Author Topic: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...  (Read 7062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #725 on: August 15, 2014, 11:48:18 PM »
Perhaps one of the more profound recent discoveries comes from Michael Behe. His work with chloroquine resistance is, in my opinion, a noteworthy demonstration on the difficulties of mutational processes as respects macroevolution.

It's essentially the accusation that God has helped malaria overcome chloroquine, so that it can kill more people.

Are you sure you really want to go there ; because it just shows that evolution is faster than the calculations that ignorant people fake up.

As an analogy, it's like saying that a person can never throw a dice and get 20 sixes in a row, and not knowing that the dice is seriously weighted. After the 20 sixes are thrown, you then declare that God must have helped. All you have proven is that there was something you didn't know (personally) that made your calculations wrong.

Yes, God is evil. Thanks for that one.

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2012/04/behes-malevolen.html
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6265
  • Darwins +722/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #726 on: August 15, 2014, 11:52:48 PM »
Folks, it is about time to give up on this one. Research has shown that many with corrupt ideas will only become more convinced when confronted with contrary information. And if he gets any more convinced even his own DNA will revolt and leave. An I'd feel bad about that.

He is set in his ways, he is convinced he is right, and nothing we can say will change that. He of course thinks he's right, and if we stop this discussion, he will run around the playground telling his friends he won, but that's going to happen regardless of the outcome.

He constantly asks us to convince him while he has no plans to ever let that happen. So there can be no progress, no meeting of the minds, no discussion worth bothering with, not even any compromise. It is so important to him that evolution be wrong that if he ever found out it isn't, he'd probably have to go in for therapy anyway. We don't want that on our conscience. We just need to stop.

And BS, if you're going to stick around, think of something else to talk about. The amount of energy being put into this conversation by both sides is considerable, and we would all be better off changing the subject.

Lets call it a draw. If BS had as much information about the food he buys as he is insisting on getting from us about evolution, he wouldn't eat it because he'd know about every single instance of salmonella and botulism and e.coli, he would know about every tiny speck of urine and feces, he would know about all of the aphids in his broccoli and the names of every pesticide on his oranges. His standards for convincing him of evolution, which are inordinately high, contrast sharply with his standards for religion, which he assumes is a given. As do most religious folk.

Lets just quit, folks.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #727 on: August 16, 2014, 12:36:45 AM »
I was reading up on Muslim retardation, and found that BS has a soul mate on the same team as him:

A small number of fundamentalist Muslims reject science for the Muslim world, seeing it as immoral and materialist; for example, a leader of the Muslim Brethren in Egypt declares epidemics to be a form of divine punishment ("God developed the microbe and kept it away from those He wished to spare") and argues against scientific efforts to eradicate the problem.16

http://www.meforum.org/306/why-does-the-muslim-world-lag-in-science
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Online Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
  • Darwins +59/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #728 on: August 16, 2014, 03:32:10 AM »
Folks, it is about time to give up on this one.

Yep. BibleStudent; time for you to explain to us how creation really happened. Time for you to explain to us how the great white shark was intelligently designed to eat seeds. Time for you to explain to us how brothers and sisters mating can create the human race without problem. Time for you to explain to us where the flood waters came from and went to. Time for you to explain to us how the original vegan cat changed to be a carnivore. Time for you to explain to us how we can see starlight that is millions of years older than the universe.

Time for you to explain to us how magic works.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - An example of a clearly demonstrably false biblical 'prophesy'.

The biblical myth of a 6000 year old Earth is proven false by the Gaia satellite directly measuring star age.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6554
  • Darwins +502/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #729 on: August 16, 2014, 05:17:18 AM »
I was reading up on Muslim retardation, and found that BS has a soul mate on the same team as him:

A small number of fundamentalist Muslims reject science for the Muslim world, seeing it as immoral and materialist; for example, a leader of the Muslim Brethren in Egypt declares epidemics to be a form of divine punishment ("God developed the microbe and kept it away from those He wished to spare") and argues against scientific efforts to eradicate the problem.16

http://www.meforum.org/306/why-does-the-muslim-world-lag-in-science
See also: http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,27246.msg629445.html#msg629445
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable. Ambrose Bierce

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #730 on: August 16, 2014, 06:38:47 AM »
Yep. BibleStudent; time for you to explain to us how creation really happened.

He doesn't have to. He just quoted Behe, who is an old Earth evolutionist, who believes that God messes with things.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Online Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
  • Darwins +59/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #731 on: August 16, 2014, 07:26:22 AM »
Yep. BibleStudent; time for you to explain to us how creation really happened.

He doesn't have to. He just quoted Behe, who is an old Earth evolutionist, who believes that God messes with things.

In essence, does this take the view that science is correct about most stuff except the bits that we don't fully understand yet, those bits were done by Biblegod? Unless those bits are later fully explained by science, in which case those bits weren't done by Biblegod, but the other unexplained bits were. Unless science subsequently explains those....
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - An example of a clearly demonstrably false biblical 'prophesy'.

The biblical myth of a 6000 year old Earth is proven false by the Gaia satellite directly measuring star age.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #732 on: August 16, 2014, 08:00:43 AM »
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Behe#The_Edge_of_Evolution

In 2007, Behe's book The Edge of Evolution was published arguing that while evolution can produce changes within species, there is a limit to the ability of evolution to generate diversity, and this limit (the "edge of evolution") is somewhere between species and orders. It was reviewed, by prominent scientists in The New York Times,[34] The New Republic,[35] The Globe and Mail,[36] Science,[37] and Nature[38] who were highly critical of the work noting that Behe appears to accept almost all of evolutionary theory, barring random mutation, which is replaced with guided mutation at the hand of an unnamed designer.[39]

Yeah, so basically, after quoting Behe, BS has revealed that he is really an evolutionist, but disagrees with Behe's central thesis that God causes macroevolution. Whereas Behe believes it happens with God's help, BS has moved beyond that, and has proven that God is not helping, because atheists have no proof that macroevolution exists. In Behe's view, if atheists can prove that macroevolution exists, then God is behind it.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline 1makesitwrong

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #733 on: August 16, 2014, 07:36:33 PM »
BS in what you except as a legitimate scientific process. Could you please explain to me how your god creates? I will even let you use everything that evolutionary biologists who believe in ToE and not in god as your own. All I ask is,  how did your god do it. Did he, blink its eyes, snap its fingers? If you are going to ask the how from science. I want to know the how from god? Please I want you to be as scientific in your description as possible. Oh and by the way if can you provide me with something in the fossil record that leaves actual evidence of gods involvement. Like a copy right or trade mark. Just for once I would like to see actual evidence of gods involvement. What
The bible was pronounced dead at the scene

Online Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11810
  • Darwins +297/-82
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #734 on: August 16, 2014, 07:43:12 PM »
BS in what you except as a legitimate scientific process. Could you please explain to me how your god creates? I will even let you use everything that evolutionary biologists who believe in ToE and not in god as your own. All I ask is,  how did your god do it. Did he, blink its eyes, snap its fingers? If you are going to ask the how from science. I want to know the how from god? Please I want you to be as scientific in your description as possible. Oh and by the way if can you provide me with something in the fossil record that leaves actual evidence of gods involvement. Like a copy right or trade mark. Just for once I would like to see actual evidence of gods involvement. What

Who you talkin' to there, little buddy?

-Nam
A god is like a rock: it does absolutely nothing until someone or something forces it to do something. The only capability the rock has is doing nothing until another force compels it physically to move.

The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously.

Offline 1makesitwrong

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • Darwins +2/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #735 on: August 16, 2014, 07:57:25 PM »
I'm sorry I was asking for a scientific explanation from biblestudent on how his god creates?
The bible was pronounced dead at the scene

Online Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
  • Darwins +59/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #736 on: August 17, 2014, 02:52:17 AM »
I'm sorry I was asking for a scientific explanation from biblestudent on how his god creates?

You'll not get one I'm afraid. I've asked BS numerous times to explain how his god magiked everything together and he won't respond.
BS demands absolute evidence from science but nothing from his god. He has blind faith in his delusion.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - An example of a clearly demonstrably false biblical 'prophesy'.

The biblical myth of a 6000 year old Earth is proven false by the Gaia satellite directly measuring star age.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #737 on: August 17, 2014, 05:17:32 AM »
Yeah, and he also likes to quote people who contradict half of what he says.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline DVZ3

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1341
  • Darwins +40/-7
  • Gender: Male
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #738 on: August 17, 2014, 09:58:42 AM »

This thread has taken the predictable path in that people who are well informed try to educate those who aren't as informed as they should be in an attempt sell their product they've already purchased and are too emotionally invested in to simply stop using it or trying to sell it. That's fine if you still want to use your shitty product - stop promoting it as the best when it's not anymore.

You cannot teach a dog science and physics because they haven't evolved the frontal lobe brain capacity in order to understand the concepts. They do however make fantastically obedient and loyal subjects!

However, unlike dogs, some people like Skeptic and BS I do believe (I still have faith) have the brain capacity to learn these concepts but choose to willfully ignore them in favor of simply demonstrating how obedient and loyal subjects they are to their master.  :-\

Good boys!
Hguols: "Its easier for me to believe that a God created everything...."

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6265
  • Darwins +722/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #739 on: August 17, 2014, 10:25:09 AM »
I'm sorry I was asking for a scientific explanation from biblestudent on how his god creates?

You'll not get one I'm afraid. I've asked BS numerous times to explain how his god magiked everything together and he won't respond.
BS demands absolute evidence from science but nothing from his god. He has blind faith in his delusion.

BS was asked specifically, many times, by several people, to tell us how he would explain things like the fossil record, with its older lifeforms to newer lifeforms layering, and he just told us that was irrelevant. That we were wrong, but that he didn't have to tell us what was right. He considered it off subject.

He did not seem to understand that to educate people, you have to teach them something. He merely wanted us to eviscerate information from our minds. He didn't want to replace it with anything. Of course he probably planned to bring up creationism at some point, but certainly not here. That would be inappropriate.  :P
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #740 on: August 17, 2014, 09:19:15 PM »
It was certainly eviscerated from my mind, after he endorsed Behe, who explains comfortably, how macroevolution can work.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4725
  • Darwins +533/-13
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #741 on: August 18, 2014, 11:04:11 AM »
I don't know if BibleStudent has quit the topic or not.  On the chance that he hasn't, I will continue replying to his posts as I have time.

Also, macroevolution is NOT scientific simply because it is the best explanation we have for the diversity of life. Frankly, if that is what you believe then, with all due respect, I think that perhaps YOU have a distorted view of science. Macroevolution would be scientific if the scientific method could confirm the hypothesis that a biological process of some sort is capable of producing fingers, toes, brains, feathers, hair, blood, etc.….not because it offers what YOU feel to be the best explanation.
Look, do you even know how to tell if something is scientific or not?  It truly seems to me that you've set the bar for whether something is scientific or not so high that even real, legitimate sciences couldn't meet it.  And that doesn't accomplish anything, especially not when you make claims that people just 'feel' that it's scientific.

I'm going to take the criteria for "is it scientific" and apply them to macro-evolution, to demonstrate that it is.

1.  Is it testable?  Yes.  It would take a long time in order to properly test it in a lab, but it is certainly testable.  Not to mention that people have come up with various models of macro-evolution and tested them.

2.  Does the basic theory change in response to evidence?  Yes.  This has happened numerous times since Darwin; a good example of this is the concept of punctuated equilibrium.

3.  Does it avoid peer review/outside confirmation?  No.  Papers studying macro-evolution undergo the same peer review process as every other science.

4.  Does it only look for evidence which confirms it?  No.  This is evidenced by the times that macro-evolution has changed in response to finding such evidence.  For example, at one point scientists thought that evolution could only happen at a very slow rate, but that was ultimately discarded after punctuated equilibrium was shown to be valid.

5.  Do claimants insist that it must be true because it has not been proven wrong?  Generally, no.  While I don't doubt that some people do in fact insist this, the people who actually study it know better.  That does not mean they think it is going to be proven wrong, but it is unreasonable to assume that it will never be.

6.  Does it defy what other established sciences have told us about the world?  No.  In fact, macro-evolution is supported by discoveries made in various other sciences.

7.  Do claimants attempt to persuade using anecdotes?  No.  Such anecdotes would not be believable in any case, due to the time scales involved.  Such changes are measured in generations, after all.

8.  Do claimants use confusing/inappropriate scientific-sounding jargon to persuade?  No.  The 'jargon' involved is quite comprehensible to someone with a reasonable amount of science education.

9.  Does it have limits?  Yes.  Macro-evolution has acknowledged limits; as the saying goes, it can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  The mouse, having undergone a million years of evolution, is still genetically linked to other rodents, and it will not start to resemble a reptile or a plant.

10.  Is counter-evidence rejected because it is not holistic?  No.  The traditional definition of holistic (treating the whole person) doesn't really apply, of course, but it can be generalized to refer to situations like this.

http://woofighters.org/2010/06/warning-signs-that-something-is-not-scientifi/

It is worth noting that both creationism and intelligent design fail most of these criteria, not to mention the criticism by their advocates against evolutionary theory, or portions thereof.  For example, BibleStudent's repeated insistence on a complete and fully-detailed process to demonstrate macro-evolution is almost exactly what #10 is warning against.

Quote from: BibleStudent
This is VERY simple. As I mentioned just a moment ago, there is a hole in the theory. You can either fill it with science or you can continue to pour speculation down the sides of the hole. I realize that perhaps you feel there is more to it than that but there really isn’t. The process, if it exists (or existed) is/was a very intricate, complex process and, as of now, there is no evidence for it. You can’t just dig up a couple of fossils and go “hey, those like a lot alike but they’re not alike but they had to be so there is really no reason to dispute that macroevolution occurred.”
I posted a good example using the Hawaiian honeycreeper family of bird species to demonstrate that it isn't just digging up a couple of fossils and concluding that because of physical similarities, they must have evolved from each other (indeed, despite the physical similarities between the various honeycreeper species, scientists did not simply assume that they were related).  Therefore, I must insist that you stop making this claim that macro-evolution is based on speculation and wishful thinking about fossils, as whether you intend it to be or not, it is a strawman and has been shown to be one.

Quote from: BibleStudent
If I said "hey, a friend of mine just experienced a miracle. He was just given a clean bill of health two months after he was diagnosed with a lethal form of cancer and told he would only live another 3-6 months," you would ask that I provide evidence that a miracle occurred. If I replied that the evidence lies in the fact that medical science cannot explain how this occurred and that the person and his family had prayed daily for a healing, would you accept that as evidence? Of course not. You would want evidence that miracles are possible and you would want to know "how" a miracle occurred, not just why I *think* it occurred.
Have you been reading Lukvance's posts?  I'm not disputing what you say here - in fact, I've argued against his definition of miracles using very similar language as you give here.

Quote from: BibleStudent
You say that evolution occurred because the fossil evidence supports the theory but you have not told me "how" it occurred. Therefore, indicating that it did when you cannot describe "how" is begging the question because you cannot provide the scientific evidence that the "how" is even possible.
It isn't just because of fossil evidence, though.  Evidence of common descentWiki has been shown through many fields other than paleontology; comparative physiology and biochemistry, comparative anatomy, geographical distribution, observed natural selection, speciation, artificial selection, and even computer/mathematical iteration have all demonstrated that common descent is a reality, and common descent pretty much means macro-evolution when you're talking about the timescales involved.  With all due respect, I do not understand how you can keep insisting that people 'believe' in macro-evolution because someone dug up a couple of fossils and saw similarities between them, and dreamed up macro-evolution as an explanation.  I especially do not understand how you can think that something as unscientific as that could have persisted as science for well over a century.

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1903
  • Darwins +339/-7
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #742 on: August 18, 2014, 11:20:28 AM »
We have no observed evidence of benefit gaining mutations that can produce macroevolution....that is, large scale biological changes (eg. snakes-from lizards, birds-from dinosaurs, etc). Most mutations are injurious. If this is your biological mechanism of choice, then there is an identifiable limitation to the level of micro changes that can occur.

'Injurious' in what regard exactly?  As in, reduces the potential for reproduction?  How's that whole natural selection thing work again?

Or are you under the impression that evolution via natural selection has some higher-order goal in mind or something?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1903
  • Darwins +339/-7
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #743 on: August 18, 2014, 11:24:21 AM »
Look, do you even know how to tell if something is scientific or not?

At the risk of thread derailment, I think it would be informative to know some of the scientific theories that BibleStudent does accept as valid science.  For the comparison point.

I'm uncertain, but BibleStudent, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that some of the theories that you accept as valid science suffer from the exact same flaws of lack of resolution as what you seem to think apply to evolutionary theory.  But that's just a guess.  Could be wrong.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Online Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2651
  • Darwins +217/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #744 on: August 19, 2014, 10:16:18 AM »
I think the larger, slower reproducing species actually do struggle against injurious mutations, so have to keep them as low as possible. However, fast reproducing small species will benefit from large mutation rates, because the species can afford the losses. The serious "macroevolution" is done in very small animals. The basic setup we see in mammals, (livers, lungs, eyeballs, brains, penises) was created quite a while back.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.