Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 16:03:13 GMT -5
I don't recall claiming to be an expert on Evolution? I said i have had Bio, Zoology, Chemistry, Physics, Calculus and other courses in math and science. I don't make any claim about being an expert and i don't make any claim about being an expert in Intelligent Design either. So, if you are expert, then that is great then go ahead and send me a link to your doctoral thesis so i can read it for myself.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Sept 2, 2012 16:20:03 GMT -5
Holy shit. Since I don't actually personally know anyone this ignorant, I have to admit I'm a little shocked how ignorant it really is. Well, whatever. That is pretty rude. I am a high earning professional with degrees so think what you want. I tend to bring this type of discussion right down to basics. If you disagree fine, but i don't think you have to call me "ignorant" because that I am not. You may be educated, but clearly not well educated on evolution. What you said about intelligence in genes and forecasting the future is a complete misundersanding of evolutionary theory. It amuses me that people like to dismiss evolution as just a theory or attempt to disprove it when they are not experts in the subject. Most people are aware they lack the education to disprove the theory of gravity or relativity, but that doesn't stop them from believing they are somehow educated enough in biology and genetics to disprove evolution. I guess it comes down to miseducation & believing that everything creationists write is actually true. I have two coworkers that do this. They repeat stupid irrelevant arguments like macro vs micro evolution. One my favorite points of theirs was that if you threw a bunch of watch parts on a beach, they would never be reassembled, therefore watches were designed & we were also. Completely overlooks the fact that watch parts don't reproduce which allows mutations & watches have no predators or eating requirements, which creates natural selection. So somehow because inanimate objects don't evolve, then people must not either.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 16:37:52 GMT -5
"Well, whatever. That is pretty rude. I am a high earning professional with degrees so think what you want. I tend to bring this type of discussion right down to basics. If you disagree fine, but i don't think you have to call me "ignorant" because that I am not."
Don't worry shooby. A sign of the ignorant is calling others ignorant who don't agree with them.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,272
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 17:54:38 GMT -5
I believe natural selection is a sound theory and makes sense, but I do think it's a leap to the say humans evolved from apes.This is very incorrect. We did not evolve FROM apes. Apes and humans have a common ancestor millions of years ago that eventually split into apes and humans. There is quite a bit of DNA, phsyological and fossil evidence to support this. Anyhoo, I want to stress that nothing is considered "proven" in science. There is either a very very large body of evidence for or against. For something to become a theory there has to be so much evidence for it that we largely consider it to be "proven". This does not mean there isn't any evidence against it or that theory is air tight. Many many of Einstein's theories and even Newton's are being turned on their heads as our technology and understanding evolves. Thsi does not mean that Einstein and Newton are WRONG. what it means is that physics is a lot more complicated than we ever imagined and the more we know the less we find we know. Like Angel I have never heard anyone try to say that the entire field of physics or the entire field of chemistry is wrong based on the fact that we are finding our understanding is not near as in depth as we think it is. But since someone can't find a man/bear/pig or sharktopus fossil that means that the entire theory of evolution is wrong and we should throw it out. Science is not out to DISPROVE religion (and if someone cites Dawkins, please don't, he's a fucking joke in the scientific community as well ). Religion has no place in the lab or scientific theory because as I said before you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. You can't test faith. You can believe in God and be educated enough to understand how hte scientific process works and recognize that it has no place in the lab. It scares me that people can't seem to figure that out.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 18:02:13 GMT -5
I believe natural selection is a sound theory and makes sense, but I do think it's a leap to the say humans evolved from apes.This is very incorrect. We did not evolve FROM apes. Apes and humans have a common ancestor millions of years ago that eventually split into apes and humans. There is quite a bit of DNA, phsyological and fossil evidence to support this. Anyhoo, I want to stress that nothing is considered "proven" in science. There is either a very very large body of evidence for or against. For something to become a theory there has to be so much evidence for it that we largely consider it to be "proven". This does not mean there isn't any evidence against it or that theory is air tight. Many many of Einstein's theories and even Newton's are being turned on their heads as our technology and understanding evolves. Thsi does not mean that Einstein and Newton are WRONG. what it means is that physics is a lot more complicated than we ever imagined and the more we know the less we find we know. Like Angel I have never heard anyone try to say that the entire field of physics or the entire field of chemistry is wrong based on the fact that we are finding our understanding is not near as in depth as we think it is. But since someone can't find a man/bear/pig or sharktopus fossil that means that the entire theory of evolution is wrong and we should throw it out. Science is not out to DISPROVE religion (and if someone cites Dawkins, please don't, he's a fucking joke in the scientific community as well ). Religion has no place in the lab or scientific theory because as I said before you cannot prove or disprove the existence of God. You can't test faith. You can believe in God and be educated enough to understand how hte scientific process works and recognize that it has no place in the lab. It scares me that people can't seem to figure that out. Drama, didn't you read above before you posted this? You are not allowed to post like you are learned in the subject unless you have a Phd. The fact that the other links the Phds could be in interior design for all I know is irrevelant.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,272
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 18:08:20 GMT -5
So six years of doing scientific research doesn't count? Shit, what are we going to tell Mich? She's been at it even longer than I have.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 18:11:55 GMT -5
So six years of doing scientific research doesn't count? Shit, what are we going to tell Mich? She's been at it even longer than I have. But she has a Phd doesn she? if she does then her opinion counts but only if it has been vetted in peer review first. You could be her peer though.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 2, 2012 18:12:23 GMT -5
pfft. i have a doctorate. i am clearly more able to understand, discuss, and evaluate the validity of evolution than you are.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,526
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 2, 2012 18:14:39 GMT -5
Real science is always testing and trying to disprove theories and ideas. I don't see Intelligent Design/Creationism trying to test and disprove anything.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 18:15:22 GMT -5
pfft. i have a doctorate. i am clearly more able to understand, discuss, and evaluate the validity of evolution than you are. You have a JD not a Phd right? I'm pretty sure that doesn't count either. Is there a publication that has peer reviewed studies of the law out there?
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,272
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 2, 2012 18:16:07 GMT -5
But she has a Phd doesn she?
Not yet. She's working on getting one. Therefore she doesn't know anything about evolution either.
::runs before Mich sees this:::
;D
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 2, 2012 18:16:44 GMT -5
ID is trying to dress God up in a lab coat.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 2, 2012 18:17:30 GMT -5
pfft. i have a doctorate. i am clearly more able to understand, discuss, and evaluate the validity of evolution than you are. You have a JD not a Phd right? I'm pretty sure that doesn't count either. Is there a publication that has peer reviewed studies of the law out there? Yes, I think they're called courts.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 18:20:27 GMT -5
You have a JD not a Phd right? I'm pretty sure that doesn't count either. Is there a publication that has peer reviewed studies of the law out there? Yes, I think they're called courts. How do you create a double blind study in a court? Better yet who is going to volunteer to be in the control group?
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Sept 2, 2012 18:22:52 GMT -5
"Well, whatever. That is pretty rude. I am a high earning professional with degrees so think what you want. I tend to bring this type of discussion right down to basics. If you disagree fine, but i don't think you have to call me "ignorant" because that I am not." Don't worry shooby. A sign of the ignorant is calling others ignorant who don't agree with them. These isn't about agreement or disagreement. Shooby doesn't understand the basics of evolution, but is trying to dispute it based on her own misunderstandings. It is like if I said gravity isnt true because gravity says all things will fall to earth, but some balloons rise. I didn't discover some flaw in the theory of gravity if I make such a claim, rather I don't fully understand physics & the theory of gravity. Shooby's claim about evolution was equally as ridiculous.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,334
|
Post by swamp on Sept 2, 2012 18:26:25 GMT -5
Yes, I think they're called courts. How do you create a double blind study in a court? Better yet who is going to volunteer to be in the control group? I dunno, but lots of criminal defendants claim "so and so had the exact same case as me and i got shafted and she didn't." if they say it, it must be true, right?
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 2, 2012 18:31:32 GMT -5
But she has a Phd doesn she?Not yet. She's working on getting one. Therefore she doesn't know anything about evolution either. ::runs before Mich sees this::: ;D Too late!
|
|
Loopdilou
Well-Known Member
AKA Mrs. Dark Honor
Joined: Feb 27, 2012 19:41:33 GMT -5
Posts: 1,365
|
Post by Loopdilou on Sept 2, 2012 18:35:41 GMT -5
"Well, whatever. That is pretty rude. I am a high earning professional with degrees so think what you want. I tend to bring this type of discussion right down to basics. If you disagree fine, but i don't think you have to call me "ignorant" because that I am not." Don't worry shooby. A sign of the ignorant is calling others ignorant who don't agree with them. These isn't about agreement or disagreement. Shooby doesn't understand the basics of evolution, but is trying to dispute it based on her own misunderstandings. It is like if I said gravity isnt true because gravity says all things will fall to earth, but some balloons rise. I didn't discover some flaw in the theory of gravity if I make such a claim, rather I don't fully understand physics & the theory of gravity. Shooby's claim about evolution was equally as ridiculous. Thank you, Angel. I'll be the first to exclaim that I'm not an expert... in anything, really.. except maybe slacking. However, shooby's statements on Evolution are about as ignorant as it would be for me to say that water just sprang into existence from Mother Earth's tits and it never ever ever changes form, because ice can't come out of tits (it'd hurt). I do have a basic understanding of evolution though.. things like.. it doesn't require intelligent genes to get to where we are now, nor even an intelligent "God," because Evolution is totally predicated on RANDOM genetic mutations, some of which ended up working out to a species advantage. Nor did anyone walk fully formed from the water; not sure how the hell anyone would have gotten that from Evolution theory.. because it doesn't even resemble a MISUNDERSTANDING of Evolutionary theory. A misunderstanding would be things like the statement, "Man evolved from apes." What shooby has said is genuine ignorance. S/he is welcome to go read a basic science book to, perhaps, disabuse some of that ignorance. Hell, ID "scientists" and "theory" aren't even THAT ignorant of Evolutionary theory.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 2, 2012 18:47:33 GMT -5
Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin should be required reading before one makes comments about evolution. What is being talked about here by many is NOT what the theory of evolution is.
The misunderstandings about evolution in this thread by supposedly learned people is downright scary.
I had to read it or one of my biology classes and knocked it out in a couple evenings. It's not difficult reading, I promise.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 18:59:32 GMT -5
"pfft. i have a doctorate. i am clearly more able to understand, discuss, and evaluate the validity of evolution than you are."
Totally off topic, but I've always wondered why the JD degre (Juris Doctor) is the only degree in which we don't call the individual "Dr. Smith" instead of "Mr./Mrs Smith."
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 19:01:22 GMT -5
"Shooby's claim about evolution was equally as ridiculous." Yes, some of Shooby's claims were not correct, but I wouldn't call her ignorant
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:06:30 GMT -5
What claims did i make about evolution? I did not say "man evolved from apes". As to ascribing Godlike characteristics to genes and so called random chemicals, that is exactly what you are doing. Random chemicals do not create orderly systems. So, in order for that to be the case, then genes and chemicals have to make a value judgement that a change is "good" and a benefit.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 19:08:33 GMT -5
Let me make a feeble attempt to explain evolution, and you guys can correct me where I'm wrong.
A physicist's explanation of evolution:
by phenoix
The idea behind evolution is natural selection. Natural selection occurs when enviornmental factors (like predators, wheather, and the scarcity of food) cause certain members of a species to die, and the survivors live to pass those characteristics that made them survivors on to their offspring. Thus, over many generations, the members of a species with the characteristics associated with survival end up surviving while those without these characters die. Over a very long time, this cuases a species to change and adapt to it's surroundings.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:11:44 GMT -5
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 2, 2012 19:23:28 GMT -5
"What claims did i make about evolution?" You claimed that evolution is ascribing intelligence to genes, and it does not. Nor does evolution claim that a man and woman walked out of the ocean. Evolution claims that members of a species pass on characteristics for survial onto their offspring. There's no intelligence involved. Nor does the theory explain how life orginally came to be. No one knows that (at least scientifically), but I bet DramaQ will figure it out, one mouse at a time
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:24:44 GMT -5
Yes, i did claim that and that is exactly what evolutionists do.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 2, 2012 19:28:37 GMT -5
"pfft. i have a doctorate. i am clearly more able to understand, discuss, and evaluate the validity of evolution than you are." Totally off topic, but I've always wondered why the JD degre (Juris Doctor) is the only degree in which we don't call the individual "Dr. Smith" instead of "Mr./Mrs Smith." A pharmacists degree is called a pharmD because it is a Doctor of pharmacy and they aren't called Dr either. The real question in my mind would be what do you call a nurse who works in a hospital who has a Phd?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:36:38 GMT -5
Nurses can and do get Doctorates. There are all kinds of Doctors. We call optometrist, podiatrists and chiropractors "doctor". The term doctor doesn't always refer to a medical doctor.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Sept 2, 2012 19:41:40 GMT -5
Yes, i did claim that and that is exactly what evolutionists do. No they don't. Which is why we are saying you don't correctly understand the basics of evolution. There is no intelligence involved in mutations. Negative mutations can & do occur, those animals just generally don't survive to reproduce & pass those genes along. In general only positive or neutral mutations will be passed along which gives the appearance of intelligence & design where none is present.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 7, 2024 14:36:40 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2012 19:47:59 GMT -5
You are crediting genes with thinking, working, cooperating, manipulating, and designing to create orderly systems. Random blobs don't act randomly to build a super computer.
|
|