|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
|
[Poll]
|
Earth Basics
|
| The Earth is round, and gravitational attraction is in force |
|
| The Earth is flat. You can fall off the edge. |
|
| The Earth does not rotate on an axis. It stands still |
|
| The Earth rotates around the Sun |
|
| Science is a tool of Satan, as is education in general |
|
| Science is neither moral nor immoral. |
|
Total Votes : 105
|
(last vote on : 8/14/2008 10:02:09 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 4:27:33 PM
|
|
|
AllForIsrael
Posts: 155
Joined: 3/1/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I'm always ready to consider any support for evolution from God's Word, cow. Do you have any? I know you don't have any "scientific evidence" to validate evolution, so don't bother with that!
I'll go slowly to see if you can follow:
Evolution ................ is .................. science ................. not ............................. religion.
The ...................... Bible ....................... is ........................ a ...................... book ....................... of ....................... religion, ......................... not ....................... science.
Creationism ....................... is ..................... bad ........................... religion.
Agree........
_____________________________
http://forensictheology.smfnew.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 4:33:37 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3135
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
Yeah, I didn't think a million generations of irradiated fruit flies would impress you, AFI. 
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 4:45:12 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1062
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
where is the evidence that a reptile can “evolve” into a mammal? There isn’t any.
Oh, but there is. The transition from reptiles to mammals is the "best-documented transition between vertebrate classes."
Now I know you won't be satisfied until a lizard gives birth to a panda while you watch, but there is plenty of evidence for evolution.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 5:17:32 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 678
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I'm always ready to consider any support for evolution from God's Word, cow. Do you have any? I know you don't have any "scientific evidence" to validate evolution, so don't bother with that!
I'll go slowly to see if you can follow:
Evolution ................ is .................. science ................. not ............................. religion.
The ...................... Bible ....................... is ........................ a ...................... book ....................... of ....................... religion, ......................... not ....................... science.
Creationism ....................... is ..................... bad ........................... religion.
Try pounding the pulpit while you say it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 5:58:15 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7774
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Dr Mark and Jhud, I have a question for both of you. Think honestly. Do you immediately assume to explain away evidence that's presented to you that's contrary to your view points? I find that I do. If I see something that's presented to support evolution or oppose my blend of YEC, I immediately assume that it's faulty. I have found that there are some things about my view that were incorrect. I had an incorrect view on plate tectonics, measuring large distances in the universe, etc. I was wondering if the two of you do the same thing. Do you find yourself assume a priori that data conclusions that appose your blend are incorrect?
I may be weird in this regard; most of what I read comes from 'secular' science scources. I peruse science articles daily, try to get to the original publications as often as I can, and while I find much of it challenging, I find most of it supportive of the notions that life is designed (even when it doesn't intend to do so).
In fact, I have been following the issue for about thirty years (from both sides of the fence, including my time spent as a biology major) and I think the case for design is stronger than it has ever been, and getting stronger.
Bottom line for me, I just enjoy understanding biology whether or not it 'supports' my point of view - it's the greatest engineering feat, as well as the most beautiful art, all rolled into one.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 5:58:47 PM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes quote:
The transition from reptiles to mammals is the "best-documented transition between vertebrate classes."
I agree that IS the best evidence evolution has to offer. However, as this quote from your cite,” the fossil record clearly shows”, demonstrates it is nothing more than circular reasoning.
Similarities in fossils are ASSUMED to have resulted from a common heritage and presented as proof of a common heritage.
quote:
Now I know you won't be satisfied until a lizard gives birth to a panda while you watch, but there is plenty of evidence for evolution.
Evidently you are gullible enough to accept it, but I am no more impressed with circular reasoning than I am with bait and switch con games. Neither have any place in science and that’s why evolution is anti-science.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 6:10:42 PM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: afiquote:
quote:
Oh, but there is. The transition from reptiles to mammals is the "best-documented transition between vertebrate classes."
Now I know you won't be satisfied until a lizard gives birth to a panda while you watch, but there is plenty of evidence for evolution.
Hehehehehehehe..........
Agreed! That supposed “evidence” is worth a laugh.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 6:15:37 PM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 678
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
quote:
Dr Mark and Jhud, I have a question for both of you. Think honestly. Do you immediately assume to explain away evidence that's presented to you that's contrary to your view points? I find that I do. If I see something that's presented to support evolution or oppose my blend of YEC, I immediately assume that it's faulty. I have found that there are some things about my view that were incorrect. I had an incorrect view on plate tectonics, measuring large distances in the universe, etc. I was wondering if the two of you do the same thing. Do you find yourself assume a priori that data conclusions that appose your blend are incorrect?
I may be weird in this regard; most of what I read comes from 'secular' science scources. I peruse science articles daily, try to get to the original publications as often as I can, and while I find much of it challenging, I find most of it supportive of the notions that life is designed (even when it doesn't intend to do so).
In fact, I have been following the issue for about thirty years (from both sides of the fence, including my time spent as a biology major) and I think the case for design is stronger than it has ever been, and getting stronger.
Bottom line for me, I just enjoy understanding biology whether or not it 'supports' my point of view - it's the greatest engineering feat, as well as the most beautiful art, all rolled into one.
What are your secular science sources?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 6:19:38 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 7774
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
What are your secular science sources?
ScienceDaily, EurekaAlerts, PLOS, various science blogs, the library, etc.
_____________________________
Jack
It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first..
- Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 9:40:52 PM
|
|
|
GroupW
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11/16/2007
From: Up in the hills of Colorado (very BIG hills...)
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I'm always ready to consider any support for evolution from God's Word, cow. Do you have any? I know you don't have any "scientific evidence" to validate evolution, so don't bother with that!
LOL, yeah I was going to commend you on your openmindedness on this topic!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/12/2008 10:33:52 PM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1062
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
I agree that IS the best evidence evolution has to offer. However, as this quote from your cite,” the fossil record clearly shows”, demonstrates it is nothing more than circular reasoning.
Similarities in fossils are ASSUMED to have resulted from a common heritage and presented as proof of a common heritage.
The reasoning is not circular. If evolution occurs, then fossils of this kind should exist. They do exist. Evolution is not falsified, and the evidence is positive evidence in favor of evolution. Alternative theories need to explain the fossil evidence as well if not better than evolution does.
The site offers a list of 30 species that present transitional forms arranged in a time hierarchy from the reptiles to the mammals, with morphological changes that mirror the timeline. That is, as time goes on, the morphology becomes more and more mammal-like. As you say, this is not PROOF of common descent, but as I persevere in pointing out, there is no proof in science. However, evolution provides the best scientific explanation of the data.
An alternative explanation is that aliens dropped off Paleothyris in the early Pennsylvanian, but they all died out.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Protoclepsydrops, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Clepsydrops, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Archaeothyris, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Varanops, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Haptodus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Dimetrodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Biarmosuchia, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Procynosuchus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Dvinia, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Thrinaxodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Cynognathus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Diademodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Probelesodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Probainognathus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Exaeretodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Oligokyphus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Pachygenelus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Adelobasileus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Sinoconodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Kuehneotherium, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Eozostrodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Peramus, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Endotherium, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Kielantherium, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Steropodon, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Vincelestes, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Pariadens, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Kennalestes, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
A few million years later, the aliens dropped off Cimolestes, but they all died out. Coincidentally, they're a bit more mammal-like.
However, this is not a very parsimonious explanation. After all, the aliens could have dropped off these species in some other order -- one that does not show a clear, monotonic time progression from reptile-like features to mammal-like features.
What is your alternative hypothesis?
Earlier you stated that "No one denies that a wolf can “evolve” into terrier". If (just as a thought experiment) some of the species in the chain above differ from their predecessors less than a wolf does from a terrier, would you deny that one "evolved" from the other?
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 12:58:32 AM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: afiquote:
However, this is not a very parsimonious explanation.
Interestingly, it does have every bit as much observational support as goo to you evolution and doesn’t require any more faith to believe.
Your rant doesn’t change the FACT that what you presented as the best evidence for reptile to mammal evolution is circular reasoning.
I don’t see what you are upset about. I agree that the circular reasoning you presented IS the best evolution has to offer.
quote:
What is your alternative hypothesis?
“And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” – Genesis 1:25
quote:
Earlier you stated that "No one denies that a wolf can “evolve” into terrier". If (just as a thought experiment) some of the species in the chain above differ from their predecessors less than a wolf does from a terrier, would you deny that one "evolved" from the other?
Evidently it went right over your head. Claiming that a dog “evolving” into a dog is evidence that a reptile can evolve into a mammal is a bait and switch con game.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 1:45:42 AM
|
|
|
henny
Posts: 1179
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: MN
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Now I know you won't be satisfied until a lizard gives birth to a panda while you watch, but there is plenty of evidence for evolution.
As evidence for evolution goes, this would be the cutest ever!
Especially if it was that lizard from the Geico ads giving birth to that Ling Ling panda that toured the US a few years back.
One look into their dooey eyes and people would forget creationism entirely (Let's face it. God may be omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, etc, etc, but he's nowhere near as cute as a baby panda).
_____________________________
Hell is other Christians.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 9:02:50 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3135
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
Do you immediately assume to explain away evidence that's presented to you that's contrary to your view points? I find that I do. If I see something that's presented to support evolution or oppose my blend of YEC, I immediately assume that it's faulty. Origins science is not amenable to observational scientific methodology. Since the Eyewitness account of origins is undeniably clear about creation, there is no "evidence" that contradicts creationism, only faulty interpretations of that evidence. This is a philosophical worldview issue, DanJames, not a scientific one. My scientific understanding of YEC interpretations of certain data and evidences has changed over the latter half of my life and I remain open to better explanations of the existing evidence for creationism. However, as cow regularly opines, the Bible is not a scientific textbook. My response to that is nothing in reality contradicts God's Word. Evolution is NOT reality!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 10:13:26 AM
|
|
|
essentialsaltes
Posts: 1062
Joined: 10/14/2007
From: Inglewood, CA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Your rant doesn’t change the FACT that what you presented as the best evidence for reptile to mammal evolution is circular reasoning.
No, it isn't. I explained why.
quote:
quote:
What is your alternative hypothesis?
“And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.” – Genesis 1:25
Assuming you adhere to a typical YEC position in which all species were created during the same literal week less than 10,000 years ago, this hypothesis does not explain why the fossils I listed are found in strata that are dated in a sequence from old to young, with millions of years of difference between them. How did they come to be buried in rocks so that they look like widely separated frames taken from a film of reptiles morphing into mammals?
Nor does your hypothesis explain why these fossils all portray extinct species. Why is it that the 'transitional-looking' forms are all extinct, but the modern forms survive? Did Noah have a grudge against repti-mmals?
quote:
quote:
Earlier you stated that "No one denies that a wolf can “evolve” into terrier". If (just as a thought experiment) some of the species in the chain above differ from their predecessors less than a wolf does from a terrier, would you deny that one "evolved" from the other?
Evidently it went right over your head. Claiming that a dog “evolving” into a dog is evidence that a reptile can evolve into a mammal is a bait and switch con game.
Just answer the question I actually asked. It's a simple yes or no.
_____________________________
"My object in all arguments is not to make any preconceived opinion of mine seem right, but merely to discover and establish the truth, whatever the truth may be."
-- HP Lovecraft, letter to Robert E. Howard 7/27-28/34
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 7:05:28 PM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL:cow451quote:
It's a soapbox, not a pulpit. You'll have to settle for Bible-waving.
So you are on your soapbox, waving the Bible, proclaiming that there is absolutely NO Scriptural support for evolution.
I agree completely. So, please explain why anyone should believe in evolution considering that the “scientific” evidence for it consists of little more than circular reasoning and bait and switch con games.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 7:27:23 PM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes quote:
quote:
quote:
Earlier you stated that "No one denies that a wolf can “evolve” into terrier". If (just as a thought experiment) some of the species in the chain above differ from their predecessors less than a wolf does from a terrier, would you deny that one "evolved" from the other?
Evidently it went right over your head. Claiming that a dog “evolving” into a dog is evidence that a reptile can evolve into a mammal is a bait and switch con game.
Just answer the question I actually asked. It's a simple yes or no.
Your question is irrelevant unless you can explain how a dog “evolving” into a dog provides observational support for the premise that a reptile can evolve into a mammal.
Your question is nothing more than an attempt at diversion from the fact that claiming that the simple variation within a kind is evidence for goo to you evolution is nothing more than a bait and switch con game.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Earth Basics - 3/13/2008 7:33:18 PM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 919
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: stellaluna quote:
How come everyone's talking about evolution in this earth-revolving thread and everyone's talking about the earth revolving in the evolution thread?
Why should these two threads be the exceptions?
quote:
I just came back from a trip in which I flew halfway across the US.
I will apologize for this up front because I just can't pass it up.
I bet your arms are tired.
_____________________________
"For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me." - John 5:46
Visit my home church.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
