User Tag List

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678
Results 106 to 115 of 115

Thread: Evolution is a falsehood

  1. #106
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,081
    Thanks
    22,830
    Thanked 6,405 Times in 4,063 Posts

    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147598
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    With a rugby field!
    I'm not much of a sports person, but ok! haha

  2. #107
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,228
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 10,364 Times in 7,616 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    I'm not much of a sports person.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  3. #108
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,081
    Thanks
    22,830
    Thanked 6,405 Times in 4,063 Posts

    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147598
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    I'm an introvert, what do you expect! XD

  4. #109
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,228
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 10,364 Times in 7,616 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    I'm an introvert, what do you expect! XD
    Being an introvert, that you'd play in the forwards.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  5. #110
    Gold level Subscriber JudgeRightly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,081
    Thanks
    22,830
    Thanked 6,405 Times in 4,063 Posts

    Mentioned
    46 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147598
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Being an introvert, that you'd play in the forwards.
    hahaha

    What if I could control a robot via a computer from home? would that work?

  6. #111
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,228
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 10,364 Times in 7,616 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by JudgeRightly View Post
    hahaha

    What if I could control a robot via a computer from home? would that work?


    Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (August 3rd, 2018)

  8. #112
    Over 5000 post club 6days's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,938
    Thanks
    1,067
    Thanked 3,981 Times in 2,369 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1805156
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfern
    I had Michael Behe in mind.
    So... You think Behe is not a scientist, but instead a "scientist". Your bandwagon fallacy 'logic' is obvious.
    Quote Originally Posted by Redfern
    Would you list him as one of the experts on your side?
    Nope. You still have not answered why you put the word 'scientist' in quote marks referring to those who disagree with you.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 6days For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (August 3rd, 2018),Right Divider (August 3rd, 2018)

  10. #113
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    354
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked 92 Times in 77 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    13862
    6 days, since posing my original question about obtaining the opinions of experts, you have responded to me over 10 times. Not once in any of those ten responses have you made any pretense of answering. my question.

    Rather than simply and honestly responding to a simple question, you have resorted to an amazing array of distortions and innuendo. Your need to rely on inference (“if you suggest … ”, “you suggested that …“, “ambiguous”, “dishonest”, “seem to indicate”, etc.) in place of facts far exceeds that needed to show that some fish actually evolved into YECs.

    Your performance is one I have not witnessed since long ago when I saw a child with a toothache screaming in abject horror being because she was being taken to a dentist. As I said many posts back – The Agony of a Simple Answer…

    On the bright side, though, you have now made the short list of those I want on my dodge-ball team.

    And just to help out, how about:

    “I think some of them would agree with me, and some would not.”
    “I expect they would all agree with me.”
    “Probably most of them would say that human evolution is silly”.
    “I would expect every last one of them to <accept>/<reject> the notion of humans being an evolved species.”

    Are any of those possible responses ones that you would expect?

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    So... You think Behe is not a scientist …
    Quite the opposite, instead of thinking he “is not a scientist”, I have looked up his admirable record of peer-reviewed studies that were accepted for inclusion in scientific journals. I am a bit surprised that you replied that you do not consider him as “an expert on your side”. Can you share with us why you don’t count him as an expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by 6days View Post
    You still have not answered why you put the word 'scientist' in quote marks…
    Again, I had Behe in mind - Behe at the Dover trial. I expect you know what happened there.

    Meantime on issues of scientific evidence, we jointly agreed to “not make scientific assertions sans specific evidence backing them.” You recommended we look at the “overwhelming deleterious nature of mutations,” and you even called it “1 strong piece of evidence”. That led to you saying “the problem is much bigger than he <Kondrashov> believed it was at that time.” In response I asked for the evidence for that claim:

    Quote Originally Posted by redfern View Post
    Ok, let’s go the evidence route. Tell us how big Kondrashov felt the problem was, and how much bigger it really is than he believed it was. We are talking specifics here – probably numbers - not just generalized assertions.
    My asking for that evidence was more than 3 exchanges ago between us. Do you intend to back your claim in the near future?

    Do I have free will – meaning of the choices I can make it is up to me as to which choice I actually select?

  11. #114
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    17,228
    Thanks
    306
    Thanked 10,364 Times in 7,616 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147824
    Quote Originally Posted by Jose Fly View Post
    I suppose that's like the "science that shows Neanderthals are [people]".....claimed but never actually cited or shown.
    Actually, we provided a few resources you could look into for that one. You might have missed mine because of the server update.
    Last edited by Stripe; August 4th, 2018 at 07:09 AM.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (August 5th, 2018)

  13. #115
    Over 5000 post club 6days's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,938
    Thanks
    1,067
    Thanked 3,981 Times in 2,369 Posts

    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1805156
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern
    I have looked (Behe's) admirable record of peer-reviewed studies that were accepted for inclusion in scientific journals.
    Great! Then why did you put the word scientist in quote marks referring to him? Its obvious you were making a bandwagon argument, suggesting that since his beliefs are different from yours that he is not a scientist, but instead a "scientist".
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern
    Can you share with us why you don’t count him as an expert?
    Strawman fallacy... I did not say he is not an expert.
    Quote Originally Posted by redfern
    Meantime on issues of scientific evidence, we jointly agreed to “not make scientific assertions sans specific evidence backing them.” You recommended we look at the “overwhelming deleterious nature of mutations,” and you even called it “1 strong piece of evidence”. That led to you saying “the problem is much bigger than he <Kondrashov> believed it was at that time.” In response I asked for the evidence for that claim: Ok, let’s go the evidence route. Tell us how big Kondrashov felt the problem was, and how much bigger it really is than he believed it was. We are talking specifics here – probably numbers - not just generalized assertions.
    In 1992 Kondrashov said that the total number of NEW mutations to each person, (in addition to the thousands they inherit) is about 100. He considers about 10% of them to be deleterious, and the remainder slightly deleterious. In the 1995 paper you refer to, Kondrashov says that mutation load can be excessive even with just 1 new mutation per diploid genome per generation. How much worse is the problem than Kondrashov imagined? Well, in 2007, ENCODE released preliminary results on our non-coding DNA. ENCODEsaid that most of the DNA previously thought to be junk, is doing something. Although we don't understand completely everything the DNA does, we do know much is involved in some type of regulatory function.. The problem Kondrashov described is worse, because he had no way of knowing that the "junk" was actually functional... IOW... he had not (and could not have) considered mutations in 'useless DNA to be a problem.
    Without Genesis, absolutely nothing makes sense in all of Scripture.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 6days For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (August 5th, 2018),Right Divider (August 5th, 2018)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us