The Believabliltiy of Evolution

[cladking]

Oh my goodness yes - why, those evil do-gooders wanting people to stop referring to people by derogatory slurs are to blame!

Back when everything actually worked, everyone had a chance, and we lived in a free and capitalistic society people were responsible for the outcomes of their actions. As things spiraled down the tubes they were responsible for what they did, Then as the educatational system collapsed they were responsible for what they said. Now that things are imploding they are only responsible for their intentions.

We can sing Kumbaya right into the new dark ages as we all hold hands.

 

[cladking]

Profound.

So... what did the speakers of the Ancient Language that only you understand yet cannot read, call groups of individuals that can interbreed?

Adam named the animals. Goats bore live young. They had fur, etc etc.

They knew that there were "mules" with mixed parentage but they had no reductionistic words. They had no abstractions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Adam named the animals. Goats bore live young. They had fur, etc etc.

They knew that there were "mules" with mixed parentage but they had no reductionistic words. They had no abstractions.

Adam was a myth.

 

[cladking]

You are merely assuming that there wasn't.

What is your evidence for this implicit assumption of yours?

I never made such an assumption,

I thought of hypotheses until I came up with one that would explain ALL the evidence and ALL of the experiment.

I've never had any use for Look and See Science. Optical illusion distorts reality. Statistics and computer modelling is confusing. And we all can see only what we believe.

Outside of experiment (like upside down flies) there is no such thing as "science". Of course it appears there's at least one more metaphysics but this metaphysics is IRRELEVANT TO ANY SPECIES THAT EMPLOYS ABSTRACTION, BELIEF, REDUCTIONISM, AND TAXONOMIES. This other metaphysics requires the use of logic and logic is impossible to express in our language.

 

[cladking]

Adam was a myth.

"S3h" is probably the ancient name and the name of the star in Orion's Belt which was the mnemonic.

That Adam was a myth is a myth. That there was once a single human is entirely possible because with mutation a species DOES begin with a single individual who was conceived suddenly, born suddenly, and procreated suddenly (I'm sure Eve/ Sopdet hoped not too suddenly).

This stuff isn't that complicated so why isn't it understood and argued?

 

[cladking]

A fantasy that you have never defined, cannot explain, and can offer no examples of.

90% of the studies that show smoking causes cancer.
98% of "global warming".
All of the studies that showed autistic people are trapped in a world of thought and the inability to communicate.
All of the studies that show washing hands is a waste of time before an operation.
Every study that says you should sneeze into a handkerchief to stop the spread of disease.
Half of the studies into "evolution".
All of Darwin's work.
All of Egyptology as it applies to the great pyramids.
All of Egyptology as "linguistics" as it applies to the PT.
Almost everything about science published in the mainstream media for at least a quarter century.

Look and See Science is rampant today. Even real science has an overemphasis on math and presumes that "laws of nature" exist which obey mathematical rules.

 

[cladking]

What laboratories existed in Pyramid days? Glass houses, and all that jazz, eh?

Lol.

For the main part men were the scientists and women were the metaphysicians. There is a natural sexual difference but, of course, there was a lot of overlap (as it were) and everybody was at least a bit of both. Language was metaphysics and women coaxed new observation to fit into language with minimum changes. Men and women made the observation and men were more likely to "connect the dots".

In a world where everyone had input and everyone could communicate "perfectly" with everyone else there was a great deal of cooperation and a great deal of need since they lacked modern knowledge and technology.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I never made such an assumption,

I thought of hypotheses until I came up with one that would explain ALL the evidence and ALL of the experiment.

I've never had any use for Look and See Science. Optical illusion distorts reality. Statistics and computer modelling is confusing. And we all can see only what we believe.

Outside of experiment (like upside down flies) there is no such thing as "science". Of course it appears there's at least one more metaphysics but this metaphysics is IRRELEVANT TO ANY SPECIES THAT EMPLOYS ABSTRACTION, BELIEF, REDUCTIONISM, AND TAXONOMIES. This other metaphysics requires the use of logic and logic is impossible to express in our language.

Too bad that you contradicted yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"S3h" is probably the ancient name and the name of the star in Orion's Belt which was the mnemonic.

That Adam was a myth is a myth. That there was once a single human is entirely possible because with mutation a species DOES begin with a single individual who was conceived suddenly, born suddenly, and procreated suddenly (I'm sure Eve/ Sopdet hoped not too suddenly).

This stuff isn't that complicated so why isn't it understood and argued?

Nope, species don't begin that way. That is not how evolution works.

 

[joelr]

I can understand how an intelligent individual may have problems with the creation account in Genesis. What I don't understand is how that same intelligent individual has no problem whatsoever believing everything we see in the world somehow came from the so-called primordial soup.

Not only must a particular life form spontaneously arise, but the other organisms upon which it depends must have arisen in lock step. And what are the odds of the flora arising in the required sequence as that of the fauna which depends on that flora? That is more believable than Genesis?
."

If your thinking of flora/fauna it sounds like you need to continue investigating earlier evolution. Flora is a vastly complicated life compared to self replicating chemicals.
This won't answer all your questions but might provide an insight to what was happening in very early evolution and what types of theories are being considered and tested.
https://www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674(00)81263-5

this is from the 90's so even more advanced findings have been discovered. Usually with evolution you can find answers to questions if you actually try to find them. It depends on what your goal is - to find out our best truth or find the best conspiracy theory.

 

[tas8831]

Until it is shown that "population genetics" is causally related to a change in species it is simply irrelevant.

Until you can show that "behavior" causes speciation, your claims are irrelevant.
Until you can show that your "mysterious force" causes bottlenecks, you claims are irrelevant.
Until you do experiments showing that the pyramids were built the way you claim they were, your claims are irrelevant.

 

[tas8831]

How is it possible I say "Look and See Science isn't science at all and you see "science is nonsense".

Are you trying this hard to appear dopey? Or does it come naturally?

How is it I say "Peer review is irrelevant to reality" and you see "science is nonsense". Just once it would be nice if you respond to what I say rather than what it sounds like to you.

We can add projection to you list of issues.

I've shown numerous species and all life change suddenly

Lie.
Out and out lie.
You have not "shown" one darn thing.

Ever.

I know I owe you and this thread a few posts but i'm in read only mode now. Later.

Whatever.

Look at all you ignored:

Oh my goodness yes - why, those evil do-gooders wanting people to stop referring to people by derogatory slurs are to blame!


Yup - just like speciation.

Where did you make your prediction about human life expectancy going down 15 years ago? In particular, where you claimed only that the U.S. population's life expectancy would be going down? Because as I showed the other day, world-wide life expectancy is going up.

Life Expectancy

"Estimates suggest that in a pre-modern, poor world, life expectancy was around 30 years in all regions of the world.

Life expectancy has increased rapidly since the Age of Enlightenment. In the early 19th century, life expectancy started to increase in the early industrialized countries while it stayed low in the rest of the world. This led to a very high inequality in how health was distributed across the world. Good health in the rich countries and persistently bad health in those countries that remained poor. Over the last decades this global inequality decreased. No country in the world has a lower life expectancy than the countries with the highest life expectancy in 1800. Many countries that not long ago were suffering from bad health are catching up rapidly.

Since 1900 the global average life expectancy has more than doubled and is now above 70 years. The inequality of life expectancy is still very large across and within countries. in 2019 the country with the lowest life expectancy is the Central African Republic with 53 years, in Japan life expectancy is 30 years longer."​

Remember when you claimed to have predicted a decrease in life expectancy 15 years ago?

And you SPECIFICALLY referred to "worldwide" life expectancy:

"It will begin a sharp drop and accelerate. My mid-century it will be down to 76.5 for men and beyond this it is unpredictable and largely dependent on decisions not yet made.

World wide life expectancy will probably continue to increase for many years yet."​

Looks like your phony If-I-Can-Dream-It-Up-It-Must-Be-totally-True pseudoscience blows.

 

[tas8831]

Many people can take a course, pass the course, and not understand the subject material. Especially courses that are not at the majors level. People that take "rocks for jocks" really do not understand geology at all.

True.

I was saddened to see a former student of mine claim on social media that when her infant has a fever, she rubs coconut oil and peppermint extract on his chest, and the fever goes away "in minutes."

 

[cladking]

You have not "shown" one darn thing.

I could work on the list of things about life that are all sudden. Of course the fact that all observed change to life are sudden isn't the kind of thing that a reductionistic mind which operates on belief uses to think. We see only those facts that coincide with what we already believe.

A really nice example is "contagion". One day lots of healthy individuals are going about their business and the next a life form (like the plague) suddenly infects an individual. The person's loss is the plague's gain as it will grow in his body and then spread in the population quite suddenly. Each individual plague germ is suddenly created and suddenly destroyed.

I don't know but maybe a picture will help you to understand this simple observable process.

The first animal suddenly turned into the second animal. There was no mysterious force that caused it and it wasn't the magic you call "evolution". Man created an artificial bottleneck by selecting animals based on their behavior. They didn't one day wake up and say "I want bacon". Rather they liked the taste of the animal and as scientists they knew that by selecting for behavior they'd end up with an animal that tasted a lot like pork. The very meaning of "pork" was redefined by the pig.

Nature is far more complex than anything you ever imagined. But many of the things it does are actually simpler than you believe. It is never predictable. What ancient scientist could ever imagine a modern pig farm or giant pigs? But he could sure imagine raising animals to eat rather than to be eaten by.

 

[cladking]

And you SPECIFICALLY referred to "worldwide" life expectancy:

YOU referred to worldwide life expectancy.

I am well aware there are still billions of exploited people and many are getting better diets and medical care. There is more infrastructure to bring more people clean water, transportation, and all those things that help to maintain and promote life. A new road can suddenly make it possible to bring in needed supplies that might save some individual from sudden death for instance. This individual might then suddenly father an individual whose ideas can be used to save more lives of more people before they meet an early death slaving away in the fields or picking through garbage looking for a sudden meal. There is a pattern here. Roads don't gradually cause change in species any more than "survival of the fittest". The concept of "natural selection" or "survival of the fittest" is what we need to believe to exploit people while singing Kumbaya and not saying politically incorrect things.

Longevity will decrease in countries making BAD decisions. When the concept that feelings are more important than results reaches the rest of the world (Our most important export) people will start dying in other advanced countries as well. If these dark ages get into full swing there could be a very dramatic drop.

 

[gnostic]

That Adam was a myth is a myth.

No. Adam is just a myth.

It is not scientifically possible for lifeless dust to transform into a living man.

And it is also not possible for any man or woman to live 900-plus years.

And it is not possible for snake to speak to humans.

These can only happen in stories...hence, it can only happen in myths.

So are Noah’s global flood...and the Tower of Babel and the whole deal of one language spoken then multiple languages...all of them pure myths.

Then there is totally inaccuracies of Genesis 10, historically and archaeologically. Egyptian and Sumerian prehistoric cultures long before Genesis was written around 7th or 6th century BCE.

That you would continuously bring up the Tower of Babel along your crackpot theory about Ancient Language and Ancient Science and this non-existent Homo Omnisciencis that you have made up, just demonstrated how far gone you are with you conspiracy theory.

 

[cladking]

This individual might then suddenly father an individual whose ideas can be used to save more lives of more people before they meet an early death slaving away in the fields or picking through garbage looking for a sudden meal.

There's a concept "hidden" in here that few modern people can see so I'll spell it out for you.

All ideas, all progress, all experiment design/ hypothesis formation and invention ALL COMES FROM INDIVIDUALS AND ALWAYS HAS. Peers are irrelevant. Consensus is irrelevant. Committees are irrelevant. It simply doesn't matter even a little bit that every Egyptologists believes the ancients were stinky footed bumpkins who molded their superstitions into the shape of a pyramid. It doesn't matter that NO Egyptologist ever noticed that there were no abstractions in Ancient Language. Reality reveals itself through physical evidence and experiment and without experiment we are prone to misinterpret physical evidence. Only experiment can tie modern theory to reality. Everything else is Look and see Science and it is frequently invented and rubber stamped by committee.

 

[cladking]

No. Adam is just a myth.

I doubt it.

It is not scientifically possible for lifeless dust to transform into a living man.

You've never heard that we are all "stardust". A little ashes, a little dust, and then just add 80% water and "instant man".

It took nature a little time to perfect this mixing and Adam was just a mutant born to parents who were proto-human.

And it is also not possible for any man or woman to live 900-plus years.

...And you know this how? Perhaps a little mechanically stripped auric sulfate would change your mind.

These can only happen in stories...hence, it can only happen in myths.

Anything at all is possible. Nature is sufficiently complex that everything can happen. But we see only what we believe.

So are Noah’s global flood...and the Tower of Babel and the whole deal of one language spoken then multiple languages...all of them pure myths.

None are "pure myth". Like all myth there is a least a grain of truth to them. We merely lack the key to understand them.

Then there is totally inaccuracies of Genesis 10, historically and archaeologically. Egyptian and Sumerian prehistoric cultures long before Genesis was written around 7th or 6th century BCE.

Of course there are "inaccuracies". Every sentence in modern language can be parsed in an infinite number of ways. Even if we had an infinite number of people to parse Genesis 10 it is entirely possible that they'd ALL be wrong!!!

That you would continuously bring up the Tower of Babel along your crackpot theory about Ancient Language and Ancient Science and this non-existent Homo Omnisciencis that you have made up, just demonstrated how far gone you are with you conspiracy theory.

Oh. Remind me what "conspiracy" that is. Is it my belief that we all see only what we believe?

 

[tas8831]

We do see species come directly come into being but people can't really observe it because we see what we believe. Indeed, everytime a species has been born it was seen by people who understood "change in species" or what you call evolution. Tame minks, cats, dogs, pigs, and cattle are a few examples. In a few years we'll even have another new species that will be "tame white tail deer". They'll probably be slower, fatter, smaller, and duller than the current "species".

What good is "observation" when we can't see what's in front of our eyes?

So, you EMBRACE 'look and see' science. When it suits you. And when it is premised on fantasies.

None of that is real. And you providing a list is not evidence.

 

[tas8831]

Please provide an example of speciation that happened in a single generation.

Dogs. Tame Minks. Cats.

Repeated unsupported assertions.

Dismissed as nonsense.