Why Evolution is real science - let's settle this "debate"!

[The Barbarian]

Originally Posted by 6days
Either a) the 'author' does not know what real science is... or b) is equivocating on terminogy. (Real science is not your beliefs about the past, nor mine)

Barbarian observes:
If you were right, we'd have to toss out geology, astronomy, archeology, forensics...(long list). But you're wrong. The notion that evidence can't tell us what happened in the past, is so patently foolish that no one actually believes it. Not even you.

In your case Barbarian, both option A and B apply.

Let's see... A. you don't know what science is.
B. you rather sloppily tried to equivocate "beliefs about the past"

Let's look at B first. As you know, the evidence for evolution (remember, "change in allele frequency in a population over time") is settled. We can watch it. Your equivocation for "evolution" and "common descent" really doesn't matter, since (as you learned) the evidence for common descent includes genetics, anatomy, transitional organisms, and phenotypes.

With regard to A, you attempted to show that there are no useful mutations. There are many, many examples, but you're having trouble getting your head around the fact.

Special Creation and common ancestry are beliefs about the past...

The difference is that there is abundant evidence for common descent, while special creation is a modern attempt to revise scripture.

(Although, science does help confirm the truth of God's Word.)The belief a frog can become a handsome prince...

...is a fairy tale proposed by creationists, who can't figure out how science works.

Fortunately not all Christians have compromised on scripture. Many of them reject the modern doctrine of YE creationism.

 

[Lon]

Even if that were the case with plasmodium, that still begs the question....where did the genetic sequences for its traits come from? Do you believe God deliberately put them there?

Let's not cast God all bad because of it. I have the 'ability' to kill someone. That doesn't mean it was what my genes were made for. As far as I understand creation, it was cursed along with us and I think, because of us. We can do awesome things with industrialization, but we always have to be thinking of consequences.

Let's stay on topic here. Remember, we're talking about where the genetic sequences that allow pathogens, parasites, and pests to be so terrible came from. Creationists like to argue that evolutionary mechanisms can't do it and that only "intelligence" (i.e., God) can. So on the surface that seems to indicate that God specifically and deliberately created things like plasmodium with the ability to cause immense suffering and death.

We've made some of these superbugs. I get a lot of mixed messages on this, from doctor wars even: I've been told, flat-out, I shouldn't be taking antibiotics for a virus. My brother, a fireman, told me that wasn't true and that his doctor said to take antibiotics.

I 'think' this is still on topic? If not, help me out. Are we able to manipulate viruses? Even inadvertently?

 

[6days]

The notion that evidence can't tell us what happened in the past, is so patently foolish that no one actually believes it.

Fallacy... moving the goal posts.
Your beliefs (and my beliefs) about the past are not science. However science can be used to help confirm the past.
The problem for evolutionists is that they start with a false history... which has resulted in decades of shoddy conclusions.

As you know, the evidence for evolution (remember, "change in allele frequency in a population over time") is settled.

Fallacy... Equivocation.
Biblical creationist scientists and even atheists understand populations change. As you have been shown, genetics shows its impossible for 'monkeys' to evolve into mathematicians.

The difference is that there is abundant evidence for common descent, while special creation is a modern attempt to revise scripture.

Perhaps part of the reason you have trouble with science is you don't know what evidence is. Did you know there is only one set of data / evidence? You are confusing your beliefs with evidence and interpretation.

The belief a frog can become a handsome prince is a fairy tale...not a parable

...is a fairy tale proposed by creationists, who can't figure out how science works.

No... science does not support frogs becoming handsome princes... no matter how much you kiss them... no matter how hard you believe it.
Evolutionism is a fairy tale that contradicts in six days, the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them

 

[The Barbarian]

(Barbarian notes that evidence can show us what happened in the past, even if we weren't there to see it)

Fallacy... moving the goal posts.

Nope. The reason you have no problems accepting evidence for sciences like forensics, and won't accept evidence for sciences like evolution, is that you aren't scared of forensics.

Your beliefs (and my beliefs) about the past are not science.

Your beliefs are based on a modern revision of Genesis. I accept evolution because it's directly observed to happen.

I accept common descent, because the genetic, fossil, and anatomical data confirm it.

The problem for creationists is that they start with a false history... which has resulted in decades of shoddy conclusions. The "belief" equivocation is often used by creationists to try to put their new doctrines on the same level as findings of science.

As you have been shown, genetics shows its impossible for 'monkeys' to evolve into mathematicians.

Scientists have to repeatedly remind creationist that humans evolved from hominins, not monkeys. But as in your case, dishonest creationists continue to pretend that evolution is about humans evolving from monkeys.

Perhaps part of the reason you have trouble with science is you don't know what evidence is. Did you know there is only one set of data / evidence? You are confusing your beliefs with evidence and interpretation.

6days tries the "frog prince" dishonesty again:
No... science does not support frogs becoming handsome princes... no matter how much you kiss them... no matter how hard you believe it.

To be fair, it's possible that you actually think that's part of evolutionary theory. If you'll believe that scientists think humans evolved from monkeys, it's probably not that big a step to invent the idea that humans came from frogs.


"Evolutionism" is a straw man that creationists like to trot out to fool the unwary.

 

[Wick Stick]

Who are you? :idunno:

 

[Jose Fly]

Let's not cast God all bad because of it. I have the 'ability' to kill someone. That doesn't mean it was what my genes were made for. As far as I understand creation, it was cursed along with us and I think, because of us. We can do awesome things with industrialization, but we always have to be thinking of consequences.



We've made some of these superbugs. I get a lot of mixed messages on this, from doctor wars even: I've been told, flat-out, I shouldn't be taking antibiotics for a virus. My brother, a fireman, told me that wasn't true and that his doctor said to take antibiotics.

I 'think' this is still on topic? If not, help me out. Are we able to manipulate viruses? Even inadvertently?

So can I take your response to mean that you believe God specifically and deliberately designed pathogens, parasites, and pests to cause suffering and death?

 

[Lon]

So can I take your response to mean that you believe God specifically and deliberately designed pathogens, parasites, and pests to cause suffering and death?

:nono: I said 'we' have made stronger cold viruses, by example. Look, you agree: Whether God exists (He does) or not, we are the caretakers of the earth. We are responsible for killer bees. Purposefully, or inadvertently, it is us. Good news? You and I both believe science is important to be responsible caretakers of the earth. Again, thanks for asking and I also appreciate the input as well. -Lon

 

[Jose Fly]

:nono: I said 'we' have made stronger cold viruses, by example.

And that's not really an answer to the actual question you were asked.

Me: "Do you believe God specifically and deliberately designed pathogens, parasites, and pests to cause suffering and death?"

Lon: Humans have made viruses stronger.​

Do you see how that doesn't answer the question you were asked? I hope so, because now I'm wondering why you've put a fair amount of effort into avoiding answering the question. Is this an uncomfortable subject for you?

 

[Silent Hunter]

And that's not really an answer to the actual question you were asked.

Me: "Do you believe God specifically and deliberately designed pathogens, parasites, and pests to cause suffering and death?"

Lon: Humans have made viruses stronger.​

Do you see how that doesn't answer the question you were asked? I hope so, because now I'm wondering why you've put a fair amount of effort into avoiding answering the question. Is this an uncomfortable subject for you?

Christians have this interesting logic...

If something is "bad"... mandidit.

If something is "good"... goddidit.

 

[6days]

Christians have this interesting logic...

If something is "bad"... mandidit.

If something is "good"... goddidit.

Evolutionists have this interesting 'logic'
They think Functionality is a result of ...evolution did it.
They think non-functionality is a result of... evolution did it.

Evolutionists think good design means... evolution did it.
Evolutionists think shoddy design means... evolution did it.

IOW... Evolutionism is a non falsifiable belief system.

 

[6days]

:nono: I said 'we' have made stronger cold viruses, by example. Look, you agree: Whether God exists (He does) or not, we are the caretakers of the earth. We are responsible for killer bees. Purposefully, or inadvertently, it is us. Good news? You and I both believe science is important to be responsible caretakers of the earth. Again, thanks for asking and I also appreciate the input as well. -Lon

'Bad' bacteria, viruses etc are likely all a result of good systems gone bad. We NEED bacteria on erth in order for life to exist. Most bacteria are good and necessary, but some have likely been altered / corrupted by mutations.

 

[Silent Hunter]

Christians have this interesting logic...

If something is "bad"... mandidit.

If something is "good"... goddidit.

Evolutionists have this interesting 'logic'
They think Functionality is a result of ...evolution did it.
They think non-functionality is a result of... evolution did it.

Evolutionists think good design means... evolution did it.
Evolutionists think shoddy design means... evolution did it.

IOW... Evolutionism is a non falsifiable belief system.

And the guy who thinks everyone else posts nothing but straw men ignores his own... again.

6days, all of your knowledge about evolution comes from creationist web sites so do us all a favor and quit posting about evolution until you actually know what evolutionary theory predicts and can do so honestly, without straw men, half-truths, and blatant lies.

 

[Jose Fly]

'Bad' bacteria, viruses etc are likely all a result of good systems gone bad. We NEED bacteria on erth in order for life to exist. Most bacteria are good and necessary, but some have likely been altered / corrupted by mutations.

Does that mean you agree mutations can add "genetic information"? If not, exactly where did the "genetic information" for the "bad" things come from?

 

[Lon]

And that's not really an answer to the actual question you were asked.

Me: "Do you believe God specifically and deliberately designed pathogens, parasites, and pests to cause suffering and death?"

Lon: Humans have made viruses stronger.​

Do you see how that doesn't answer the question you were asked? I hope so, because now I'm wondering why you've put a fair amount of effort into avoiding answering the question. Is this an uncomfortable subject for you?

No. "No I don't see why that doesn't answer your question." Answer (longer version): No, "We" have made pathogens, not God but God did subject creation to futility, likely because 'we' are the 'futile' part creation is subject too (consequences to our every action). Now, if God's hand is more involved than that, it doesn't matter to me, just a blame game where I will not be giving ammunition. If you want to accuse God of anything, you will stand and do so on your own, without my involvement. I've been clear enough: "No, I don't think so." :e4e:

'Bad' bacteria, viruses etc are likely all a result of good systems gone bad. We NEED bacteria on erth in order for life to exist. Most bacteria are good and necessary, but some have likely been altered / corrupted by mutations.

 

[Jose Fly]

No. "No I don't see why that doesn't answer your question." Answer (longer version): No, "We" have made pathogens, not God but God did subject creation to futility, likely because 'we' are the 'futile' part creation is subject too (consequences to our every action). Now, if God's hand is more involved than that, it doesn't matter to me, just a blame game where I will not be giving ammunition. If you want to accuse God of anything, you will stand and do so on your own, without my involvement. I've been clear enough: "No, I don't think so." :e4e:

Thanks for clarifying.

So if you don't believe God put the "genetic information" into pathogens that allows them to cause disease, do you have a view on how they did get there?

Obviously at some point there were organisms that didn't have this "genetic information", and then at some later point there were. Where did that "genetic information" come from and how did it find its way into the genomes of various pathogens?

 

[6days]

Does that mean you agree mutations can add "genetic information"? If not, exactly where did the "genetic information" for the "bad" things come from?

Is this another question like your microsatellite question? You don't understand, but when you are presented with evidence you claim you knew it all along?

Lets suppose a mutation destroys specificity for an enzyme in bacteria. Enzymes are generally tuned to a specific substrate. The enzyme now has lost, or has reduced function. It might be new info... but certainly not a gain of specified complex information. (The LOSS of information might bestow a benefit...which in bacteria may be a designed response since we need good bacteria)

 

[6days]

6days, all of your knowledge about evolution comes from creationist web sites so do us all a favor and quit posting about evolution until you actually know what evolutionary theory predicts and can do so honestly, without straw men, half-truths, and blatant lies.

Awwwww Sorry if I upset you Silent Hunter, but what I said is true. Evolutionism is like a fog that covers any landscape. Evolutionists claim shoddy design is evidence of common ancestry. Evolutionists claim good design is evidence of the power of natural selection. Evolutionism (advocacy of the common ancestry belief system) is a non falsifiable belief.

 

[Silent Hunter]

And the guy who thinks everyone else posts nothing but straw men ignores his own... again.

6days, all of your knowledge about evolution comes from creationist web sites so do us all a favor and quit posting about evolution until you actually know what evolutionary theory predicts and can do so honestly, without straw men, half-truths, and blatant lies.

Awwwww Sorry if I upset you Silent Hunter, but what I said is true.

Upset? No. Just tired of your continuous misrepresentation of evolution.

Evolutionism is like a fog that covers any landscape. Evolutionists claim shoddy design is evidence of common ancestry. Evolutionists claim good design is evidence of the power of natural selection.

You've been corrected on this straw man too many times to count yet you continue to post it; why?

Evolutionism (advocacy of the common ancestry belief system) is a non falsifiable belief.

Your dishonesty is well known. You've been lectured on how to falsify evolution. Would you like to try or are you going to continue with your lies?

 

[6days]

Upset? No. Just tired of your continuous misrepresentation of evolution.

You mean you think the 'monkey' to man is dishonest rather than saying a monkey like primate? You don't like when being teased that you believe 'fish' evolved into philosophers??

Your dishonesty is well known. You've been lectured on how to falsify evolution.

Awww... you almost hurt my feelings. I consider it a compliment (in a funny sort of way) when I get 'lectured' by those who believe in uphill evolution.

Would you like to try or are you going to continue with your lies?

You can try refute what I said..... but it seems you are unable so resort to ad hominem. Shall we discuss how evolutionists claim both good design... and bad design supports their beliefs? IOW... the evidence does not matter, but it all that matters is trying to create explanations that shoehorn into the belief system.

 

[Lon]

Evolutionists have this interesting 'logic'
They think Functionality is a result of ...evolution did it.
They think non-functionality is a result of... evolution did it.

Evolutionists think good design means... evolution did it.
Evolutionists think shoddy design means... evolution did it.

IOW... Evolutionism is a non falsifiable belief system.

He's on my ignore list for adding absolutely nothing to a conversation but his own display of incredulity and ridicule.

He just isn't that interesting to engage on TOL, to me. He is simply too, 2-dimensional and not here to actually discuss anything (troll's troll)