|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
 Posted - 06/17/2008 : 06:12:58 [Permalink]
|
I think until N1N "shows us the money" all future resposes should be the following.
Originally posted by Dave W.
It's quid pro quo time. Show me...- ...a culturally based epistemology that works as well as science for learning about our world.
- ...evidence that had some other culture come up with evolution, it would somehow be different.
- ...that the theory of evolution lacks a mathematical foundation.
- ...that the theory of evolution cannot be empirically verified.
- ...that "many words have been written about the differences between evolution and Christianity."
- ...your probability calculation for determining that the alleged parallels between evolution and Christianity are not coincidence.
- ...that people who can only think "linearly" could ever come up with an equation including an r2 term.
- ...that the space between electron shells in an atom is "forever empty."
- ...that past history is a good indicator of the future of evolutionary theory.
- ...that part of your motivation for posting here is to test your own beliefs in an open forum.
- ...that "Evolution is simply an idea in some people's minds and not the reality of the natural world."
- ...that biological extinction is an apt parallel with Christianity's Hell.
- ...that evolutionary theory "is a nothing more than a world view."
- ...that you "have raised the question of where Darwin got his ideas as a serious issue."
- ...that you "have shown the clear parallels between Christian and Evolutionary scenarios."
- ...that defending evolution means one defends Christianity.
- ...that if everyone became like Jesus there would be no death or sickness or war.
- ...that evolution "is about the survival of the fittest."
- ...that "many social evils follow naturally from the theory of evolution core ideas."
- ...that "Evolution is presented as a complete description of nature."
- ...that "Darwin just filled in the gaps with a bit of twisted christianity."
- ...that you are "making some valid points."
Show me those things - things you've already asserted and that you've failed to support - and then I'll show you an equation.
|
|
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 06:58:17 [Permalink]
|
no1nose chooses to forfeit by refusing to make even a "good faith" gesture. No other communication could be a clearer demonstration that he's full of crap, he has no intention of arguing honestly, and he knows it. This administrator's patience just wore much thinner.Originally posted by no1nose
Finally there you have it!!! And even in the above I can't see how this is dependent on the Theory of Evolution itself. Maybe you can make the links for me. But it looks to me that these algorithms would fit in many other theories of life. |
Evolution isn't a theory of life, it's a theory of biodiversity. But beyond that, can you name another one?
The reason cladistics support evolution is that no other explanation that's ever sought to compete with evolution requires that cladistics be useful.| Also fail to understand the logic of saying that evolution is correct because I don't back up my assertions or something like that. |
You're simply delusional.| I realize that some of you may have some personal investment in the Theory of Evolution and I understand if it were suddenly shown to be wrong that you would look the fool. |
Ah, a clear ad hominem attack.| But maybe it is time to move on. |
Move on to what, exactly?| Winston Churchill said that he found eating his own words a nourishing diet. |
You're too dishonest to take Churchill's advice.| It would be really refreshing if you guys would be a little less dogmatic and open minded. |
Another irony meter down the drain. Carl Sagan said that we should be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains fall out.
The list below are my requests to you for more information about what you've said. How can I open my mind to knowledge that you're purposefully keeping secret?!
no1nose, can you show me...- ...a culturally based epistemology that works as well as science for learning about our world.
- ...evidence that had some other culture come up with evolution, it would somehow be different.
- ...that the theory of evolution lacks a mathematical foundation.
- ...that the theory of evolution cannot be empirically verified.
- ...that "many words have been written about the differences between evolution and Christianity."
- ...your probability calculation for determining that the alleged parallels between evolution and Christianity are not coincidence.
- ...that people who can only think "linearly" could ever come up with an equation including an r2 term.
- ...that the space between electron shells in an atom is "forever empty."
- ...that past history is a good indicator of the future of evolutionary theory.
- ...that part of your motivation for posting here is to test your own beliefs in an open forum.
- ...that "Evolution is simply an idea in some people's minds and not the reality of the natural world."
- ...that biological extinction is an apt parallel with Christianity's Hell.
- ...that evolutionary theory "is a nothing more than a world view."
- ...that you "have raised the question of where Darwin got his ideas as a serious issue."
- ...that you "have shown the clear parallels between Christian and Evolutionary scenarios."
- ...that defending evo
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 07:26:48 [Permalink]
|
Statement of fact: Evolution works.
Statement of fact: Evolution can be falsified.
Statement of fact: Evolution can only be faslified by empirical evidence.
Statement of fact: That evidence, any of it, has yet to be forthcoming.
Statement of fact: Said evidence will not come from spiritual bullshit.
Someone, I forget who (embarrased; I should remember), said to the effect: "Without the Theory of Evolution, nothing in biology would make any sense." At this writing, that statement has yet to meet a serious challenge. And why? Because it is yet another Statement of Fact.
n1n, you need to come up with a Statement of Fact that is backed up with at least as much positive and definitive evidence as the ToE. All of these red herrings and hand waving won't cut it. That might fly in fundie church, but not in here.
|
"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! 
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 07:40:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
Someone, I forget who (embarrased; I should remember), said to the effect: "Without the Theory of Evolution, nothing in biology would make any sense." |
Theodosius Dobzhansky
|
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 07:48:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by no1nose
Throw some out baby! 
|
Here; and here; here; here; here; and there.
-It's only a very rapid overview done in 5 minutes of quick browsing, there is plenty more out there but, as you do not seem honest enough to even open the links, why bother? |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
| Edited by - Simon on 06/17/2008 07:52:16 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 08:28:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Originally posted by filthy
Someone, I forget who (embarrased; I should remember), said to the effect: "Without the Theory of Evolution, nothing in biology would make any sense." |
Theodosius Dobzhansky
|
Originally posted by tomk80
Originally posted by filthy
Someone, I forget who (embarrased; I should remember), said to the effect: "Without the Theory of Evolution, nothing in biology would make any sense." |
Theodosius Dobzhansky
|
Of course! Big Dummy should have easily recalled a foine, old Irish name like that! Senile dementia and delierium tremens creep ever closer, ever closer....
If this does indeed fuel n1n's cold and futile fire, then so be it. We will never convince him to even study the ToE, much less accept it, anyway. We've seen that all too many times before.
As for any sort of a parallel between Christianity and the ToE, well, I guess it's all according to how you look at it. And if your vision is permenantly clouded by preachings of non-scientists, then you must continue on, choking in the dust of scientific advancement; a lame hound following a cheetah.
|
"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!
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13481 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 08:44:16 [Permalink]
|
no1nose:
Also fail to understand the logic of saying that evolution is correct because I don't back up my assertions or something like that. |
Just how puffed up can a person be?
I'm sorry to inform you no1nose that you have absolutely nothing to do with my acceptance of evolution being the best theory that describes the diversity of life on this planet. Your inability to back up your assertions about it plays no roll in my thinking about that. None.
Call me foolish, but I prefer basing my conclusions on scientific evidence and not the wild and willfully un-evidenced claims of a forum troll/spammer who has demonstrated by way of mistakes of reasoning, logical fallacies and bold assertions, that he doesn't even know what evolution is.
Anyhow, thanks for the above quote. As Dave said, it's delusional. But I would add that it's also funny as hell. At least, and finally, I got some entertainment value from you.
And now down to business. You now have two administrators who have made a demand that you engage by supporting your claims. The clock is ticking. You are on very thin ice and the ice is melting fast. We both understand that you are out of your league here, but it has been an SFN tradition to give even the most silly of persons a chance for redemption by supporting their claims, no matter how weak the results might be, as long as it is an honest attempt.
So get to it. Defend the claims you have made. Show us that your premise is not just hot air born from a drug induced (or possibly the lack of taking your prescribed drugs) epiphany. Show us that you can do something other than pontificate and be rude.
I am making a demand now. No more bullshit. Support your claims or the ax falls…
I see no need to repost Dave's list in this post. Go back to it and begin the terrible ordeal of having to do what we all have to do when we make a claim to a fact on this forum. Perhaps in that way, even you might learn something about logic…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
no1nose
BANNED
50 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 10:40:52 [Permalink]
|
| Evolution isn't a theory of life, it's a theory of biodiversity. But beyond that, can you name another one? |
Oh please!!
Besides being a math free zone the Theory of Evolution is also an “observer” free.
Relativity is referenced to an “observer”. Changes in time and mass and velocity are “observed” by an observer. In quantum physics the state of a system remains indeterminate until it is “observed”. In atomic systems if the observer looks for a wave a wave is observed, if a particle is “looked” for then a particle and not a wave is observed. Strange but true as they say.
However the Theory of Evolution has no provision for the role of an observer even though the changes that take place are at the atomic level where quantum realities should dominate. When one surveys the natural world and the changes that do occur one must notice the trend toward beauty. If changes in the natural world were completely random then the world around us would have all the beauty of a junk yard. Beauty in the natural world implies that these changes are driven by an observer. The lack of a role for an observer is yet one more piece of evidence against the Theory of Evolution as a valid description of the natural world.
|
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 11:06:38 [Permalink]
|
You are wrong on two counts.
-Quantum physics occurs at the quantum level, which is one step below the atomic level.
-Molecular evolution occurs at the molecular level. Moreover the molecules concerned are rather big and complex.
The other bit of your argument is even more retarded.
Evolution is not random. The initial change is; but natural selection itself is deterministic.
Also, you describe the natural world to be beautiful. I am not sure if you include flesh eating bacteria or Cochliomyia hominivorax or if you are just unaware of their existence.
But, let me tell you, nature is often a messy place worse than any junk-yard I can imagine.
And why repeat that Evolution is 'Math free' when this 'argument' (for lack of a better word) has already been rebuked a few times on this exact page?
Despite your pretence of understanding quantum theory and your propensy to steal its terminology, you should try not to overestimate your role as an observer.
Just because you refuse to acknowledge the facts do not make them disappear.
|
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 11:09:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by no1nose
| Evolution isn't a theory of life, it's a theory of biodiversity. But beyond that, can you name another one? |
Oh please!! |
Your failure to support any of your assertions of fact is, once again, noted as you traipse off onto some other unrelated bunny trail.
Again: how can I open my mind to knowledge that you're purposefully keeping secret?!
no1nose, can you show me...- ...a culturally based epistemology that works as well as science for learning about our world.
- ...evidence that had some other culture come up with evolution, it would somehow be different.
- ...that the theory of evolution lacks a mathematical foundation.
- ...that the theory of evolution cannot be empirically verified.
- ...that "many words have been written about the differences between evolution and Christianity."
- ...your probability calculation for determining that the alleged parallels between evolution and Christianity are not coincidence.
- ...that people who can only think "linearly" could ever come up with an equation including an r2 term.
- ...that the space between electron shells in an atom is "forever empty."
- ...that past history is a good indicator of the future of evolutionary theory.
- ...that part of your motivation for posting here is to test your own beliefs in an open forum.
- ...that "Evolution is simply an idea in some people's minds and not the reality of the natural world."
- ...that biological extinction is an apt parallel with Christianity's Hell.
- ...that evolutionary theory "is a nothing more than a world view."
- ...that you "have raised the question of where Darwin got his ideas as a serious issue."
- ...that you "have shown the clear parallels between Christian and Evolutionary scenarios."
- ...that defending evolution means one defends Christianity.
- ...that if everyone became like Jesus there would be no death or sickness or war.
- ...that evolution "is about the survival of the fittest."
- ...that "many social evils follow naturally from the theory of evolution core ideas."
- ...that "Evolution is presented as a complete description of nature."
- ...that "Darwin just filled in the gaps with a bit of twisted christianity."
- ...that you are "making some valid points."
- ...another "theory of life" that competes with evolutionary theory?
- ...anyone here saying that evolution is correct because you're a hypocrite.
- ...that the "observer" of quantum physics acts as you say.
- ...that Relativity requires an "observer."
- ...that "the Theory of Evolution has no provision for the role of an observer."
- ...that evolution asserts that changes will be "random."
- ...that there is a trend towards "beauty" in the "natural world."
I am waiting with an open mind for you to show me these things that you claim are true. Let's see 'em, please.| When one surveys the natural world and the changes that do occur one must notice the trend toward beauty. |
Yes, I notice that all the time in the faces of starving children, in the shape of terminal brain cancers, and of course rabid wolves. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
no1nose
BANNED
50 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 11:28:38 [Permalink]
|
| Quantum physics occurs at the quantum level |
Quantum level? Please tell us more
|
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 11:37:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by no1nose
Besides being a math free zone the Theory of Evolution is also an “observer” free.
Relativity is referenced to an “observer”. Changes in time and mass and velocity are “observed” by an observer. In quantum physics the state of a system remains indeterminate until it is “observed”. In atomic systems if the observer looks for a wave a wave is observed, if a particle is “looked” for then a particle and not a wave is observed. Strange but true as they say.
However the Theory of Evolution has no provision for the role of an observer even though the changes that take place are at the atomic level where quantum realities should dominate. When one surveys the natural world and the changes that do occur one must notice the trend toward beauty. If changes in the natural world were completely random then the world around us would have all the beauty of a junk yard. Beauty in the natural world implies that these changes are driven by an observer. The lack of a role for an observer is yet one more piece of evidence against the Theory of Evolution as a valid description of the natural world. |
 Huh? I guess it's a fact that there is a "trend toward beauty" in the natural world? How so? Also, I must have missed the proof on how beauty implies an observer. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/17/2008 : 11:42:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by no1nose
| Quantum physics occurs at the quantum level |
Quantum level? Please tell us more |
Wow. You're kind of a jerk. Obviously quantum level = the sub-atomic level, where sub-atomic particles cannot be measured in terms of its exact position in space at a given time. (Edit: Here's an article where real authors use the term!!) And on top of that, you fail to address any of his legitimate objections to your bizarre argument that for the ToE to be right, it needs "an observer".
(On top of all your other dodges, of course. I suspect your time at SFN may be short if you don't start to actually answer questions!) |
| Edited by - Cuneiformist on 06/17/2008 11:45:11 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Darwin’s debt to Christianity
Topic Locked
