Evolution, maybe someone can explain?

[Dimi95]

It shows change since 2000 BC. No language traces back before this.

Yes , but we don't know about other writing systems and how they developed , since most of the evidence does not exist anymore.

This was one of the many means I used to tentatively date the ToB; the advent of PIE languages. These all arose from dialects of Ancient Language that had been turned into pidgin languages.

So you admit that the neuro part of the body evolved , but not the whole body.

Correct me if i am wrong.

Why do people assume I'm stupid.

I have not noticed someone doing that , it is maybe that your confusion makes you make that conclusion.

Ignoring data, facts, and experiment derives from confusion, not stupidity.

This is again clear evidence that you don't want to admit that you are confused maybe.

Everybody makes sense in terms of their premises and your premises are wrong.

Not once you have provided any evidence for that so i can look it up where i would be possibly wrong.

Then you want to consider reality one experiment and fact At a time. Just as all things bear on all events and all experiment bears on all reality one must consider all known facts and experiment to deduce the nature of reality and this goes many times over with ancient reality that has been forgotten.

I don't say that i know everything and that i am all-knowledgeble , but what the evidence says is that what you say refers to you and comes back to you as a boomerang.

I am really tired of trying to convince you and make a proper disucssion out of it where you would be able to focus on points about Evolution , and not some jambo-mambo non-sense.

Are you able to discuss , or there is little hope for me to continue answering all of this?

 

[cladking]

Airplane takes off because human kind has made that possible.
And they take off and land the moment i am writing this.

Is it hard for them to land with every airport in the world traveling at between 200 and 1000 miles an hour? Taking off might be hard to with air moving at 32,000 MPH (at least). It's a wonder that we've done so well against such obstacles.

Imagine trying to stack stones on a speeding pyramid going the opposite direction!

 

[cladking]

Still the same thing , you say things and no evidence for what you say.

Everything is just dismissed out of hand. I list Darwin's confusions and they are ignored. It's impossible to discuss something that the other party can't even imagine.

 

[cladking]

I am telling you that most of the evidence is gone, and you continue with this kind of reasoning.

You said there was history. I challenged you to present some. You failed because there is no human history before 2000 BC. It was a different species that recorded history in a different formatting. That history doesn't survive IS prima facie evidence of a different species.

If you do not address THIS I will not continue this "discussion".

 

[Dimi95]

Everything is just dismissed out of hand.

That which is asserted without evidence , can be dismissed without evidence.

I list Darwin's confusions and they are ignored.

This discussion shows otherwise.

It's impossible to discuss something that the other party can't even imagine.

I agree

 

[cladking]

So you admit that the neuro part of the body evolved , but not the whole body.

Correct me if i am wrong.

No Evolution. All change in species is sudden and related not to "fitness" but to consciousness.

 

[Dimi95]

You said there was history. I challenged you to present some. You failed because there is no human history before 2000 BC.

Writings alone don't make history.
Everything that is there makes history.

Again you deny that the evidence that might solve this is gone.

Who builded the pyramids,then?

It was a different species that recorded history in a different formatting.

You need to demonstrate that.
Again only conclusions and no evidence.

That history doesn't survive OIS prima facie evidence of a different species.

You reject every plausible alternative without any traits of logic.

I am done , i wish you well.

I will not try to convince a person , if he just keeps ignoring the evident.

 

[cladking]

This is again clear evidence that you don't want to admit that you are confused maybe.

How many times do I have to say we are all confused because language is confused. Every single homo omnisciencis on the planet (all 8 billion of us) is confused singly and collectively.

Yes. I am confused. I build models of reality that reflect my beliefs more than reality. But this doesn't mean I'm not more right than Darwin and every Egyptologist on the planet.

 

[Dimi95]

No Evolution. All change in species is sudden and related not to "fitness" but to consciousness.

False.
All change is gradual and releated with the species and the enviourment that drived the behaviour of individuals in all aspects.

It cannot be sudden in any way.

 

[Dimi95]

How many times do I have to say we are all confused because language is confused.

How many times do i have to say that just because you think that human language is confusing , that does not mean all of us think the same

Every single homo omnisciencis on the planet (all 8 billion of us) is confused singly and collectively.

You are not going to make claims thaf concern all of human kind , while most of it don't agree with your conclusions.

Yes. I am confused. I build models of reality that reflect my beliefs more than reality. But this doesn't mean I'm not more right than Darwin and every Egyptologist on the planet.

So you admit that Darwin was right , is that so?
You want to say that you may be right as Darwin was?
How can you say that , when you reject Darwin in every answer of yours?
Is this what you do?
You use it only when it is usefull to you?

 

[cladking]

Everything that is there makes history.

This is just sad. Meanings of words drift and morph in the middle of a conversation. You are now equating "hoistory" with "the past" which you define as everything that is there instewad of everything that was. Or perhaps you mean that you can deduce history from knowing the Iceman's last meal. God only knows.

I know one thing and that is you failed utterly to support your contention that there was any history before 2000 BC and my point stands. This IS prima facie evidence there was different species and their words weren't translatable and our memory is discontinuous.

Now it's YOUR job to show they were the same species or that they spoke the same language. I could make this argument for you as well if you wish. But I'll soon grow weary of making both sides of a discussion.

 

[Dimi95]

This is just sad. Meanings of words drift and morph in the middle of a conversation. You are now equating "hoistory" with "the past" which you define as everything that is there instewad of everything that was.

We have structures that are present now and were present then.
Not everything that was has disapeared

Or perhaps you mean that you can deduce history from knowing the Iceman's last meal. God only knows.

No i am saying every time the oposite of it , but you can't understand it.

You are again switching the burden of proof here.

I know one thing and that is you failed utterly to support your contention that there was any history before 2000 BC and my point stands. This IS prima facie evidence there was different species and their words weren't translatable and our memory is discontinuous.

Now it's YOUR job to show they were the same species or that they spoke the same language. I could make this argument for you as well if you wish. But I'll soon grow weary of making both sides of a discussion.

No , the onus is on you.

I have provided probable alternatives and you reject them without evidence.
The onus is on you to present another alternative , and not ask the same questions in different forms again and again.

 

[Pogo]

Is it hard for them to land with every airport in the world traveling at between 200 and 1000 miles an hour? Taking off might be hard to with air moving at 32,000 MPH (at least). It's a wonder that we've done so well against such obstacles.

Imagine trying to stack stones on a speeding pyramid going the opposite direction!

Ah yes the ancient wisdom. The earth is the center of the universe and all the stars and the sun revolve around it. So how do airplanes take off and land?

The fact that others can make mistakes does not make your thought experiments correct.

Oh, in your collection of irrelevancies we could add the 600,000 mph velocity around the galaxy.
Do you have any sort of a point?

 

[cladking]

Man existed before he developed writing.

You have no evidence to support your belief there was no fundamental change in humans. We dig up words and parse them like ours and we dig up bodies and assume they were just like anthropologists because they look just like anthropologists et al.

A thorough history of man goes back to the Big Bang, when the particles and forces that comprise him (as well as everything else) first arose and eventually formed filaments of galaxies of solar systems.

I like how every believer took the acceleration of the expansion of the universe in stride. The acceleration doesn't matter until someone says it doesn't matter. Kuhn reigns.

We can continue in this manner and connect those events to today. That was [1] material evolution. Next came [2] chemical evolution to form life on earth. Then came [3] biological evolution which yielded animals with brains. Then came [4] psychological evolution and the advent of consciousness and eventually intelligence in higher order brains leading to human intellect.

Homo omnisciencis.

Most people were once certain God created the world on Sept 4,241 BC. You're like a Nostradamus who can see behind him as well.

"The impossibility of how it unfolds"? That's not what we're learning.

And how many times have a told you that if you flip a coin a billion times that every outcome is equally likely? All heads is exactly as likely as ANYTHING else. Butterflies in China cause hurricanes as surely as any fast moving molecules hitting a 14 year old boys eardrum making sound. Why do people want to look at the reduction of reality and not see the real thing in front of their face. Reality is binary and only half harmonic with the other half pure chaos determined by whether there are an odd or even number of variables most likely.

You assume you see reality and then you assume you can extrapolate experiment to apply to even things that can't be seen and for which no evidence exists. Worse you believe experts can see reality and don't need experiment. You believe in miracles like defining fitness as the cause of gradual change makes it all pop into existence.

If you computed the odds of what happens between any two moments no matter how close together the universe isn't large enough to hold all the zeroes to express the number but you want to believe we can see and understand all of it by merely looking if we have sufficient training.

The mind boggles at the hubris of homo omnisciencis.

 

[cladking]

"The impossibility of how it unfolds"? That's not what we're learning.

Every single thing we've learned since the ToB shows us the world is more complex than we had known. We've no dissected atoms into many pieces we don't even understand but we do know that all events start at the subatomic level and there are a finite number outcomes to every occurrence though this number is enormous. But you ignore this and ignore the butterfly that flaps its wings fo5r unknown reasons and then you think you know everything because hurricanes form over warm water and are very windy.

I'm astounded at the hubris. I'm astounded that despite history most people think science will never change. We have achieved perfection through science so it must stay the same. And then they find ever new ways to say this.

 

[cladking]

You might be unaware that the march of science has been to replace supernatural explanations with naturalistic ones

Oh. What supernatural way is in the Bible to explain why the expansion of the universe is accelerating?

 

[Dimi95]

Ah yes the ancient wisdom. The earth is the center of the universe and all the stars and the sun revolve around it. So how do airplanes take off and land?

The fact that others can make mistakes does not make your thought experiments correct.

Oh, in your collection of irrelevancies we could add the 600,000 mph velocity around the galaxy.
Do you have any sort of a point?

Yeah , this is correct.

But i provide the information as he does, not that i cannot answer them the proper way.

Air pressure, temperature, and humidity can all impact the length of an aircraft's take-off roll as many other things also do.
In different ways under different circumstances.

If It is hotter, then 'less dense' the air is.
The 'cooler' the air is , the more dense it becomes, and the wings can provide more lift.

The 'denser' the air is , more molecules per unit of volume there are.
The reason a plane flies is because it's wings are displacing an equal amount of air to the plane's weight. If that air is less dense, then you need to be moving 'faster' through it to keep enough air displaced to keep the plane aloft.

I will not waste my time anymore to explain things that he will reject by his own set of definitions.
It is very obvious when one looks up answer by answer.

I did this the way cladking wanted, under his terms,under his logic and his arguments are still baseless.

In the most simple form , they fail.

He has not provided any usefull counter-arguments.

 

[cladking]

Gods enjoy the same ontological status as vampires and leprechauns.

Then how were the pyramids built? Why was the species that was on site at the time say "the gods built the pyramids"? The gods organized themselves into work gangs of nine, called enneads and cut and lifted stones.

Either they were confused or we are. Seeing as how they were there I'm going with we are confused.

 

[cladking]

I am telling you that most of the evidence is gone, and you continue with this kind of reasoning.

Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence.

I stated the evidence. You are tap dancing around it.

 

[Dimi95]

I stated the evidence. You are tap dancing around it.

That's not evidence , that's your false dogmas.