Darwin's Illusion

[cladking]

The other ludicrous problem is him (cladking) believing that evolution and speciation can happen in less than 3 generations.

It is always sudden.

It can be so sudden that it can be symbolized by the collapse of a structure.

The actual change started in 3200 BC and wasn't truly complete until the last Nephilim (homo sapien) died around 1200 BC but most of the change began and ended when the official language all over the world was simultaneously changed from Ancient Language to the many modern pidgin languages.

For all practical purposes speciation occurs when the old species is exterminated by any event and especially an event that selects for unusual behavior such as a proclivity to use or fluency in "confused language". It also occurs when a water hating species is exterminated except for individuals who are in the water such as the whale ancestors.

This theory is not difficult to understand if you want to want to understand it. Believers rarely if ever want to understand ANYTHING that flies in the face of doctrine. Make no mistake about it, I believe that in all probability doctrine as begun by Darwin is still wrong and that Darwin was wrong about everything.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They were wholly ignorant of modern science.

But there is more than one kind of science and they were masters of theirs. They had 40,000 years of human history and science at their disposal.

If I'm right they were using a metaphysical language to describe rituals and that from this language and these rituals I can deduce the means they used to build pyramids then it follows they were scientists rather than stinky footed bumpkins as envisioned by orthodoxy. It further follows that their understanding of "evolution" should be considered relevant. INDEED, even if I am wholly wrong then the very fact these bumpkins invented agriculture still makes their opinion relevant to Darwin's illusion. How in the hell did savages invent agriculture? And while you're pondering this you better ask how beavers, ants, and termites also invented agriculture.

You can't address any of this with experimental basis, I can.

Show us the evidence of all change being sudden. Explain how the different lengths of time observed in biological phenomena all can be said to be sudden. E. coli can go through 900 generations in 11 days, chickens go through a generation every 6 months and humans have a generation time of 25 years. Show us, with evidence that these are all the same and all sudden.

Show us all your experiments. Don't just say that all experiments support your belief system. That isn't an answer and it isn't evidence to support your claims.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It is always sudden.

It can be so sudden that it can be symbolized by the collapse of a structure.

The actual change started in 3200 BC and wasn't truly complete until the last Nephilim (homo sapien) died around 1200 BC but most of the change began and ended when the official language all over the world was simultaneously changed from Ancient Language to the many modern pidgin languages.

For all practical purposes speciation occurs when the old species is exterminated by any event and especially an event that selects for unusual behavior such as a proclivity to use or fluency in "confused language". It also occurs when a water hating species is exterminated except for individuals who are in the water such as the whale ancestors.

This theory is not difficult to understand if you want to want to understand it. Believers rarely if ever want to understand ANYTHING that flies in the face of doctrine. Make no mistake about it, I believe that in all probability doctrine as begun by Darwin is still wrong and that Darwin was wrong about everything.

Dismissed.

 

[cladking]

It is YOUR JOB to provide a rational basis for YOUR claims. Something you routinely avoid, while equally routinely claiming you didn't.

The invalid claims are YOURS.

YOU agreed based on the implications of your words.

You don'ty even know what we're talking about and I don't intend to continue this conversation until you do.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

And THIS is what I have to deal with!!!!! Just in the last day or two in tis very thread I specifically stated one of Darwin's Illusions; one of his failed assumptions.

But you only state them. You don't defend them. You don't show why the science you disagree with is wrong, you just say it is. You can't convince a critical thinker without a sound, evidenced argument.

The most critical of all his failed assumptions each of which I've listed many times in this and other threads and you ignore them. You ignore it and ignore it and then act like it never happened.

They reject insufficiently supported claims. You know that already. If you want to make an impact, you'll need more than claims. You'll need sound, compelling arguments to go with them.

Ignoring facts does not cancel them

And claiming that they are facts doesn't make them that.

I'd repeat it but it will be ignored AGAIN so you go look it up.

Why would he? The only reason I'd go back to find something from another poster would be to show it to him, not to show it to myself again.

All the facts, all the logic, all the evidence, and every experiment says Darwin was wrong.

Not in the main. The theory is correct, even if some of the details need to be tweaked from time to time to account for new findings since Darwin's time.

He was also wrong when he said the mechanism for "Evolution" was best expressed as "survival of the fittest". There is no such thing by any name at all.

I don't his know exact words, but the meaning was that evolution proceeds as nature selects among genetic variations. Survival of the fittest is an unfortunate term like church-state separation (God forbid the church were ever not subject to the laws of the state) and defunding the police.

I have "no" expertise in biology or Egyptology.

Then why are you contradicting those that do?

It is normal in science history for every single expert to be wrong.

But very rare to recognize and correct it. It takes a rare individual to see further. How many people that try succeed? A percent of a percent of a percent of a percent?

I try to have no opinions or beliefs and avoid stating any unless I state them all. You should remember they start with "reality is what is perceived by all people who always make perfect sense". It goes on and on so don't stop there.

What I do have is explanations for experiment and why the world exists as it does and presents it face (evidence) as it does. These "explanations" aren't "conclusions" nor "opinions" but are more akin to probabilities. There is a 75% probability that the pyramids were built with linear funiculars by scientists whose "theory of evolution" looked very very similar to my own. Of course they and I might be wrong but I believe there's a 60% chance that Darwin was wrong about every single thing. I have to reconcile my models to reality and I have to reconcile all of them to all of reality simultaneously.

Funny thing is that I'm always the only person that can be wrong. Scientists can't be wrong. Believers in science can't be wrong. Only I mght be wrong. I define "superstition" as knowing you are right. If you KNOW that survival of the fittest causes gradual change in species even though every generation is the same species as its parents then you are superstitious, your beliefs are non sequitur, and you haven't provided much of any evidence for your beliefs in this thread.

Simply stated if there is a change in species then there is a change in species. The difference it to me it appears to be sudden like all change in all life and you believe it is a gradual adaptation. But you can't show a single niche anywhere that shows speciation and this is because no niche lasts long enough for speciation to occur. DARWIN WAS WRONG when he said population were stable. He assumed the conclusion and now this has become a religion.

This was a response to, "To them (Dunning-Kruger victims), all opinions are arrived at like theirs - whatever seems or feels right - and thus no opinion is better than any other." Do you think it addressed that comment? I don't see where.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

YOU agreed based on the implications of your words.

You don'ty even know what we're talking about and I don't intend to continue this conversation until you do.

When you present evidence and experiment for anything you believe, perhaps then, there will be something for me to agree to. But I don't have much confidence that you will ever do that.

Until then, all you have presented is a belief system draped with vague references and semantics.

 

[cladking]

Show us the evidence of all change being sudden.

All I can do is show observed change is sudden.

Real "evolution" is far more highly complex than any human can conceive so I can't possibly show how something like a bird (mightta) come from a dinosaur. I can speculate but I can do little more.

This is the nature of reality; it is complex. It is even more complex over the long term or on the small scale. It's not a nice tidy little reality that obeys laws and reveals its entire self in a single lab experiment. Even if reality were as tidy as some believe it still couldn't be modeled accurately by any individual.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It is always sudden.

It can be so sudden that it can be symbolized by the collapse of a structure.

The actual change started in 3200 BC and wasn't truly complete until the last Nephilim (homo sapien) died around 1200 BC but most of the change began and ended when the official language all over the world was simultaneously changed from Ancient Language to the many modern pidgin languages.

For all practical purposes speciation occurs when the old species is exterminated by any event and especially an event that selects for unusual behavior such as a proclivity to use or fluency in "confused language". It also occurs when a water hating species is exterminated except for individuals who are in the water such as the whale ancestors.

This theory is not difficult to understand if you want to want to understand it. Believers rarely if ever want to understand ANYTHING that flies in the face of doctrine. Make no mistake about it, I believe that in all probability doctrine as begun by Darwin is still wrong and that Darwin was wrong about everything.

Nephilim appear to be mythical too. They only appear in the Noah's Ark myth, as far as I know, and that was debunked before Darwin's time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

All I can do is show observed change is sudden.

Real "evolution" is far more highly complex than any human can conceive so I can't possibly show how something like a bird (mightta) come from a dinosaur. I can speculate but I can do little more.

This is the nature of reality; it is complex. It is even more complex over the long term or on the small scale. It's not a nice tidy little reality that obeys laws and reveals its entire self in a single lab experiment. Even if reality were as tidy as some believe it still couldn't be modeled accurately by any individual.

But it isn't. You have to only consider terrestrial fossils and terrestrial fossils are extremely rare because the surface of the Earth is very very rarely a fossilizing environment.

 

[gnostic]

Homo sapiens are extinct. Long live Homo sapiens.

I'm just trying to remind the reader I believe humans became extinct at the tower of babel and we are an entirely new species I oft call homo circulus ratiocinatio (circularly reasoning man) because we use an abstract language expressed through the brocas area that allows induction and forces us to reason circularly. We do this all the time where no other spe

You are still peddling this smoke-and-mirror garbage about the Tower of Babel and the nonexistent Homo Omnisciensis.

The Tower of Babel is a myth that has never existed 4000 years ago, and a myth that everyone spoke one language becoming many. Genesis Tower of Babel didn’t exist in writing until the 6th century BCE, inspired by the construction of ziggurat completed by Nebuchadnezzar, when Jews were living in exile in Babylon.

Archaeologically, no such ziggurat existed in Babylon prior to 2000 BCE, because Babylon was only a minor town at this time. Babylon was no prosperous capital until the 6th Amorite king, Hammurabi, reigning during the second half of 18th century BCE.

As to your Homo omniscienesis, this species is an illusion of your own deluded making.

Both Homo omniscienesis and Tower of Babel are garbage you have been preaching in your Ancient Reality thread. Why do you resurrecting these pseudo-history & pseudoscience that only you believe?

 

[cladking]

You don't show why the science you disagree with is wrong,

I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH SCIENCE. I disagree with the silly paradigm created by Darwin.

All observed change in life is sudden.

And claiming that they are facts doesn't make them that.

So what are you suggesting isn't a fact?

Survival of the fittest is an unfortunate term..

BUT IT WAS STILL USED BY DARWIN.

Then why are you contradicting those that do?

I AM NOT CONTRADICTING THEM. Their expertise is always valid even though their conclusions and methodology are wrong.

But very rare to recognize and correct it. It takes a rare individual to see further. How many people that try succeed? A percent of a percent of a percent of a percent?

YES. I might be wrong.

But only I might be wrong because Peers hand down physical law.

Do you think it addressed that comment? I don't see where.

I'm not sure the question but I could restate the entire paragraph in a sentence fragment that might answer it.

Homo circularis ratiocinatio. Circularly reasoning man. We each always and only put the cart before the horse. I just coincidentally started with true assumptions. I reasoned in circles and came right back to "true". This is how I'm able to make predictions. I'm no expert and no Nostradamus but good theory by definition makes good prediction. Only by "definition" when using an amalgam of two different types of sciences. I believe we will find such amalgams useful someday.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

All I can do is show observed change is sudden.

YOU NEVER HAVE. All you have done is repeat the claim just like you do here.

Real "evolution" is far more highly complex than any human can conceive so I can't possibly show how something like a bird (mightta) come from a dinosaur. I can speculate but I can do little more.

Now there is a "real" evolution. Yet, the implication is that you do conceive it. I conclude that it is widely recognized that all you post is speculation.

This is the nature of reality; it is complex. It is even more complex over the long term or on the small scale. It's not a nice tidy little reality that obeys laws and reveals its entire self in a single lab experiment. Even if reality were as tidy as some believe it still couldn't be modeled accurately by any individual.

This tells me nothing except that you do recognize that you don't understand and that your claims are mostly arising from your own ignorance. I think you will find that this is also widely recognized based on what you post.

You basically aren't saying anything except that you don't know.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH SCIENCE. I disagree with the silly paradigm created by Darwin.

All observed change in life is sudden.

But it isn't. You have been given specific examples many many times.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH SCIENCE. I disagree with the silly paradigm created by Darwin.

And yet, you cannot explain to anyone why you disagree. If it is so obvious that one that is not an expert in any science can see it, why is it so difficult to present a rational argument supporting your opinion and explaining it to the rest of us. Just because this is all really hard for you to understand doesn't mean it is difficult for the rest of us.

All observed change in life is sudden.

No it is not. Dismissed.

So what are you suggesting isn't a fact?

99% of what you claim.

BUT IT WAS STILL USED BY DARWIN.

So what. It isn't used now. Darwin wasn't a prophet.

I AM NOT CONTRADICTING THEM. Their expertise is always valid even though their conclusions and methodology are wrong.

Then you are contradicting experts and dismissing their expertise in favor of your belief system. Face it, you are the believer using semantics and dogma in the face of evidence and experiment that shows you to be wrong.

YES. I might be wrong.

There is no "might be" to it. You have been shown to be wrong. Consistently.

But only I might be wrong because Peers hand down physical law.

You are wrong because you offer a baseless belief system that you cannot defend with experiments and evidence as if you are an oracle dispensing revealed truths.

I'm not sure the question but I could restate the entire paragraph in a sentence fragment that might answer it.

Homo circularis ratiocinatio. Circularly reasoning man. We each always and only put the cart before the horse. I just coincidentally started with true assumptions. I reasoned in circles and came right back to "true". This is how I'm able to make predictions. I'm no expert and no Nostradamus but good theory by definition makes good prediction. Only by "definition" when using an amalgam of two different types of sciences. I believe we will find such amalgams useful someday.

This is just something you have made up without any valid reasoning or evidence to back it up.

People do argue in circles at times. You present numerous examples of that it is true. But nothing comes of it, but to see you post these circles again and again as if they are facts.

Have you elevated Nostrodamas to the level of prophet in your belief system? That is what it looks like.

You don't have any valid theory and have made no valid predictions that I am aware of. I doubt anyone is aware of any valid predictions you have made.

More religious belief that is not science and is not established as fact.

 

[gnostic]

The actual change started in 3200 BC and wasn't truly complete until the last Nephilim (homo sapien) died around 1200 BC but most of the change began and ended when the official language all over the world was simultaneously changed from Ancient Language to the many modern pidgin languages.

Nephilm is another 6th century BCE Genesis myth (Genesis 6), relating to the Flood myth.

A Flood myth that was inspired by story of Utnapishtim in the Epic of Gilgamesh, again when Jews were living in exile in the 6th century BCE.

I find the irony that you would accuse anyone who disagree with you about human history as believing in the prehistoric and historical ancient people were superstitious “smelly-foot bumpkins”, when you are the one believing in superstitious myth of nonexistent nephilim and nonexistent Tower of Babel.

If anyone who believe in superstitions, it is you, which would make you the bumpkin with smelly feet.

 

[cladking]

You are still peddling this smoke-and-mirror garbage about the Tower of Babel and the nonexistent Homo Omnisciensis.

The Tower of Babel is a myth that has never existed 4000 years ago, and a myth that everyone spoke one language becoming many. Genesis Tower of Babel didn’t exist in writing until the 6th century BCE, inspired by the construction of ziggurat completed by Nebuchadnezzar, when Jews were living in exile in Babylon.

Archaeologically, no such ziggurat existed in Babylon prior to 2000 BCE, because Babylon was only a minor town at this time. Babylon was no prosperous capital until the 6th Amorite king, Hammurabi, reigning during the second half of 18th century BCE.

As to your Homo omniscienesis, this species is an illusion of your own deluded making.

Both Homo omniscienesis and Tower of Babel are garbage you have been preaching in your Ancient Reality thread. Why do you resurrecting these pseudo-history & pseudoscience that only you believe?

Speciation is very sudden.

There were many pidgin languages before babel. Languages can't rise from a cloud of dust. What you are misrepresenting is the change from the official state languages being Ancient Language which was used in mutually intelligible dialects all over the world to the official language becoming the mutually unintelligible pidgin languages based on these dialects. It was out with the old and in with new but the "old" included all human knowledge and its metaphysics and the new was only confusion because even as today two people speaking the same language rarely understood one another. Such is life. They had a great 40000 year run and then it was time to spiral down for 4000 years.

Everything is sudden. the people who didn't understand AL and had to learn a new one was sudden, societal collapse is sudden, death is sudden. worlds colliding is sudden. Whole epochs and eras arise suddenly as well as the many species that fill them.

The fossil record is composed chiefly of missing links and then it is misinterpreted suddenly by a Look and See Scientist we call Charles Darwin.

There are no missing links because when speciation occurs population are exceedingly low. This is the very definition of "bottleneck". Believers in science have nothing but a profound belief in their own knowledge and the omniscience of Peers.

I am sorry reality is so complex we will never be able to fully understand speciation events of the past. I am not responsible. I am merely a seeker like most on this site.

 

[cladking]

Nephilm is another 6th century BCE Genesis myth (Genesis 6), relating to the Flood myth.

Oh, and by the ay the Sumerian version of this goes back to 1800 BC I believe.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I DO NOT DISAGREE WITH SCIENCE. I disagree with the silly paradigm created by Darwin.

All observed change in life is sudden.



So what are you suggesting isn't a fact?



BUT IT WAS STILL USED BY DARWIN.



I AM NOT CONTRADICTING THEM. Their expertise is always valid even though their conclusions and methodology are wrong.



YES. I might be wrong.

But only I might be wrong because Peers hand down physical law.



I'm not sure the question but I could restate the entire paragraph in a sentence fragment that might answer it.

Homo circularis ratiocinatio. Circularly reasoning man. We each always and only put the cart before the horse. I just coincidentally started with true assumptions. I reasoned in circles and came right back to "true". This is how I'm able to make predictions. I'm no expert and no Nostradamus but good theory by definition makes good prediction. Only by "definition" when using an amalgam of two different types of sciences. I believe we will find such amalgams useful someday.

I have no issue that people have different belief systems. Even one that appears to be an amalgam of pieces of distorted history, random bits of Christianity, some science fiction, distorted understanding of science, conspiracy theories and parts I'm not even sure where they come from. You can believe all that.

But you are trying to sell your beliefs to everyone as fact and they should ignore or reject valid knowledge in favor of your system that you cannot even articulate, let alone establish any basis for.

In the end, all you continue to do is make claims you cannot seem to support or even explain. You ignore or reject any valid criticism of what you have posted. You cannot provide any examples or reasons to accept your beliefs and reject what is understood based on evidence.

You are asking everyone to reject science and accept your personal opinions as some sort of factual story explaining reality.

I'm not going to do that. I have seen no reason to even consider it.

 

[cladking]

If anyone who believe in superstitions, it is you, which would make you the bumpkin with smelly feet.

Good Grief.

I DEFINED "superstition" as being 100% sure of anything. I am at most 60% certain that ancient people were not stinky footed bumpkins.

I could cite several lines in the Pyramid Texts where they refer to washing their feet and selves with seltzer water and natron but this is not the thread for it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Speciation is very sudden.

No it isn't. That you present no evidence to consider this claim as valid ensures us that you are just making another empty claim that is part of what you believe for no particular reason.

There were many pidgin languages before babel. Languages can't rise from a cloud of dust. What you are misrepresenting is the change from the official state languages being Ancient Language which was used in mutually intelligible dialects all over the world to the official language becoming the mutually unintelligible pidgin languages based on these dialects. It was out with the old and in with new but the "old" included all human knowledge and its metaphysics and the new was only confusion because even as today two people speaking the same language rarely understood one another. Such is life. They had a great 40000 year run and then it was time to spiral down for 4000 years.

Nothing.

Everything is sudden. the people who didn't understand AL and had to learn a new one was sudden, societal collapse is sudden, death is sudden. worlds colliding is sudden. Whole epochs and eras arise suddenly as well as the many species that fill them.

Now everything is sudden. Who knew? No one.

The fossil record is composed chiefly of missing links and then it is misinterpreted suddenly by a Look and See Scientist we call Charles Darwin.

Ah yes. Look and see science. A bugbear to scare the children. Didn't you claim to be a look and see scientist? You sure did.

There are no missing links because when speciation occurs population are exceedingly low.

Now we see some examples of how you contradict yourself in the same post. Just one sentence up, you declare the fossil record chiefly composed of missing links. One sentence later they don't exist.

This is the very definition of "bottleneck". Believers in science have nothing but a profound belief in their own knowledge and the omniscience of Peers.

I am sorry reality is so complex we will never be able to fully understand speciation events of the past. I am not responsible. I am merely a seeker like most on this site.

A bottleneck has been routinely explained to you. It is not a speciation event. You don't understand that.

It is your belief as a believer that is being challenged here. Continually claiming a conspiracy theory without a basis hasn't helped you before and doesn't help you now.

There is ample evidence that you are not a seeker of knowledge here, but rather are acting as an oracle dispensing revealed truths to the rest of us that know nothing. But none of those revealed truths answer anything. Certainly, if they did, I would think that you would reveal that.