Questions about evolution and origins

[Pattylt]

Thanks, that helps.

 

[buffalo]

Applying the latest findings that natural selection breaks or blunts complex things it makes it much harder for it to refute IC.

 

[Techno2000]

I would answer that each step in the process WAS useful for what it did and that many mutations were unlucky…until one of them wasn’t.

So, the first life cell and the flagella had to wait around and get a bunch of lucky mutations for it’s parts to start showing up ?

 

[Techno2000]

No it does not. Just fix all the metal parts to a wooden floor. It will still catch mice, but it can’t be moved because the separate wooden base is missing. The wooden base is an improvement, certainly, but the trap still can catch mice without it.

It’s already a simple system, you can only reduce it down so far ,all the metal parts still have to be in place for it to work. You are pushing the envelope of simplicity.

 

[buffalo]

Just fix all the metal parts to a wooden floor.

The floor is still a base for the other parts to be mounted. If you take away the BASE the trap does not work.

 

[Techno2000]

Techno2000:

Just fix all the metal parts to a wooden floor.

The floor is still a base for the other parts to be mounted. If you take away the BASE the trap does not work.

He thinks having one less step in evolution makes it more plausible.

 

[FredBloggs]

Yeah, go ahead. It is conjecture with no empirical evidence to back it.

So let’s be clear on this: you reject any hypothesis that isn’t supported by empirical evidence?

That’s just hilarious.

 

[rossum]

By Definition, God the Creator Created Creation…

And by definition He did not become “God the Creator” until about 13.5 billion years ago at the time of the Big Bang.

… Recall - we’re discussing Common Ancestor/Macro-Evo …
Speciation is very poor evidence at best - of unlimited Evolution throughout the Taxa

That paper showed two species with a common ancestor.

If you are going to discuss biology, then please learn the basics. Macroevolution is speciation. I provided a scientific reference to a speciation event: macroevolution.

Being a Buddhist does not negate one’s also embracing Darwin’s opinions.

Evolution has left Darwin a long way behind. For example, Darwin had no opinions about DNA. Modern evolutionary theory says a great deal about DNA. You are tilting at a windmill here.

 

[EndTimes]

And by definition He did not become “God the Creator” until about 13.5 billion years ago at the time of the Big Bang.

Oh Please… But if that’s what you choose to believe - so be it!
PS - He existed before time. Even Physics accepts how time itself came into existence via the Ex Nihilo Singularity of No Mass…

Macro-Evo is thought and taught by some to mean that all Life descended from an imagined Common Ancestor – Body forms came into evidence de novo…
Constant mutations due to RNA mistakes always change a genome.

Again… changes beyond and most likely including the Taxa level of Genus,
have never been witnessed… never been genome-ically spelled out.
each little tiny amino-acid mutational transition by transition.

Oh yeah… We do know how a Malarial Parasite changed … at the molecular biological level.

Ergo? No… Darwin’s actual demands have never ever been realized.

 

[Techno2000]

Macro-Evo is thought and taught by some to mean that all Life descended from an imagined Common Ancestor – Body forms came into evidence de novo…
Constant mutations due to RNA mistakes always change a genome.

Again… changes beyond and most likely including the Taxa level of Genus,
have never been witnessed… never been genome-ically spelled out.
each little tiny amino-acid mutational transition by transition.

• The intervals of time that separate the [fossils] are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent.
  • In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life , by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.
• To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.
  • In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life , by Henry Gee, pp. 116-117.
• It’s evident that Darwin saw evolution not as progressive or improving, but as an activity that happens moment by moment. From this it is clear that evolution has no plan. It has neither memory nor foresight. No vestige of cosmic strivings from some remote beginning; no prospect of revelatory culmination in some transcendent end.
  • The Accidental Species: Misunderstandings of Human Evolution , by Henry Gee, p. 12

 

[EndTimes]

• The intervals of time that separate the [fossils] are so huge that we cannot say anything definite about their possible connection through ancestry and descent.
• In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life , by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.
• To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story—amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.
• In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life , by Henry Gee, pp. 116-117.
• It’s evident that Darwin saw evolution not as progressive or improving, but as an activity that happens moment by moment. From this it is clear that evolution has no plan. It has neither memory nor foresight. No vestige of cosmic strivings from some remote beginning; no prospect of revelatory culmination in some transcendent end.
• The Accidental Species: Misunderstandings of Human Evolution , by Henry Gee, p. 12

EXACTLY - The common visual depiction of a few artist-rendered critters going from Ape to Man as if they’re Transitions and therefore proof of Darwinism - it Totally and Completely Ludicrous from the POV of Empirical Science.

The only thing they have - is opinion_ed Similarity of Skeletal Structure…

Similarity is never Science.

---

 

[Wozza]

The only thing they have - is opinion_ed Similarity of Skeletal Structure.

If that was all there was then there’d be a problem. Saying that that’s all there is just indicates that you haven’t investigated the subject at all.

But I find that difficult to believe. Even just searching web sites that do nothing except try to dismiss evolution would tell you that there is a lot more.

Yet you still give every indication that you know nothing about something that you are trying to argue against. How is that possible?

 

[EndTimes]

If that was all there was then there’d be a problem. Saying that that’s all there is just indicates that you haven’t investigated the subject at all.

But I find that difficult to believe. Even just searching web sites that do nothing except try to dismiss evolution would tell you that there is a lot more.

Yet you still give every indication that you know nothing about something that you are trying to argue against. How is that possible?

And all you appear to indicate in that 'answer" is merely evidencing to us that you’re only laying down simplistic unsupportable put-downs as your sum total scientific is it? ecumen…

Try me…

 

[Wozza]

Wozza:

If that was all there was then there’d be a problem. Saying that that’s all there is just indicates that you haven’t investigated the subject at all.

But I find that difficult to believe. Even just searching web sites that do nothing except try to dismiss evolution would tell you that there is a lot more.

Yet you still give every indication that you know nothing about something that you are trying to argue against. How is that possible?

And all you appear to indicate in that 'answer" is merely evidencing to us that you’re only laying down simplistic unsupportable put-downs as your sum total scientific is it? ecumen…

Try me…

What I posted was not an answer but a comment. I’m not here to educate you. If you think that there is nothing more to refute than skeletal comparisons then you have said enough. I need say no more.

 

[EndTimes]

Please Delete

 

[EndTimes]

What I posted was not an answer but a comment. I’m not here to educate you. If you think that there is nothing more to refute than skeletal comparisons then you have said enough. I need say no more.

I can speak way beyond the Historical Science of Paleontology…

Again . Please to bring up the science itself level of your communications to me.

Please let’s get specific…

And Yes. I’d enjoy learning more - if you actually have the wherewithal to do so.

 

[Wozza]

Wozza:

What I posted was not an answer but a comment. I’m not here to educate you. If you think that there is nothing more to refute than skeletal comparisons then you have said enough. I need say no more.

I can speak way beyond the Historical Science of Paleontology…

Again . Please to bring up the science itself level of your communications to me.

Please let’s get specific…

And Yes. I’d enjoy learning more - if you actually have the wherewithal to do so.

Yet again…I’m not here to educate you. The internet is a wonderful thing. It can connect you to whatever it is you would wish to understand.

When you understand it (not necessarily believe it) and on the assumption that you find something with which you disagree, then the forum is a great place to discuss those disagreements.

But bear in mind that you need to understand something before you can argue against it.

 

[EndTimes]

Yet again…I’m not here to educate you.

Presuming that you actually can?
Again… Show it… Don’t be a-feared to try me in public…
It’s too easy to claim one is knowlegeable, yet so difficult to show it.

_

 

[Wozza]

Wozza:

Yet again…I’m not here to educate you.

Presuming that you actually can?
Again… Show it… Don’t be a-feared to try me in public…
It’s too easy to claim one is knowlegeable, yet so difficult to show it.

Yet again…I’m not here to educate you. And it wouldn’t be sufficient just to give you information. To pass on knowledge. One has to understand it. And there I can’t help you. You need to do that yourself.

Let me know which parts of evolution you have studied and understand. And then let me know with which of those parts you disagree.

 

[EndTimes]

Delete This