- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:04 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:
as long as the intelligence isn’t God.
Give it a name.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:05 pm to McLemore
Spaghetti.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:27 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Spaghetti
Or just fail to think for yourself and call it what you heard some other moron who thinks he's clever say on a faggy bumper sticker. Either way works.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:27 pm to tarzana
quote:
No one has ever seen one creature evolve into something else, nor will they.
What exactly do you mean by this? The time scales of observation through recorded history haven’t been long enough.
Still we see instances of very fast selection. See the Peppered Moth...
LINK
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:32 pm to McLemore
quote:
Or just fail to think for yourself and call it what you heard some other moron who thinks he's clever say on a faggy bumper sticker. Either way works.
God is a word some idiot made up, too.
Why deviate from what works?
at anyone who believes the Bible is true calling anyone out for not thinking for themselves.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:34 pm to mattloc
A scientist can show how a mutation can come about in an individual.
A computer can show how to progress these mutations through time in a population and then potentially as new species. Because a computer can simulate time.
A computer can show how to progress these mutations through time in a population and then potentially as new species. Because a computer can simulate time.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:35 pm to Pectus
Sweet.
Who programmed the computer?
Who programmed the computer?
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:51 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
A point I've raised here once already should give you a hard reset.
Cats (Felidae) -- Lions, Tigers, Leopards, Pumas Jaguars, Bobcats, Servals, House Cats -- are clearly similar. Yet they are clearly dissimilar. They obviously diverged variently from a common ancestor.
Yes?
Some species of cat can still interbreed, albeit with oft sterile or naturally disadvantaged offspring. Other cat species are evolved just beyond that point. Hell! Some members of Family:Felidae can even breed transgenus! Most cannot.
Are separate genuses of felidae actually "the same" animal, albeit "with a different beak"?
Is cat divergence simply evidence of microevolution?
Is this your shining example to support macro evolution? Cats having a common ancestor? Show me someone who doesn't think cats likely had a common ancestor. I believe that to be true.
We are not arguing about going from one form of feline to another over a couple million years. We are arguing the macro case... for example Hippo ancestors turned into whales according to many macro evolutionists. They are supposedly part of the same evolutionary tree. How many new organs and adaptions are required to go from hippo to dolphin/whale? What evidence do we have for such a transition?
Posted on 2/11/19 at 7:58 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
A duplicitous hack? If he is arguing against evolution as a general precept, then it seems so.
He is actually still in the evolution camp. He is pointing out that current theory of evolution doesn't have any kind of mechanism to show how you have major changes from species to species.
You were honest to admit that there are gaps in the fossil record based on what would be expected from a macro evolution model. And yet you are calling this guy a hack who is a strident evolutionist and member of the Royal Society?
Edit: Species to species is a bad way to state it. Going from one type of cat or fish to another is expected based on minor adaptation. It's from one animal group to another.
This post was edited on 2/11/19 at 8:01 pm
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:09 pm to CivilTiger83
quote:Looking over the paper Why an extended evolutionary synthesis is necessary, I don’t think you’re representing it correctly.
He is actually still in the evolution camp. He is pointing out that current theory of evolution doesn't have any kind of mechanism to show how you have major changes from species to species.
He appears to be arguing that the current theory does not adequately explain HOW and WHY some of it happens, not that these limitations mean they didn’t happen.
In other words, I see nothing to suggest that he’s questioning species evolving into new species (as you call it “macro” evolution). Instead he’s arguing that the theory doesn’t explain exactly how and why this occurs and needs to incorporate additional variables and mechanisms.
This type of scientific limitation is present in all fields and all areas of study. For example, we don’t know exactly how a number of medications actually cause a particular response, and there is debate in the exact mechanisms (the how and why). But neither side of that debate disagrees that the medication causes the response.
That’s a big difference from what you’ve been arguing.
This post was edited on 2/11/19 at 8:13 pm
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:22 pm to TigerBait1971
quote:
Sweet.
Who programmed the computer?
A person that probably looked generally like the person who wrote the bible. Except with more knowledge and understanding of modern science and advanced math.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:23 pm to mindbreaker
quote:
A person that probably looked generally like the person who wrote the bible. Except with more knowledge and understanding of modern science and advanced math.
Like climate scientists?
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:33 pm to TigerBait1971
quote:Sure. What is wrong with the scientists? Most of lot all of the asinine “climate science” arguments aren’t coming from scientists. Just like people who used the The Bell Curve to support their asinine and racist views, weren’t Murray and Herrnstein, the scientists who wrote it.
Like climate scientists?
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:35 pm to buckeye_vol
You should have FAITH in scientists.
Weird huh?
Weird huh?
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:36 pm to CivilTiger83
There’s no such thing as “macro” evolution, loon.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:48 pm to TigerBait1971
quote:I have faith in science, its process, and the evidence it provides, which limits and corrects for the fallibility of scientists, who are humans after all.
You should have FAITH in scientists.
I don’t believe in evolution because scientists said it was so. They are necessary conduits, but they are only as useful as the empirical-evidence they provide.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue against.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 9:01 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
You are living [fake internet name person] proof of the truth of Proverbs 26:4.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 9:04 pm to McLemore
Yawn.
Let us know when you come up with something better.
Let us know when you come up with something better.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 9:32 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue against
He is just trying to muddy the waters
really though it's because he is upset that anyone who takes a scientific approach to a problem or idea has no problem admitting ignorance without feeling compelled to invoke a supernatural cause This post was edited on 2/11/19 at 9:33 pm
Page 16 of 29
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News