Questions about evolution and origins

  • Thread starter Thread starter amaxiner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m not sure you know what a missing link. Unless you think all members of a species are clones, each generation is a link between the previous generation and the next generation, and each generation has a slightly different genetic makeup.
 
niceatheist said:
IC is a fraud. ID is nothing more than Creationism stripped of the word “God” in an attempt to get past the Supreme Court’s lemon test. No one uses IC for anything, not SETI, not archaeologists, no one. It’s a fake, a word salad claim that has no utility whatsoever.
Click to expand...
It is not. A mousetrap for example has a spring and other parts that can be used for many things. The unique composition of these parts for a SPECIFIED purpose is what IC is about. Evos’ have to show at each and every step the survival advantage along the path to the finish. The mousetrap still stands as an example.
 
Wesrock said:
And then your entire ID argument is based solely on how mechanically complex things can’t be reduced to so-called natural efficient and material causes. Nothing to do with final or formal causes.
Click to expand...
Huh? …
 
buffalo said:
40.png
niceatheist:
IC is a fraud. ID is nothing more than Creationism stripped of the word “God” in an attempt to get past the Supreme Court’s lemon test. No one uses IC for anything, not SETI, not archaeologists, no one. It’s a fake, a word salad claim that has no utility whatsoever.
Click to expand...
It is not. A mousetrap for example has a spring and other parts that can be used for many things. The unique composition of these parts for a SPECIFIED purpose is what IC is about. Evos’ have to show at each and every step the survival advantage along the path to the finish. The mousetrap still stands as an example.
Click to expand...
We know a mouse trap is designed because we know that object and similar ones like it are designed. But even by that standard, biological systems do not look designed. They are frequently far less efficient than analogous objects that we do know are designed.

IC is nothing more than word salad variant of the god of the gaps argument. It’s worthless.
 
Hand waving. Go to your car and start removing parts around the engine.
 
buffalo said:
40.png
niceatheist:
because we can’t think of a way that it could have evolved.”
Click to expand...
Evo proponents have to show the step by step way it happened. They have not. They just know it did. (blind faith)
Click to expand...
Except, of course, in the IC claim that came up in Dover about the vertebrate immune system, biologists had demonstrated, years before the trial, how that function had arisen. So, like the god of the gaps argument it actually is, IC has absolutely no explanatory power. It has no utility. It is not science.
 
Evolution has no utility. That’s why Bioinformatics was created.
 
Bradskii said:
So our ‘home’ is like a galaxy sized house built for one person.
Click to expand...
I don’t know. I have a couple of friends that bought their McMansions after the kids left the house - they are essentially in galaxy sized houses for two people. In one case, they have rooms for the dogs. So maybe there are dogs out there using that space?
 
Buffalo, you keep making this claim and misunderstanding how evolution works.

The previous steps to say, the flagella, wasn’t working towards a working flagella. It was doing other things…proton pump or waste removal or something completely different…each step of which was good enough at doing whatever it was doing with mutations occurring that changed it slightly over time to arrive at our current time where it is a motor unit with flagella attached. It probably isn’t done evolving either though we have no idea what direction it will take other than whatever it becomes, it too will be something that is good enough to help it survive.

The mousetrap was always designed to be a mousetrap. We weren’t nor were each of our parts. Some of our parts are very obvious how they developed and some are still mysterious or partially mysterious. And plenty of them have left their evolutionary marks along the way. Please quit making this mousetrap claim. It appears as a very foolish argument.
 
What is truly foolish is going to any complex mechanical device, removing parts and expecting it to work.
 
We work guide well without our tonsils, appendix and gallbladder. How is that possible? 🤔
 
It shows how well designed the human body is. We can can lose a finger or limb and still function.
 
edwest211 said:
Evolution has no utility. That’s why Bioinformatics was created.
Click to expand...
You keep saying this, but over a century of research demonstrates your wrong. In fact, your chief criticism of Dobzhansky is that he doesn’t talk about God in his essay, which suggests you agree with his basic tenet, you just feel it is incomplete.

Bioinformatics is a field of discipline within genetics, and is really a statistical and computational contribution to overall evolutionary theory.
 
Last edited:
edwest211 said:
It shows how well designed the human body is. We can can lose a finger or limb and still function.
Click to expand...
We can’t lose our heads or our lungs, or any other number of critical organs and functions. As to well designed, well, ask anyone with back problems why God only conferred upon us a spine only partially adapted to bipedalism.

None of this disproves a Creator, but it suggests a certain level of indifference or incompetence.
 
Look it up. Word salad is your version of throw up my hands?

academic.oup.com

About

The leading journal in its field, Bioinformatics publishes the highest quality scientific papers and review articles of interest to academic and industrial rese
academic.oup.com academic.oup.com

It’s useful. Evolution? No.
 
niceatheist said:
in the IC claim that came up in Dover about the vertebrate immune system, biologists had demonstrated, years before the trial,
Click to expand...
One example disproves all others? No.

Show me the step by step vertebrate immune system. No story telling, just each successive step with empirical proof.
 
Pattylt said:
Buffalo, you keep making this claim and misunderstanding how evolution works.

The previous steps to say, the flagella, wasn’t working towards a working flagella. It was doing other things…proton pump or waste removal or something completely different…each step of which was good enough at doing whatever it was doing with mutations occurring that changed it slightly over time to arrive at our current time where it is a motor unit with flagella attached. It probably isn’t done evolving either though we have no idea what direction it will take other than whatever it becomes, it too will be something that is good enough to help it survive.

The mousetrap was always designed to be a mousetrap. We weren’t nor were each of our parts. Some of our parts are very obvious how they developed and some are still mysterious or partially mysterious. And plenty of them have left their evolutionary marks along the way. Please quit making this mousetrap claim. It appears as a very foolish argument.
Click to expand...
That is what I asked for - each successive step with each one necessary for survival.

I like the mousetrap.
 
Pattylt said:
We work guide well without our tonsils, appendix and gallbladder. How is that possible?
Click to expand...
As we learn more so called vestigial organs serve a purpose. I thought evolution talks populations not individuals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top