Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[JM2C]

An Actuary would laugh his *** off at that theory, because Actuaries do have an understanding to how to calculate factors affecting human life expectancies.

But the most important fact is that were we do have data from the last 2,000 years it clearly shows that your calculations are horse pucky (to borrow a phrase). The rate of human population growth has accelerated in the past couple of centuries at a massive rate due to advances in agriculture, transport and medicine.

"Carrying Capacity" is a vital concept in any theory about human populations and it explains why today's population levels are completely different to the figures we have data for from history.

Actuary is basically a practicing statistician. Mathematicians, such as Edmond Halley, developed the life table as the basis for life insurance mathematics. In 1693 Halley published an article on life annuities, which featured an analysis of age-at-death on the basis of the Breslau statistics Caspar Neumann had been able to provide. This article allowed the British government to sell life annuities at an appropriate price based on the age of the purchaser.

Halley's work strongly influenced the development of actuarial science [hello]. The construction of the life-table for Breslau, which followed more primitive work by John Graunt, is now seen as a major event in the history of demography.

Demography involves the statistical study of human populations. -Wiki

 

[JM2C]

Except during plagues and natural disasters of course.

We know that the Black Death killed off about half the population of Europe and that it took over 200 years for the population to recover because we do have records from back then. It had a similar effect in Asia as well.

We are talking about millions of years of no records at all. You are just commenting on a couple hundreds of years, after this plagues life went on to where we are today at 7,000,000,000. Those 200 years was just a tiny speck compare to your millions of years theory.

 

[JM2C]

Why in the world would you make the assumption that modern growth rates are applicable to more primitive populations 4 million years ago?

This is the third or fouth time now that you've tried to make this argument without explaining why you're making this HUGE assumption.

Yes! I’m making this HUGE assumption based on your HUMONGOUS assumption of 3,200,000 years that you can’t explain or no records of anything at all, except of course, some frauds fossils that evolutionists found.

 

[JM2C]

Completely bogus as it is based on one assumption after another after another... Some entire societies went extinct, such as the Huron Indians here in the Midwest. Hunting & gathering tribes had to make sure they didn't outstrip their food supply. Etc,, etc.

My assumption was based on their assumption of 3,200,000 years. You, as a Jew, do you believe in this verse? DT 10:22 “ Your fathers went down to Egypt seventy persons in all, and now the LORD your God has made you as numerous as the stars of heaven.

From 70 to over 2 million in 430 years. That’s an average growth of 2.50%.

 

[JM2C]

Cry me a river.
Your sad attempt at using math really is a joke.
That you have no clue just how bad it is is actually most comical.

Sorry if I can't get that animated

 

[JM2C]

No matter how you may try and manipulate the "information", Lucy was human-- an Australopithecus afarensis-- and definitely not an ape. Until more is understood as far as the lineage from the Australopithecines is known, they will not be put into the Homo category. However, don't confuse this with any question as to whether Lucy is human-- she was.

A recommendation: if you're going to deal with science, deal with science and not pseudo-science.

Manipulate? Are you blind? Didn't you see the video on how Dr. Menton described the differences between the human hips and the ape’s and how it was altered by Dr. Lovejoy to make it look like a human?

 

[JM2C]

How about the Nebraska Man?

 

[JM2C]

I didn't say nothing was decaying.
Thanks for confirming that you know absolutely nothing about radiometric dating other than the lies that you copy from creationist websites.

Nothing "started clocking or decaying", radioactive decay is a result of the fundamental nature of matter itself and the only things that can alter those decay rates (and only some types of decay in any case) involve forces never found on our planet.

Please explain.

 

[JM2C]

Again, more hypocrisy from you.
And you don't have to worry, because I have no interest in replying to you.

Don't bother to reply to me in the future, because I no longer have any desire to say anything to you.

How many times you gonna say this?

You have already shown dishonesty with you replies with other members here, because yo have made so many bogus claims, one after another, with no evidences to back them up.

Actually I'm looking for evidence of evolution from any of you guys, especially you and the other ninja, but here you are again with your never ending emotional human drama.

 

[outhouse]

How about the Nebraska Man?

You could try reading.

Nebraska Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From its initial description, Hesperopithecus was regarded as an inconclusive find by a large portion of the scientific community.

Further field work on the site in the summers of 1925 and 1926 uncovered other parts of the skeleton. These discoveries revealed that the tooth was incorrectly identified

 

[Bunyip]

How many times you gonna say this?

Actually I'm looking for evidence of evolution from any of you guys, especially you and the other ninja, but here you are again with your never ending emotional human drama.

You are immune to evidence. You have proven that.

 

[Bunyip]

Manipulate? Are you blind? Didn't you see the video on how Dr. Menton described the differences between the human hips and the ape’s and how it was altered by Dr. Lovejoy to make it look like a human?

Humans are apes mate.

 

[Sapiens]

Manipulate? Are you blind? Didn't you see the video on how Dr. Menton described the differences between the human hips and the ape’s and how it was altered by Dr. Lovejoy to make it look like a human?

Accordin to the British Medical Journal "Lancet," Dr. David Menton is a liar.


From the Encyclopedia of American Loons, we have:

270: David Menton


Yes, we’re dealing with another absurdly confused creationist. David Menton is an anatomist (with a PhD) and a regular contributor to Answers in Genesis (AiG). He has, among other things, contributed to the study of baraminology, a crackpot discipline bent on providing a creationist alternative to Linnaean taxonomy and cladistics based on a Biblically literal young Earth world view. He also works at the Creation Museum and is involved with AiG’s journal, the Answers Research Journal. For instance, he, Anne Habermehl and David A. DeWitt contributed letters to vol.3 under the common headline “Baraminological Analysis Places Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis and Australopithecus sediba in the Human Holobaramin: Discussion”, which basically displays Menton’s (and the others’) shock that a creationist (Todd Wood) could consider other hominids human. As Menton says: “Most importantly, the Bible believing creationist will be careful to confine himself to speculations that are consistent with God’s Word.” That pretty much sums him up.

Maybe we misunderstand him. This ridiculous letter (from him, Georgia Purdom and Andrew Snelling) suggests as much. But no – and Menton sums up his position on science again here. While one may wonder why anyone would bother, it is at least nice to see a real scientist (Martin Brazeau) take down Menton’s delusional ramblings on Tiktaalik here. Menton has a PhD in anatomy, for crying out loud – one may wonder how he got that given the complete lack of knowledge of the issue displayed in his original piece. More here.

He has also been an accomplice in attempts to get creationism taught in public schools, and is a tireless opponent of what he calls “scientism”.
Diagnosis: The usual. While he’s not the biggest name in the movement, Menton is still a prominent champion of ignorance and delusion.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Accordin to the British Medical Journal "Lancet," Dr. David Menton is a liar.


From the Encyclopedia of American Loons, we have:

270: David Menton


Yes, we’re dealing with another absurdly confused creationist. David Menton is an anatomist (with a PhD) and a regular contributor to Answers in Genesis (AiG). He has, among other things, contributed to the study of baraminology, a crackpot discipline bent on providing a creationist alternative to Linnaean taxonomy and cladistics based on a Biblically literal young Earth world view. He also works at the Creation Museum and is involved with AiG’s journal, the Answers Research Journal. For instance, he, Anne Habermehl and David A. DeWitt contributed letters to vol.3 under the common headline “Baraminological Analysis Places Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis and Australopithecus sediba in the Human Holobaramin: Discussion”, which basically displays Menton’s (and the others’) shock that a creationist (Todd Wood) could consider other hominids human. As Menton says: “Most importantly, the Bible believing creationist will be careful to confine himself to speculations that are consistent with God’s Word.” That pretty much sums him up.

Maybe we misunderstand him. This ridiculous letter (from him, Georgia Purdom and Andrew Snelling) suggests as much. But no – and Menton sums up his position on science again here. While one may wonder why anyone would bother, it is at least nice to see a real scientist (Martin Brazeau) take down Menton’s delusional ramblings on Tiktaalik here. Menton has a PhD in anatomy, for crying out loud – one may wonder how he got that given the complete lack of knowledge of the issue displayed in his original piece. More here.

He has also been an accomplice in attempts to get creationism taught in public schools, and is a tireless opponent of what he calls “scientism”.
Diagnosis: The usual. While he’s not the biggest name in the movement, Menton is still a prominent champion of ignorance and delusion.

Actually "the lancet" is wellknown as a politicized medical journal, which commonly slants findings towards what they want to find. They also publish excellent research but for an issue like this you know the lancet is only ever going to produce slanted rubbish.

 

[Aupmanyav]

We are talking about millions of years of no records at all. You are just commenting on a couple hundreds of years, after this plagues life went on to where we are today at 7,000,000,000. Those 200 years was just a tiny speck compare to your millions of years theory.

Of which millions of years there is no record? Fossils are available for all periods for all animals (of course, there are breaks but they are explainable). Sure, there were time when human population took a dive. Population bottleneck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JM2C]

I disagree, none of the examples you give encompass "starting decaying" or "starting clocking".

Decay is an inherent characteristic of certain isotopes, its not something that starts or stops it is an ongoing process. In the same way clocking does not start or stop, its another ongoing process that can, under certain conditions, attract markers that allow us to treat the clock as if it has "reset" which gives us a baseline to work from to determine timescales.

I think you are confused between “clocking” and “decaying”, they are the same. Any elements are radioactive, meaning they are decaying, meaning it changes from one element to another like potassium to argon and that’s how they get the ages by measuring half-lives. Potassium when starts decaying, that is, clocking, you will see the presence of argon and by measuring their half-lives you can determine the age.

Yeah, got it from the internet again and no formal study of this.

 

[JM2C]

For example the out-gassing of Argon from molten rock before it hardens after an eruption for example produces a state that is akin to a clock resetting which allows us to make calculations.

Argon is the final or stable element of potassium. So, when after the argon cooled off, let’s say for 10 years, one can start dating it, but the problem is no potassium can be found to base a half-life of potassium to argon. IOW, you need to know when the potassium started decaying or clocking.

“Since one can’t know for certain the ratio of the various isotopes of argon gas inside the Earth, one can’t legitimately compare the ratio of isotopes to determine how much argon gas has been produced by decay of potassium since the eruption, making the potassium-argon method of determining age invalid.”

"Lucy’s bones" are dated by dating the strata above, on the side and below the fossil using Argon-Argon or Ar-Ar and Potassium-Argon or K-Ar dating methods. IOW, Lucy’s bones were NOT directly dated by any dating method, i.e., the Ar-Ar and K-Ar dating methods.

Thus all K-Ar and Ar-Ar dates of fossils are questionable because they were calibrated by them based on geological columns, existed only on papers or theory, and of course their doctrines of millions of years of evolution.

A good example is a speed gun. A speed gun can be calibrated to any miles/hour. If a cop sets his speed gun to 55mph, the gun won’t go off below 55mph. So, if argon was tested below 10,000 years if would read error. Why? Like the speed gun, their machines was calibrated to specific ages only, and that is, to the millions or billions of years, and that’s how they got their millions or billions of years theory of evolutions.

Going back to my first question to you guys, “By what standard of studies or age assignments did they compare it from?” The answer is, from their own calibrated machines.

Although this is only my theory, except of course about Lucy’s and since all of us here have nothing but theories of their own, meaning no formal studies, we can then compare with each other’s theories. What do you think?

 

[JM2C]

You could try reading.


Nebraska Man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


From its initial description,Hesperopithecus wasregarded as an inconclusive find by a large portion of the scientific community.


Further field work on the site in the summers of 1925 and 1926 uncovered other parts of the skeleton. These discoveries revealed that the tooth was incorrectly identified

Did you know that it took 40 years before they discovered that the Piltdown Man was nothing but a hoax?

 

[JM2C]

Humans are apes mate.

Really? Find me an ape that speaks of any language fluently, mate.

 

[McBell]

Did you know that it took 40 years before they discovered that the Piltdown Man was nothing but a hoax?

Did you know it was scientists who revealed it was a hoax?

Your sad devotion to this particular dead end is rather comical.