A Challenge ... - Page 3

natrone23 · #21 05-15-2008, 08:13 AM

email468 · #22 05-15-2008, 08:26 AM

What's a sure-fire way to prove your science is pseudo-science?

Make a movie about it instead of publishing your EVIDENCE in peer-reviewed journals.
It would help IDs cause greatly if they would provide evidence for their case rather than take pot-shots at evolution through natural selection. Give us evidence and we will consider it science.

And what is up with poo-pooing the guy who suggested aliens may have started life here - i mean substitute God for aliens and that is pretty much ID isn't it?

medicineman · #23 05-15-2008, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by email468

What's a sure-fire way to prove your science is pseudo-science?

Make a movie about it instead of publishing your EVIDENCE in peer-reviewed journals.
It would help IDs cause greatly if they would provide evidence for their case rather than take pot-shots at evolution through natural selection. Give us evidence and we will consider it science.

And what is up with poo-pooing the guy who suggested aliens may have started life here - i mean substitute God for aliens and that is pretty much ID isn't it?

Theres science everywhere. All you have to do is look at the earth going through the warming and accept it.....Of course man is adding to the natural causes. How could he not be, I mean there are 5-6 billion of us wonderful creatures using up the natural resources as fast as we can, burning everything from forests to coal to fuel rods, hell even ciggarette smokers contribute, even you potheads and your infernal Bongs. (LOL) get over it, you've been proven wrong time and again and your tired old arguements put forth by paid quasi-scientists is getting oh so boring. Don't ask me for proof, the proof is out there, look around. I challenge you to watch Planet Earth, the whole series, and refute it.

email468 · #24 05-15-2008, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by medicineman

Theres science everywhere. All you have to do is look at the earth going through the warming and accept it.....Of course man is adding to the natural causes. How could he not be, I mean there are 5-6 billion of us wonderful creatures using up the natural resources as fast as we can, burning everything from forests to coal to fuel rods, hell even ciggarette smokers contribute, even you potheads and your infernal Bongs. (LOL) get over it, you've been proven wrong time and again and your tired old arguements put forth by paid quasi-scientists is getting oh so boring. Don't ask me for proof, the proof is out there, look around. I challenge you to watch Planet Earth, the whole series, and refute it.

you do realize i was talking about ID vs. Evolution through natural selection since that is what this thread is about (Ben Stein's Expelled). Or am i posting in the wrong thread?

But it is interesting you thought i was talking about climate change.

pokey · #25 05-15-2008, 08:50 AM

It seems a lot of people here think natural selection = evolution. Not so. Natural selection does happen, those black and white Peppered Moths from England are a good example. It is not that the moths morphed into darker moths when their surroundings got darker, as was previously assumed, it's simply that the lighter moths stood out and got eaten, and the darker ones didn't, and vice versa when the area was cleaned up. Similarly, natural selection happens on the plains of Africa and anywhere else where predators attack herd animals. The fast animals are able to run away to live and reproduce, and the weak animals, be they young, old, or simply sick, get eaten.

It is sad that so many creationists and such get wrapped up in thinking that natural selection is part of evolution, and try to claim it doesn't happen/exist. It is very visible to see, and while Darwin was one of the first to study it, associating it with him doesn't make it a theory, unlike some of his other work.

Furthermore, on that note, Evolution is still just "the theory of Evolution" regardless of how most people approach it today, including Academia. It has not been proven, and remains simply one mans idea of how life might have come to be. Somehow in the past 100 years that has become twisted, with people thinking that Evolution is scientific fact, when in reality it has no more proof and standing than any other creation theory.

Well, I have races to go win this weekend, plus it's my birthday today, so laters all.

email468 · #26 05-15-2008, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokey

It seems a lot of people here think natural selection = evolution. Not so. Natural selection does happen, those black and white Peppered Moths from England are a good example. It is not that the moths morphed into darker moths when their surroundings got darker, as was previously assumed, it's simply that the lighter moths stood out and got eaten, and the darker ones didn't, and vice versa when the area was cleaned up. Similarly, natural selection happens on the plains of Africa and anywhere else where predators attack herd animals. The fast animals are able to run away to live and reproduce, and the weak animals, be they young, old, or simply sick, get eaten.

It is sad that so many creationists and such get wrapped up in thinking that natural selection is part of evolution, and try to claim it doesn't happen/exist. It is very visible to see, and while Darwin was one of the first to study it, associating it with him doesn't make it a theory, unlike some of his other work.

Furthermore, on that note, Evolution is still just "the theory of Evolution" regardless of how most people approach it today, including Academia. It has not been proven, and remains simply one mans idea of how life might have come to be. Somehow in the past 100 years that has become twisted, with people thinking that Evolution is scientific fact, when in reality it has no more proof and standing than any other creation theory.

Well, I have races to go win this weekend, plus it's my birthday today, so laters all.

Oh my - lots of problems here.
First - you are talking about adaptation not evolution through natural selection. Evolution is the result of natural selection -- not sure how you are separating the two unless you are again confusing natural selection with adaptation.

Ah the old "it's just a theory" and so isn't proven argument. Theory doesn't mean guess - do you know gravity is also just another theory? The Earth revolves around the Sun is yet another theory.

Evolution has the fossil record, genetics, astronomy - literally millions of pieces of evidence in its favor. It sounds like you haven't kept up with the evidence and science regarding Evolution through Natural Selection - its not like it stopped evolving (haha) after Darwin's death.

And if the theory didn't "work" scientists would abandon it. But the predictions made using evolution do work and every time this happens the case for evolution grows stronger.

Jointsmith · #27 05-15-2008, 09:25 AM

Evidence is key to 'knowledge'.

Decartes said 'I think therefore I am', this is talking about what anyone can 'know' (which is nothing except that they exist).

How do you know the sky is blue? Because you SEE it as blue, and you TRUST your eyes.

Look at the evidence at hand, not unfounded statements/guesses. Thats the best way not to look Ignorant.

pokey · #28 05-15-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by email468

Oh my - lots of problems here.
First - you are talking about adaptation not evolution through natural selection. Evolution is the result of natural selection -- not sure how you are separating the two unless you are again confusing natural selection with adaptation.

Ah the old "it's just a theory" and so isn't proven argument. Theory doesn't mean guess - do you know gravity is also just another theory? The Earth revolves around the Sun is yet another theory.

Evolution has the fossil record, genetics, astronomy - literally millions of pieces of evidence in its favor. It sounds like you haven't kept up with the evidence and science regarding Evolution through Natural Selection - its not like it stopped evolving (haha) after Darwin's death.

And if the theory didn't "work" scientists would abandon it. But the predictions made using evolution do work and every time this happens the case for evolution grows stronger.

I can't resist being an idiot and arguing on the internet

so here goes!

Natural selection IS adaptation, but through outside forces. That's exactly what I am talking about! Seems it is not just the creationists. Evolution is a theory of creation THROUGH natural selection, but while Evolution cannot exist without natural selection, natural selection can and does exist without Evolution. Using my African plains animals example, let me explain. Those strong creatures that go on to reproduce, they breed, and pass on stronger genes, which may cause more muscle mass, lowered susceptibility to disease, etc... However, they do not create a new species. That is how I differentiate. Nature picks the strongest, but the strongest don't then in turn go on to become something that are not because of it. I am saying that natural selection happens all the time, and nothing new comes of it. Which is to say, natural selection without any evolution of species.

As for it being a theory, it is. Granted, most theories are not guesses, but that doesn't also make them true. The fossil record doesn't help evolution any more than it helps any other theory. Carbon dating is nice and all, but when attempting to date anything older than a supposed 60,000 years, you can't count on it too much for accuracy. For items supposedly millions of years old, you'd only be accurate within a few hundred thousand years, if that. Of course, people can post whatever numbers they wish and who is to dispute them? It's really all just educated guesses anyways.

Also, you talk of predictions made with evolution, I'm sorry, but we have not existed with the theory of evolution long enough to test or observe any of it, and by the time we have (if we don't blow ourselves up, etc...) I doubt people will even remember what we puny ancients thought of our creation.

Another thing, you say evolution didn't stop after Darwin's death, well, apparently it did. We have not found any of his creatures, nor have we found any creature that is between species, that has some sort of adaptation/mutation that makes it better than it's own relatives yet is not a new species yet. According to Darwin, we are constantly evolving, so how come mankind just happens to be in a place where all the creatures have finished evolving or decided to take a break? Does evolution have a stopping point? A place where all creatures are somehow perfectly evolved for their niche and so mutations can only be for the worse and get weeded out?

What I am trying to argue is that there is no way to prove any of man's theories of creation. There is no point in trying to say one is correct, although there is great fun in trying to prove them all wrong. There is no solid evidence for any one theory, and there's been enough bullshit on all sides to make you wonder how you can believe anything else put out by said sides.

email468 · #29 05-15-2008, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokey

I can't resist being an idiot and arguing on the internet

so here goes!

Natural selection IS adaptation, but through outside forces. That's exactly what I am talking about! Seems it is not just the creationists. Evolution is a theory of creation THROUGH natural selection, but while Evolution cannot exist without natural selection, natural selection can and does exist without Evolution. Using my African plains animals example, let me explain. Those strong creatures that go on to reproduce, they breed, and pass on stronger genes, which may cause more muscle mass, lowered susceptibility to disease, etc... However, they do not create a new species. That is how I differentiate. Nature picks the strongest, but the strongest don't then in turn go on to become something that are not because of it. I am saying that natural selection happens all the time, and nothing new comes of it. Which is to say, natural selection without any evolution of species.

As for it being a theory, it is. Granted, most theories are not guesses, but that doesn't also make them true. The fossil record doesn't help evolution any more than it helps any other theory. Carbon dating is nice and all, but when attempting to date anything older than a supposed 60,000 years, you can't count on it too much for accuracy. For items supposedly millions of years old, you'd only be accurate within a few hundred thousand years, if that. Of course, people can post whatever numbers they wish and who is to dispute them? It's really all just educated guesses anyways.

Also, you talk of predictions made with evolution, I'm sorry, but we have not existed with the theory of evolution long enough to test or observe any of it, and by the time we have (if we don't blow ourselves up, etc...) I doubt people will even remember what we puny ancients thought of our creation.

Another thing, you say evolution didn't stop after Darwin's death, well, apparently it did. We have not found any of his creatures, nor have we found any creature that is between species, that has some sort of adaptation/mutation that makes it better than it's own relatives yet is not a new species yet. According to Darwin, we are constantly evolving, so how come mankind just happens to be in a place where all the creatures have finished evolving or decided to take a break? Does evolution have a stopping point? A place where all creatures are somehow perfectly evolved for their niche and so mutations can only be for the worse and get weeded out?

What I am trying to argue is that there is no way to prove any of man's theories of creation. There is no point in trying to say one is correct, although there is great fun in trying to prove them all wrong. There is no solid evidence for any one theory, and there's been enough bullshit on all sides to make you wonder how you can believe anything else put out by said sides.

OK - what evidence would convince you that evolution through natural selection is the more valid theory?

pokey · #30 05-15-2008, 10:55 AM

Things like not finding the coelacanth, finding a missing link, etc... But you guys backing evolution have it easy, to convince me of creation you're going to have to prove the existence of God!