|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 01/31/2006 : 18:44:26 [Permalink]
|
| Okay, thanks people. I will only touch on his argument. I don't want to get into a debate with him on evolution. I want that to be a real debate. He has already turned me down in today's mail, but I will take one last shot at him. In any case, our correspondences to date will surly make their way into our fan mail... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2006 : 21:35:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kil
Okay, thanks people. I will only touch on his argument. I don't want to get into a debate with him on evolution. I want that to be a real debate. He has already turned me down in today's mail, but I will take one last shot at him. In any case, our correspondences to date will surly make their way into our fan mail...
We're looking forward to it.
 |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
byhisgrace88
Formerly "creation88"
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2006 : 23:23:19 [Permalink]
|
Here's my thought....
When I hear about the simalarities between the DNA of humans and apes, I think less of "We must be the same thing, only slightly more evolved", and more "We must come from the same place/person." It all depends on your world view. Considering my world view is that the God of the Bible created the heavens and the earth, and all that is within it; I tend to look at these simalarities as more the handy work of God.
I realize that this is not an argument, it is an opinion. I am not trying to make an argument right now. Here's what I want to know. Do any of you see any logical fallacies in my opinion, keeping in mind my world view. If so, I would love to hear, and learn from it.
Also: When discussing this very topic with a friend recently; he threw out the idea that we also share 50% of our DNA with a Banana. Can anyone confirm or deny the validity of this statement. Because at least in my un-educated point of view; this would take much of the puch out of the 97% that we share with Apes. I look forward to hearing some of your thoughts. |
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desire, not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.-- C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 01/31/2006 : 23:55:37 [Permalink]
|
byhisgrace88 typed:quote:
Do any of you see any logical fallacies in my opinion, keeping in mind my world view.
Hi! Before we start, I'd like to be clear: Do you mean by the above that our counter-arguments must be limited by the bounds of your own world-view? If so, don't expect a whole lot of us to play by Biblical Inerrancy rules here in a skeptic forum. If you mean something else, fine, but the implicit rule here is pretty much, "Show me the evidence."
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 01/31/2006 23:57:23 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 01:15:44 [Permalink]
|
Hi C'88! Long time, no hear from; where've you been keeping yourself?
I am all but innocent of knowledge in genetics, so the only fallacy that I might point out is that we are not more evolved than the apes. Evolution is not a contest; there are no winners and the only high scorers are those species that last the longest; horseshoe crabs and cockroaches come to mind.
If memory serves, Kent Hovind uses the bananna genetics example quite a bit and there are some grounds for it, although I don't know what the shared percentages actually are. I would think that it hints at some common ancestor way back when (Cambrian? Pre-Cambrian?), rather than some sort of special creation, divine or otherwise.
Welcome back!
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 02/01/2006 01:19:15 |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 03:53:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
When I hear about the simalarities between the DNA of humans and apes, I think less of "We must be the same thing, only slightly more evolved", and more "We must come from the same place/person." It all depends on your world view. Considering my world view is that the God of the Bible created the heavens and the earth, and all that is within it; I tend to look at these simalarities as more the handy work of God.
Hi byhisgrace88!
From the response to creationist claim CI141:
quote:
2 There are similarities that cannot rationally be attributed to design. For example, an endogenous retroviral element (ERV) is a retrovirus (a parasite) that has become part of the genome. There are several kinds of ERVs, and they can insert themselves at random locations. Humans and chimps have thousands of such ERVs in common -- the same type of ERV at the same location in the genome (D. M. Taylor 2003).
Copied mistakes are evidence of plagiarism.
As others noted, we are not necessarily more evolved than other species. |
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 04:15:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
I realize that this is not an argument, it is an opinion. I am not trying to make an argument right now. Here's what I want to know. Do any of you see any logical fallacies in my opinion, keeping in mind my world view. If so, I would love to hear, and learn from it.
The "common design from a single designer" argument is not actually falsifiable. I'm sure that the fact we share 99% of our DNA with apes isn't surprising to you, since in your view god made each of us. However, ask yourself, would you be "surprised" if humans and apes shared very little DNA in common? Probably not. It could be equally argued that the Designer made us and apes differently.
So while such a creationist view as yours has the luxury of accommodating any result, the theory of evolution is not so fortunate. According to it, we must be more related to apes than sea sponges or bananas, and of course the genetic evidence shows that we are.
So can we prove you are wrong? Of course not. All we can say is that your beliefs hold no predictive value, can account for anything discovered, and is not factually founded. In common parlance, it's a blind faith.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 02/01/2006 04:16:59 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 08:48:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Here's what I want to know. Do any of you see any logical fallacies in my opinion, keeping in mind my world view. If so, I would love to hear, and learn from it.
Evidence. Your "opinion" lacks any evidence to support it.
Therefore it is free from actual meaning.
Objective reality doesn't give a rats ass what your "world view" is.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
byhisgrace88
Formerly "creation88"
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 11:31:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Evidence. Your "opinion" lacks any evidence to support it.
Therefore it is free from actual meaning.
Objective reality doesn't give a rats ass what your "world view" is.
It's not that my opinion lacks evidence, it that I chose not to dive into that. That would just be the whole "does God exsist" debate, which has been rehearsed countless times. It's a different debate, for a different day. You obviously did'nt read my post carefully. (Which is fine, but don't attack my thoughts when you don't understand what I'm trying to say) Because I very clearly said that "this is not an argument". Meaning; I was not even attempting to get into the facts of my world view at this point. Though I would be happy to get into that in a diferent thread, where it would'nt hijack kil's discussion.
And also, you don't have to tell me that my world view doesn't effect reality. You're preaching to the choir on that one. I would be the first person here to speak out against the post-modernism going on in America. It's a movement that has caused otherwise smart people to believe that everyone is somehow right, because there is no truth. So believe me; I have no imaginary feeling that my thoughts effect reality.
quote:
I might point out is that we are not more evolved than the apes. Evolution is not a contest; there are no winners and the only high scorers are those species that last the longest;
This is a very interesting idea, that I have heard before. I see it as a logically sound argument within what I believe is an un-logical point of view. I would ask you this one question to clarify. This is basicly saying the idea that; even though a brand new Mustang Covertible appears to be "better" than one of those old Chevy Caprice tank like cars from the 80's. The Caprice would be "better" if you were in a demolition derby.
If you can excuse the terrible analogy...Am I correct in thinking that is what you are saying? |
Indeed, if we consider the unblushing promises of reward and the staggering nature of the rewards promised in the Gospels, it would seem that Our Lord finds our desire, not too strong, but too weak. We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us, like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because he cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea. We are far too easily pleased.-- C.S. Lewis |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 11:41:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
It's not that my opinion lacks evidence, it that I chose not to dive into that. That would just be the whole "does God exsist" debate, which has been rehearsed countless times. It's a different debate, for a different day. You obviously did'nt read my post carefully. (Which is fine, but don't attack my thoughts when you don't understand what I'm trying to say) Because I very clearly said that "this is not an argument". Meaning; I was not even attempting to get into the facts of my world view at this point. Though I would be happy to get into that in a diferent thread, where it would'nt hijack kil's discussion.
Yes, your opinion not only lacks evidence, it is entirely devoid of it.
And you did ask us to evaluate something within the confines of your world view.
quote:
This is a very interesting idea, that I have heard before. I see it as a logically sound argument within what I believe is an un-logical point of view. I would ask you this one question to clarify. This is basicly saying the idea that; even though a brand new Mustang Covertible appears to be "better" than one of those old Chevy Caprice tank like cars from the 80's. The Caprice would be "better" if you were in a demolition derby.
If you can excuse the terrible analogy...Am I correct in thinking that is what you are saying?
"better" is relative to context. Just as is the idea of evolutionary "fitness".
Care to elaborate on whatever it is you are referring to as "un-logical"? (can't help but laugh a little at "un-logical", sorry).
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 12:29:11 [Permalink]
|
Let's not leave out of this discussion that ID relies on the premise that there is evidence for it. Though not the way science approaches questions and therefore not true science, the evidence claimed for ID is supposedly the failure of evolution to account for transitions claiming there is no use for half a wing, for example, AND the premise that organisms have parts which could not have arisen from scratch so to speak. Behe's famous example is that of the bacterial flagella which Behe claims there is no precursor a flagella arose from.
Both of these premises have been thoroughly discredited with genetic science research. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/01/2006 12:29:55 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 12:46:49 [Permalink]
|
As far as mutation rates of the human genome, keep in mind there are other factors, namely selection pressures, separation and isolation of a species that lead to new species emerging. So mutation rate is only one piece of information needed to show species evolution processes.
We also can look at longer term mutation rates rather than single events. From memory so my numbers may be off but the principles are not, the human species narrowed to a few thousand members around 40,000 years ago. I do not know how much variation existed in that group but the hypothetical data is probably available. For discussion's sake lets say the group was closely related. We now differ from each other by about 3 million base pairs. So in 40,000 years quite a bit of variation likely occurred in our genome.
Again, I don't know the numbers but one could figure also the rate of variation in chimpanzees which is considerably greater than in humans and look at the fact the chimps did not go through the population bottleneck that humans did. On a shorter time scale, there is greater variation in populations that stayed in Africa compared to populations that migrated away. These are just suggestion for ways to assess the mutation rates of primates and other species to verify that they do indeed correlate with the time line of evolution. It's been done and they do correlate.
Evolution deniers throw out numbers of mutation rates without valid premises and draw invalid conclusions which Bible believers happily do not question. The arguments simply don't hold up to scientific scrutiny. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 02/01/2006 12:49:07 |
|
|
|
Hawks
SFN Regular
Canada
1383 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 13:07:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Also: When discussing this very topic with a friend recently; he threw out the idea that we also share 50% of our DNA with a Banana. Can anyone confirm or deny the validity of this statement. Because at least in my un-educated point of view; this would take much of the puch out of the 97% that we share with Apes. I look forward to hearing some of your thoughts.
I think I've heard somewhere that we are 50% similar to bananas at the DNA level. I haven't seen a scientific paper stating this, though, so we can file this under unasserted claims for now (if you find a paper I would be happy to read it).
What I want to delve into is your un-educated point of view that this similarity (50%) would take the punch out of the 97% we share with apes. What would, to you personally, be a reasonable similarity between humans and bananas? 40%? 25%? 10%? 5%? 1%? Could you please pick a number (not necessarily one of the ones I wrote) and keep that in mind as you read the rest of this post?
DNA is composed of four bases. If you were to compare, base to base, two totally random DNA sequences of equal length, you would find that by pure chance these DNA sequences would be roughly 25% similar. I.e. there is a 1 in 4 four chance of any base to match the base at the "same position" in the other sequence (this assumes that there is a random distribution of bases in the two sequences, a statement I can't confirm right now, but let's for arguments sake say it is). In other words, if two DNA sequences are totally unrelated, we would not find that they are 0% similar, but rather 25% similar.
Which similarity figure did you keep in mind above? Was it lower than 25%? Was it a lot lower? Has this taken back some of the punch from the 97% that we share with Apes. Do you appreciate why personal incedulity (as you displayed here) says very little about the issue at hand and a lot about the person displaying the incredulity?
Note: I have no idea what figure you chose, so my paragraph above might essentially have been me building a straw-man, in which case I apologize. I would, in any case, be keen to know the figure you chose.
|
METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL
It's a small, off-duty czechoslovakian traffic warden! |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 14:02:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
Here's my thought....
When I hear about the simalarities between the DNA of humans and apes, I think less of "We must be the same thing, only slightly more evolved", and more "We must come from the same place/person." It all depends on your world view. Considering my world view is that the God of the Bible created the heavens and the earth, and all that is within it; I tend to look at these simalarities as more the handy work of God.
I realize that this is not an argument, it is an opinion. I am not trying to make an argument right now. Here's what I want to know. Do any of you see any logical fallacies in my opinion, keeping in mind my world view. If so, I would love to hear, and learn from it.
Also: When discussing this very topic with a friend recently; he threw out the idea that we also share 50% of our DNA with a Banana. Can anyone confirm or deny the validity of this statement. Because at least in my un-educated point of view; this would take much of the puch out of the 97% that we share with Apes. I look forward to hearing some of your thoughts.
Yes, I find logical fallacies within the reasoning.
As we are not evaluating the truth value of the premises and just the logical structure, I find that the argument suffers from a few fallacies of explaination and a syllogistic error. Specifically untestability and limited depth as well as non-support. In addition there is affirming the consequent.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 02/01/2006 : 15:03:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by byhisgrace88
...
Why don't you respond to H.Humbert's post? That's about as clear as it gets.
quote:
The "common design from a single designer" argument is not actually falsifiable. I'm sure that the fact we share 99% of our DNA with apes isn't surprising to you, since in your view god made each of us. However, ask yourself, would you be "surprised" if humans and apes shared very little DNA in common? Probably not. It could be equally argued that the Designer made us and apes differently.
So while such a creationist view as yours has the luxury of accommodating any result, the theory of evolution is not so fortunate. According to it, we must be more related to apes than sea sponges or bananas, and of course the genetic evidence shows that we are.
So can we prove you are wrong? Of course not. All we can say is that your beliefs hold no predictive value, can account for anything discovered, and is not factually founded. In common parlance, it's a blind faith.
|
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
