Re: Evolution
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:08 am
Another day in the Universe
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/
https://www.onthenatureofthings.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2046
exactly.
I don't know about that.noddy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:28 amexactly.
this is only a problem for some flavours of religion, a god that recedes - with science its the ho hum status quo, every answer triggers another question.
noddy's point exactly, no one does.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:35 amI don't know about that.noddy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:28 amexactly.
this is only a problem for some flavours of religion, a god that recedes - with science its the ho hum status quo, every answer triggers another question.
How many links do you wantSimple Minded wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 2:03 am The real question, that all y'all are dancing around is, and to chicken too type........ if creationism is real, who were God's parents?
I've yet to figure out noddy's point. He's sort of all over the map
I've never understood this argument. If God did something what are we supposed to do about it.Although "God dun it!" seems to end the curious inquiry for many, and allows them the peace of mind to get back to the more important aspect of life, like milking the chickens....
I think science of the gaps is ultimately a strawmannoddy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:28 amexactly.
this is only a problem for some flavours of religion, a god that recedes - with science its the ho hum status quo, every answer triggers another question.
not at all - your just confused because your cut and paste arguments about what i believe have nothing to do with anything.Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 8:42 pmI've yet to figure out noddy's point. He's sort of all over the map
\
BUT HE DOESNT BELIEVE WHAT I SAID HE BELIEVES
No we don't.noddy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:33 am not at all - your just confused because your cut and paste arguments about what i believe have nothing to do with anything.
which leaves the rest of it an exercise in absurdity.
i believe nothing - we have geology and fossils, we have dna, we have a documented tree of life,
Correct if I'm wrong.we have some theories "which may" account for that.
its pretty simple, no belief required.
huge swathes of things we dont know about, massive gaps in the story of infinity - which is hardly surprising and doesnt matter, we plug onwards, one turtle at a time.
we can summarise 35 pages as follows.
A hypothesis that after 150+ years subsisting on might haves is a hypothesis we should discard. And, we should definitely not call it science.BUT HE DOESNT BELIEVE WHAT I SAID HE BELIEVES
its moving beyond comical to retarded.
yes we do.Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:43 amNo we don't.noddy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:33 am not at all - your just confused because your cut and paste arguments about what i believe have nothing to do with anything.
which leaves the rest of it an exercise in absurdity.
i believe nothing - we have geology and fossils, we have dna, we have a documented tree of life,
your problem is you think Evolution is about abiogenisis, I studied biology for 3 years and that topic was a half a day in first year - its been discussed more by you here than I have ever been involved with in my entire life, its really not that interesting. we dont know.Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:43 amCorrect if I'm wrong.we have some theories "which may" account for that.
its pretty simple, no belief required.
huge swathes of things we dont know about, massive gaps in the story of infinity - which is hardly surprising and doesnt matter, we plug onwards, one turtle at a time.
we can summarise 35 pages as follows.
You believe:
1. Evolution is science
2. But we don't know the mechanism
Do you see the inherent conflict? A lot of your statements have problems because you appear to be trying to bridge the gaps and round out the square pegs.
Also, almost all evolutionists claim it is science, when it is not, which is the real problem. It also appears to be impossible.
nope. ive been through all this before and you ignore it because their is no cut and paste talking point to refute it.Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:43 amA hypothesis that after 150+ years subsisting on might haves is a hypothesis we should discard. And, we should definitely not call it science.
BUT HE DOESNT BELIEVE WHAT I SAID HE BELIEVES
its moving beyond comical to retarded.
well, in hindsight, i dont think that was my point - just that their is a point where anyone claiming authority does need to invoke a circuit breaker on the endless "why" questions.Simple Minded wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 2:41 pmnoddy's point exactly, no one does.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:35 amI don't know about that.noddy wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 7:28 amexactly.
this is only a problem for some flavours of religion, a god that recedes - with science its the ho hum status quo, every answer triggers another question.
Although "God dun it!" seems to end the curious inquiry for many, and allows them the peace of mind to get back to the more important aspect of life, like milking the chickens....
No we do not.
No, I don't. Evolution is about fungus turning into Elephants.your problem is you think Evolution is about abiogenisis,
Some people say otherwise and consider it to be science. That is a trend.I studied biology for 3 years and that topic was a half a day in first year - its been discussed more by you here than I have ever been involved with in my entire life, its really not that interesting. we dont know.
It's pretty much impossible. As I have cited numerous times, you can't even define what a species is, which means you can't define speciation.we are very interested in biochemistry and the mechanisms behind cells and dna and will continue to throw billions of research at it.
so no, i dont "believe in evolution" .. i do believe in species changing into other species is pretty much garunteed,
More is obviously not possible. Everything has a limit. We've been breeding race horses for centuries, the lap times hit DMR a long time ago, countless more examples of this.the mechanisms of successful breeding works to change small things, as you say, we used to call that breeding. do it for hundreds of years and wolves become pugs, do it for millions of years, more is obviously possible.
Nope.their are transitionary fossils, hence creationists have dropped that argument.
Citation needed.their are creatures that are areas of grey between species - can sort of breed, but the offspring arent viable , etc.
Nope, more strawman. Evolution must be testable in a lab, like any other hypothesis. So far the failure rate is 100%.we have pages of information you ignore with "but i cant make a new species in my kitchen" commentary.
Nope, I've asked repeatedly to all comers how you determine speciation, and if your method satisfies the scientific method, and have had zero replies, going on 15 years all over the internet.nope. ive been through all this before and you ignore it because their is no cut and paste talking point to refute it.
Absolutely not.we dont study evolution much, its a side effect of all the things we do study, its not going anywhere, its an unstoppable requirement for the huge amount of science discovering new things about life on earth.
Biochemistry and DNA work very well without fungus turning into Elephants. All known science shows that in nature biochemistry and DNA work very hard to have fungus stay fungus and Elephants stay Elephantsbiochemistry and dna work is the biggest area of new discoveries and medical treatments , food supplies and many more things besides, its unstoppable and will continue to flesh out the chemical nature of our existence
Show me how a mining company found out that fungus turn into Elephants.nothing to do with evolution, yet everything to do with evolution, its not even up for discussion.
mining companies throw billions at drilling/excavating and find fossils that change the evidence, unstoppable, nothing to do with evolution.
Finding new species does not tell us how the species came to be.biologists are always finding and documenting new species, nothing to do with evolution, yet everything to do with it.
Creationists invented chemistry. Creationists love chemistryi believe you might have tried to stop chemistry when it was just alchemy and loons blowing themselves up in their sheds in an attempt to change lead into gold.
Nope, have no idea why you would say that.you probably wanted electronic engineering stopped when it was eccentric english millionaires electrocuting their staff and doing hideous things to dead bodies.
Evolution isn't going anywhere because it can't. Fungus don't turn into Elephants. You wasted a whole blog post and posted zero science to support your claims.evolution isnt going anywhere, it cant, you are shouting at the wind.
Actually your side struggles with that issue.
As many as you are willing to post!Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 8:40 pmHow many links do you wantSimple Minded wrote: ↑Mon Nov 09, 2020 2:03 am The real question, that all y'all are dancing around is, and to chicken too type........ if creationism is real, who were God's parents?
Yep!noddy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:33 am
we can summarise 35 pages as follows.
BUT HE DOESNT BELIEVE WHAT I SAID HE BELIEVES
its moving beyond comical to retarded.
Thats how I read it. I might not have capture the thought well.noddy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 3:06 am
well, in hindsight, i dont think that was my point - just that their is a point where anyone claiming authority does need to invoke a circuit breaker on the endless "why" questions.
mostly i think creationists are horrified by the thought of us being chemistry, the story about us having souls and being special and different to god would be less clear if we are reducable.
im actually uncertain it makes much difference - stack enough complexity and randomness together and the reducibility of even mechanical systems becomes moot.
Wow!Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:57 am
Actually your side struggles with that issue.
This is going to hurt.
F6rd4HEdffw
I believe Mr. Lennox has a checkmate.Simple Minded wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:20 pm
Wow!
Expert mind reading...... and.... sensitive virtual empathy in one post....
Mr. Perfect, you are outdoing yourself!
I think we can get it down to 2.
In other words, I believe this means infinite Gods.These ideas are incomprehensible to some, but they are simple. It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God, and to know that we may converse with Him as one man converses with another, and that He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ Himself did;
What would be an example of thatSimple Minded wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:00 pm
Yep!
Add in also: "HE DOESN'T BELIEVE WHAT HE SAID BELIEVES!"
That's why I say Zack is a young Mr. Perfect.
Both are expert mind readers who know when someone else does not believe what they type, or when they are lying about the life experiences you have actually lived thru.
Only Zack and Mr. Perfect know what REAL Dems, Repubs, Scientists, Theologians, Gays, Queers, Americans, Whites, Blacks, etc. think or know. Both are experts when deciphering all those listed are either lying or telling the truth.
Ya gotta admire their consistency of faith.
we moved past the copy n paste of evidence 20 pages ago, you dont read it, its not worthy anyones time to play that game.Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 11:08 pmIn other words you don't have any science to support evolution. After 150+ years you don't have a single solitary example of it.
Mr. Perfect wrote: ↑Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:57 amActually your side struggles with that issue.
This is going to hurt.