tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post7111929990423169604..comments2024-01-23T02:32:28.567-08:00Comments on Darwin's God: Evolution Professor: Special-Creation “Effectively Eliminated”Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger234125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-79556566701287691242012-07-02T14:40:53.573-07:002012-07-02T14:40:53.573-07:00Been without Internet access since Saturday, June ...Been without Internet access since Saturday, June 30, and I come back to this <i>tsimis</i>?<br /><br />Let me make this <i>perfectly</i> clear: There are no supernatural agents. If you want to understand anything about the Universe, try something else.Pedanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12656298969231453877noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-7443642181306616562012-07-02T09:40:22.707-07:002012-07-02T09:40:22.707-07:00Joe G: shut up. The name was the thing I am talkin...Joe G: <i>shut up. The name was the thing I am talking about. I am OK with the definition.</i> <br /><br />The name is all you can focus on. That leaves you no brain power to focus on the definition.oleghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11644793385433232819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-79105907122115645702012-07-02T09:38:22.375-07:002012-07-02T09:38:22.375-07:00A coin toss is merely an informal description of w...A coin toss is merely an informal description of what her algorithm does. No actual coin tosses were involved in her Matlab program. What it does is generate, randomly, binary sequences of a fixed length (500 bits). Each bit has a 50-50 chance of attaining either value, which is analogous to the statistics of tossing a fare coin. <br /><br />Liz could have written "binary strings drawn from a uniform distribution," but that would be a lengthy description and it would be a mouthful to say it every time. Instead, she used a cultural reference that is clear to anyone. <br /><br />Scientists often do that. Physicists refer to quark colors red, green, and blue. That shouldn't be taken literally: they merely convey an analogy with color vision wherein three basic colors can be added to obtain white (neutral) light. Quarks are often found in groups of three. <br /><br />Liz's program does not rely on any properties of coins, so there is no point in saying that coins don't reproduce. Yet again, you get distracted by something completely irrelevant and unable to discuss relevant things.oleghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11644793385433232819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-28088455515513748202012-07-02T09:11:57.197-07:002012-07-02T09:11:57.197-07:00Strawman:
If, on the other hand, natural causatio...Strawman:<br /><br /><i>If, on the other hand, natural causation is denied, and a caring Intelligent Designer is to be held directly responsible for life’s imperfect features, then the theodicy challenge remains poignant.</i><br /><br />ID is OK with Darwinian processes breaking things. And ID is OK with a non-caring designer.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-86218833092299626172012-07-02T07:16:41.630-07:002012-07-02T07:16:41.630-07:00The father of the biological classification system...The father of the biological classification system was Carl Linnaeus, who was a creationist. <br /><br />Linnaeus and many others had no difficulty seeing the morphological patterns in nature as a result of common design. Their belief in an intelligent and dependable creator inspired their work. This was true in biology, but also true of most of the founders of the every major branch of science. <br /><br />Genetics betrays Darwinism and destroys his imagined tree of life. These problems are too great to account for by horizontal gene transfer or convergence. <br /><br />Darwinists were able to cherry pick and force fit the morphological data to fit their fairy tale. These have been documented repeatedly on this site. <br /><br />Darwin was not good at making accurate assessments of what he observed. <br /><br /> He observed African tribes and classified them as being somewhere between Gorilla's and white Europeans on the evolutionary scale. He placed women on a lower evolutionary level that men... Smarter than black people, but not as smart as himself. <br /><br />With all the pomp from Darwin's 200 year birthday celebrations you would think it foolish to waste the time on someone who thought that blacks were closer to gorillas and that women were not as smart as he was. <br /><br />From peppered moths to Junk-DNA, the evolutionist tradition of bad science continues. With the lack of good tools, Darwin was shooting from the hip. Evolutionists today now have no excuse. It's all about money and metaphysics at this point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-79931803214153374442012-07-02T06:41:36.481-07:002012-07-02T06:41:36.481-07:00Oh, oh what a ronery boy!
Oh what a ronery boy!
...Oh, oh what a ronery boy!<br /><br />Oh what a ronery boy!<br /><br />Ronery boy!Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-71053708969044847532012-07-02T06:25:13.757-07:002012-07-02T06:25:13.757-07:00oleg, you are just upset because your reference su...oleg, you are just upset because your reference supports what I said about GAs.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-82933130728808795132012-07-02T00:29:23.594-07:002012-07-02T00:29:23.594-07:00Let me get this straight. Slight variations within...Let me get this straight. Slight variations within species due to the known process of adaptation are considered evidence for Darwinian evolution, now? Is a Chihuahua the result of Darwinian evolution? After all, a Chihuahua does not look like a wolf, right? What a maroon. I'll tell you what. Find me evidence in the fossil record that shows a smooth transition from a mouse-like creature to a bat or from a cow to a whale and I'll call it quits.<br /><br />I was right. You don't have room temperature IQ. You have the IQ of a watermelon. LOL.Rebel Sciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11762287159937757216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-76885671931897036282012-07-01T20:49:33.632-07:002012-07-01T20:49:33.632-07:00Louis Savain
No evidence for Darwinian smooth var...<i>Louis Savain<br /><br />No evidence for Darwinian smooth variation has been found in fossilized seabed layers.</i><br /><br />Big FAIL again for you Louis.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/fossil_series.html" rel="nofollow">Smooth Changes in the Fossil Record</a><br /><br />Don't you ever get tired of being wrong all the time?Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-32878999860413270912012-07-01T20:38:00.814-07:002012-07-01T20:38:00.814-07:00computerist29
Seems like my hypothesis is just as...<i>computerist29<br /><br />Seems like my hypothesis is just as good as Darwinism, if not better.</i><br /><br />Still clueless I see.<br /><br />Tell you what - why don't you come up with some objective tests for your front-loading hypotheses, actually perform the tests, write up any positive results you find and get them published in a top line science journal like <i>Nature.</i> Do that and someone may pay attention to your Creationist fantasies.<br /><br />Until then you're just another clueless woo merchant.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-38233202757613876822012-07-01T20:05:47.466-07:002012-07-01T20:05:47.466-07:00I don't care about your view, Lizzie.I don't care about your view, Lizzie.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-71261235910395538672012-07-01T20:04:00.090-07:002012-07-01T20:04:00.090-07:00They ARE coin tosses as defined by Liz. Also the a...They ARE coin tosses as defined by Liz. Also the ability to reproduce is the very thing that requires an explanation and she just grants that.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-70267680312817983142012-07-01T20:02:12.191-07:002012-07-01T20:02:12.191-07:00oleg-
shut up. The name was the thing I am talkin...oleg-<br /><br />shut up. The name was the thing I am talking about. I am OK with the definition.<br /><br />But anyway you said I didn't know what I was talking about and then provided a reference that supports what i said.<br /><br />Nice job, ace...Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-36020658669827627782012-07-01T19:48:13.961-07:002012-07-01T19:48:13.961-07:00Thorton:
LOL! No Louis, the coarseness in the fos...Thorton:<br /><br /><i>LOL! No Louis, the coarseness in the fossil record is due to the extremely coarse sampling rate of the fossilization process, not because the evolutionary process is coarse. Fossilization is extremely rare, and you're not going to get a fossil from each generation, or even each 100th generation.</i><br /><br />What a maroon. Even if it is true that the fossil record is spotty, there are enough temporally overlapping fossil gisements to establish the existence of a smooth gradation a la Darwin but it's nowhere to be found.<br /><br />Moreover, the sampling rate is much higher and complete in ocean floor sediment layers. Animal carcasses are continually falling to the bottom, subsequently covered over with sediments and fossilized. No evidence for Darwinian smooth variation has been found in fossilized seabed layers.<br /><br /><i>That's a pretty dumb argument even by your low standards.</i><br /><br />"Room temperature IQ" is no longer adequate to describe your rapidly declining mental faculties.Rebel Sciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11762287159937757216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-33662253805203727652012-07-01T19:25:11.238-07:002012-07-01T19:25:11.238-07:00Joe G:
LoL! Look in a mirror assface
ahahahaha.....Joe G:<br /><br /><i>LoL! Look in a mirror assface</i><br /><br />ahahahaha... I'm beginning to like you, Joe.Rebel Sciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11762287159937757216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-5483757236619315612012-07-01T17:54:47.098-07:002012-07-01T17:54:47.098-07:00And of course, we have certain "parameters&qu...And of course, we have certain "parameters" which can and can't be modified at will. This ensures integrity of variation and subsequent reversibility within a species, and irreversibility with respect to different species.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-51973269323222337262012-07-01T17:46:20.757-07:002012-07-01T17:46:20.757-07:00The initial function is already there, ready for d...The initial function is already there, ready for different contexts. Ready for whatever RM's can throw at it, until it can't, hence extinction.<br />Seems like my hypothesis is just as good as Darwinism, if not better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-59844282118957661812012-07-01T17:41:40.756-07:002012-07-01T17:41:40.756-07:00And Thorton,
The genetic similarity data agrees wi...And Thorton,<br />The genetic similarity data agrees with my hypothesis.<br />The similarity/dissimilarity between species is based on the differences in input (or "arguments" to the "parameters"), not the function itself. This is why it doesn't surprise me we share 98% of the genome with chimps, it wouldn't matter.<br />Varying "arguments" can vary function and even silence function altogether. Silencing (or not) function would be determined by the "front-loaded" code which determines the unfolded route information takes to produce different species. Varying function would be determined by NS & RM's.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-54941900833219510772012-07-01T17:05:20.847-07:002012-07-01T17:05:20.847-07:00Thorton said:
"Heritability by itself doesn&...Thorton said:<br /><br />"Heritability by itself doesn't lead to new functions. Selection by itself doesn't lead to new functions. But selection and heritability together lead to the accumulation of beneficial traits. The accumulation of beneficial traits is what creates the new functions, like the evolution of a land dwelling animal's paw into a cetacean's fin."<br /><br />If you can imagine it, sure, heritability and "if it survives" (ie: selection) leads to an increase in function. You have to show evidence that it can create initial function.<br />We have evidence for variation.<br />Variation does not equal function.<br />There is no evidence the initial function is being changed, only the "arguments" to the "parameters". This is why variation is reversible (unlike macro-evolution which is not reversible), we can go back and forth between functional states by varying the "arguments" without touching the initial function.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-52256919015000736232012-07-01T16:11:44.652-07:002012-07-01T16:11:44.652-07:00Louis Savain
The fossil record supports design ev...<i>Louis Savain<br /><br />The fossil record supports design evolution (sequence of intelligent interventions) even more. The record does not support the minute variations that is called for in Darwinian evolution. The variations along a lineage are grainier and coarser than a Darwinian theorist would expect. A coarse evolution is in keeping with design evolution.</i><br /><br />LOL! No Louis, the coarseness in the fossil record is due to the extremely coarse sampling rate of the fossilization process, not because the evolutionary process is coarse. Fossilization is extremely rare, and you're not going to get a fossil from each generation, or even each 100th generation.<br /><br />That's a pretty dumb argument even by your low standards.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-28804954510178476152012-07-01T16:03:30.639-07:002012-07-01T16:03:30.639-07:00computerist29
Thorton: "But evolutionary alg...<i>computerist29<br /><br />Thorton: "But evolutionary algorithms and natural evolutionary processes involve more than just selection, remember? There's also heritability which leads to the accumulation of beneficial traits."<br /><br />Would a trait be beneficial "if it didn't survive"?<br /><br />Heritability assumes function to begin with, it doesn't explain it.</i><br /><br />You're still clueless. Heritability by itself doesn't lead to new functions. Selection by itself doesn't lead to new functions. But selection and heritability together lead to the <b>accumulation of beneficial traits.</b> The accumulation of beneficial traits is what creates the new functions, like the evolution of a land dwelling animal's paw into a cetacean's fin.<br /><br />You really should learn the basics of the theory before attempting to critique it. Right now your ignorance is just making you look silly.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-85265747173348328442012-07-01T15:22:25.073-07:002012-07-01T15:22:25.073-07:00Liddle:
Darwin also proposed that by this mechani...Liddle:<br /><br /><i>Darwin also proposed that by this mechanism, the variety of species that we see could be descended from much simpler, and less varied ancestral populations, which adapted to different environmental conditions, and bifurcated down different lineages, to produce the nested hierarchy of morphological features that Linnaeus observed.<br /><br />Again, the fossil record supports this.</i><br /><br />The fossil record supports design evolution (sequence of intelligent interventions) even more. The record does not support the minute variations that is called for in Darwinian evolution. The variations along a lineage are grainier and coarser than a Darwinian theorist would expect. A coarse evolution is in keeping with design evolution.Rebel Sciencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11762287159937757216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-50307990435164148662012-07-01T15:09:59.856-07:002012-07-01T15:09:59.856-07:00Thorton said:
"But evolutionary algorithms a...Thorton said:<br /><br />"But evolutionary algorithms and natural evolutionary processes involve more than just selection, remember? There's also heritability which leads to the accumulation of beneficial traits."<br /><br />Would a trait be beneficial "if it didn't survive"?<br /><br />Heritability assumes function to begin with, it doesn't explain it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-21383094035056079942012-07-01T14:43:05.756-07:002012-07-01T14:43:05.756-07:00computerist29
Thorton: "Since they obviously...<i>computerist29<br /><br />Thorton: "Since they obviously work in producing complex, efficiently functioning solutions, what's the problem?"<br /><br />It all depends on how well the intelligent programmer defined the selective criteria. NS, only has one: "if it survives".<br /><br />"if it survives" has yet to be shown to produce function of any kind.</i><br /><br />But evolutionary algorithms and natural evolutionary processes involve more than just selection, remember? There's also heritability which leads to the accumulation of beneficial traits.<br /><br />Are you really that clueless about how evolutionary processes work?Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-680383876632407152012-07-01T14:31:52.023-07:002012-07-01T14:31:52.023-07:00Thorton said:
"Since they obviously work in ...Thorton said:<br /><br />"Since they obviously work in producing complex, efficiently functioning solutions, what's the problem?"<br /><br />It all depends on how well the intelligent programmer defined the selective criteria. NS, only has one: "if it survives".<br /><br />"if it survives" has yet to be shown to produce function of any kind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com