• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Darwin's Illusion

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
I cannot see how it is feasible to have a discussion with a person that refuses to listen to others, to learn or to recognize that most of what they declare as knowledge of a subject is conjecture they imagine are facts.

It was obvious pretty early on that most of the declarations were empty and not only don't conform with the evidence of observation and experiment, but more often conflict with it. Then too, the conflict of views that are contrary to previously offered empty assertions. None of it offers any sort of useable, rational explanation of observations.

I gave up when I read that posts weren't addressed and evidence wasn't provided so the message could be preached to lurkers. Kind of defeats the purpose of a discussion.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
If I were to breed wolves that I recognized as having traits that made them less aggressive or more tame, then I would be selecting existing variation from the population and not creating that variation or reducing the numbers and genetic variation of wild wolves.

How credible is a claim that wolves are wiped out by the breeding of dogs when wolves still exist? When they can still interbreed with dogs. Wolf populations have experienced recent bottlenecks, but not due to breeding dogs. They do not mix well with people and have been overhunted and had much of their habitat reduced leading to a precipitous drop in numbers and populations. However, those populations are on the rebound due to conservations efforts by people. None of those efforts is based on an appeal to pseudoscience.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
I gave up when I read that posts weren't addressed and evidence wasn't provided so the message could be preached to lurkers. Kind of defeats the purpose of a discussion.
I'm still open to discussion, just not over pseudoscience.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
Freaking unbelievable that a nonsense thread can be kept going for over 6,500 posts. What, I wonder, does that say about our collective intelligence? Weep for us...
I've persisted as a personal intellectual exercise. Of course no one is forced to read it or participate.

But you make a good point.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunately not an option when your questions go unanswered and evidence is never provided.
I agree.

I've been looking at it like one of those "what's different about the two pictures" exercises to amuse myself and keep me from falling asleep during the waking hours. This apnea is killing me right now. It has been helping me focus while I get that back under control.
 

John53

I go leaps and bounds
Premium Member
I agree.

I've been looking at it like one of those "what's different about the two pictures" exercises to amuse myself and keep me from falling asleep during the waking hours. This apnea is killing me right now. It has been helping me focus while I get that back under control.

I should do something about mine but I don't want to do the sleep study. I've booked it a few times but cancelled.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunately not an option when your questions go unanswered and evidence is never provided.
I've thought about the difference between having one thread where no amount of evidence will make any difference as opposed to the many threads of the same sort. There seems to be a lot of threads where questions go unanswered and no evidence is ever offered to support the many claims. Maybe keeping it all on one thread is more efficient.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
I should do something about mine but I don't want to do the sleep study. I've booked it a few times but cancelled.
I am prone to respiratory allergies associated with indoor air quality and this winter here has been incredibly difficult for me. The allergies cause my nasal passages to swell shut reducing or eliminating the benefit of the CPAP. It varies from day to day and there is no telling when it will increase in severity. Before I was diagnosed and got treatment, I thought I was experiencing some sort of escalating mental health issue. I turned to my personal physician thinking I was on the verge of losing my mind. I ended up seeing more than one doctor and receiving several different therapeutic medications that I didn't really need in the end. I'm not sure why it took so long for my physicians to consider a sleep study, but it wasn't until about 10 years ago that I went. As soon as I got the CPAP, I changed overnight literally. I was back to myself again. No falling asleep in the middle of report writing. No pendulous mood swings for no apparent reason. No drifting off in my thoughts or hyper focusing. It turns out that I wake up 99 times an hour without treatment. To be diagnosed, you only have to wake up 5 times an hour. Incredibly, mine isn't even a record. But apparently I had been going for years with little or no effective sleep. It is not a condition I wish to see repeated.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
I should do something about mine but I don't want to do the sleep study. I've booked it a few times but cancelled.
The sleep study is pretty easy and only takes a portion of the night to complete. You are adorned with a number of electrical leads and given a bed to sleep on. I was so constantly fatigued, I didn't even know I had fallen asleep when I was roused to let me know the test was over and I had a confirmed diagnosis of sleep apnea.

It is hard to say what damage I may have accumulated over the ensuing years prior to treatment. If you think you need the study, I would recommend it.
 

Dan From Smithville

The Flying Elvises, Utah Chapter
Staff member
Premium Member
I should do something about mine but I don't want to do the sleep study. I've booked it a few times but cancelled.
One interesting discovery in all of this is that sometime in the past my nose had been broken and I was unaware of this. There has been some discussion about going under to have it rebroken and positioned to re-establish and enhance my airway. The break means the nasal passages are deviated.

Apparently, there was even less intelligence used in my design and this has been further effected by my experiences in the environment.
 

cladking

Well-Known Member
I do know that genetic bottlenecks are not speciation events. The definition of the term was established by the first persons to coin the term and use it to describe a phenomenon that is not speciation.

This is exactly correct.

Speciation events often occur in tandem with near extinctions (bottlenecks). This hardly means the bottlenecks cayuse speciation. Behavior which is selected for at near extinction events is caused by unusual genes and these genes cause speciation.

All life is conscious and consciousness which arises from genes drives behavior. Nature doesn't select for "fitness" it selects for behavior. It's just this simple. The Bible got it closer than Darwin.
 

cladking

Well-Known Member
Look at wolves. The species still exists. They can still interbreed with dogs. The diversity of wolves can be introgressed into dogs or vice versa if a breeder wanted to. In natural selection, there is no demand of theory that ancestral species must go extinct. Neither is that the case in artificial breeding.

But they typically do go extinct suggesting there were very few of them when the speciation event occurred and explains the missing links. Evidence and logic argue against Darwin's Illusion.
 

cladking

Well-Known Member
You know me. I'm really posting to the millions of the silent readers that must be there hanging on my every word.

Well... ...106,000 anyway.

Your post quoted here will get about 50 views, 25 good reads, and a few who understand it.

People are swayed individually so we must choose our words carefully.
 

cladking

Well-Known Member
I should do something about mine but I don't want to do the sleep study. I've booked it a few times but cancelled.

The roto rooter job is easier and doesn't require a sleep study for most insurance.

Get a doc with a good bedside manner and you'll be best off.
 
Last edited:

cladking

Well-Known Member
Freaking unbelievable that a nonsense thread can be kept going for over 6,500 posts. What, I wonder, does that say about our collective intelligence? Weep for us...

LOL.

I'll even have you convinced there's no such thing as intelligence yet!

What I'd like to understand is why the religious people here make better arguments than the believers in science!!! I've never seen anything like this in my whole life. Many people have argued well from a religious perspective and all science supporters seem to do is cite what they believe are "facts" at random. There have been some good arguments on both sides but if I could pick sides I'd try to walk with God or at the very least acknowledge His existence and sing His praises.

You guys need to work on your game here.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
But they typically do go extinct suggesting there were very few of them when the speciation event occurred and explains the missing links. Evidence and logic argue against Darwin's Illusion.
Yes, the book Darwin's Illusion is nonsense. Evolution is a well established fact, what science deniers have to say especially those that do not understand the concept of logic or evidence does not matter.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
I'm reminded of what a genetics instructor said about how fortunate we are that Mendel chose the garden pea as his subject and not some other plant. They are easy to grow, the traits easy to detect and they aren't linked. Making study of them really easy with nice repeatable results.
I liked learning about Mendel's experiment also, while genetics were explored, the plants stayed as plants. Laugh as you will...:)
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
But did the soil he planted them in move? That might skew the results.
Not to call anyone stupid, but was the soil tested for dates during Mendel's time? haha, and hehe. :) I'm really beginning to learn from you guys, no kidding intended. :)
Big time to demonstrate just how fallacious the "theory" of Darwinian style of evolution is.Thank you, y'all!!!!
 
Top