Posts: 46043
Threads: 538
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:16 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:09 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Because you said that evolutionary theory isn't a fact. News flash: Theories are never, EVER facts. They are structures of ideas used to explain facts.
Boru It isn't fact!! That's a true statement. Not in the scientific or common use of the word
But the theory of evolution and the fact of evolution are two different things. Populations of organisms evolve - this is the fact of evolution, a fact observed so often that to deny it becomes and act of intellectual perversity, akin to dropping a hammer on your foot and denying the fact of gravity.
How organisms evolve is the theory of evolution. The current model is a combination of mutation, natural/sexual selection and genetic drift. This theory is pretty widely supported by people who (unlike yourself) actually understand biology.\
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:18 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:12 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:07 pm)AAA Wrote: The issue I have with it is that mutation degrades genetic information (making it functionless) in every instance!!!!!! It happens but it isn't evolution. it is devolution!
*chuckle* There is no way you're a biology major. Your claim that mutations makes genetic information functionless is simply wrong. Also, the term 'devolution' is meaningless in biology.
Boru Your claim that my claim is simply wrong is simply wrong. And yes as our species is accumulating mutations in our genomes, we are seeing more cancers and medical issues.
Posts: 67172
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
162
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:20 pm
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:21 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:16 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:09 pm)AAA Wrote: It isn't fact!! That's a true statement. Not in the scientific or common use of the word
But the theory of evolution and the fact of evolution are two different things. Populations of organisms evolve - this is the fact of evolution, a fact observed so often that to deny it becomes and act of intellectual perversity, akin to dropping a hammer on your foot and denying the fact of gravity.
How organisms evolve is the theory of evolution. The current model is a combination of mutation, natural/sexual selection and genetic drift. This theory is pretty widely supported by people who (unlike yourself) actually understand biology.\
Boru
Yes, allele frequencies become more frequent when they are selected for. That is not what is being argued. We are arguing whether the selected individuals are selected after they have mutated to become superior, or whether the selected individuals are the ones who have more functional genomes due to not having mutated sequences.
What about the many examples of what, at least on the surface, appear to reflect design?
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:24 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:04 pm)Rhythm Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:00 pm)AAA Wrote: I don't know if you're high, delusional, or both, but telling me what I believe is not wise when I have been saying the exact opposite this whole thread?
You told us what you believed. For example..you believe that change and mutation are facts. You believe that natural selection is a fact. That -is- the theory of evolution.
Is it tinfoil hat time?
That is not the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution, at least the one I am arguing against is that we share one common ancestor and that life could start from molecules. If that is how we will define evolution, then all species will eventually be unfit once enough mutations accumulate to degrade the functions of the genomes.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:25 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 6:57 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 6:36 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Design is irrelevant to abiogenesis. Our pro-ID poster here considers the current theory of evolution to be a fact and -also- believe in abiogenesis. He literally disagrees with -nothing-.
I don't agree with either of those
Doesn't matter what you agree. Only what you can demonstrate.
If you can't show it... you don't know it.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:26 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:06 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:03 pm)AAA Wrote: The dude who first peer reviewed a paper that mentioned intelligent design was demoted, had his access to samples taken away, was put under supervision of others who disliked him, had his religious views investigated, and was eventually pressured to resign. People don't want that to happen to them, so the don't peer review it.
Wow. In addition to theories v facts, you also don't understand peer review. Peer review is not done by an individual, it is done by groups.
Boru Yeah but what I said happened to that guy really did happen
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:27 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:03 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 6:41 pm)Stimbo Wrote: What makes you say that?
The dude who first peer reviewed a paper that mentioned intelligent design was demoted, had his access to samples taken away, was put under supervision of others who disliked him, had his religious views investigated, and was eventually pressured to resign. People don't want that to happen to them, so the don't peer review it.
Ahh, the truth comes out. You think that people who disagree with ID are a big conspiracy set on destroying the US by disrupting pseudoscientific progress. I don't think they have some sinister plot and master plant to destroy fake science like you seem to think.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:30 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:26 pm)AAA Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 7:06 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Wow. In addition to theories v facts, you also don't understand peer review. Peer review is not done by an individual, it is done by groups.
Boru Yeah but what I said happened to that guy really did happen
Great - give us his name and whatever other information we can use to check out the story.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 624
Threads: 1
Joined: December 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Intelligent Design
January 10, 2016 at 7:30 pm
(January 10, 2016 at 7:25 pm)Stimbo Wrote: (January 10, 2016 at 6:57 pm)AAA Wrote: I don't agree with either of those
Doesn't matter what you agree. Only what you can demonstrate.
If you can't show it... you don't know it.
Fair enough. You can't demonstrate the type of evolution that I disagree with. You guys may be having trouble seeing that natural selection and mutation are not what I am arguing against. I am arguing against their ability to lead to the life we see (from some ancient ancestor). If you can't show it you don't know it may be true, but you can decide the most likely alternative based on the evidence. We will never be able to show the way that life was formed, therefore we will never know.
|
