had a tail that “swayed like a cedar”. There is nothing anywhere about it being the size of one. That’s another among thousands of creationist lies you have fallen for.

 

[buffalo]

Adaptation is sometimes evolution as well, when the genetics of the population changes. Loss of eyes in cave fish is a genetic change, and so is evolution.

Not in the sense you do. Shuffle three packs of cards together. The chances of you getting exactly that order are 1.3e-276, well beyond the UPB, yet it happened. Things beyond the UPB happen all the time.

The other problem is the (name removed by moderator)ut into the calculation. The probabilities of a shuffled pack of cards are well understood. Abiogenesis is much less well understood. Exactly how many possible ways are there to form a just-about-alive proto-cell? Unless you know how big the target is, it is very difficult to calculate the chances of hitting that target.

rossum

Let’s focus on a targeted search. To search for that particular sequence will take how long?

Yup. Makes it a lot tougher.

 

[johnnyjones]

So because other evolutionists have been rigid and uncivil, I must be wrong and rude? Great logic. No wonder you don’t understand.

“Pawn of satan” is quite uncivil. Based on that alone your rude. Wrong is debatable, but I tend to lean towards it. It seems I do understand.

 

[buffalo]

This thread will end up being shutdown unless charity prevails.

 

[Farsight001]

“Pawn of satan” is quite uncivil. Based on that alone your rude. Wrong is debatable, but I tend to lean towards it. It seems I do understand.

And you haven’t been uncivil? Speaking down to me and others just for having a differing view, claiming superior knowledge, acting high and mighty, blatantly twisting the meaning of what other posters say, posting misinformation about other posters, talking like you are privy to amazing knowledge that hundreds of thousands of scientists who have dedicated their lives to the subject somehow missed? I’m blunt and use the words I mean. You’re more subtle. It doesn’t mean you’re being more civil. Incivility is found just as easily in words as it is in tone and attitude. Don’t get annoyed just because I called you out on it. It’s my Christian obligation to do so.

 

[Farsight001]

This thread will end up being shutdown unless charity prevails.

You mean a thread in which you try to promote IDvolution once again gets shut down? Shocker. Oh wait. That’s because it is the core cause of all this incivility anyway, and it is what should have been topic banned, not evolution.

 

[edwest2]

Just tell me which posting number it was and I will find it myself.

Even if it is true, what reason is this to reject what they say about science?

From unjustified criticism.

It was post # 113.

Respectfully, I have learned nothing from this thread, except from buffalo.

I have seen the same evo-evangelism on this forum for years. And I’ve seen too many posters who come here to check up on what Catholics believe. Even the lowest level of dissent must be dealt with by the ‘insistence argument.’

For myself, I am not handing out flyers in front of school buildings to students telling them that this or that is wrong, nor do I belong to an organized group that tries to do the same. I am one person. I have good, supportable reasons to believe what I believe. If you don’t think so, it will have no effect whatsoever on scientific research or education. I do hope, however, I can help Catholics by providing them with clear references to Church teachings, including statements from various Popes, that tell them who they really are as human beings. Perhaps a few teachers reading this will look into this more closely and/or learn that there is other information out there that is worth their time to consider.

The regular ‘policing’ of sites like this is strange and suggests that universal acceptance is the goal.

Peace,
Ed