The Big Bang and Evolution

[ChristineM]

The Cambrian Explosion, and the sheer diversity of organisms! Both lend credence to separate creative actions!

? Care to provide citations?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

science not only doesn't care what we say, it doesn't care what scientists say either, unless it's to go out of it's way to contradict them as it so often does!

That's an odd comment. How does science say anything except through the consensus of scientists and scientific organizations? Do you see science as something that can disagree with scientists?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I've spoke to spe via topix pm, i think he's having the same problems but did not realise it until my message. That's the trouble with underhanded way topix have implemented their ban, a poster does not know they are banned because they can see their own posts, they joust get frustrated because no one is answering.

I got no warning, explanation, or notification. I had to figure out that I was being shadowbanned. Apparently it happened to several of us at once. I have no idea why.

But all's well that ends well. This is much better.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

This blanket ban i lay on Trump as it happened not a week after he took office along with his sacking the EPA.

Hedonist Heretic ("Thumper" on this site) told me that Christine thought that she was banned for an uncomplementary post about the new American president.

That may have been what happened to me as well. Nobody knows. After nearly a decade and several tens of thousands of post there, I was suddenly and inexplicably persona non grata.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

That's an odd comment. How does science say anything except through the consensus of scientists and scientific organizations? Do you see science as something that can disagree with scientists?

Science absolutely can disagree with scientists, in that individual scientists can make claims not represented by the methodology or results of their study. And it is absolutely necessary to disavow the idea that science can only come from scientists and scientific organizations, because science is a methodology for gaining knowledge available to all. This works to prevent 'a-ha, because individual scientists and scientific organizations have bias or competing results that must reflect on science as a process.' It doesnt, and it stresses focusing on finding fault with a study's methodology instead of focusing on the background of a person.

When you ask a creationist to show scientific (that is, the methodology which shows an evident creator) support for creation, they overwhelmingly fail to do so so they, instead, try and make evolution a conspiracy of scientists, because attacking the people and their background is easier than doing due diligence in showing creationism is scientific.

 

[ChristineM]

I got no warning, explanation, or notification. I had to figure out that I was being shadowbanned. Apparently it happened to several of us at once. I have no idea why.

But all's well that ends well. This is much better.

I think you were one of the first to notice, for me it was a thread i frequented where several poster started asking whats happened to Chris? An bad there was me shouting as loud as i could.

Topix have been really underhanded about it for sure.

Yes this place seems good, im not completely au fait with the system yet but im getting there

Its good to see so many faces i can relate to without the trolls getting in the way. But a must admit, i do miss a few, but they are American and unlike regolith are not likely to jump off the sinking ship

 

[ChristineM]

Hedonist Heretic ("Thumper" on this site) told me that Christine thought that she was banned for an uncomplementary post about the new American president.

That may have been what happened to me as well. Nobody knows. After nearly a decade and several tens of thousands of post there, I was suddenly and inexplicably persona non grata.

I don't think it was personal, any and all non north American, america protectorates and canedian posters were shadow banned. Not truly banned, one could log in and pm, even post, but the posts could not be a seen by anyone but the poster.

I think a good 50% posted anti trump stuff, including many American's who have not been banned.

I really don't understand the thinking behind their move.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Are you Bob of Quantum Faith on another venue?

Yes... yes I am. Few got the joke-name. So I reverted to my original Topix moniker, which is more accurate anyhow.

 

[omega2xx]

I doubt that anybody would disagree with you. It is impossible to prove anything to you without your cooperation. Your part is to bring an open and impartial mind capable of evaluating evidence and sound argument. That means reviewing the evidence dispassionately and with the ability and willingness to be convinced by a compelling argument. Nobody can make you see or understand what you a vested interest in not seeing or understanding.

sure they can. It is the principle of presenting irrefutable scientific evidence. I was indoctrinated in the TOE in high school and in college and I rejected it long before I became a Christian. What you consider compelling, does not make it compelling. Feel free to present any argument you consider compelling and we can discuss it.

 

[omega2xx]

And that would mean that a god must have designed and created all animals separately?

Unless you have a better explanation. However you are still missing the point---there ain't no intermediate fossils.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

this may be a violation of the rules, but I have gathered a series of links in support of evolution. I'll post them here, for anyone who is unfamiliar with these. If this is against the forum rules? I'd be happy to delete.

Here are four of the my favorites

Lines of evidence: The science of evolution
http://io9.gizmodo.com/8-scientific-discoveries-that-prove-evolution-is-real-1729902558
Human Evolution Evidence | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

 

[omega2xx]

No but it seems you are plagiarising as an integral method of your objection to reality

What have I plagiarized? What qualified you more than me to determine wht is reality.

Honey, been here before, if you cite religiously motivated websites then you get tarred with the same brush

You really haven't checked any subject at the ICR or Answers in Genesis have you. The present more scientific evidence than Talk Origins, and I haven't been tarred yet.

Id prefer to go to real science sites like cern and the perimeter institute. That way i know the data is peer reviewed and accepted as valid.

Evolutionist reviewing evolutionist is like the fox guardind the hen house. I bet you can't show any evidence the cern has presented by proves evolution. Prove me wrong.

More plagiarism? Genetics upholds evolution on 2 independent level's<<

Not only don't you not understand plagiarism, you don't have a clue about genetics. Prove me wrong and post the 2 levels you have in mind.

What? Yes of course they were separate species, that evolved over time.

You said all fossils were intermediates. You don't even know that time willo not channge the laws of genetics. Al gasoline will help get the tar off.

You appear to be going round and round in circles and not progressing. Evolution is observed, repeatedly on several levels, the observations, the evidence, the facts of evolution confirm the theory.

Talk is cheap, give me an example.

Your understanding is not required, nor is it needed

Yours is if you ever want to know the truth.

 

[omega2xx]

Because bacteria DO EVOLVE to different species of bacteria. Once again, you demonstrate utter cluelessness with regards to cladistic nomenclature.

The do not and once again you validated that you indoctrination is been successful

"bacteria" is not the same as "species". It is quite sad to witness such willful ignorance.

They are not the same., and you can overcome your ignorance with just a little study with an open mind.

False. Salamanders are not a **species**... they are a large group classification. **not** **species**.

Within that large classifiation there several species of salamanders.

And false-- classification IS NOT ONLY RELEVANT-- IT IS THE ONLY THING!

Only if the classification is correct.

If you are going to discuss **species**!!!!

The logical fallacy you are engaging in is multiple fail: 1) strawman 2) false dichotomy 3) moving the goalposts

But the worst offense of all? You are changing the meaning of the word "species" IN MID SENTENCE!

You do not GET to define "species" to suit your own delusions. That's not how Evolution Works.

I haven't defined species and you also don't get to define it to suit your delusions.

 

[omega2xx]

Actually, it is.<<

It is not.

Here's something I posted on another thread:

"How do we decide which group is correct when one group of people tells us that they had a sensory experience of some type, and another group of people in similar circumstance say that they have not?

"How about if I found myself in a world in which people told me that they could see red and green, but I couldn't. How could I decide whether it was I that could not see something that existed, or if they were seeing things or perpetrating a hoax?

"Easily. I test them. I have two socks that appear identical to me numbered 1 and 2. Then I independently interview a number of people who claim to be able to discern red from green, and ask them to tell me which sock appears red and which appears green to them.

"When I get the same answer from them all, I know that they can see something I can't. When they're unable to come to a consensus and more or less half tell me that sock 1 is red and the other half tell me it's green, I know that they are not seeing any more than I do.

Personal experiences do not work the same way as genetics.

"It's by this same method that I know that the people telling me that they have experienced a god are only experiencing their own minds. They describe multiple gods with multiple personalities, each of which happens to think just like they do."

I see we have another omniscient member in the forum.

 

[Cobol]

The most powerful evidence of evolution lies in the genetic code. Evolution predicts that organisms that are more closely related to one another will have more of their DNA in common. We are able to prove this with our ability to sequence the genomes of different species. The story of human evolution is written not only in the language of bones and fossils, but in the far more eloquent script of the human genome.

 

[omega2xx]

Actually? If you wish to remain honest? You most certainly do need to use the word "species" exactly as the Theory Of Evolution describes.

Only if they use itg correctly. l How do the defcine it?

To do otherwise? Is flat out lying. You cannot "disprove" the idea of "species" if you fabricate your own meaning! <<

I havent defined the meaning. It is dishonest to keep inferring I have and it is wrong/

But, in my experience, anti-evolution people are rather the opposite of honest... least of all, with themselves.

Oh well.

In my experiece which is probably much greater than yours, I have found anti-creation people to have been indoctrinated and don't even know it.

 

[ChristineM]

What have I plagiarized? What qualified you more than me to determine wht is reality.



You really haven't checked any subject at the ICR or Answers in Genesis have you. The present more scientific evidence than Talk Origins, and I haven't been tarred yet.



Evolutionist reviewing evolutionist is like the fox guardind the hen house. I bet you can't show any evidence the cern has presented by proves evolution. Prove me wrong.

Well the fact that you copied word for word my wording is a good indicator. Facts, evidence and not relying on faith and wishful thinking qualifies me

Honey, i debunked icr and answers in genesis many years ago, I'm not going back over the same old rubbish just to satisfy a godbots sensibilities.

Correct, i never said otherwise however you could try an evolutionary biology institute as opposed to a particle physics institute if you want to learn about evolution, i suggest the The Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology


And godbots preaching God magic is like believing in bronze age mumbo jumbo. See where your sullenness takes you?

 

[Dogen]

I have challenged all the evo to cut and paste what they consider evidence. None INCLUDING YOU have done that. I have to assume you can't.

The most common example has been bacteria becoming resistant to anti-biotics. The problem is they remained bacteria. Surely you understand that evolution requires a change of species. For all you know some of the bacteria may have already been resistant. Otherwise they would have died and that particular variety would have become extinct.

????

You might want to look up what the word "species" means. Bacteria are an entire domain of life. A domain is bigger than a Kingdom which is bigger than a phylum, which is bigger than a class which is bigger than an order which is bigger than a family which is bigger than a genus which is, in turn, bigger than a species.

Not to be pedantic (okay, a little late for that) but the last time we had a new domain was like a billion years ago.

 

[Dogen]

You can't prove any of that . In fact you can't even make a good guess.




You are missing the point. You said all fossils are intermediate. All in whale evolution are separate and distinct with no links joining them. This will be true in any animal you want to show its evolution.

Um...... I feel myself wanting to become pedantic again. All species between any two related species are transitionals, by definition. What are you looking for? Half a whale? LOL.

 

[Dogen]

Hey hey the gang's all here!

Nice reunion.