Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?
CreationEvolutionHeadlines ^ | September 10, 2008

Posted on 09/11/2008 9:55:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Sept 10, 2008 — Astrobiologist David Deamer believes that life can spontaneously emerge without design, but he thinks lay people are too uneducated to understand how this is possible, so he gives them the watered-down version of Darwin’s natural selection instead, which he knows is inadequate to explain the complexity of life. That’s what he seemed to be telling reporter Susan Mazur in an interview for the Scoop (New Zealand). Is the lay public really too dense for the deeper knowledge of how evolution works?...

(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: 2smart2fall4it; atheistagenda; creation; crevo; darwin; evolution; god; intelligentdesign; scientism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,651-1,7001,701-1,7501,751-1,800 ... 2,051-2,064 next last
To: js1138

Your quotes and some comments…

“Evolution is equivalent to playing in a casino where you collect your winnings but don’t have to pay your losses.”

Sounds excellent!!! Do you have some examples? I wish evolution could get ME a life or even a job like that. All the ones at Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, et al have evaporated for the time being. Those lucky execs said “hasta luego” with their lucre thanks to arrangements designed by intelligent, if devious, living beings. They were able to profitably opt out and leave us with the bill.

But in the big casino of evolution, living things can not opt out, can not exit. They have to keep playing. More importantly, as even you seemed to imply (and I would agree), in the long run the player WILL lose: “Now all you need to do is think about the fact that casinos don’t need to cheat in order to make money.” For every prisoner of this casino (and they’re all prisoners)…game over.

The never-observed mutation which theoretically hits the jackpot of increased INFORMATION and function (one step of many required to become a game-changer, a new KIND of organism) would later experience other mutations which would cancel its “winnings.” (As I recall, even evolutionary biologists admit that the great majority of observed mutations are deleterious, with the rest appearing to be neutral in effect.) It would be like one step forward, two steps back. You never get there.

And besides, drawing a straight flush in poker or cranking three cherries on a slot machine are just dumb, meaningless but probabilistically foreseeable events. They don’t seem at all comparable to creating INFORMATION, which necessitates a developer, a sender and a receiver/interpreter, all acting in concert to achieve a GOAL.

The cards and the cherries have no goal.

Your casino analogy just isn’t helping me understand evolution.


1,701 posted on 09/22/2008 4:31:38 PM PDT by MartyK (Hey, don't blame me. BLAME EVOLUTION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1694 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
"Shoddy thinking is reading a pubmed abstract about phylogenetic comparison and thinking that they actually TESTED mutation rather than ASSUMING it. And then Gibsoning the article to try to make it say that mutation is not random, when they never even tested mutation."

Again, the reason I quoted that article was to demonstrate that mutation is not random as you had said. You have already admitted that you use the word 'random' when the word 'probabilistic' is the correct term to accurately describe the phenomenon.

You are either a fool or utterly dishonest. Either way, misrepresenting mutation as being 'random' when it is probabilistic shows you have no interest in approaching the subject honestly.

1,702 posted on 09/22/2008 4:37:27 PM PDT by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1449 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
now that I have demonstrated that partisans on both sides of the debate have acknowledged that Dawkins was stumped by the question

Please. What you demonstrated is that you could find one guy, who doesn't have any particular standing in the field and frankly seems a little erratic and a bit of a wacko, to agree with your interpretation. I find Dawkins' own account of what went on far more persuasive.

1,703 posted on 09/22/2008 4:42:51 PM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1699 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
An article where they didn't even TEST mutation was your source that mutation wasn't random. All this source attests to is that you didn't understand the Science, but were willing to chop out the section you thought said what you wanted it to say. A Charlie Gibson quote.

Ten posts later you are still confused about what the authors did, maybe if you read the abstract instead of chopping it up to quote it out of context you would have realized that they assumed mutation based upon common ancestry by looking at the gene, as it exists, in eleven different species. They never actually tested mutation to see if its probabilistic pattern of mutation where any mistake can and will happen, but some are more common than others.

Random, as a definition, includes probabilistic. Your objection is as ridiculous as saying someone who says “7 card stud is a random game” had no interest in approaching the subject honestly.

Mutation is random in the sense that it is probabilistic. Some mutations are made more often than others just as some errors in speaking are more common than others. Copying some DNA is like trying to say “rubber baby buggy bumpers” fast, mistakes are a little more common in those sequences. This doesn't mean that each mutation is somehow preordained and will happen every time, it is probabilistic.

1,704 posted on 09/22/2008 4:46:14 PM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1702 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; mrjesse
“I asked you to show the Sun orbiting the Earth. You said that you agreed with the 2.1 degree lag if the Sun orbited the earth. Why are you trying to show it with a rotating Earth, you said that you couldn't do that way and I have to agree.” [excerpt]
Because that is the model we are working with right now.

Maybe some other time we can work with the other model.
(I plan to do a full particle sim on both models, but I'm to busy at the moment)

“Then falsify their claims, win a Nobel :) Will you pardon me if I don't hold my breath while I am waiting?” [excerpt]
And have my name next to Al Gore's?

What kind of sicko are you!

“Creationism isn't science.” [excerpt]
We're not talking about Creationism.

Remember your alleged 2.1° caused by the rotation of the earth?

“I fail to see why you are so upset : ) I am simply agreeing that it doesn't matter whether the sun is orbiting the Earth or the Earth is merely spinning. It is essentially the same thing.” [excerpt]
“Your assertion that there is no difference between the Sun orbiting the Earth and the Earth spinning is scientifically false.”
“Not in a two body model : ) ” [excerpt]
We're not talking about a model.
We are talking about the Sun and the Earth.

Put yer strawmen away.

“What does a laser ring gyro prove in a two body model? That either the Earth or the Gyro is rotating? It is the same difference as the Earth/Sun model.” [excerpt]
We're still not talking about a model.

Your slight of hand tricks are pathetic.

“Really you should do yourself a favor and visit the Library at least once in your life : )” [excerpt]
I used to go to a library on a regular basis when I lived within walking distance.

“You don't believe Joshua 10:13? "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."” [excerpt]
I see your bringing up religion in a scientific debate again.

I guess your just so drawn to Christ that you cannot help but bring up the Bible at all hours of the day.

“Obviously the Bible claims that the Sun was moving around the Earth. You do believe the Bible don't you? It is your ultimate authority isn't it? LOL If you don't believe what the Bible says, then you have my apology.” [excerpt]
So does this mean you believe in a global flood that destroyed all of mankind except 8 persons?

Your ignorance of the Bible is appalling.
“All you have to do is go outside with a transit and an accurate chronometer and take some careful measurements, no faith required. That is the difference between you and me, I believe in reality and you believe in fiction.” [excerpt]
That will not tell you the difference in angle between the Suns apparent position and its actual position.

That will only tell you how fast the earth is rotating.

I believe the real meaning of your little exercise is to trick people no smarter than yourself into thinking they just tested and proved that the rotation of the Earth causes a 2.1° difference in apparent position.

You've admitted to slight of hand trickery before, I have no reason to believe thats not what you've been doing all along.


I must compliment you, LeGrande.

You are the very embodiment of the evolutionary dogma.

Fervently defending as science that which is nothing more than faith.
1,705 posted on 09/22/2008 4:52:50 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1700 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Thank you for the input. I understand the concept that ‘living to reproduce’ shaves the balance of the dice. But perhaps there’s something more. If multiple mutations are required simultaneously, perhaps there is a sensible, albeit, unconventional explanation.

This may sound way out. I suspect that mind over matter may play a small role in mutations. Even a slight role could shift mutations drastically over time. The will of the parents may, perhaps one in a thousand times, shift the odds a fraction. [And subtle intervention of God as well.]

There could be other factors. I’m just not in an argumentive mood tonight. Nor am I ‘playing it safe’ either. — FRegards ....


1,706 posted on 09/22/2008 5:12:39 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1678 | View Replies]

To: MartyK
But in the big casino of evolution, living things can not opt out, can not exit. They have to keep playing. More importantly, as even you seemed to imply (and I would agree), in the long run the player WILL lose:...

Most players do lose. Nearly every species we know about is extinct. Estimates of extinct species approach 99 percent of all known species, based on the fossil record.

However, life continues because reproduction overall balances death. What this dynamic produces is changes over time in the characteristics of populations.

1,707 posted on 09/22/2008 5:12:50 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1701 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Thank you for the input. I understand the concept that ‘living to reproduce’ shaves the balance of the dice. But perhaps there’s something more. If multiple mutations are required simultaneously, perhaps there is a sensible, albeit, unconventional explanation.

If multiple simultaneous mutations are "required" for a species to survive, then the species will go extinct. But this is not how evolution works.

What does happen, and has been observed in controlled laboratory experiments, is that neutral mutations accumulate. This happens all the time in every species, including humans.

Occasionally a mutation occurs that makes unexpected "sense" of one or more neutral mutations, adding some new capability. In retrospect it looks as if three mutations occurred in sequence "in order to" provide the new function. But there is not the slightest evidence of foresight. Else why the tens of thousands of discarded mutations.

This scenario is not theoretical. It has been observed, and may well result in a Nobel Prize.

1,708 posted on 09/22/2008 5:21:47 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1706 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Interesting. I’ll save your post in my evolution file, along with your post about protein cells.

So we are thinking beyond random mutations then. Glad to hear that. As long as our minds keep reaching, we’ll grow. Without Darwin’s Theory, it would have been difficult to reach this point. At the same time, I think that conventional thinking can ultimately slow down progress. — FRegards for now.


1,709 posted on 09/22/2008 5:50:09 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1708 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Maybe some other time we can work with the other model. (I plan to do a full particle sim on both models, but I'm to busy at the moment)

LOL Then why are you wasting your time on FR?

And have my name next to Al Gore's?
What kind of sicko are you!

Hmm, you actually have a point. You are a Freeper which puts you miles ahead of Al Gore : ) I suppose I should apologize for potentially comparing you to Al Gore. That was a below the belt shot.

There was a time when winning the Nobel meant something.

We're still not talking about a model.

Your graphics are models, math is modeling. What are you talking about?

I guess your just so drawn to Christ that you cannot help but bring up the Bible at all hours of the day.

That is how you avoid answering the question, by calling me a Christian? Your cognitive dissonance must be really be acting up.

I used to go to a library on a regular basis when I lived within walking distance.

It doesn't do you any good if you don't read the books : )

So does this mean you believe in a global flood that destroyed all of mankind except 8 persons?
Your ignorance of the Bible is appalling.

Isn't that what you believe happened about 4000 years ago? I play a game that is about that old. Somehow the Chinese managed to avoid that flood. Interesting isn't it : )

That will not tell you the difference in angle between the Suns apparent position and its actual position.

That will only tell you how fast the earth is rotating.

No, I want you to look at the solar system. You can derive everything you need to know. Remember the moons of Jupiter reference (that you didn't want to talk about) it might amaze you what can be deduced from the moons of Jupiter. Galileo did it and so can you. I have faith in you : )

You've admitted to slight of hand trickery before, I have no reason to believe thats not what you've been doing all along.

Yes but it was the truth. Sometimes people have to be shaken out of their preconceived ideas in order to 'see' reality. You will need a lot of shaking :( You wouldn't happen to be a shaker would you?

Fervently defending as science that which is nothing more than faith.

Like I said before, why don't you falsify evolution? If you Creationists are right it should be easy enough to get some DNA samples and make some comparison tests. If you creationists are right, there should no be any commonality in the DNA from different Species. Simple.

But you already know that, don't you? That is why you won't even attempt to falsify TOE. That is the essence of Science, falsification. What we can't falsify we accept, what we can falsify we reject. Rejection is the opposite of faith, but I don't suppose that makes any sense to you.

1,710 posted on 09/22/2008 5:51:26 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1705 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Fichori - Because that is the model we are working with right now.

Fichori - Maybe some other time we can work with the other model. (I plan to do a full particle sim on both models, but I'm to busy at the moment)

Fichori - We're not talking about a model. We are talking about the Sun and the Earth.

I give. I don't think that I am equipped to deal with this kind of cognitive dissonance. May I suggest professional help?

1,711 posted on 09/22/2008 6:04:03 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1705 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I’ll agree that the Amish aren’t perfect, but neither is our public school system. I, like most people, respect the Amish in general. Isn’t America a great country to have such freedom that people can choose to be Amish and to raise their children that way too? — FRegards ....


1,712 posted on 09/22/2008 6:04:33 PM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1684 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
So we are thinking beyond random mutations then.

Be careful to read what I said and not what you'd like to hear. Mutations have been statistically studied for a century without finding any evidence that they have any correlation whatsoever with the variations that become fixed in populations.

All the evidence is that mutations traverse the available search space.

1,713 posted on 09/22/2008 6:22:09 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1709 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; mrjesse
“I fail to see why you are so upset : ) I am simply agreeing that it doesn't matter whether the sun is orbiting the Earth or the Earth is merely spinning. It is essentially the same thing.” [excerpt]
Your assertion that there is no difference between the Sun orbiting the Earth and the Earth spinning is scientifically false.
Not in a two body model : ) ” [excerpt]
We're still not talking about a model.
We are talking about the Sun and the Earth.
“Your graphics are models, math is modeling. What are you talking about?” [excerpt]
We weren't talking about graphics or math.

We were talking about the Sun and Earth.

“I guess your just so drawn to Christ that you cannot help but bring up the Bible at all hours of the day.”
“That is how you avoid answering the question, by calling me a Christian? Your cognitive dissonance must be really be acting up.” [excerpt]
I satirically concluded that you were drawn to Christ, not that you were a Christian.

Seems to me the only cards you have left are of the strawman variety.

“It doesn't do you any good if you don't read the books : )” [excerpt]
To read and be misinformed is much worse than to not read.

“Isn't that what you believe happened about 4000 years ago? I play a game that is about that old. Somehow the Chinese managed to avoid that flood. Interesting isn't it : )” [excerpt]
The Chinese think they missed the flood and LeGrande thinks the rotation of the Earth causes a 2.1° discrepancy in the Sun's apparent position.

That is interesting!

“No, I want you to look at the solar system. You can derive everything you need to know. Remember the moons of Jupiter reference (that you didn't want to talk about) it might amaze you what can be deduced from the moons of Jupiter. Galileo did it and so can you. I have faith in you : )” [excerpt]
The physics of Jupiter and its moons are completely different than the Sun/Earth relationship.

When your standing on Jupiter watching the Sun and Jupiter's moons go by, we can compare that system with Earth and its moon, etc.

“Yes but it was the truth. Sometimes people have to be shaken out of their preconceived ideas in order to 'see' reality. You will need a lot of shaking :( You wouldn't happen to be a shaker would you?” [excerpt]
If you really think you can convince me of your absurd ideas, you've got a rubber brick for a brain.

“Like I said before, why don't you falsify evolution? If you Creationists are right it should be easy enough to get some DNA samples and make some comparison tests. If you creationists are right, there should no be any commonality in the DNA from different Species. Simple.” [excerpt]
Faith cannot be scientifically falsified.

Creation requires commonality due to there being a common designer.

“But you already know that, don't you? That is why you won't even attempt to falsify TOE. That is the essence of Science, falsification. What we can't falsify we accept, what we can falsify we reject. Rejection is the opposite of faith, but I don't suppose that makes any sense to you.” [excerpt]
Like I said before, Faith cannot be scientifically falsified.
Neither can a philosophical assumption.

Evolution is nothing more than a mixture of the two.

Why are you frantically trying to change the subject from your pet 2.1°?

1,714 posted on 09/22/2008 6:23:55 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1710 | View Replies]

To: js1138
The Nobel Prize awaits the lab that developed the citrate plus e.coli strain, awaiting only the discerning of the exact metabolic pathway of citrate digestion and what was changed to bring about that new metabolic pathway.

We may not see their paper for a couple years, or see the Nobel Prize for a few years after that....but it will come.

1,715 posted on 09/22/2008 6:33:35 PM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1708 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

That is the work I had in mind. Did I distort it to the point it could not be recognized?


1,716 posted on 09/22/2008 6:57:05 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1715 | View Replies]

To: js1138

Regarding your words: “Most (about 99 percent of) players do lose…. However, life continues because reproduction overall balances death. What this dynamic produces is changes over time in the characteristics of populations.”

Any thoughts on how the dynamics of a reproductive system mutated into existence before its first owner died?

Also, you seem to be implying that evolution is about population characteristics changing over time. If you are, then I guess we have no issue. We have tall people and short people, dachshunds and Great Danes, cockatoos and canaries, Herefords and Holsteins. Why, we even have nylon-eating bacteria and non-nylon-eating bacteria. And we can make quite accurate scientific predictions regarding the results of breeding or breeding experiments and OBSERVE those results.

But evolution isn’t about causing great variety within the populations of different kinds of living things.

It’s about causing the populations to begin with.

Any OBSERVATIONS?


1,717 posted on 09/22/2008 7:24:10 PM PDT by MartyK (Hey, don't blame me. BLAME EVOLUTION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1707 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Sounds as though you and js1138 have found some common ground, which is nice.

And apparently you have Charles in Charge to thank - “Without Darwin’s Theory, it would have been difficult to reach this point.”

I’m sure all three of us would find common ground in desiring the protection and advancement of science. But I was wondering what else we owe to Darwin in our beloved but besieged field of science.

Maybe I’m having an early onset of Alzheimer’s, but I can’t seem to remember one, single, solitary scientific discovery or technological development, that has had a real impact (good or bad) on our every day lives, for which belief in Darwinian or neo-Darwinian theory was indispensable.

Can you?


1,718 posted on 09/22/2008 7:30:37 PM PDT by MartyK (Hey, don't blame me. BLAME EVOLUTION!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1709 | View Replies]

To: js1138

not at all.


1,719 posted on 09/22/2008 7:43:52 PM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1716 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
“I give. I don't think that I am equipped to deal with this kind of cognitive dissonance. May I suggest professional help?”
Hey, not a bad idea!

You should get to the doctor immediately!

Nobody should have to experience such cognitive dissonance alone as you have been.


Oh, while the doctors are working on your head, be sure to have them remove the rubber brick.

When you get back from surgery, be sure to stay away from the strawmen.

They might make your cognitive dissonance come back.
1,720 posted on 09/22/2008 7:47:40 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1711 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
LOL What you mean is that you cut and pasted a quote from somewhere on line.

Actually I didn't cut and paste my calculation for apparent angular displacement due to secular aberration. I did double check your claimed 150MPS (not hours as I absent mindedly typed last time [grin]) on a couple websites, but then I calculated all the rest myself based on the speed of light, the distance of 1AU, and the 150 miles/second, and so on.

What was my untrue claim? I simply claimed that apparent position does not equal actual position.

That's a lie - you didn't simply claim -- you claimed much more then that!

you said LOL The 2.1 degrees is is exactly related to the light-time correction and the distance of the earth from the the sun. If the Sun was closer the angle would be smaller, and if the sun was further away the angle would be larger.
You saidThe 20 arc seconds you are talking about is the displacement of the suns masses orbit around the barycenter. It is not due to stellar aberration.
You're just outright wrong here - see here or do your own research - but Stellar Aberration is unquestionably do the the observer's transverse velocity and is about 20 arcseconds.
You said: The suns actual position and gravitational position do line up. The apparent position doesn't though, it is off by 2.1 degrees ...
And in case you might say that I was just confused, that's not possible either because I have been continually telling you things like:
But you claimed that the angular displacement between the sun's gravitational pull and optical position is 2.1 degrees, at any given instant, without waiting 8.3 minutes!
(I have told you many many times things along those many times. If you doubt I will gladly provide more links.)

In any case, not only are you claiming that the apparent angular displacement of the sun is 2.1 degrees but you have been claiming that it was due to the fact that the earth rotates 2.1 degrees in the time it takes light to fly the 1AU.

Furthermore, I have made it unquestionably clear that that's what I thought you were saying, and at no point did you come out and say "That's not what I'm saying."

So you've been claiming 2.1 degrees and I've been telling you that I understand you to be claiming 2.1 degrees at any given instant for an observer on earth.

You may change your mind but there is no question that you have been communicating by what you said and by what you didn't say that the sun is apparently angularly displaced by 2.1 degrees due to the fact that the earth rotates 2.1 degrees in the 8.3 minutes it takes the suns light to reach the earth, for an observer on the earth at any given instant in time.

Are you saying that you were wrong, or are you standing by your longstanding claim that if one had a gravity meter which would tell the exact actual position of the sun that it would (for an observer on the earth at any instant in time) read 2.1 degrees ahead of a regular sundial?

And no I am not going to do the math to show that either. I am simply trying to goad you into getting an education : )

Are you trying to goad me into getting an education by telling me lies and making me debunk them, thereby learning the truth? You're certainly not (on average) teaching me anything true by any other means. I'd really appreciate honesty though. I'm more or less ignoring your question about the increase of mass with light-speed velocities because I'm well aware of derailing tactics and this looks like one. And besides if we can't figure out a simple geometry then think how lost we could get with lightspeed weights.

-Jesse
1,721 posted on 09/22/2008 10:51:48 PM PDT by mrjesse (Could it be true? Imagine, being forgiven, and having a cause, greater then yourself, to live for!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1671 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I notice you have no data with which to contradict me.

As you had no data with which to convince me.

1,722 posted on 09/23/2008 4:45:13 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1694 | View Replies]

To: scarface367
Somehow I don't think you know what you are talking about.

"You want some FRIES with that?"

1,723 posted on 09/23/2008 4:46:24 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1696 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
The theory of evolution through natural selection is well supported by evidence.

INTERPRETATION of 'evidence'.


Are you starting to comprehend? Should I try over again and go slower?

You should show some experiments to back up what you so assuredly assert.

1,724 posted on 09/23/2008 4:48:51 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1697 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
That is the difference between you and me, I believe in reality and you believe in fiction.

Well then, since Jesus REALLY rose from the grave...

1,725 posted on 09/23/2008 4:49:54 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1700 | View Replies]

To: js1138
What does happen, and has been observed in controlled laboratory experiments, is that neutral mutations accumulate. This happens all the time in every species, including humans.

And what is the evolutionary process that keeps these 'accumulations' around until the final brick is placed?

Where is the Evolutionary 'advantage' to do so?

What is this strange, half formed THING growing in my body?

1,726 posted on 09/23/2008 4:52:51 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1708 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I, like most people, respect the Amish in general.

When the Apocalypse comes; AMISH 'skills' will insure survival.

1,727 posted on 09/23/2008 5:07:04 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1712 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I, like most people, respect the Amish in general.

When the Apocalypse comes; AMISH 'skills' will insure survival.

1,728 posted on 09/23/2008 5:07:07 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1712 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Communal cookie press education is not what America stands for.


1,729 posted on 09/23/2008 5:30:49 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1727 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
Well then, since Jesus REALLY rose from the grave...

And promised everyone that he would return 2000 years ago as a conqueror. Yeah I can see that that happened.

Elsie let me give you a clue. Elisha's bones didn't raise a dead man from the grave. Christ didn't rise from the dead and return 2000 years ago. Constantine the Emperor/Pope who put the Bible together was a cynical pagan. The Bible is a book of history mixed with myths, parables and stolen stories.

1,730 posted on 09/23/2008 5:38:15 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1725 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
To read and be misinformed is much worse than to not read.

Ignorance really must be blissful : )

The physics of Jupiter and its moons are completely different than the Sun/Earth relationship.

When your standing on Jupiter watching the Sun and Jupiter's moons go by, we can compare that system with Earth and its moon, etc.

I stand in awe of your knowledge : ) Knowing that the physics, light and gravity, are completely different on Jupiter than they are on Earth. Do you even realize that you constantly say something and then contradict yourself with your next thought?

Faith cannot be scientifically falsified.

No, but what you believe in can be : )

Why are you frantically trying to change the subject from your pet 2.1°?

I'm not. I am just waiting for your model of the Sun orbiting the earth that shows the 2.1 degree lag.

1,731 posted on 09/23/2008 5:49:04 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1714 | View Replies]

To: MartyK
But evolution isn’t about causing great variety within the populations of different kinds of living things. It’s about causing the populations to begin with. Any OBSERVATIONS

I suppose if you can change the accepted definitions of scientific terms at your whim you can win any argument.

1,732 posted on 09/23/2008 6:03:22 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1717 | View Replies]

To: Fichori; LeGrande

Fichori – Unless I’m misunderstanding your position; do you really believe that the Sun orbits a stationary and unmovable Earth?

Do you also believe that the Moon landings were a big cover up and government conspiracy and filmed and staged on a Hollywood sound stage?

Because to believe in the first would necessitated a belief in the second based on your a$$ backward and totally irrational and uniformed and uneducated understanding of basic physics, gravity and the long proven fact of a heliocentric solar system.


1,733 posted on 09/23/2008 6:05:30 AM PDT by Caramelgal (a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer except that you have actual responsibilies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1731 | View Replies]

To: mrjesse
Actually I didn't cut and paste my calculation for apparent angular displacement due to secular aberration. I did double check your claimed 150MPS (not hours as I absent mindedly typed last time [grin]) on a couple websites, but then I calculated all the rest myself based on the speed of light, the distance of 1AU, and the 150 miles/second, and so on.

My point was that you did the calculations before you found out that the Sun was moving at over 500,000 mph. Do you also know that the galaxy that the Earth is orbiting is itself orbiting the center of the Universe at a great speed? Did you know that most of the stars that you see in the sky are galaxies?

In any case, not only are you claiming that the apparent angular displacement of the sun is 2.1 degrees but you have been claiming that it was due to the fact that the earth rotates 2.1 degrees in the time it takes light to fly the 1AU.

That is essentially correct, the Earth rotates about 2.1 degrees in the time it takes light to get here from the Sun.

Are you saying that you were wrong, or are you standing by your longstanding claim that if one had a gravity meter which would tell the exact actual position of the sun that it would (for an observer on the earth at any instant in time) read 2.1 degrees ahead of a regular sundial?

You seem hung up on this 2.1 degrees that you calculated, it isn't a constant.

Are you trying to goad me into getting an education by telling me lies and making me debunk them, thereby learning the truth? You're certainly not (on average) teaching me anything true by any other means. I'd really appreciate honesty though. I'm more or less ignoring your question about the increase of mass with light-speed velocities because I'm well aware of derailing tactics and this looks like one. And besides if we can't figure out a simple geometry then think how lost we could get with lightspeed weights.

I don't think that you are capable of learning anything new that contradicts your mental map.

1,734 posted on 09/23/2008 6:13:16 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1721 | View Replies]

To: Caramelgal; Fichori

Fichori is a creationist. He believes the Earth is the center of the Universe, that it is surrounded by water and that God made the Earth 6000 years ago. Then God flooded the Earth 4000 years ago with that water that the earth is surrounded by (rain from heaven).


1,735 posted on 09/23/2008 6:23:12 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1733 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html

Also...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18753935?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

And heck why not just go to...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez

and search “phylogenetic” or “evolution”.

You apparently have a lot of homework to do.

1,736 posted on 09/23/2008 6:28:04 AM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1724 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
"You want some FRIES with that?"

Yep, now I'm sure you don't know what you're talking about.

1,737 posted on 09/23/2008 7:25:38 AM PDT by scarface367
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1723 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
And what is the evolutionary process that keeps these 'accumulations' around until the final brick is placed?

Interesting question that has been the subject of much research. The genetic code has a number synonyms -- the equivalent of the way "y" and "i" are pronounced. So many mutations have no immediate affect on fitness. The fact that neutral mutations can become fixed in a population is in observed fact, and the scenario I described has also been observed.

1,738 posted on 09/23/2008 7:53:24 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1726 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
You are either a fool or utterly dishonest. Either way, misrepresenting mutation as being 'random' when it is probabilistic shows you have no interest in approaching the subject honestly.

Dice are probabilistic rather than random.

1,739 posted on 09/23/2008 8:28:00 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1702 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande

Constantine was a believer in Sol until his conversion to Christianity. He put him on all his coins up to that point in time.

Constantine was dead by the time the great councils of Bishops decided which Books were inspired by God and included in their Bible. This was the Old Latin Bible. Not many of those around anymore.

But the Bible is the inspired work of God. It wouldn’t hurt you to read it once or twice.


1,740 posted on 09/23/2008 8:39:49 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1730 | View Replies]

To: MartyK
Maybe I’m having an early onset of Alzheimer’s, but I can’t seem to remember one, single, solitary scientific discovery or technological development, that has had a real impact (good or bad) on our every day lives, for which belief in Darwinian or neo-Darwinian theory was indispensable.

Animal testing. If all "kinds" were independent creations, testing drugs on mice would have no relevance to what would happen in humans.

Genetic testing of families. If traits are not passed from parents to children, then testing parents would provide no information about possible risks to their children.

Drug-resistant bacteria. If bacteria that were selected from being dosed didn't have increased resistance, there could be no drug-resistant bacteria.

If I spent more time in the old archives I could probably come up with some more.

1,741 posted on 09/23/2008 8:53:52 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1718 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; Fichori
I had already figured that out... ;)>

I just like to point it out for those who may still misunderstand the bigger issue.

I understand the objections to TOE by many evangelical fundamentalists and those of other faiths (including many Muslims BTW) based on their religious beliefs and their interpretations of scripture and I really don’t want to denigrate or belittle their religious faith only because I don’t hold the same religious view.

But on the other hand I want to point out that this is just the kind of thing that some (perhaps many) YEC fundamentalists would also have taught in public school or university science class rooms.

It is one thing to rationally and scientifically question or debate TOE or to even bring up Creationist or ID theories as topics of general theoretical and philosophical debate along side of the TOE, but then it’s quite another thing to teach as hard science, an Earth centered solar system and Universe, a 6,000 year old earth, the Great Flood of Noah’s time in place of plate tectonics and volcanism, a flat earth, dino’s walking along side humans, any fossils that don’t fit the Bible are fakes, etc. etc, etc. because it is based solely on their interpretation of a religious text and the OT book of Genesis in particular.

Some religions have scripturally based objections to blood transfusions and all pharmaceuticals or in eating pork or shell fish or in eating red meat on Friday’s but I’d sure not want any of my doctors to have gotten their medical degree from a medical school based solely on that particular sort of religious interpretation. I wouldn’t go out of my way to hire an Amish electrician or auto mechanic for much the same reason. (But if you are interested, ask me about the time by brother’s car broke down on a country road in SE central PA and an Amish farmer repaired his car ;)> )

I also have objections to the equally unscientifically unsound and socio-political- economically driven agenda that global warming is a singularly a man-made phenomenon, in teaching that socialism or communism is preferable to the Republic our Founders gave us in History classes, to a radical homosexual and feminist agenda in Literature classes and many other things currently being taught in public schools and universities.

But in my opinion, radical fundamentalist creationism “science” is just the opposite side of the same very bad coin.

I’m sure that many YEC fundamentalists would be very happy to have other fundamentalist YEC’s teach public school Science/Religion/Biblical interpretation to their kids but might not be so happy about having a Catholic or a Mormon science teacher teaching their kids about Science/Religion/Biblical interpretation any more than I would like a fundamentalist/YEC telling my Catholic kid that not only is the TOE evil but so is the Pope and that my kid isn’t a “real” Christian because he or she doesn’t go to the same church as the teacher.

I have no problems with religion I just don’t want anyone’s religion forced on me. And if some think that science and TOE is a religion on its own, then fine – opt out and home school or send your kid to a religious school but don’t try to skew sound science just to fit your religion.

I offer what I think is a good compromise – I’ll keep out me and my Priest and my kid’s science teacher out of your Sunday school class if you keep your Sunday school teacher and YEC Pastor out of my kid’s science class.
1,742 posted on 09/23/2008 8:55:31 AM PDT by Caramelgal (a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer except that you have actual responsibilies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1735 | View Replies]

To: Caramelgal
“Fichori – Unless I’m misunderstanding your position; do you really believe that the Sun orbits a stationary and unmovable Earth?” [excerpt]
Do I think the Sun orbits a stationary Earth?

No!
(Goodgrief, where do people get these ideas?)

By placing a laser-ring gyro on the Earth, we can know that is is spinning, at what rate and on what axis.

By observing the stars(with the knowledge that the Earth spins), we know that the Earth orbits the Sun.

“Do you also believe that the Moon landings were a big cover up and government conspiracy and filmed and staged on a Hollywood sound stage?” [excerpt]
I have not done an in depth study on the subject of moon landings (But I do know someone who has researched it), but from what I've seen, the conspiracies are just that.

I have yet to see hard evidence that the moon landings did not take place.

“Because to believe in the first would necessitated a belief in the second based on your a$$ backward and totally irrational and uniformed and uneducated understanding of basic physics, gravity and the long proven fact of a heliocentric solar system.” [excerpt]
LOL!

Theres a name for that: Geocentric Fruitcake.
1,743 posted on 09/23/2008 9:24:57 AM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1733 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
“Fichori is a creationist. He believes the Earth is the center of the Universe, that it is surrounded by water and that God made the Earth 6000 years ago. Then God flooded the Earth 4000 years ago with that water that the earth is surrounded by (rain from heaven).”
LeGrande is an atheist and habitually lies about what he assumes other people believe.

When he says I believe something, it only means that he wants me to believe that.

(i.e. he wants his debate opponents to be fruitcakes)
1,744 posted on 09/23/2008 9:30:51 AM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1735 | View Replies]

To: Caramelgal
Ping to 1735

(For some reason when I hit CRTL-V, it didn't paste your username into the box.)
1,745 posted on 09/23/2008 9:33:29 AM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1744 | View Replies]

To: Caramelgal; GodGunsGuts; mrjesse; tpanther; CommieCutter; metmom; Cvengr; Quix
“I had already figured that out... ;)>” [excerpt]
Its not what people don't know, its just that they know so much that ain't so.

“I understand the objections to TOE by many evangelical fundamentalists and those of other faiths (including many Muslims BTW) based on their religious beliefs and their interpretations of scripture and I really don’t want to denigrate or belittle their religious faith only because I don’t hold the same religious view.” [excerpt]
You forgot scientific objections.

“But on the other hand I want to point out that this is just the kind of thing that some (perhaps many) YEC fundamentalists would also have taught in public school or university science class rooms.” [excerpt]
I am a YEC and I do NOT want Creationism taught in public school.

“It is one thing to rationally and scientifically question or debate TOE or to even bring up Creationist or ID theories as topics of general theoretical and philosophical debate along side of the TOE, but then it’s quite another thing to teach as hard science, an Earth centered solar system and Universe, a 6,000 year old earth, the Great Flood of Noah’s time in place of plate tectonics and volcanism, a flat earth, dino’s walking along side humans, any fossils that don’t fit the Bible are fakes, etc. etc, etc. because it is based solely on their interpretation of a religious text and the OT book of Genesis in particular.” [excerpt]
You bring up a an interesting point.

Lets look at it from another perspective.

It is one thing to rationally and scientifically question or debate Creation or to even bring up Evolution or ID theories as topics of general theoretical and philosophical debate along side of Creation, but then it’s quite another thing to teach as hard science, a Death centered solar system and Universe, a 4.5 billion year old earth, the Great Cambrian explosion in place of plate tectonics and volcanism, an old earth, dino’s dying out millions of years ago, any fossils that don’t fit Evolution are fakes, etc. etc, etc. because it is based solely on their interpretation of a religious text and the Holy book of Darwin in particular.

Evolution requires you to have Faith in the interpretation of evidence, and that the philosophical assumptions are correct.

Empirical science is testable and does not require Faith.
Evolution is not testable and is not Empirical science.

It shouldn't be taught as science.

“I also have objections to the equally unscientifically unsound and socio-political- economically driven agenda that global warming is a singularly a man-made phenomenon, in teaching that socialism or communism is preferable to the Republic our Founders gave us in History classes, to a radical homosexual and feminist agenda in Literature classes and many other things currently being taught in public schools and universities.” [excerpt]
So how about a compromise?
Schools keep teaching all the above stuff you don't like and they also keep teaching Evolution.

Neither Global Warming nor Evolution are empirically testable.

“But in my opinion, radical fundamentalist creationism “science” is just the opposite side of the same very bad coin.” [excerpt]
So you don't want Global Warming forced down your kid's throats, but you want Evolution forced down the throats of all the Creationists kids.

“I’m sure that many YEC fundamentalists would be very happy to have other fundamentalist YEC’s teach public school Science/Religion/Biblical interpretation to their kids but might not be so happy about having a Catholic or a Mormon science teacher teaching their kids about Science/Religion/Biblical interpretation any more than I would like a fundamentalist/YEC telling my Catholic kid that not only is the TOE evil but so is the Pope and that my kid isn’t a “real” Christian because he or she doesn’t go to the same church as the teacher.” [excerpt]
Like I said before, as a YEC, I don't want Creationism being taught in public school.

“I have no problems with religion I just don’t want anyone’s religion forced on me. And if some think that science and TOE is a religion on its own, then fine – opt out and home school or send your kid to a religious school but don’t try to skew sound science just to fit your religion.” [excerpt]
Leading Evolutionists have said that Evolution is a religion.

So you want your religion(TOE) taught in public school at tax payer expense, but if any taxpayer doesn't want their children being taught your religion, they have to keep paying taxes but opt out and spend MORE money to teach their children?

“I offer what I think is a good compromise – I’ll keep out me and my Priest and my kid’s science teacher out of your Sunday school class if you keep your Sunday school teacher and YEC Pastor out of my kid’s science class.” [excerpt]
For that compromise to be fair, your kid's taxpayer funded public school science class will have to became a privately funded science class.

Otherwise, its rank hypocrisy.
(aka, business as usual)

1,746 posted on 09/23/2008 10:14:34 AM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1742 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

You captured my own view EXACTLY.


1,747 posted on 09/23/2008 10:58:24 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1746 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; Elsie
And promised everyone that he would return 2000 years ago as a conqueror. Yeah I can see that that happened.” [excerpt]
What the !
“Elsie let me give you a clue. Elisha's bones didn't raise a dead man from the grave. Christ didn't rise from the dead and return 2000 years ago. Constantine the Emperor/Pope who put the Bible together was a cynical pagan. The Bible is a book of history mixed with myths, parables and stolen stories. ” [excerpt]
LeGrande! Git yer fuut outa yer maouth!


Christ did not promise to return 2000 years ago.

2000 years ago, He promised to return, but did not give the date.

Talk about opening your mouth and removing all doubt!
1,748 posted on 09/23/2008 11:05:46 AM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1730 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

Otherwise, its rank hypocrisy.

>>>>>>> In a nutshell it’s what this all boils down to.


1,749 posted on 09/23/2008 11:56:47 AM PDT by tpanther (All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1746 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; Elsie
And promised everyone that he would return 2000 years ago as a conqueror.

Oh He did? Where? Would you mind providing the evidence to support that?

1,750 posted on 09/23/2008 12:40:19 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1730 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 1,651-1,7001,701-1,7501,751-1,800 ... 2,051-2,064 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson