Irony of the evolutionary belief

[We Never Know]

Careful misleading headlines, What was actually found were fossilized remains of blood cells and NOT preserved blood cells, These discoveries rean fossilized remains even though the tissue remained soft.

Dinosaur blood cells extracted from 75-million-year-old fossil

Surprise discovery of bird-like blood cells in dinosaur bones suggests that fleshy remains might be commonplace even in poorly preserved fossils

www.newscientist.com

Instead, they found blood-like cells and collagen from 75-million-year-old dinosaur fossils – 10 million years before T. rex appeared.

Although the cells are unlikely to contain DNA, those extracted from better preserved fossils using the same technique may do so, she says.

And even without DNA, soft tissue cells and molecules could help us learn much more about dinosaur physiology and behaviour, the team says. For example, the physical size of blood cells can reveal insights into metabolism, and the possible transition from a cold to warm-blooded existence.

So far, such soft flesh tissues were only ever found in serendipitous fossils preserved in exceptionally rare circumstances, for example, by being frozen in ice or in a dry environment free of microbes that would otherwise break down the flesh, says Maidment.

Don't get your hopes up. What they found were actual fossils though uniquely protected from deterioration,

And one has to be careful of what's a lie vs a misunderstanding being some are ignorant when it comes to science.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Please what does that mean?

It means, "my goodness, I can't believe I just saw that!"

 

[walt]

It means, "my goodness, I can't believe I just saw that!"

thanks for the clarification.

 

[leroy]

It's mentioned in the very next part you quoted from my post.


You just said it yourself.................

It's impossible to argue with this level of obtuseness.....

That is very dishonest and dishonorable from your part.

I made a robust case “with my own words” because you imposed that rule…………..I showed with proper sources that Bolzman Brains would be more common than “normal observers” and you are evading a direct confrontation.

You don’t even openly agree nor disagree with your claim; you are just hand waving and being ambiguous.

Anyway I have nothing else to say, but to thank you, I honestly enjoyed the research and learned a lot from it. Please contact me whenever you are ready to agree (so that I can prove my other claims) or disagree and explain why you disagree

 

[SkepticThinker]

okay checking out, i've said more than enough, thank you for your view, you have a perfect right to your way of thinking! I'm just one person out of billions.

You just did it again.

You've hit a wall and that wall is called cognitive dissonance.

 

[YoursTrue]

Careful misleading headlines, What was actually found were fossilized remains of blood cells and NOT preserved blood cells, These discoveries rean fossilized remains even though the tissue remained soft.

Dinosaur blood cells extracted from 75-million-year-old fossil

Surprise discovery of bird-like blood cells in dinosaur bones suggests that fleshy remains might be commonplace even in poorly preserved fossils

www.newscientist.com

Instead, they found blood-like cells and collagen from 75-million-year-old dinosaur fossils – 10 million years before T. rex appeared.

Although the cells are unlikely to contain DNA, those extracted from better preserved fossils using the same technique may do so, she says.

And even without DNA, soft tissue cells and molecules could help us learn much more about dinosaur physiology and behaviour, the team says. For example, the physical size of blood cells can reveal insights into metabolism, and the possible transition from a cold to warm-blooded existence.

So far, such soft flesh tissues were only ever found in serendipitous fossils preserved in exceptionally rare circumstances, for example, by being frozen in ice or in a dry environment free of microbes that would otherwise break down the flesh, says Maidment.

Don't get your hopes up. What they found were actual fossils though uniquely protected from deterioration,

I didn't look at it yet. But I am interested.

 

[leroy]

Of what?

Again: that would depend on an actual proper design hypothesis.
All you were able to give us so far are arguments from incredulity, special pleading, assumed conclusions, arguments from ignorance, etc.



A proper hypothesis.

(in the context of the FT argument)….

1 you asked for a testable prediction for design

2 my prediction “life permitting values would be narrow”

This prediction is testable……. It can be tested with the information that we have today, and the door will always be open to ether confirm or refute the prediction, if new discoveries are made

So that is your testable prediction, what else do you want? Quit making excuses and explain what observations or discoveries, would convince you that the FT of the universe is caused by an intelligent agent?

A proper hypothesis.

The hypothesis is that the FT of the universe was caused by an intelligent designer…………….what is improper about that hypothesis?

You already have a thread where you explain how can design be detected………. So what is stopping you from answering the question? What observations would convince you that the hypothesis is true (or likely to be true)

All you were able to give us so far are arguments from incredulity, special pleading, assumed conclusions, arguments from ignorance, etc.

Ok, granted for the sake of this post and oncoming replies…………from your point of view all the arguments that I have provided fail ok ok…………… the question is………what would convince you that the design hypothesis is true?.............why is it so hard to answer this question ?

 

[YoursTrue]

Why do you think it is that most everyone who has interacted with you on these threads have all concluded that 1) You don't understand evolution (or the sciences in general), and 2) Your attitude towards science drips with contempt?

Could it be that your posts come across that way, perhaps? I mean, if everyone is telling you the same thing ....

It could be that "everyone is telling me the same thing..." but then there are some who are not telling me the same thing although they are far and few between. That does not mean however, that there is no divine guidance.

 

[Pogo]

Ok evading direct answers,.........

No, we can't teach remedia lreading comprehension here.

 

[YoursTrue]

And one has to be careful of what's a lie vs a misunderstanding being some are ignorant when it comes to science.

I just started looking at it -- he (?) be pretty ugly -- almost as ugly as crocodiles.

 

[YoursTrue]

Plus @We Never Know I did not see Jurassic Park and I did not want to see it because -- I thought it was -- stupid. lol, that's why. Oh yes, I also didn't see Planet of the Apes for a similar reason. Dumb. But naturally some people will like it.

 

[Димитар]

Evolution like you just stated 3 billion years, how about this known fact - at birth you would not live 5 seconds, If you didn't have lungs, a heart, a bloodstream, a nervous system, a brain and many other vital organs. All these organs I mentioned need to exist all at the same time, not evolve 10 minutes later let alone 3 billion years!

Oh My God
What is causing these properties in the first place?

 

[walt]

I would like to send out some kindness to everyone out there and the big hug.

I know it's kind of silly.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It could be that "everyone is telling me the same thing..." but then there are some who are not telling me the same thing although they are far and few between. That does not mean however, that there is no divine guidance.

I said nothing of divine guidance.

I'm talking about your lack of understanding of evolution, and science in general.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Plus @We Never Know I did not see Jurassic Park and I did not want to see it because -- I thought it was -- stupid. lol, that's why. Oh yes, I also didn't see Planet of the Apes for a similar reason. Dumb. But naturally some people will like it.

Both are very entertaining and thought-provoking movies.

 

[F1fan]

Can we see evaporation happening?

Have you never seen steam coming from a boiling pot of water?

Can we see all the steps that happen in a cloud, like how the evaporation collects in the cloud,

Yes, we can see clouds darken.

how it forms water, can we see how a cloud is capable of carrying over 1 million pounds of water?

Why is this a question? You see clouds, yes? They are made up of water vapor.

 

[walt]

Have you never seen steam coming from a boiling pot of water?

Yes, we can see clouds darken.

Why is this a question? You see clouds, yes? They are made up of water vapor.

I get what you're saying, i think I did when I was 12

 

[F1fan]

The hypothesis is that the FT of the universe was caused by an intelligent designer…………….what is improper about that hypothesis?

It’s not a hypothesis. A hypothesis needs to make a prediction and be based in facts and suggest a way to test it. What you have here is just a claim. What is your observation? What is your prediction? What are the facts? What is the test? What variables do you control for?

 

[Pogo]

W

(in the context of the FT argument)….

1 you asked for a testable prediction for design

2 my prediction “life permitting values would be narrow”

That is nice, your next step is to propose a test that we can agree will actually test the prediction.

This prediction is testable……. It can be tested with the information that we have today, and the door will always be open to ether confirm or refute the prediction, if new discoveries are made

So that is your testable prediction, what else do you want? Quit making excuses and explain what observations or discoveries, would convince you that the FT of the universe is caused by an intelligent agent?

Burden of proof is on you to provide the evidence. To provide the test, and demonstrate how the evidence leads to your conclusion.,
You have done none of this, only asserted your conclusion.

The hypothesis is that the FT of the universe was caused by an intelligent designer…………….what is improper about that hypothesis?

Assuming FT without even demonstrating it first just takes you back a step, you have to define and demonstrate FT first. Hint, the fact that we are here by itself only demonstrates we are here, nothing about tuna.
And then we have lack of definition and evidence of this ID.
The hypothesis is that the FT of the universe was caused by a Flying Spaghetti Monster,…………….what is improper about that hypothesis?
Can you figure it out?

You already have a thread where you explain how can design be detected………. So what is stopping you from answering the question? What observations would convince you that the hypothesis is true (or likely to be true)

Not for us to decide, We have explained how to demonstrate design, you need to explain how your idea fits this idea.

 

[leroy]

It’s not a hypothesis. A hypothesis needs to make a prediction and be based in facts and suggest a way to test it. What you have here is just a claim. What is your observation? What is your prediction? What are the facts? What is the test? What variables do you control for?

what is your observation?: that the universe is FT
What is your prediction: that chance and necesity hypotheis woudl fail // that the life permittign rage would still be narrow as more knowledge and deeper laws are discovered
What are the facts?: that the universe is Ft (this measn that the life permitting values are narrow)

----


What is the test? : this is not part of the hypothesis (this would be the next step)
What variables do you control for: no idea what you mean