Author Topic: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...  (Read 8285 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mrbiscoop

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
  • Darwins +32/-2
  • Faith is not a virtue!
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #493 on: August 05, 2014, 05:38:18 PM »
BS,
     How old is the Earth?
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
              -Emo Philips

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11133
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #494 on: August 05, 2014, 05:40:21 PM »
You are still missing the point. Unless you are able to demonstrate that there exists a '+' capable of producing the cumulative effect, a large portion of the ToE becomes unscientific. Do you see what I am driving at now? At best, you can only ASSUME that the '+' exists based on other evidence.

While your analogy makes some sense, it is by no means scientific in nature.

Uh... DNA is very long and one mutation occurring in one particular gene only changes that gene, allowing for mutations to occur elsewhere in DNA?
Just a thought, though.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #495 on: August 05, 2014, 05:41:05 PM »
BS,

No, you need to explain why a bunch of small changes wouldn't eventually become large changes.


I don't know the answer to that and neither do you !!!!!!!!


Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #496 on: August 05, 2014, 05:43:06 PM »
You are still missing the point. Unless you are able to demonstrate that there exists a '+' capable of producing the cumulative effect, a large portion of the ToE becomes unscientific. Do you see what I am driving at now? At best, you can only ASSUME that the '+' exists based on other evidence.

While your analogy makes some sense, it is by no means scientific in nature.

Uh... DNA is very long and one mutation occurring in one particular gene only changes that gene, allowing for mutations to occur elsewhere in DNA?
Just a thought, though.

Is this a personal hypothesis or a scientifically valid claim?

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #497 on: August 05, 2014, 05:44:59 PM »
BS,
     How old is the Earth?

I do not know. Why? How is that relevant to this thread?

Offline Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
  • Darwins +61/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #498 on: August 05, 2014, 05:47:14 PM »
Can I get a yes or no BS?
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 One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11133
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #499 on: August 05, 2014, 05:47:53 PM »
Is this a personal hypothesis or a scientifically valid claim?

...Do you not know the length of DNA? The DNA from a single human cell is 2-3 meters in length. In addition, one mutation occurring in one gene does not produce mutations outside that gene. That'd be like changing one floorboard and expecting the entire floor to change.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #500 on: August 05, 2014, 05:48:07 PM »
BibleStudent; were you able to find time to look at this post?

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,27189.0.html

Just so you know....I am not intentionally ignoring you. I took a look at your post and will see if I can provide a response.

Offline Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 560
  • Darwins +61/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #501 on: August 05, 2014, 05:49:48 PM »
Thank you. I realise theists are a bit outnumbered here.
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 BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #502 on: August 05, 2014, 05:50:21 PM »
Is this a personal hypothesis or a scientifically valid claim?

...Do you not know the length of DNA? The DNA from a single human cell is 2-3 meters in length. In addition, one mutation occurring in one gene does not produce mutations outside that gene. That'd be like changing one floorboard and expecting the entire floor to change.

Forgive me but I fail to see the point you are trying to make and how it relates to the discussion. Can you please just elaborate further and indicate what you are trying to demonstrate. Thank you.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11133
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #503 on: August 05, 2014, 05:52:20 PM »
Forgive me
<snip>

No. The only reason you "don't see how it relates" is because either you haven't been paying attention to what was said, or you have been and know that it proves your Bible to be false, so you're just trying to ignore it.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #504 on: August 05, 2014, 05:54:22 PM »
Science can tie together the genetic similarities in all sorts of life forms back to common ancestors. No other explanation makes any sense. We can see the results of the changes, we can see where they came from, we can predict what we will find in organisms based on what we know of their forebearers.

How do these "changes" happen? That's all I am asking. Once you answer that we will have made some progress.

Virtually every time genes split in any organism, changes take place. Usually on small, irrelevant scales. But whether in single celled organisms that only procreate by splitting, or in animals that use the goode olde sperme and egge method, those changes sometimes cause the resulting offspring to be a bit different than the parents. If this doesn't' occur, why don't all humans look alike? And these changes are cumulative (and please note, they are harmful far more often than they are advantageous. Many a change kill or cripples the new critter). When changes are beneficial, they have a chance of being passed on to further offspring.

In time frame science can handle, we can track genetic changes, and see shifts in living organisms. One scientist tracked one specific set of single celled organisms and over a period of 20+ years some of the cells developed the ability to use a new food source. He backtracked, found the original genetic mutation that caused that change, and saw the process by which the cells were able to start using a new food source. And, using frozen cells from before the change and trying the experiment again, he was able to duplicate the change.

Not all of the cells in the experiment changed. But it only took one cell changing and being stronger for it to causes more and more of that new type of cell to start proliferating.

Cells are simply unable to create exact duplicates of themselves every time. Aberrations abound in all cell splits/duplications. It can't be helped. Sometimes it doesn't matter, sometimes it is critical and/or fatal, sometimes is provides noticeable advantages. Science has observed such changes in cells over and over and over. The findings are well documented. The specific effects of some mutations have been studied thoroughly. But there are far to many for us to study them all, especially when a large portion of the population has been force-fed the belief that such things aren't possible. Hence none of them become scientists, and less progress is made. But I digress.

The mechanism is there, in plain sight. It has been observed. It is being observed. It will continue until our sun finally expands into a red giant and the planet is incinerated. Get used to it.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #505 on: August 05, 2014, 05:55:58 PM »
Forgive me
<snip>

No. The only reason you "don't see how it relates" is because either you haven't been paying attention to what was said, or you have been and know that it proves your Bible to be false, so you're just trying to ignore it.

That is a completely false accusation. I was making an honest request for you to help me understand the point you are trying to make. If you'd rather not respond then just say so.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11133
  • Darwins +294/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #506 on: August 05, 2014, 06:01:34 PM »
That is a completely false accusation. I was making an honest request for you to help me understand the point you are trying to make. If you'd rather not respond then just say so.

Then go back to my "How much is 1+1" post and work your way up.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken/Lucifer/All In One/Orion.

Online Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1547
  • Darwins +105/-12
  • Why is it so difficult to say you don't know?
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #507 on: August 05, 2014, 06:02:23 PM »
You see, the definition of ‘speciation’ that you use is vague and misleading. It dupes people such as yourself into thinking that because one species of birds won’t do the nasty with another species of birds anymore that somehow it makes a case for snakes evolving from lizards.

So you accept microevolution of birds, that pigeons are related to ostriches, and probably you accept the microevolution of dogs that poodles came from wolves. How about the much smaller microevolution among the apes, now that humans "won't do the nasty" with other apes anymore?

I am still waiting. Dodging only shows up your unwillingness to think about the issues.

Why you (and others) cannot grasp what I am pointing out and asking is stunning.

If the ToE is based on science, then where is the evidence that supports HOW a single celled organism evolved into a human? HOW did that happen? If you cannot provide the scientific evidence which demonstrates the biological process(es), then you are ASSUMING that it occurred. That is NOT science. A hypothesis must be tested using the scientific method. Experimentation is required to demonstrate that the hypothesized prediction is repeatable and can confirm or falsify the hypothesis. What experimentation has been done to demonstrate, for example, that observations made in the fossil record are the result of an evolutionary mechanism?

Like it or not, a mere assumption that microevolution produces macroevolution is not a scientific basis for claiming it to be true.

None of that answered my question.
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline mrbiscoop

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
  • Darwins +32/-2
  • Faith is not a virtue!
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #508 on: August 05, 2014, 06:05:51 PM »
BS,
     How old is the Earth?

I do not know. Why? How is that relevant to this thread?

   Microevolution  over long, sometimes vast, periods of time produces macroevolution. If you think the earth is somewhere between 6-8 thousand years old then there is no evolutionary mechanism that could produce the diversity of life that exists today.
   Give me your best guess, based on whatever you want, of how old the earth is.
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
              -Emo Philips

Offline jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5061
  • Darwins +580/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #509 on: August 05, 2014, 08:02:13 PM »
If you choose to reject the claims being made by Douglas Axe strictly on the basis of his background, then so be it. That only suggests to me that you are more interested in discrediting the author than determining if his claims have any merit or not. Personally, I would be more interested in knowing if the claims are accurate...but to each his own.
I'm guessing that you only read the first couple of sentences I wrote and basically ignored the rest, seeing as you made the mistaken assumption that I was rejecting his argument simply because he was a chemical engineer.  The first point I made was that you used him to make an argument from authority that had no actual basis in fact, since he isn't an authority on the subject of evolutionary biology (I have noticed that most creationists with scientific backgrounds come from fields outside of biology).  The second point was that his conclusions did not actually prove that 'macro'-evolution was impossible or even improbable; all he succeeded in showing is that the question is not yet settled.  Although, that isn't the question of "creationism vs evolution", but rather, the question of how feasible the divergence of organisms is.

I think it's also worth noting that this paper did not establish a single point in favor of creationism, or if you prefer, "intelligent design".  His own abstract says it best:  "Although substantial functional innovation is thought to be possible within paralogous families, the tight limits on the value of d found here (d ? 2 for the maladaptive case, and d ? 6 for the neutral case) mean that the mutational jumps in this process cannot have been very large. Whether the functional divergence commonly attributed to paralogs is feasible within such tight limits is far from certain, judging by various experimental attempts to interconvert the functions of supposed paralogs. This study provides a mathematical framework for interpreting experiments of that kind, more of which will needed before the limits to functional divergence become clear."

Lastly, it's important to note that it takes more than simply pointing out problems with evolutionary biology to establish creationism as a feasible alternative.  Even if evolutionary biology were somehow totally discredited (which is not likely, for the simple reason that it works much too well as an explanation), it would not make creationism a workable alternative.  In order to do that, creationists must produce work which establishes the scientific feasibility of creationism.  So far, no creationist has managed to do that, or even to come remotely close to it.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6773
  • Darwins +542/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #510 on: August 05, 2014, 09:12:44 PM »
We have no observed evidence of benefit gaining mutations that can produce macroevolution...
This is mainly because few of us have lived for a couple of hundred million years. However, God told me He saw it happening, so you can believe Him or not - it's up to you.

Lev:11:13 “‘These are the birds you are to regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle,[a] the vulture, the black vulture, 14 the red kite, any kind of black kite, 15 any kind of raven, 16 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 17 the little owl, the cormorant, the great owl, 18 the white owl, the desert owl, the osprey, 19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.

The bat evolved from a bird into a bat.

BibleStudent, It's either evolution or magic - what are you going for?





Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #511 on: August 05, 2014, 10:58:02 PM »
If people are going to claim that evolution is BS, they need to provide alternate explanations for observed phenomena. Stuff like "Yea, the fossil record does seem to indicate a progression in complexity over time, but in fact what you are seeing is actually..."

Simply saying "Um, well, that doesn't match what I was told in church last Sunday so it must be wrong!" is of no help. Ignoring the fact that that Discovery Institute and similar others have only come up with a tiny handful of specific arguments against evolution doesn't help either. If evolution is just plain wrong, it should be fairly easy to list the errors and provide counter-examples or counter-theories or anything that doesn't start with the words "If you could just explain how a single celled organism could…"

Demanding that science provide some specific proof while putting no effort in to coming up with viable alternatives that support their POV, people against evolution don't even have a low bar to settle for. They have nothing. They claim they do, but they are unable to see the many flaws in their counter arguments. The Axe paper that BS and jaimehlers have been discussing is a case in point. Axe arbitrarily chooses a number, argues that it is impossible, and expects people to swoon as they automatically get enlightened by his wild guess that evolution is improbable. By not offering up alternative explanations for anything, he accomplishes nothing, unless you count how excited he makes people like BS feel.

If a creationist makes claims contrary to science, they are not likely to get any support from within the scientific community because nothing they claim matches scientific realities. And the only support they get is from people who apparently know nothing about science. That sure has to be an empty job.

Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2756
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #512 on: August 05, 2014, 11:26:37 PM »
Why you (and others) cannot grasp what I am pointing out and asking is stunning.

If the ToE is based on science, then where is the evidence that supports HOW a single celled organism evolved into a human? HOW did that happen? If you cannot provide the scientific evidence which demonstrates the biological process(es), then you are ASSUMING that it occurred. That is NOT science. A hypothesis must be tested using the scientific method. Experimentation is required to demonstrate that the hypothesized prediction is repeatable and can confirm or falsify the hypothesis. What experimentation has been done to demonstrate, for example, that observations made in the fossil record are the result of an evolutionary mechanism?

Like it or not, a mere assumption that microevolution produces macroevolution is not a scientific basis for claiming it to be true.

Let me put it to you this way:

Sometime around 1660, Newton discovered the properties of gravity. He explained the way things orbited and came up with a formula for how two objects attracted each other. Even with Einstein's modifications, nobody has said Newton came up with an incorrect theory, because of the fact that he had no idea of what caused gravity. We still don't. I believe that Newton thought gravity was caused by God.

Just because Newton had NFI what gravity was, does not mean that flat Earthers and other lunatics were still correct.

Even though we can't duplicate past evolutionary events to the satisfactions of flat earthers, we can see that everything that has been dug up out of the ground, conforms to the picture of evolution. That is a type of science, whether you like it or not.

Ernest Rutherford claimed that physics is the only real science and everything else is stamp collecting. It's clear that you can actually manipulate objects to deduce the laws of physics, but some some fields of knowledge that you can't easily manipulate objects, require different approaches.

They remain science as long as the researchers don't ignore counter evidence.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2756
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #513 on: August 05, 2014, 11:29:56 PM »
Basically, what I'm saying there, is that you are manipulating your definition of science to exclude your concept of what evolution is.
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1330
  • Darwins +97/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #514 on: August 06, 2014, 04:33:02 AM »
How do these "changes" happen? That's all I am asking. Once you answer that we will have made some progress.

Here's a time line and a brief description[1]

1) ~223 million years ago, a species of single-celled green algae began forming aggregates of cells stuck together by a glue of secreted proteins and sugars (and we can see species which do this today).

2) Also ~200 million years ago, the rate of cell division began to be controlled genetically. Unlike single-celled organisms, which reproduce whenever the surrounding environment is right, the new multicellular algae began controlling exactly how many daughter cells they produce. This is a critical step towards establishing a multi-cellular body-plan with genetically controlled dimensions.

3) Roughly 10 million years later, the cells of some multicellular algae species began to orient their whip-like flagella in the same direction, so that all of the flagella would work together to control the swimming direction of the organism.

4) By ~100 million years ago, some of the algae species had established separate reproductive germ cells, and ever since then, various volvocine algae species have developed more cells with highly specialized functions.

This is based on the observation of "modern" algae you can view the paper as a PDF here - http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/02/13/0811205106.abstract
 1. taken from http://www.science20.com/adaptive_complexity/how_singlecell_organisms_evolve_multicellular_ones

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #515 on: August 06, 2014, 08:02:05 PM »
Science can tie together the genetic similarities in all sorts of life forms back to common ancestors. No other explanation makes any sense. We can see the results of the changes, we can see where they came from, we can predict what we will find in organisms based on what we know of their forebearers.

How do these "changes" happen? That's all I am asking. Once you answer that we will have made some progress.

Virtually every time genes split in any organism, changes take place. Usually on small, irrelevant scales. But whether in single celled organisms that only procreate by splitting, or in animals that use the goode olde sperme and egge method, those changes sometimes cause the resulting offspring to be a bit different than the parents. If this doesn't' occur, why don't all humans look alike? And these changes are cumulative (and please note, they are harmful far more often than they are advantageous. Many a change kill or cripples the new critter). When changes are beneficial, they have a chance of being passed on to further offspring.

In time frame science can handle, we can track genetic changes, and see shifts in living organisms. One scientist tracked one specific set of single celled organisms and over a period of 20+ years some of the cells developed the ability to use a new food source. He backtracked, found the original genetic mutation that caused that change, and saw the process by which the cells were able to start using a new food source. And, using frozen cells from before the change and trying the experiment again, he was able to duplicate the change.

Not all of the cells in the experiment changed. But it only took one cell changing and being stronger for it to causes more and more of that new type of cell to start proliferating.

Cells are simply unable to create exact duplicates of themselves every time. Aberrations abound in all cell splits/duplications. It can't be helped. Sometimes it doesn't matter, sometimes it is critical and/or fatal, sometimes is provides noticeable advantages. Science has observed such changes in cells over and over and over. The findings are well documented. The specific effects of some mutations have been studied thoroughly. But there are far to many for us to study them all, especially when a large portion of the population has been force-fed the belief that such things aren't possible. Hence none of them become scientists, and less progress is made. But I digress.

The mechanism is there, in plain sight. It has been observed. It is being observed. It will continue until our sun finally expands into a red giant and the planet is incinerated. Get used to it.

Is this process you describe capable of producing, for example, new functional organs and extremities? If so, how do you know that? What scientific evidence do you have that demonstrates this could account for a soup-to-humans evolution? What experiments have been conducted?

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #516 on: August 06, 2014, 08:03:21 PM »
How do these "changes" happen? That's all I am asking. Once you answer that we will have made some progress.

Here's a time line and a brief description[1]

1) ~223 million years ago, a species of single-celled green algae began forming aggregates of cells stuck together by a glue of secreted proteins and sugars (and we can see species which do this today).

2) Also ~200 million years ago, the rate of cell division began to be controlled genetically. Unlike single-celled organisms, which reproduce whenever the surrounding environment is right, the new multicellular algae began controlling exactly how many daughter cells they produce. This is a critical step towards establishing a multi-cellular body-plan with genetically controlled dimensions.

3) Roughly 10 million years later, the cells of some multicellular algae species began to orient their whip-like flagella in the same direction, so that all of the flagella would work together to control the swimming direction of the organism.

4) By ~100 million years ago, some of the algae species had established separate reproductive germ cells, and ever since then, various volvocine algae species have developed more cells with highly specialized functions.

This is based on the observation of "modern" algae you can view the paper as a PDF here - http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/02/13/0811205106.abstract
 1. taken from http://www.science20.com/adaptive_complexity/how_singlecell_organisms_evolve_multicellular_ones

I need to ask you the same thing that I just asked PP:

Is this process you describe capable of producing, for example, new functional organs and extremities? If so, how do you know that? What scientific evidence do you have that demonstrates this could account for a soup-to-humans evolution? What experiments have been conducted?

Forgive me if I am wrong but what I see in the link you provided is algae turning into algae??

Offline BibleStudent

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1677
  • Darwins +11/-79
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #517 on: August 06, 2014, 08:07:25 PM »
Basically, what I'm saying there, is that you are manipulating your definition of science to exclude your concept of what evolution is.


Then please show me how the scientific method was employed to demonstrate that there exists a biological process that produced life as we know it from a single celled organism.

This is the point I continue to make to no avail. If the ToE is scientific in nature, where is the scientific evidence (using the scientific method) that explains how, for example, how a snake evolved from a lizard?

Offline shnozzola

Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #518 on: August 06, 2014, 08:27:48 PM »
http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/past-exhibitions/lizards-and-snakes-alive/transitional-group/geckos

Quote
Meet the Family
The gecko family--Gekkonidae--is huge. It includes about 1,000 species, or well over 10 percent of all squamate species on Earth. And like any big family, it displays a lot of variety-in size, in shape, in lifestyle. Some family members are active at night, and some during the day; some have eyelids, and some don't; some don't even have legs.
“The best thing for being sad," replied Merlin, beginning to puff and blow, "is to learn something."  ~ T. H. White
  The real holy trinity:  onion, celery, and bell pepper ~  all Cajun Chefs

Offline mrbiscoop

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 950
  • Darwins +32/-2
  • Faith is not a virtue!
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #519 on: August 06, 2014, 09:59:01 PM »
BS,
     How old is the Earth?

I do not know. Why? How is that relevant to this thread?

   Microevolution  over long, sometimes vast, periods of time produces macroevolution. If you think the earth is somewhere between 6-8 thousand years old then there is no evolutionary mechanism that could produce the diversity of life that exists today.
   Give me your best guess, based on whatever you want, of how old the earth is.

Still waiting on an answer.
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
              -Emo Philips

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6612
  • Darwins +789/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #520 on: August 06, 2014, 10:06:23 PM »
Is this process you describe capable of producing, for example, new functional organs and extremities? If so, how do you know that? What scientific evidence do you have that demonstrates this could account for a soup-to-humans evolution? What experiments have been conducted?

Yep, it creates new organs. Now, if you're thinking "How did the genes know to make a new organ?", then you don't understand evolution. Organs come about from gradual changes, and those changes happen to be beneficial, the organism gets a new organ out of the deal. Researchers are able to follow the slow evolution of various life forms over time because of fossils, and what they find in the fossils is consistent with the performance of genes.

Nope, no experiments. This is mostly because no scientist has ever been given a grant to study something for a million years. Too spendy. So we have to settle for observation rather than experimentation. Though experiments via computer programs designed to simulate evolution have shown the ability to create new capabilities that were not programmed in by humans.

Before you have a hissy fit about the lack of experimentation, are you equally upset that we haven't created a giant sun here on earth to make sure our understanding of the one out there in space is accurate. Or are you fairly happy with just observing and confident in the assessment science has made on the subject?

You are allowed to be curious and have your doubts. That's a good attitude to have about science. But if you think that the tens of thousands, or more likely hundreds of thousands, of people who have entered science and studied various aspects of evolution have all conspired to hoodwink us for some nefarious reason, you are overestimating the ability of that many people to keep their mouths shut. If it were indeed a big conspiracy of lies, methinks a few spy-type theists would go underground, get a science "education" in paleontology or genetics and then go public and reveal all the lies, and provide proof for such lies. But maybe theists just aren't all that up on finding out what is true or something. I dunno.

Everything relevant sciences find points to evolution. It is consistent with not only paleontology and biology/genetics, but also with other findings in geology, chemistry, astronomy, plate tectonics, climatology, etc. And nothing points to a young earth, let alone big floods or other fantastic stories.

You cannot base entire scientific disciplines on lies. You can base entire pseudo-scientific disciplines on lies (astrology, for instance) but not real science, using real observation, real study, real research. And driven by real curiosity.

Today the European Space Agency, using real science, put a probe into orbit around a tiny little comet a couple of hundred million miles from earth. That is real science doing real things with real knowledge. Geneticists have no way to put tiny microscopes in orbit around DNA molecules in our bodies. If they could, I'm sure they would. But the sciences you don't like, don't agree with, are exactly the same quality as the science being done in outer space right now. It is done with the same care, the same concern for accuracy, the same concern for the truth. And every discovery in science is taken with a grain of salt until the evidence for any given discovery becomes so overwhelming that there is little chance of alternative explanations. And evolution is just that.

Keep in mind that if your god is real and did all this life stuff, he also invented the parasitic fungi that kill ants by infecting their living bodies and slowly killing them so that they can fruit and distribute spores. It looks like this:



Evolution, completely lacking in human morals, does whatever the heck it wants. You and I can go "yuck" and tell ourselves we would never harm innocent creatures like that, but evolution has no control over what happens. If there is anywhere the phrase "shit happens" applies universally, it is within evolution. There is no control, no guidance, only those things that are possible and those things that work. It isn't pretty. But we are here because it functions well enough to make humans who are smart enough to invent morals and go all judgmental on evolution's ass. But we can't stop it.

You have accepted a belief system that contradicts evolution, along with the current scientific thinkings about astronomy, geology and many other fields. You have accepted as true a set of stories that must discount both research and reality. You know, the parts of reality that shouldn't be there if your story is true, like the always consistent fossil fields, and the living organisms older than 6,000 years, stuff like that.

So whatever flavor of religion you adhere to, it is one that discounts a large body of scientific evidence solely because if that evidence is true, your religion is wrong, at least at the level of basic details. Evolution doesn't say there is no god. That's is not within its purview. It says life evolved to its present state over a period of several billion years, that it is still evolving, and that the evidence for such things is overwhelming. But it makes no statement about gods. Because researchers haven't found any sign of one yet. So science has nothing to say on the subject.

Your job, should you choose to do it, is to continue denying that it is true, and to concoct a long series of one and two sentence rebuttals every day for the rest of your life. Your job is to remain incredulous that eyes could form at all, that billions of years have passed since the planet was formed, wonder little about why we have an appendix, and deny that any rational explanations are true. And while that will keep you busy for awhile, it won't do you any good, because you are requiring yourself to remain ignorant of a large body of knowledge, merely to placate your religious opinion.

Which is fine. Just don't be so frickin' surprised that not everyone agrees with you. We have plenty of reasons to think otherwise, but none of them include deliberately pissing off the theists. Thats a byproduct of learning, and we won't apologize for it.
Jesus, the cracker flavored treat!

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2756
  • Darwins +222/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: Please cross The Pond, please cross The Pond...
« Reply #521 on: August 07, 2014, 12:55:30 AM »
Basically, what I'm saying there, is that you are manipulating your definition of science to exclude your concept of what evolution is.

Then please show me how the scientific method was employed to demonstrate that there exists a biological process that produced life as we know it from a single celled organism.

This is the point I continue to make to no avail. If the ToE is scientific in nature, where is the scientific evidence (using the scientific method) that explains how, for example, how a snake evolved from a lizard?

You continue to make this point for reasons that I can't really understand, because like Newton's theory of Gravity, enough was discovered about gravity, to undermine everyone else's thoughts about gravity.

Just the dating systems that we've come up with, that reveal that the earth is very old, combined with the cosmological understanding that the Sun was not created on a 4th day, undermines Genesis to such an extent, that your Bible can no longer be used as a guide to creation reality. Examining the Genesis story in detail shows that the writer believed that chaotic water was separated, and the Earth's land appeared out of the water chaos. Then the sun moon and stars were pasted into the heaven., below the upper water, as signs ... or afterthoughts. The writer's story lacks so much detail, that we can't even tell if he believed that the sun was in the upper atmosphere, as generally believed at the time, from stories like Icarus. The writer also gives us no clue that man is genetically related to animals and plants.

Now, the thing is, that the writer put extensive amounts of babble into telling us that the water separated, so we can be sure that it's not in our imaginations:

[6] And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
[7] And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
[8] And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

He put all this effort into shooting himself in the foot, but no effort into mentioning planetary orbits, or giving the reader a sense that he knew that the world was a ball in empty space. This lead to ignorance through the ages, because the Bible is wrong.

Quote
Then please show me how the scientific method was employed to demonstrate that there exists a biological process that produced life as we know it from a single celled organism.

At the time Darwin wrote OoS, he really knew nothing about the mechanics of anything. He just had a fossils library and fairly detailed observations about change in Galapagos. He even muddled up his Galapagos Island data. Wallace had also developed a theory, because of his observation that a load of species would not cross the deep water trench above Australia. Some continents have gaps that create islands of evolution. New Zealand and Hawaii are also extreme examples. Lamarck had preceded him with his idea that animals willed themselves into changing.

Darwin used the fossil record, which showed changes to thousands of animals that had been extinct, and never recorded in the Bible, and the changes in morphology of birds and lizards in Galapagos, to deduce that it could be explained by gradual changes, in groups that had been separated. Remember that Darwin had come from UK, which is such a fairyland of non-evolution that the diversity on any other continent would have impressed him.

You have asserted that the belief in the mechanics of evolution is an assumption. It was never an assumption to Darwin or anyone else. It's something we have been forced to believe, by looking at the evidence. We have not been let down, either. As knowledge of DNA increases, faults in the theory are not being found, but instead many mechanisms that make it seem more plausible are being found.

We have been forced to believe many things which appear ridiculous, by observing the facts around us. QM is about as absurd as it gets, but physicists just use the equations that work, without having a clue why they would work - having absolutely no proven interpretation of how reality is. Therein lies a big hurdle for your argument from incredulity. QM points to a multiverse, or something working through trial and error. So, it doesn't matter how ridiculous it seems that something might genetically evolve, there is another problem lurking, that we may be forced to also accept.

So, as humans face the idea that there many be infinite parallel universes, you are still languishing with the idea that God separated some water, and pasted the sun and moon into the sky on the 4th day.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 01:32:58 AM by Add Homonym »
Humans, in general, don't waste any opportunity to be unfathomably stupid - Dr Cynical.