Evolution vs. Creation

Full story: Best of New Orleans

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Comments (Page 2,868)

Showing posts 57,341 - 57,360 of111,889
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61329
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Where is Subduction Zone? I am still out to demonstate earns his points with woffle.
Finally he has actually had a go at providing more than his opinion.
The sad fact is that if Subby actually researched his claims prior to posting he would have very quickly learned that his assumption in relation to 'neutral' mutations being the more numerous was very incorrect and has never been a scientific assertion, ever.
So not only is Subby outdated, he actually makes up his own science as he goes along, and likely thinks every one here is too stupid to notice.
Evolutionists have not presented evidence to support the hypothesis that adaptation can carry on for billions of years without limit, let alone not succuming to the costs. Recent data is more suggestive of limits rather than anything else.
You evos have bombed out on so much, junk dna, vestigial organs, ervs, chromosome 2, fossil evidence that better aligns with creationism, creos having no evidence to present etc. Now you lot are going to have a fantastic time with me demonstrating that this adaptation you insist is evolution in motion is limitless and can be supported. Surely you have some algorithmic magic to support your view here. There is algorithmic magic to support just about anything including contradictory views. That is the beauty of evolutionary science.
For now I am still waiting for Subby to show us all how evo algorithmic magic is better than Sanfords.
Easy. We rely on reality. Sanford relies on inconsistency and Jewish manipulation of the physics of the universe. Even if we did use magic like you do ours is better because we have a Beer Volcano. Simples. Creationism loses. If we stick to the science though creationism hasn't even lost, it just hasn't bothered to turn up on the starting line. Since it's only our side that's doing anything that works. You mooks are still complaining about materialism.

Aww!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61330
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Subduction Zone
Sanfords work has been peer reviewed.
Not his book or his anti-evolution nonsense he hasn't. You know this. We know this. He knows this. The scientific community knows this. Yet you fail to mention this.

Why is that?
MazHere wrote:
Sanford and colleagues developed the quantitative forward genetic modeling program Mendel's Accountant. Sanford et al. published two peer reviewed papers dealing with genetic entropy in computing journals concerned with modeling methodology.[7][8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Sanford
Interesting, his computer modelling has been submitted to a... computer modelling journal. Not a biology one. Thought it was quite curious, what with Baumgardner being part of it and all (which isn't even his real name if I recall.

Of course also using computer model one sets up the axioms before calculations are run. Tell me, did he ever do any genetic calculations starting with a single pair of humans 6,000 years ago? And if so, was this peer-reviewed in a valid *biology* journal?
MazHere wrote:
Here is one clip from your link.
So Behe may be right about the probability of chloroquine resistance. However, that says nothing about an “edge” to evolution. Although for chloroquine resistance in malaria there may be only one, narrow target (the two specific proteins in PfCRT), there are many, many other possible pairs of mutations in any living being. For organisms with say 10**9 base pairs, there are 10**18 possible two-point simultaneous mutations. Behe is implicitly assuming that only a single, pre-specified one of all these 10**18 pairs of mutations could possibly be useful in developing any new protein binding site.That is nonsense. Granted, most of these 10**18 pairwise mutations will be neutral or deleterious to fitness, and perhaps (as in the case of chloroquine resistance in malaria) there is only one pairwise mutation will achieve one specified result, but this in no way implies that some other pairwise mutation cannot achieve some other beneficial effect. As one reviewer noted, this is a “painfully basic” error on Behe’s part.
Here the author knocks Behe by saying that Behe has made an assumption, an assumption that may be right. That is what algorithmic magic is all about.
Ah, so to you science is merely apologetics? That explains a lot.
MazHere wrote:
Unless you can supply evidence that some other pair wise mutation has occured then Behe can assume what he likes just like evos do. That is what TOE in its' entirety is built on. That is why they make huge mistakes like saying non coding dna is junk and their assumptions were incorrect.
Your lie has already been addressed numerous times.
MazHere wrote:
There is no fundamental error, there is a fundamental assumption and you lot do exactly the same thing. I don't see this work refuted at all here.
You wouldn't see anything refuted because you're not interested.(shrug)

The validity of biology certainly does not rest on your lack of intellectual integrity. Much as you wish it would.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61331
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Don't evolutionists also limit their studies and ignore differences all the time.
Projection.
MazHere wrote:
"As is usual for major mutations, most frameshift mutations are very deleterious to the organism. This is not a problem for evolution, since the highly deleterious mutations will be removed from the population by natural selection, whereas the rare beneficial frameshift mutation can give its bearer a selective advantage."
Where is the evidence for this claim?
Life.

Sorry bub, it ain't OUR fault that Sanford's BS leads to total destruction of Earth. Thousands of years ago.
MazHere wrote:
Indeed new research suggests the accumulating effects of epitasis and beneficial mutations is overwhelmingly NEGATIVE. Hence this using ones own assumptions to suggest anothers assumption is not a refute at all. Hence evos rarely refute creationist work in reality.
This is the point that I made at the very beginning. Evos refute creo work on the basis of their own assumptions. That is also why I request the research for any points, so I can pull apart the assumptions it is based on.
Hence Sanfords work is as good as any you can present. Even if I did not have Sanfords work the accumulating data is more suggestive of limits to adaptation than anything else.
Despite this we have already pointed out Sanford's error. And your dishonesty for merely repeating it over and over.
MazHere wrote:
The other point evos try to make, that creationists cannot present support for their view is also falsified because creos have predictions that have been validated, fossils that align more with a creationist paradigm then TOE, biased evo research that still suggests that adaptation should actually have ground to a halt, evidence that 70% of mutations are deleterious and only evo handwaving to suggest evolutions proceeds limitlessly.
(yawn)
MazHere wrote:
So that initial claim is incorrect because indeed there is support for creationist paradigms.
False. "If not A therefore B" is a logical fallacy. That's all you have.
MazHere wrote:
F It is just that evos are too ignorant, egocentric and self righteous to admit to it.
Over all creos have had their predictions validated in relation to junk dna and vestigial organs where as evos could make no prediction at all in their fun fare of psuedo science. Nested hierarchies are arbitrary and depend on assumptions and pick a box homology. Overall the fossil evidence better aligns with Genesis than with TOE.
Keep lying and skipping, skippy.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61332
Nov 27, 2012
 
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>I am an evo, and I do not hate this conversation in the least bit. I've never once had to rely on junk DNA to mop the floor with creationists. So, I do not need to rely on junk dna to shoot down every reason you feel your god does exist and every reason you feel that you need a god for life to exist.

IÂ’ve done this dance many times, and I have grown tired of it, but since itÂ’s been awhile, if you would like, letÂ’s do do this exercise one last time, just for kicks:

Please explain why you feel your god must exist. What proof or logic do you use to support your belief? Is there any? Or is it just faith?

Also are you Christian? If not, what are you? What do you think of the gods of other religions? Are they false?

Please explain why you feel god must have created life.
I'm a Christian I believe in God because of several points in my life where I had problems and beyond all logical reasoning God was there. As far as other Gods I only believe in one true God. I neither force my beliefs on other nor hold a grudge so to speak against evos such as yourself. I have seen God work in ways you can't explain away as coincidence. I believe God created all life because I have no reason to doubt it. If you care to dance please make it a waltz I'm not much of a dancer.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61333
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Subby some more. I have to head to work now but I am dying to hook into this ribbish you posted on Sanfords refute.
From your link..
"These shared functional and nonfunctional DNA sequences help us to trace the common lineages of diverse organisms. Considering the striking physical variations among living things, it was a surprise for some scientists in the late twentieth century to discover the degree of commonality among genotypes. This was a key factor in changing Michael Denton’s mind on the viability of evolutionary theory."
Oh joy. Denton. He had an epiphany since the 80's, but creationists still quote his early religious apologetics despite the fact he doesn't agree with them any more.
MazHere wrote:
What does this idiot have to say now that at least 80% of the genome is now known to be functional?
ERVs have some vital functions. This is going to turn into another vestigial organ fiasco.
ERV's having function is not a problem for evolution. Evolution predicts DNA changes can lead to function. Creo's claim otherwise. Therefore ERV's support evolution or ERV's are not ERV's and creationists still call them ERV's for... what reason? And do they have any other mechanism other than Jewmagic to account for them?

Nope.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61334
Nov 27, 2012
 
Sublime1 wrote:
It’s not observed that the earth is at the center of universe.
Hey, the Bible sez it's at the center and relativity sez it looks like the center where ever we are anyway, therefore can't we just say that the Earth IS the center just like the Bible sez?!?

MAZ WANTS TO BE SPECIAL!!!

>:-(
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61336
Nov 27, 2012
 
Jim wrote:
he bible was written by ignorance people who though the earth was flat.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

“happy to be horny”

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61337
Nov 27, 2012
 
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Well just make sure it doesn't happen again!
And remember next time herd sheep. Goat horns can be dangerous!
The thing is, as befits a union, we were trying to play both sides of the belief issue for our own benefit and ended up giving up the sheep to the local Muslims in return for some really stylish sandals and 2 sick days per millenium..........

“happy to be horny”

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61338
Nov 27, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a Christian I believe in God because of several points in my life where I had problems and beyond all logical reasoning God was there. As far as other Gods I only believe in one true God. I neither force my beliefs on other nor hold a grudge so to speak against evos such as yourself. I have seen God work in ways you can't explain away as coincidence. I believe God created all life because I have no reason to doubt it. If you care to dance please make it a waltz I'm not much of a dancer.
There is no problem in believing in things of course, the problems arise when that belief becomes taken as a truth for no other reason than said belief has been given too much gravitas..........
Anonymous

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61339
Nov 27, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
So fine dont believe and dont live a good life. Take the risk,it is your eternal soul at risk. I mean being a good Christian is so easy and feels so right and good. Tell me why take the risk.
If your Christian god does exist, which is extremely unlikely, but if he does he will know that you are only a Christian because you don't want to risk being wrong and don't want to risk going to hell, but really you have serious doubts about god but worship him just incase, hedging your bets, that makes you a fake Christian, only in it to avoid hell in the unlikely event that the bible is true, not gunna work is it

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61340
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Subduction Zone
Sanfords work has been peer reviewed.

False. He, in a most cowardly and profit seeking manor, published his "work" in a popular "science" book.

The only "research" that has been done is Baumgardner's "work" that was published in an ON-LINE Computing Journal!!!

The "research" in question used data that was completely made up with a made up algorythem.

Only a complete moron would be duped by crap like this.

BTW, do you want to buy some swamp land in Florida?
Anonymous

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61341
Nov 27, 2012
 
Constitution-lover wrote:
<quoted text>
Think as you wish. It is your soul that will fry if you dont except God. I hope you did not raise any children. Sad if you did to know they will fry also.
What total nonsense, what kind of god do you believe in, why would god create man and give us logical brains that require evidence to believe something, and then send us to hell for using the logic brains that he gave us, that makes absolutely no sense, why would he come to earth and leave no evidence even thoe he knows that humans will find it difficult to believe in something without proof, because that's the way he made us, and the brains he gave us, so now hes going to send people to hell just for being what he made them. I've heard christians say that only Christians go to heaven, so what about all the people who lived in Asia centuries ago, most had never left their areas and would not of even heard of the bible or Christianity, but they are now burning in hell because they were unfortunate enough to have never been taught about christianity, your religeon makes no sense and is totally retarded, aparently god knows everything, so he knows the future and knows whether we will go to hell or not before were even born, if thats the case then why would he bother coming to earth, another of Christianitys illogical tripe

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61342
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Subduction Zone
Sanfords work has been peer reviewed.
Sanford and colleagues developed the quantitative forward genetic modeling program Mendel's Accountant. Sanford et al. published two peer reviewed papers dealing with genetic entropy in computing journals concerned with modeling methodology.[7][8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Sanford
Here is one clip from your link.
So Behe may be right about the probability of chloroquine resistance. However, that says nothing about an “edge” to evolution. Although for chloroquine resistance in malaria there may be only one, narrow target (the two specific proteins in PfCRT), there are many, many other possible pairs of mutations in any living being. For organisms with say 10**9 base pairs, there are 10**18 possible two-point simultaneous mutations. Behe is implicitly assuming that only a single, pre-specified one of all these 10**18 pairs of mutations could possibly be useful in developing any new protein binding site.That is nonsense. Granted, most of these 10**18 pairwise mutations will be neutral or deleterious to fitness, and perhaps (as in the case of chloroquine resistance in malaria) there is only one pairwise mutation will achieve one specified result, but this in no way implies that some other pairwise mutation cannot achieve some other beneficial effect. As one reviewer noted, this is a “painfully basic” error on Behe’s part.
Here the author knocks Behe by saying that Behe has made an assumption, an assumption that may be right. That is what algorithmic magic is all about.
Unless you can supply evidence that some other pair wise mutation has occured then Behe can assume what he likes just like evos do. That is what TOE in its' entirety is built on. That is why they make huge mistakes like saying non coding dna is junk and their assumptions were incorrect.
There is no fundamental error, there is a fundamental assumption and you lot do exactly the same thing. I don't see this work refuted at all here.

So desperate.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61343
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't care what conversations you have had, you have yet to deal with me.
Nor do I have to be sucked into talking to philosophy seeing as evos can't mange the rubbish they call their science.
The bible is the only spiritual writing where the composers do not take glory for themselves and did not live in shameless luxury. As far as humanity is concerned, that is a miracle itself.
I believe in God because I want to. I also believe in God because as observed earth is at the centre of the universe. I can present a theory that supports that claim, and depite all the rhetoric on alien life we have not found any.
So with all the available data, and disregarding all the woffley speculation it dsure does look to me that Copernicus was a fool and we certainly are special.
Belief in God does not inform this debate as there are theist evolutionists. I suggest they have been sucked in and mesmerized by evolutionary misrepresentation and empirical evidence that is not empirical at all.
As usual you evos run for phisosophy when the reality of your psudo science is highlighted.
TOE needs to be taken out of he science streams and put in with philosophy. It is there that assumptive reasonings should be dealt with until they come up with something stable that actually looks like a science.

More philosophical gibber jabber wearing pseudoscience clothing.

Pathetic.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61344
Nov 27, 2012
 
MazHere wrote:
Subby some more. I have to head to work now but I am dying to hook into this ribbish you posted on Sanfords refute.
From your link..
"These shared functional and nonfunctional DNA sequences help us to trace the common lineages of diverse organisms. Considering the striking physical variations among living things, it was a surprise for some scientists in the late twentieth century to discover the degree of commonality among genotypes. This was a key factor in changing Michael Denton’s mind on the viability of evolutionary theory."
What does this idiot have to say now that at least 80% of the genome is now known to be functional?
ERVs have some vital functions.
This is going to turn into another vestigial organ fiasco.

WOW! 80%! That is exciting.

And of course the vestigial fiasco (obviously we NEED wisdom teeth and TITS on men!)

/condescension.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61345
Nov 27, 2012
 
straa wrote:
<quoted text>What total nonsense, what kind of god do you believe in, why would god create man and give us logical brains that require evidence to believe something, and then send us to hell for using the logic brains that he gave us, that makes absolutely no sense, why would he come to earth and leave no evidence even thoe he knows that humans will find it difficult to believe in something without proof, because that's the way he made us, and the brains he gave us, so now hes going to send people to hell just for being what he made them. I've heard christians say that only Christians go to heaven, so what about all the people who lived in Asia centuries ago, most had never left their areas and would not of even heard of the bible or Christianity, but they are now burning in hell because they were unfortunate enough to have never been taught about christianity, your religeon makes no sense and is totally retarded, aparently god knows everything, so he knows the future and knows whether we will go to hell or not before were even born, if thats the case then why would he bother coming to earth, another of Christianitys illogical tripe
As for people who have never known of God how can a loving God send those people to hell? He doesn't it works like this the bible says because of the law I know sin. In other words where there is no law there is no sin people who do not know right from wrong are not judged. As far as God knows everything so he knows who goes up and who goes down. That's a yes and a no thing mans ability to choose comes in to play there God rarely does anything to force people to choose his way however Gods will is always done. You nor anyone else is destined for hell. Don't let any holy roller tell you different believe in God or not he loves us all.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61346
Nov 27, 2012
 
lisawow wrote:
<quoted text>There is no problem in believing in things of course, the problems arise when that belief becomes taken as a truth for no other reason than said belief has been given too much gravitas..........
I do not spout to much of the modern church tag line. Their is a ton of crap the church has done and said over the last few hundred years. Jesus taught about love, forgiveness, not just for the elect groupies of church goers but for all man kind. Just because a person sins doesn't mean God votes you off the island. The churches message of our way or you'll burn is chasing people from God and it makes me mad. Ok I'm off my soap box now. How is everyone tonight?

“Steaming hunk”

Level 4

Since: Jun 11

butler, pa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61347
Nov 27, 2012
 
Bat Foy wrote:
<quoted text>
No people should be free to voice their ideas with out us Christians saying our God is going to cast you into the fires of hell. Those kind of threats are just ridiculous as even those of us who follow the bible cant say who is and is not hell bound. Jesus said let he who is without sin cast the first stone. Grrrrr that hell fire and damnation fear tactic religion makes me mad.
I totally agree with that! Jesus said that we are not to judge anybody! He said to love your enemies. We are not in any position to judge anybody.

Since: Feb 08

Tampa, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61348
Nov 27, 2012
 
Charles Idemi wrote:
You are just too weak to challenge my facts.
On the contrary, I have successfully challenged many of your claims (what you refer to as "facts"), such as your claim that modern Germans can understand Old English.

Got any *quotes* from your "authority"?

No, I didn't think so. Funny how you claim an authority from a book you don't even have.

Since: Sep 12

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61349
Nov 27, 2012
 
Drew Smith wrote:
<quoted text>On the contrary, I have successfully challenged many of your claims (what you refer to as "facts"), such as your claim that modern Germans can understand Old English.

Got any *quotes* from your "authority"?

No, I didn't think so. Funny how you claim an authority from a book you don't even have.
Didn't most if not all western language come from Latin?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 57,341 - 57,360 of111,889
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••