What's new
By:

Science vs. Creationism

PearlWatson said:
The design of all these mislabled parts you talk about is obvious to me, but go on believing in "vestigial" organs. I ain't going to talk you out of it, because you are extremely dogmatic in your beliefs, but I will present one part of the Creationism argument anyway because it goes along with the information theory I have been talking about.

"The notion of vestigial organs as an argument for evolution fails on a number of counts.
Firstly, vestigial organs provide no positive evidence for evolution. They are presented as negative evidence against a designer. And even if the vestigial organ argument were true, it at best presents examples of degeneration or information loss. This is the opposite of what evolution requires to explain the origin of the complexity and diversity of life."​
Click to expand...

Ridiculous false statement ( from creationism website I guess) as always. The emergence of vestigiality occurs by normal evolutionary processes, typically by loss of function of a feature that is no longer subject to positive selection pressures when it loses its value in a changing environment.
Losing legs for the snake was positive. Losing hair on the skin for whale was positive same as their hind legs becoming vestigial. Losing ability to fly for some birds was positive, losing some toes for horses was positive - nature is full of positive examples of vestigiality. Whats so difficult to understand here and where the imaginary designer is coming from here?
And by the way I have not seen any reputable links supporting your previous false statements. You just throw out false claims from creationism websites and never provide any supporting information when they are dismissed. As I said bring up some more!
How about that Hoatzin bird? Sure those claws on wings look "designed" lol?
 
PearlWatson said:
Holy hell, I'm in Darwiniac Bizzaro World.

You believe fish begat frogs, but then say I am the one who believes a dog can begat a cat.
Click to expand...

I accept frogs are a special type of fish based on the evidence, and I notice you have not denied my claim about your beliefs.
 
PearlWatson said:
IF a monkey flew out my butt it would be using the old ability in a new way, thus making a new ability.

Too bad neither of our scenarios ever happened.
Click to expand...

Except,you have acknowledged a similar scenario did happen with Lenski's bacteria; an old ability being used in a new way.
 
AKMVP said:
Ridiculous false statement ( from creationism website I guess) as always. The emergence of vestigiality occurs by normal evolutionary processes, typically by loss of function of a feature that is no longer subject to positive selection pressures when it loses its value in a changing environment.
Losing legs for the snake was positive. Losing hair on the skin for whale was positive same as their hind legs becoming vestigial. Losing ability to fly for some birds was positive, losing some toes for horses was positive - nature is full of positive examples of vestigiality. Whats so difficult to understand here and where the imaginary designer is coming from here?
And by the way I have not seen any reputable links supporting your previous false statements. You just throw out false claims from creationism websites and never provide any supporting information when they are dismissed. As I said bring up some more!
How about that Hoatzin bird? Sure those claws on wings look "designed" lol?
Click to expand...

You are trying to tell me losing something is positive when losing something is clearly negative. When information theorists say "positive" they mean additive.

I guess you mean losing something can be beneficial in its results, but that ain't what I'm talking about.

I"ve concluded that besides the basic assumptions involved the reason this debate is so difficult is because of semantic and/or connotation problems.

I might be burnt out on this discussion for now. Thanks for providing some challenge.

Remember when we simply shared our love of AK and disgust of Sloan, and pioneered the GTS game? Those where the good old days.
 
PearlWatson said:
What did begat the cat?

Let me guess. The "cat-like" ancestor.
Click to expand...

Carnivorans evolved from members of the paraphyletic family Miacidae (miacids). The transition from Miacidae to Carnivora was a general trend in the middle and late Eocene, with taxa from both North America and Eurasia involved. The divergence of carnivorans from other miacids, as well as the divergence of the two clades within Carnivora, Caniformia and Feliformia, is now inferred to have happened in the middle Eocene, about 42 million years ago (mya).
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivora#Phylogeny
 
One Brow said:
Except,you have acknowledged a similar scenario did happen with Lenski's bacteria; an old ability being used in a new way.
Click to expand...

An old ability used under different conditions on an animal that didn't change form at all.

It would take a miracles for a fish to begat a frog. They are a completely different design form.
 
One Brow said:
It's not done deliberately. If you prefer, we can call it "accidentally created". Golden-dolphin-immortal-porpoise-it-means-the-same-thing-it's-synonymous.
Incorrect. Typos can occur due to mistakes in the transmission/copying process with no human intervention. For example, when OCR readers are used, typos are common.
Yet, these duplications happen from time to time, without being designed, and increase information as a result.
Click to expand...

When you pair random with created you have an oxymoron.
Creation denotes purpose.

So humans designed a reading machine that rearranges words...or replaces letters within words with other letters?
 
PearlWatson said:
You are trying to tell me losing something is positive when losing something is clearly negative.

Remember when we simply shared our love of AK and disgust of Sloan, and pioneered the GTS game? Those where the good old days.
Click to expand...

As documented by numerous examples in evolution losing something can be positive. I think modern human females having less hairy body than our ancestors is certainly quite positive development IMHO:)

Yes, that was way more than 10 years ago. Me being at that time in Europe I had no idea creationism even exists or that there are some people in USA questioning evolution.
USA is indeed very strange country. Seems to be so advanced in science but at the same time huge part of it still stuck in medieval times. Do you ever wonder why creationism is basically non existent anywhere else in the world?
 
AKMVP said:
Do you ever wonder why creationism is basically non existent anywhere else in the world?
Click to expand...

....now there's a hyperbole right out of Darwins "Origin of the Species!" Yes, the world is going godless faster than ever, and those who teach "creationism" (24 hour creative days that included the stars, planets and universe) have surely contributed greatly!

Is there a distinction between “creation” and “creationism”?
Yes, there is. The word “creation,” appearing some 18 times in the Holy Scriptures, whereas the term “creationism” is not found in the Bible.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1971) defines “creation” as “the act of creating,” and “creationism” as “a doctrine or theory of creation.” The same dictionary defines “ism” as “a distinctive doctrine, cause, system, or theory—often used disparagingly.”

In the 21st. Century, “creationism” has become a true “ism” because of its adoption by political pressure groups, such as the Moral Majority. It is no longer a neutral term, but embodies extreme fundamentalist views of the Bible, such as the view that God created the earth and everything upon it in six days of 24 hours each. There are now more than 350 books in circulation setting out such “creationism” dogma. However, many of us here and throughout the world reject the unreasonable theories of “creationism” in favor of what the Bible really teaches about “creation.”
 
AKMVP said:
As documented by numerous examples in evolution losing something can be positive. I think modern human females having less hairy body than our ancestors is certainly quite positive development IMHO:)

Yes, that was way more than 10 years ago. Me being at that time in Europe I had no idea creationism even exists or that there are some people in USA questioning evolution.
USA is indeed very strange country. Seems to be so advanced in science but at the same time huge part of it still stuck in medieval times. Do you ever wonder why creationism is basically non existent anywhere else in the world?
Click to expand...

The genetics professor I talked about that was critical of Darwinism lives in Poland, I believe, not USA.

Yes we are a strange country, because we haven't been taken over by godless communism and socialism...yet.
 
PearlWatson said:
"The notion of vestigial organs as an argument for evolution fails on a number of counts. Firstly, vestigial organs provide no positive evidence for evolution. They are presented as negative evidence against a designer. And even if the vestigial organ argument were true, it at best presents examples of degeneration or information loss. This is the opposite of what evolution requires to explain the origin of the complexity and diversity of life."​
Click to expand...

....so at best, AKMVP is a believer, not in "evolution" but in "de-evolution" if he wants to believe in all these "vestigial" organs! I suspect he might be on to something....if they ever examined what's inside his cranium!
 
carolinajazz said:
....now there's a hyperbole right out of Darwins "Origin of the Species!" Yes, the world is going godless faster than ever, and those who teach "creationism" (24 hour creative days that included the stars, planets and universe) have surely contributed greatly!

Is there a distinction between “creation” and “creationism”?
Yes, there is. The word “creation,” appearing some 18 times in the Holy Scriptures, whereas the term “creationism” is not found in the Bible.

Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1971) defines “creation” as “the act of creating,” and “creationism” as “a doctrine or theory of creation.” The same dictionary defines “ism” as “a distinctive doctrine, cause, system, or theory—often used disparagingly.”

In the 21st. Century, “creationism” has become a true “ism” because of its adoption by political pressure groups, such as the Moral Majority. It is no longer a neutral term, but embodies extreme fundamentalist views of the Bible, such as the view that God created the earth and everything upon it in six days of 24 hours each. There are now more than 350 books in circulation setting out such “creationism” dogma. However, many of us here and throughout the world reject the unreasonable theories of “creationism” in favor of what the Bible really teaches about “creation.”
Click to expand...

So you don't want godless liberals looking down on you for believing in creative periods instead of days. My guess is that they look down on you either way, so it ain't going to matter if they use "ism" or not.

I wouldn't worry about what they call you. Darwinism ain't any less ideological than creation or creationism, or even IDism (there is probably some overlap). They just have huge faith in accidental spontaneous generation instead of a designer or intelligent force.
 
carolinajazz said:
....so at best, AKMVP is a believer, not in "evolution" but in "de-evolution" if he wants to believe in all these "vestigial" organs! I suspect he might be on to something....if they ever examined what's inside his cranium!
Click to expand...

I can appreciate your jest.

He ain't a dumb guy any more than you are.

I'm guessing he is mostly motivated in this debate by his profession.
 
PearlWatson said:
The genetics professor I talked about that was critical of Darwinism lives in Poland, I believe, not USA.

Yes we are a strange country, because we haven't been taken over by godless communism and socialism...yet.
Click to expand...

Well communism was just a theory, it never happened in any country. And socialist and godless countries like Denmark, Finland Sweden and Norway left USA in dust when it comes to general quality of life.

https://lifestyle9.com/worlds-best-country-to-live-in-2013/10/
 
carolinajazz said:
....so at best, AKMVP is a believer, not in "evolution" but in "de-evolution" if he wants to believe in all these "vestigial" organs! !
Click to expand...

Who says I want to believe in vestigial organs? They are established fact. Thus I KNOW about it and see it every day in front of my eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top