Peaceful Science Agrees that Evolution is NOT Science
-
https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/objective-direct-and-indirect-evidence-and-subjective-inferences/6260/116
Those morons are so clueless that they don't even understand that they have smooched the pooch and admitted theirs is bullshit.
Peaceful Science- proudly promoting the pseudoscience of materialism.
https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/objective-direct-and-indirect-evidence-and-subjective-inferences/6260/116
If we limit ourselves to science, the best interpretation is the one that explains the most data, makes testable predictions, and has testable mechanisms.Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Those morons are so clueless that they don't even understand that they have smooched the pooch and admitted theirs is bullshit.
Peaceful Science- proudly promoting the pseudoscience of materialism.
posted by Joe G @ 3:06 PM
32 Comments:
At 4:37 PM,
JV said…
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Since no one can point to any guiding mechanism then all the data must be via unguided processes. And there are testable predictions which you can test yourself: go and try and find a fossil that is clearly out of sequence. Or find an irreducibly complex structure that is accepted as such by the majority of working biologists. And the mechanisms are being tested via research everyday. If you demand that thousands or millions of years of evolution must be demonstrated and observed in a decade or two then you will always be disappointed.
As always, you have not been able to demonstrated or illustrate a mechanism in the cells that is guiding mutations. You claim it exists but so far you have produce no physical evidence that it exists. Nor have you even speculated how it's stored or how it affects mutations. Since cells have been extensively studied for decades and decades it's hard to accept your claims without solid physical evidence. Just saying it must exist doesn't quite cut the mustard.
Those morons are so clueless that they don't even understand that they have smooched the pooch and admitted theirs is bullshit.
The correct expression is 'screwed the pooch'.
At 5:58 PM,
Joe G said…
Ho hum...
Since no one can point to any guiding mechanism then all the data must be via unguided processes.
It doesn't matter as you don't have a mechanism capable of producing what we observe.
And there are testable predictions which you can test yourself: go and try and find a fossil that is clearly out of sequence.
That has NOTHING to do with blind and mindless processes. And you don't have a mechanism capable of producing the organisms that were fossilized.
Or find an irreducibly complex structure that is accepted as such by the majority of working biologists.
That has been done over and over again.
And the mechanisms are being tested via research everyday.
And FAILing miserably.
If you demand that thousands or millions of years of evolution must be demonstrated and observed in a decade or two then you will always be disappointed.
I demand what science demands. If your side can't do that then stop whining and get out of the way.
As always, you have not been able to demonstrated or illustrate a mechanism in the cells that is guiding mutations.
Who cares? No one can show any amount of mutational change can do what your side requires. If ID didn't exist you would have nothing and nothing to bitch about
Since cells have been extensively studied for decades and decades it's hard to accept your claims without solid physical evidence.
LoL! Your side doesn't have any evidence. And in typical fashion you prove to be ignorant- smooched the pooch is a correct expression. Look it up.
At 1:41 AM,
JV said…
As usual, when I point out that you have no physical evidence of a mutation guiding mechanism you say it doesn't matter because there is no mechanism for unguided processes achieving anything. That doesn't make sense, no guidance means every thing we observe is due to un-guided processes, period. You are convinced there is guidance (even without physical evidence) so you think you are counter-punching but you are really just displaying your unsubstantiated opinion that there is guidance. In other words you are making a circular argument.
Until you can find physical evidence of a guiding process it's all unguided. No matter how much you want to believe otherwise. And without physical evidence all you have is belief.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/01/screw-the-pooch-etymology-of-the-idiom-dates-back-to-nasa-and-the-military.html
It may only go back to The Right Stuff but it comes from an earlier, cruder expression.
At 8:15 AM,
Joe G said…
As usual I point out that you have nothing but your ignorance and you don't know what science entails. You don't have any physical evidence that the genetic changes are unguided. The default is "we don't know", you ignorant ass. You have to be one desperate ass to think that your position gets a free pass.
You don't have a mechanism that is capable of producing what we observe. You don't have a methodology to test your claims.
You don't have any predictions and you don't have any supporting data.
And "smooch the pooch" has been acceptable for decades. Again, YOUR ignorance is not an argument.
https://definithing.com/smooched-the-pooch/
At 8:15 AM,
Joe G said…
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Deal with that, asshole.
At 1:43 AM,
JV said…
Either mutations are guided or they aren't. Guiding requires a physical process. You haven't found any physical process or even any physical evidence such a process exists. No guiding means it's all unguided.
"We don't know" doesn't apply when there is zero physical evidence for guided mutations.
You don't need to provide evidence that mutations are unguided when you can't find any evidence that they are. If someone accused you of beating your wife they have to provide evidence for their claims. You do not have to provide evidence that you don't. You are claiming mutations are guided so provide the physical evidence.
At 9:29 AM,
Joe G said…
LoL! Unguided mutations requires a physical process, too, moron. There is zero evidence that unguided mutations can produce anything beyond diseases and deformities.
And yes, science demands that you be able to support your claims, which clearly you cannot.
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Deal with that, asshole.
Fucking loser...
At 9:49 AM,
JV said…
Until you find a physical process that guides mutations no one is going to take you seriously. Until then it's all just you making claims which you cannot substantiate.
Biologists have studied and continue to study evolutionary mechanisms and they have yet to find a guiding mechanism. In other words, there is lots of physical evidence that unguided processes are very capable of producing a wide variety of biological variation. If you disagree then it's up to you to find the guiding processes.
You can claim and claim and claim all you want but since you cannot demonstrate a guiding process then it doesn't matter what you think is true or what you want to be true. You have no physical evidence for your claim.
If I were you I'd start doing some real research; I'd start looking for a physical guiding mechanism. Unless you want to do what lots of ID proponents do and assume God is the guiding process and since s/he/it exists outside of space and time, supposedly, then they don't have to look any further. Stop the science, we're done here.
So, what's it to be? Do some work or forget science? Your call.
At 9:54 AM,
Joe G said…
LoL! No one takes evolutionism seriously! No one uses it for anything. It has not helped advance our understanding of anything.
Until someone can demonstrate that blind and mindless/ unguided processes can produce a living organism there is no reason to infer evolution proceeds via unguided processes.
Real research? Your side has NOTHING. You definitely don't have any science, dumbass.
ID doesn't need any designer to guide mutations. Your computer did NOT come with a programmer.
And you are such an ignorant coward you can't even address the OP. You have no idea what, if anything, your side predicts. You have no idea how to test your side's claims.
All you can do is spew your scientific ignorance as if it means something.
ID makes testable claims. Your side does not. You lose
At 9:55 AM,
Joe G said…
There is plenty of evidence that mutations are guided. Ignoring that evidence just makes you willfully ignorant.
At 6:36 PM,
JV said…
Can you show physical evidence for a mechanism that guides mutations? Yes or No?
If the answer is yes then produce that evidence.
If the answer is no then I'd advise you to do some work and find that physical evidence.
If there is no guiding mechanism then everything we've observed is due to unguided processes.
If you can provide some physical evidence of a guiding mechanism then that's a game changer.
Without the physical evidence all you've got is supposition. Find the evidence and make a difference.
The rest of your screed is just deflecting, trying to get people to gloss over the fact that you haven't provided the physical evidence to back up your claim. If you can't back up your claim then it fails no matter what your opinion of other paradigms.
You have to provide solid, physical evidence. Can you do that? No more abuse, no more being a merchant of doubt. Find the physical evidence to support your hypothesis.
At 7:25 AM,
Joe G said…
Look, asshole, stop talking about evidence and science until YOU are ready to ante up. You have absolutely NOTHING.
If it is an unguided process then it is clear that the starting populations were as described in the Bible- that humans were specially created- because there isn't enough time in the universe for unguided processes to produce humans from non-humans. You don't even have a mechanism capable of producing eukaryotes- and forget about producing a living organism.
Your entire screed is just deflecting, trying to get people to forget about the fact that all you have is your lowlife bullshit.
The solid evidence for guided mutations has been provided. Jerad's willful ignorance is neither an argument nor a refutation. And his FAILure to provide any predictions for unguided evolution speaks volumes.
So fuck off, Jerad. It always comes to this and your utter FAILure to produce anything beyond your willfully ignorant spewage.
At 7:26 AM,
Joe G said…
In other words, there is lots of physical evidence that unguided processes are very capable of producing a wide variety of biological variation.
You are a fucking LIAR.
At 11:10 AM,
JV said…
Until you can provide physical evidence of a guiding mechanism (which you have not done) your opinion is just an opinion. Since you can't even say specifically where the mechanism is, how it's stored or chemically how it affects mutations you don't even have a hypothesis.
You want to win based on your opinion that those you disagree with have failed. They haven't failed AND you haven't shown that what you claim exists does in fact exist. Drawing analogies with The Bible don't help your case at all.
If you have physical evidence for a guiding mechanism then produce it.
If you can't produce actual physical evidence then it's all down to unguided processes. No matter what else you'd like to claim.
Show the physical evidence. Don't deflect, don't be abusive, don't make claims you cannot back up. This isn't about those you disagree with, it's about your stated beliefs and claims and your ability to support them. Not by being rude or belligerent or nasty, but by producing the physical evidence.
Can you support your claim with actual, physical evidence or not?
At 9:11 PM,
Joe G said…
Your ignorance is not an argument, Jerad. You have nothing but your opinion and your opinion is based on your ignorance.
Can you support your claim with something other than your cowardly deflection? This thread is about you and yours and the FAILURE everyone is laughing at.
If it is down to unguided processes then the existing diversity came from a similar diversity. Meaning Special Creation is true as unguided processes can't do anything but damage or destroy.
And stop talking about a hypothesis. You must be one ignorant tool. Lead by example and stop being such a pussy.
At 2:46 AM,
JV said…
Glad to see you admitting to be a [special] creationist. It's always best to be honest.
Nothing else to say after that really; if your contention is that some undetected, undocumented and undefined designer 'did it' then you've abandoned science and there's no point in discussing the issue.
And since you haven't been able to elucidate a physical process by which mutations are guided then we don't have to spend any more time worrying about that either.
You can keep trying to cast aspersions on real work being done by real scientists but until you come up with something physical and testable no one is going to take you seriously.
At 9:55 AM,
Joe G said…
Only a moron would think that I admitted to being a special creationist. It seems that you have no idea what you are reading.
Your contention is some unknown, undocumented and undefined process did something, then you have abandoned science- well you don't even know what science entails.
You are clearly a scientifically illiterate troll, Jerad. By your ignorance we can never say that something is an artifact unless we know who, exactly who, designed it and how built it. That means Stonehenge is not an artifact- by your ignorant reasoning.
There isn't any real work being done by real scientists with respect to blind and mindless processes. The only people who take unguided evolution seriously are the ignorant assholes of the world- people like you, Jerad.
At 5:56 PM,
JV said…
Your contention is some unknown, undocumented and undefined process did something, then you have abandoned science- well you don't even know what science entails.
Not unknown, undocumented or undefined. The major processes are universal descent with variation, natural selection, sexual selection, genetic drift and quite a few others all of which are easily found described in any good evolution textbook.
You are clearly a scientifically illiterate troll, Jerad. By your ignorance we can never say that something is an artifact unless we know who, exactly who, designed it and how built it. That means Stonehenge is not an artifact- by your ignorant reasoning.
That's a clear misinterpretation of what is accepted by a vast majority of archaeologists. It is clear that Stonehenge is a human built artefact based not only on the lack of examples where no humans existed but we also have evidence of the tools they used, the fact that we know humans were in the area at the time and huge amounts of evidence supporting their habitations concurrent with the building of the monument. We may not be able to say exactly how Stonehenge was built and why but we have some plausible, supported guesses AND more work is being done all the time to close the gaps.
There isn't any real work being done by real scientists with respect to blind and mindless processes. The only people who take unguided evolution seriously are the ignorant assholes of the world- people like you, Jerad.
Clearly untrue by any measure.
Again, even if your contention that natural processes aren't up to the job had some real weight you still have to establish physical evidence of how guidance was implemented. Which you have not been able to do even after years of claims. And, let's be honest, no one is even trying to do that work. No one. Like you they think they can win just by casting doubt on the established science without doing any real work to support their alternate view. If you had the physical evidence I'd take you seriously. But you don't so I'll continue to be highly skeptical.
No physical evidence of a designer, no physical evidence of design being implemented, not even a guess as to when and how design was conceived and introduced into the system. You've got a lot of work to do. Time to stop being abusive and start doing that work. But it's easier just to make claims and be rude.
At 6:14 PM,
Joe G said…
The major processes are universal descent with variation,
LoL! That assumes the consequent. Try again. And no one knows if any amount of genetic variation can produce the changes required by universal common descent.
natural selection, sexual selection, genetic drift and quite a few others all of which are easily found described in any good evolution textbook.
Natural selection has never been demonstrated to do anything beyond shifting allele frequencies, over time, within any given population. You don't have a mechanism capable of producing sexually reproducing organisms, so you lose, again. Genetic drift isn't of any help either.
You are totally ignorant of what is required to pull of the miracles you need.
That's a clear misinterpretation of what is accepted by a vast majority of archaeologists.
You clearly misrepresent science
It is clear that Stonehenge is a human built artefact based not only on the lack of examples where no humans existed but we also have evidence of the tools they used, the fact that we know humans were in the area at the time and huge amounts of evidence supporting their habitations concurrent with the building of the monument.
Nature produces stones of all sizes. We don't have any evidence for the tools they used to quarry and move the stones. We know glaciers can do it. Humans are in the areas of volcanoes, too. Does that mean they built them?
We may not know exactly how the Designer did it and we may never know. That doesn't mean the evidence cannot support the design inference. And given there aren't any testable explanations other than Intelligent Design, you lose.
There isn't any real work being done by real scientists with respect to blind and mindless processes. The only people who take unguided evolution seriously are the ignorant assholes of the world- people like you, Jerad.
Clearly untrue by any measure.
Cuz you say so? Forgive me if I laugh in your face.
Again, even if your contention that natural processes aren't up to the job had some real weight you still have to establish physical evidence of how guidance was implemented.
WRONG. We have real weight because we know what designing intelligences can do. We have the real weight of knowledge of cause and effect relationships.
You don't have nay stablished science you lying fuck. So shut the fuck up.
The physical evidence is the DESIGN. It is a consilience of evidence that starts with the laws that govern our universe, includes the genetic code and the components to carry it out in a biologically relevant manner. And the fact that we live on a just-so planet that has a just-so moon that we need to be alive, but it also provides us with scientifically valuable information about the universe. It was just one big fucking coincidence- an impossible just-so series of events- to pull that off, and Jerad thinks he has the science to back it up.
Clearly you are just an ignorant ass, Jerad. That isn't being abusive. That is an observation based on the fact that you clearly have no idea what goes on inside of a cell.
At 10:12 AM,
JV said…
You are totally ignorant of what is required to pull of the miracles you need.
Creating alleles and shifting their frequencies perhaps?
Nature produces stones of all sizes. We don't have any evidence for the tools they used to quarry and move the stones. We know glaciers can do it. Humans are in the areas of volcanoes, too. Does that mean they built them?
Glaciers don't shape a large collection of stones to close to the same shape and size and then arrange them in holes, standing upright in a clear astronomical configuration. Remember: those stones show signs of being worked by tools we know were used at the time.
We may not know exactly how the Designer did it and we may never know. That doesn't mean the evidence cannot support the design inference. And given there aren't any testable explanations other than Intelligent Design, you lose.
You don't win until you provide more substantial and physical evidence of your claims. Your "evidence" for design is your contention that some biological structures are too complicated for natural processes to have created them. But, since you cannot prove a negative, you cannot say for sure that natural processes were not able to create those structures. And when you cherry pick actual science research papers and interpret isolated phrases as if they support your contentions you just look disingenuous.
WRONG. We have real weight because we know what designing intelligences can do. We have the real weight of knowledge of cause and effect relationships.
Without know who the designer was you have no idea what they were capable of. You're just guessing. AND design has to be physically implemented which you have zero evidence for.
You don't have nay stablished science you lying fuck. So shut the fuck up.
Real scientific there.
At 10:12 AM,
JV said…
And the fact that we live on a just-so planet that has a just-so moon that we need to be alive, but it also provides us with scientifically valuable information about the universe. It was just one big fucking coincidence- an impossible just-so series of events- to pull that off, and Jerad thinks he has the science to back it up.
You have no evidence that life hasn't evolved on other planets with other moons or none at all so you are falling into the fallacy of assuming we were the ultimate goal. You don't know that.
I believe we are fine-tuned to our environment not the other way around. Natural selection favoured life forms which were able to better exploit the situation at hand and so, after billions of years, of course we have life forms that seem so closely tied to the conditions they exist in it almost seems as though the situation was fine-tuned for them. That's natural design at work; molding, shaping, culling, working with the natural variations that arose, slowly forming adapted forms that out compete others. Then, when those forms become aware and mobile you get other forms of 'selection' coming on board. Sure some forms survived at some points just out of sheer luck but, over millions and millions of generations the allele combinations that built the strongest, swiftest, most well adapted forms became dominate.
To think that some undefined, undetected and unknown designer had us and all extant life forms in mind when s/he/it did whatever they did whenever they did it is just theology. And, by they way, if that's the story then that/those designer(s) were pretty wasteful: billions of years of death and extinct forms to get to us? Why? Why spend all that time letting uncounted number of living forms suffer and die and mostly go extinct just so that in the last briefest moment of geological time (and barely even measurable in the life time of the whole universe) we arrived at the scene. They created or allowed to come into existence billions of galaxies each with billions of stars just for 7 billion of us on one planet in one solar system on the outer edges of one galaxy in the vastness of space? Really? God really does work in mysterious ways.
At 11:15 AM,
Joe G said…
Creating alleles and shifting their frequencies perhaps?
Except for the fact you don't have a mechanism capable of producing alleles.
You don't win until you provide more substantial and physical evidence of your claims
Already done. Your ignorance means nothing.
.Your "evidence" for design is your contention that some biological structures are too complicated for natural processes to have created them.
Wrong again, asshole. But even if true then you should be able to refute it but you cannot. You lose.
But, since you cannot prove a negative, you cannot say for sure that natural processes were not able to create those structures.
There isn't any evidence that they can, dumbass. There isn't even a way to test the claim. You lose
Without know who the designer was you have no idea what they were capable of.
You dumbass we know what designers are capable of by what they left behind.
AND design has to be physically implemented which you have zero evidence for.
The design is such evidence.
At 11:17 AM,
Joe G said…
You have no evidence that life hasn't evolved on other planets with other moons or none at all so you are falling into the fallacy of assuming we were the ultimate goal.
You don't have any evidence for that. You don't have anything.
Look, asshole, your side has nothing but ignorant and gullible morons like you.
This thread is about the predictions your side makes and it looks like it doesn't make any. So according to the scientists over on Peaceful Science your side is pseudoscience and total bullshit.
At 3:10 AM,
JV said…
I have a prediction: 20 years from now you will be making the same claims and there will still be no evidence to back them up. And that's because no ID proponents are doing any work except to try and find limits to unguided evolutionary processes. NO ONE is looking for any kind of physical guiding mechanism. You certainly aren't. That would take some hard work and no one, including you, is doing it.
The discovery of Tiktaalik was a prediction that was successfully proven. I know, you have some odd, skewed version of it wherein it was not a successful prediction but I think I'll go with the interpretation of a vast majority of working biologists.
Evolutionary theory predicts that new variations will be based on exiting forms and there will be no unjumpable gaps between generations. Evolutionary theory predicts that bacteria will develop resistance to antibiotics. Evolutionary theory predicts that there will be no irreducibly complex forms. Evolutionary theory predicts that there will be no 'rabbits in the Cambrian', i.e. in the fossil record you will not find forms severely out of place. Evolutionary theory predicts ring species. Evolutionary theory predicts that given any two species, extant or extinct, they will have a common ancestor. Evolutionary theory explains the bio-geologic distribution of forms we observe. Many of the predictions come from the basic definition of evolution: universal common descent with unguided variation.
So, let's see . . . what specific predictions does ID make? How does ID explain 'junk' DNA? How does ID handle the varying number of repeats of unused DNA segments that are extensively used in identifying individuals? How does ID explain the point of trilobites? How does ID explain that one strain of bacteria out of many changed to exploit an environmental condition?
At 9:59 AM,
Joe G said…
LoL! Yes, in 20 years evos will be making the same claims and will still have nothing to back them up.
Tiktaalik? Really? You don't have a mechanism capable of producing it you ignorant ass. You don't have a mechanism capable of producing eukaryotes. You are a liar an a loser.
Please reference this alleged evolutionary theory you keep mentioning. Or shut up about it because you are a LIAR.
Not one of your predictions is based on any mechanism. Clearly you are just an ignorant coward.
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Eat that, asshole
At 10:26 AM,
JV said…
Tiktaalik? Really? You don't have a mechanism capable of producing it you ignorant ass. You don't have a mechanism capable of producing eukaryotes. You are a liar an a loser.
A transitional form like Tiktaalik was predicted to exist in the strata it was found in. You were talking about predictions and I gave this as an example. The prediction was tested and found to be correct.
Bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics. Did ID make that prediction? Nope. Is it true? Yup.
Has anyone found a fossil that is clearly well out of place in the fossil record? Nope.
Have we found ring species? Yes, quite a few actually. How does ID explain them? It doesn't bother except to say: that's how the designer did it.
The bio-geographic data for evolutionary theory is very strong. How does ID deal with it? By waving hands and saying that's how the designer did it.
Evolutionary theory predicts that there will be no irreducibly complex life forms. And, guess what? No one has found one. I know a few true believers think they've found some but such claims have been roundly and widely disproved.
Please reference this alleged evolutionary theory you keep mentioning. Or shut up about it because you are a LIAR.
I have many times and you have denied that it exists many times. You are not even trying to accept that the theory exists and has been written about for many decades. You just deny, deny, deny.
Not one of your predictions is based on any mechanism. Clearly you are just an ignorant coward.
So, you now admit evolutionary theory does make predictions when earlier you said it didn't. Make up your mind. Gravitational theory makes predictions, do you know how gravity works? Nope. But the theory makes predictions that turn out to be true. (That's not to say that there is just magic under the hood of evolutionary theory, despite your denials. How it happens is, again, universal common descent via inherited variation. You keep thinking that, for some reasons, humans were the goal and so you need some guiding . . . being that makes sure humans come about.)
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Even Darwin told how to test his theory. And, again, since you haven't been able to establish a way that mutations are guided (your claim) then it is the case that all biological development is unguided so, therefore, all the investigations and experiments, etc are addressing unguided evolution.
Eat that, asshole
Very scientific. And, as usual, you not only repeat the same claim you always make but you become abusive when someone points out your mistakes and asks you questions which you clearly avoid answering. Go back through the thread and look at all the issues and questions you (as always) fail to address. Is that how science is done? You make claims, fail to back them up, fail to respond to questions and queries and then hurl abuse at those who disagree with you?
At 10:38 AM,
Joe G said…
So double down on your lies and ignorance. Nice.
What part of "you don't have a mechanism capable of producing eukaryotes" don't you understand?
You have NEVER referenced any evolutionary theory. You are a LIAR.
So, you now admit evolutionary theory does make predictions
Go fuck a donkey you lying asshole.
Evolution by means of blind and mindless processes is devoid of testable predictions and also devoid of mechanisms that can be tested to see if they are capable of producing the result observed. It cannot explain the data.
Darwin didn't know anything. Darwin didn't say how to test his claims. You are a LIAR.
You don't know anything about science, loser. You are just an ignorant ass.
You do not have a mechanism capable of producing universal common descent. That is because you can't get beyond populations of bacteria nd you had to be given those.
You can ignore all of the evidence that mutations are guided. I don't care. It just proves that you are an ignorant ass. And apparently you are proud of it.
At 10:56 AM,
Joe G said…
Bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics. Did ID make that prediction?
Yes. ID says that organisms were designed with the ability to adapt and evolve. Tiktaalik also fits that prediction.
At 5:07 PM,
JV said…
You have NEVER referenced any evolutionary theory. You are a LIAR.
Go fuck a donkey you lying asshole.
Darwin didn't know anything. Darwin didn't say how to test his claims. You are a LIAR.
You don't know anything about science, loser. You are just an ignorant ass.
The great science communicator who doesn't do any research or publish any papers or teach science and doesn't have a degree in science ends up resorting to profanities when someone disagrees with him.
You do not have a mechanism capable of producing universal common descent.
Any tree of descendants starting with a single ancestor exhibits universal common descent. In other words, the mechanism is reproduction.
You can ignore all of the evidence that mutations are guided.
I haven't seen any physical evidence that mutations are guided. No one can point to any kind of physical system in cells that affects mutations. So, there's nothing to ignore.
Yes. ID says that organisms were designed with the ability to adapt and evolve.
How is that ability implemented? If bacteria becoming resistant to antibiotics is an example of 'built-in design' then should I assume the same is true of cancer? Of HIV? Of Polio? Of measles? Of whooping cough? Syphilis? Age related macular degeneration? Dementia? And if those aren't examples of designed guidance then how can you tell the difference? If someone develops MS is that when something went wrong? How does it go wrong? Why doesn't the built in guidance overcome that?
NO ONE in the ID community is addressing these issues. NO ONE in the ID community cares about looking for built-in design. You aren't even looking for it. You just come up with something and hope people stop asking questions. 'Cause you don't do science. You just claim and deny.
All ID proponents care about is proving design exists so that they can bring God into the science classroom. That's what it's all about. That's why NO ONE is doing any ID research. Don't give me any of that BS that it's because of funding. Do you know how many theological colleges and universities there are that could easliy create their own research facilities? Why don't they do that? Because ID isn't about science. NO ONE is doing any science. They don't care. Take down materialism, that's the goal.
At 8:20 PM,
Joe G said…
The great science communicator who doesn't do any research or publish any papers or teach science and doesn't have a degree in science ends up resorting to profanities when someone disagrees with him.
Wrong again. You have a history of being a liar and all you are doing is repeating the same fucking lies. You are pathetic.
Any tree of descendants starting with a single ancestor exhibits universal common descent. In other words, the mechanism is reproduction.
Umm, except there isn't any evidence that said mechanism is capable of producing new body parts and new body plans
I haven't seen any physical evidence that mutations are guided.
You don't know how to assess evidence. And the evidence you ask for exists so clearly you are the issue
NO ONE in the ID community is addressing these issues.
1- You don't know that and 2- those will come AFTER ID is accepted.
Only a moron like yourself thinks that ID has to have all of the answers. Which is strangely ironic seeing that your side has absolutely NOTHING.
I noticed you FAILed to link to any scientific theory of evolution. And you FAILed to provie any predictions based on blind an mindless processes.
Above you spewed the following as if it meant something:
The major processes are universal descent with variation, natural selection, sexual selection, genetic drift and quite a few others all of which are easily found described in any good evolution textbook.
Unfortunately you have no idea what that variation is. You have no idea what heritable material can get changed such that it produces new body parts and new body plans.
YOURs is the mechanistic scenario, you ignorant ass. And yet here you are, the ignorant ass, trying to put that onus onto ID.
No one is trying to figure out how blind and mindless process produced vision systems.
ID has the science- you pathetic piece of shit. Your side has pathological liars and intellectual cowards such as yourself.
ID research is the detection and study of design in nature. Blind watchmaker research doesn't exist.
At 1:44 AM,
JV said…
It's all unguided evolution since you cannot provide physical evidence of a guiding mechanism.
It's all going to come after ID is accepted eh? What a weak and pathetic thing to say. We can't do anything because a bunch of you don't take us seriously. Go talk to the Discovery Institute, go talk to the Biologic Institute, go talk to one of the wealthy Bible colleges, go talk to a theology department. There are plenty of organisations with money that could fund a real ID research program. But they don't. They won't. They don't care. It's not about science.
Unfortunately you have no idea what that variation is.
Gee, changes in the genome?
YOURs is the mechanistic scenario, you ignorant ass. And yet here you are, the ignorant ass, trying to put that onus onto ID.
Oh right, ID doesn't have to answer questions about physical processes and implementations. You've always said 'it's in the cell'; that means some physical representation. I guess you're chickening out of that now. I guess it really was God what did it. No mechanism! Yeah! No need to de any research or answer questions! It's all in the Bible. Cool.
No one is trying to figure out how blind and mindless process produced vision systems.
Of course they are! I just cannot imagine that you really believe some of the things you say.
ID has the science- you pathetic piece of shit. Your side has pathological liars and intellectual cowards such as yourself.
Abuse, abuse, abuse. IF ID is science then you should be able to do some research and answer some questions.
ID research is the detection and study of design in nature.
AND you've said many times that design has been detected, quite a long time ago in fact. BUT, strangely, no one is doing any follow on work. NO ONE. You aren't, no one is. ID isn't about research or science. That's why 20 years from now you'll be saying the same things because no one will have done anything more. You aren't, the Discovery Institute isn't, the Biologic Institute isn't. You've been saying exactly the same things for 10 years now. Nothing is moving, nothing is progressing, nothing is being done.
ID is not going to move forward just because you believe and you abuse people who disagree with you. The ID community needs to do some work. You pick your own research agenda but pick one and do some work. Of course, we both know that's not going to happen. Praying is so much easier than doing some hard work isn't it?
At 9:21 AM,
Joe G said…
It's all unguided evolution since you cannot provide physical evidence of a guiding mechanism.
That is false. You are clearly a scientifically illiterate troll.
What a weak and pathetic thing to say.
Only to you, an ignorant asshole. Your side has nothing and all of the resources. You are such a coward you think that hiding behind father time is science.
Gee, changes in the genome?
Too vague, asshole. What changes? Be specific or admit that you are just an ignorant ass.
Oh right, ID doesn't have to answer questions about physical processes and implementations.
It doesn't. We may never know how but that will never detract from the fact that you have nothing and ID's claims can be tested. And design is a mechanism, moron.
No one is trying to figure out how blind and mindless process produced vision systems.
Of course they are!
LIAR! It is very telling that you never support what you spew.
IF ID is science then you should be able to do some research and answer some questions.
We can answer some questions. Your side cannot
AND you've said many times that design has been detected, quite a long time ago in fact.
And I have also said it is still an ongoing process.
BUT, strangely, no one is doing any follow on work.
You mean no one is doing your asinine follow on work.
Look, asshole, your side doesn't make any testable predictions and you don't even have a methodology to test your claims.
Post a Comment
<< Home