tobs: common decent continued

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

jabriol - 13 May 2004 18:12 GMT

>From: "tinroad66"
><tinroad66@yahoo.com> Add to
>Address Book
>Date:Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:31:30 -0000
>Subject:[creation_evolution_debate]
>Re: Common
>decent?
>
>> that would be the intent eh? But the
>again, as with
>> any other theory.. how would you falsify it?
>
>Tin: Falsify common descent by:
>
>1. finding modern mammals in Precambrian rock;

Misdirection noted. next you are going to say we need
to find a
modern dinosaur to falsify creation ;-)

>2. finding a physical barrier to the
>mechanisms of
>mutation,
>selection and inheritance;

Manpanzee

>3. find a fundamentally different type of
>life form
>(one that
>doesn't run on DNA, RNA and protein.

Casper the friendly ghost?

>A more complete treatment can be found
>below. For
>each type of
>positive evidence potential falisfication is
>described.
>
>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Ah yes the wolly wonderful non-peered-reviewed faqs.

Reply to this Message

Mikey Brass - 13 May 2004 20:24 GMT

>>Tin: Falsify common descent by:
>>
>>1. finding modern mammals in Precambrian rock;
>
> Misdirection noted.

No misdirection at all.

>>2. finding a physical barrier to the
>>mechanisms of
>>mutation,
>>selection and inheritance;
>
> Manpanzee

Since chimps have also evolved, of course there won't be one.

>>3. find a fundamentally different type of
>>life form
>>(one that
>>doesn't run on DNA, RNA and protein.
>
> Casper the friendly ghost?

Inability to answer noted.

>>A more complete treatment can be found
>>below. For
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Ah yes the wolly wonderful non-peered-reviewed faqs.

Then check the scientific literature and stop getting your science
information from the non-peer-reviewed Bible and non-peer-reviewed
creationist sites.

Signature

===========
Mikey Brass
MA in Archaeology student
"The Antiquity of Man" http://www.antiquityofman.com
Book: "The Antiquity of Man: Artifactual, fossil and gene records
explored"

- "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research, would
it?"
(Albert Einstein)

Reply to this Message

JaBrIoL - 14 May 2004 11:55 GMT

> >>Tin: Falsify common descent by:
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> No misdirection at all.

of course it is. that like finding a neanderthal living in the pine's
barrens of Jersey.

> >>2. finding a physical barrier to the
> >>mechanisms of
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Since chimps have also evolved, of course there won't be one.

since there is a 98% genetic compatibility with humans, why not make
one?

> >>3. find a fundamentally different type of
> >>life form
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Inability to answer noted.

define alternate lifeform

> >>A more complete treatment can be found
> >>below. For
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> information from the non-peer-reviewed Bible and non-peer-reviewed
> creationist sites.

I am not a creationist. And I have quoted science document in the past
from scientist, who have their doubts in evolution.

Reply to this Message

Mikey Brass - 14 May 2004 12:17 GMT

>> >>Tin: Falsify common descent by:
>> >>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> of course it is. that like finding a neanderthal living in the pine's
> barrens of Jersey.

If the earth was created 6000 years ago, then modern animals should be in
pre-Cambrian strata and they should be present today.

>> >>2. finding a physical barrier to the
>> >>mechanisms of
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> since there is a 98% genetic compatibility with humans, why not make
> one?

Because genetic differences are significant and because imagine the
political outcry...

>> >>3. find a fundamentally different type of
>> >>life form
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> define alternate lifeform

Inability to answer noted.

>> >>A more complete treatment can be found
>> >>below. For
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> I am not a creationist. And I have quoted science document in the past
> from scientist, who have their doubts in evolution.

Inability to address my point noted. You reading science journals, ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Signature

Reply to this Message

JaBrIoL - 15 May 2004 13:51 GMT

> >> >>Tin: Falsify common descent by:
> >> >>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> If the earth was created 6000 years ago, then modern animals should be in
> pre-Cambrian strata and they should be present today.

you are confusing me with those who believe in the 6 day quickie
I am not a creationist.

>
> >> >>2. finding a physical barrier to the
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> political outcry...
>

why? we can make a few and send to Iraq. pick cotton in the south,
that sort of thing.

> >> >>3. find a fundamentally different type of
> >> >>life form
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> Inability to address my point noted. You reading science journals, ha ha
> ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Reply to this Message

=^..^= - 15 May 2004 21:03 GMT

Signature

Jabriol is a Jehovah's Witness and so *IS* a devout creationist. *All* JWs
are creationists. Please remove ARJW from this thread since no one here is
interested or participates in these endless, boring, redundant Jabriol
evolution/creation debates.

Thank you :-)
============

> > Inability to address my point noted. You reading science journals, ha ha
> > ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

============================
The typical ravings of a lunatic.

Signature

Catzen Jammers.......
"Men (like Jabriol) never do evil so completely and
cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
~ Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) ~
~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~* ~~*
"Anonymous Sender" <anonymous@remailer.metacolo.com> wrote in message
news:2d21fc79fb0431cea7b286d0d78e1a49@remailer.metacolo.com...
If you are a victim of Jabriol who is really Antonio J. Santana
of Camden NJ's Kingdom Hall on Walnut Street, you can report him
the Camden NJ PD (Det.Gibson) at 1-856-757-7400. You can report
Jabriol to his ISP at abuse-nonverbose@qwest.net or abuse@qwest.net.
==========================================================

Reply to this Message

Zool of Love - 14 May 2004 17:22 GMT

Signature

Jabriol is a Jehovah's Witness and so *IS* a devout creationist. *All* JWs
are creationists. Please remove ARJW from this thread since no one here is
interested or participates in these endless Jabriol evolution/creation
debates.

Thank you
The Zools
==========================================

> >
> > >>Tin: Falsify common descent by:

====================================SNIP!

Reply to this Message

Lam Son 719 - 14 May 2004 02:29 GMT

> >From: "tinroad66"
> ><tinroad66@yahoo.com>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> to find a
> modern dinosaur to falsify creation ;-)

Pardon? Which creationist hypothesis would be falsified by finding a
chicken?

> >2. finding a physical barrier to the
> >mechanisms of
> >mutation,
> >selection and inheritance;
>
> Manpanzee

In what sense does that constitute a barrier to any combination of
those mechanisms?

> >3. find a fundamentally different type of
> >life form
> >(one that
> >doesn't run on DNA, RNA and protein.
>
> Casper the friendly ghost?

Hmmm. Pure fantasy deliberately (if not intelligently) designed as a
simplistic morality play to market breakfast cereal to children. I'm
starting to see where you're coming from.

Reply to this Message

JaBrIoL - 15 May 2004 13:54 GMT

> > >From: "tinroad66"
> > ><tinroad66@yahoo.com>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> Pardon? Which creationist hypothesis would be falsified by finding a
> chicken?

exactly..

> > >2. finding a physical barrier to the
> > >mechanisms of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> In what sense does that constitute a barrier to any combination of
> those mechanisms?

can we make one or not?

> > >3. find a fundamentally different type of
> > >life form
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> simplistic morality play to market breakfast cereal to children. I'm
> starting to see where you're coming from.

not really, many people belives in ghosts as live disembodied souls..
where is their dna?

Reply to this Message

Lam Son 719 - 25 May 2004 20:16 GMT

> > > >From: "tinroad66"
> > > ><tinroad66@yahoo.com>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> exactly..

Exactly what?

> > > >2. finding a physical barrier to the
> > > >mechanisms of
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> can we make one or not?

Make one what? What is a "manpanzee?" And what would "our" ability to
"make" one (or not) establish about the existence of a physical
barrier to mutation? Or selection? Or inheritance?

Would the inability to artificially construct (as opposed to naturally
select) arbitrary beasts of your imagination demonstrate a locus that
could not mutate? Or the inability of the environment to prefer the
reproduction of some phenotypes over others? Or a gene that could not
be copied?

> > > >3. find a fundamentally different type of
> > > >life form
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> not really, many people belives in ghosts as live disembodied souls..
> where is their dna?

Produce a ghost and we'll see.

Casper's DNA is well documented however. The history of American comic
strips and cartoon characters has been recounted at length in dozens
of well illustrated tomes.

Reply to this Message

Douglas Theobald - 14 May 2004 05:43 GMT

> >From: "tinroad66"
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Ah yes the wolly wonderful non-peered-reviewed faqs.

Actually, that FAQ *has* been rather extensively peer-reviewed, in
part or in total by the following of my peers, each with a PhD:

John Wilkins
Wesley Elsberry
Edward Max
Laurence Moran
Ian Musgrave
John Harshman
Paul Gans
Howard Hershey
Peter Nyikos
Gavin Tabor
Scott Classen
Tom Schneider

and many others.

Anyway, that FAQ has never claimed to be original research-- it is
really nothing more than a recounting for the layperson of the
consensus scientific view, the very scientific view given in the
peer-reviewed scientific literature. There's nothing ground-shaking in
it. My only original contribution is really just consolidation,
organisation, and presentation. If you don't believe it accurately
reflects the peer-reviewed scientific research literature, then just
go to the references I give in the FAQ. You also might want to check
out the following links from the largest scientific organizations in
the world, all of which echo the fundamental conclusion from that FAQ:

American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990) Science for
All Americans.
http://www.project2061.org/tools/sfaaol/sfaatoc.htm

Geological Society of America (2001) "Evolution."
http://www.geosociety.org/aboutus/position.htm

National Academy of Sciences. (2003) multiple statements.
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/evolution/nas.html

National Center for Science Education. (2003) "Voices for Evolution:
Statements from Scientific and Scholarly Organizations."
A compilation of statements from 47 of the world's largest and most
prestigious societies of professional research scientists, on the
importance of evolutionary theory.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3053_statements_from_scientific_and_12
_19_2002.asp

Working Group (2001) "Evolution, Science, and Society: Evolutionary
biology and the national research agenda." American Naturalist. 158:
S1. Endorsed by:
American Institute of Biological Sciences,
American Society of Naturalists,
Animal Behavior Society,
Ecological Society of America,
Genetics Society of America,
Paleontological Society,
Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution,
Society for the Study of Evolution, and
Society of Systematic Biologists.
Full-text at
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~ecolevol/fulldoc.pdf
and
http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~ecolevol/fulldoc.html

Cheers,

Douglas

Reply to this Message

JaBrIoL - 14 May 2004 11:58 GMT

> > >From: "tinroad66"
>
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> and many others.

and they still are not peered reviewed articles..
that is like calling Jason Blair a bonafide Journalist.

Reply to this Message

Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / May 2004

tobs: common decent continued