Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Sunday, May 03, 2015

Elizabeth Liddle- Proudly Ignorant of Nested Hierarchies

Elizabeth Liddle is either very ignorant or very dishonest. Methinks it is both. She sed:

You have misunderstood the meaning of the term “nested hierarchies” then. Try “phylogenies” – it means the same thing, and they do not require discrete groups.
Imbecile, phylogenies are not nested hierarchies. They are NOT the same thing. Obviously you are ignorant of the concept.

Nested hierarchies require distinct groups. That is their trademark, just look at Linnaean Classification and all existing nested hierarchies- oops she doesn't know what they are!

Extinction has only defined the groups: it has by no means made them; for if every form which has ever lived on this earth were suddenly to reappear, though it would be quite impossible to give definitions by which each group could be distinguished, still a natural classification, or at least a natural arrangement, would be possible.- Charles Darwin chapter 14
There is another stringent condition which must be satisfied if a hierarchic pattern is to result as the end product of an evolutionary process: no ancestral forms can be permitted to survive. This can be seen by examining the tree diagram on page 135. If any of the ancestors X, Y, or Z, or if any of the hypothetical transitional connecting species stationed on the main branches of the tree, had survived and had therefore to be included in the classification scheme, the distinctness of the divisions would be blurred by intermediate or partially inclusive classes and what remained of the hierarchic pattern would be highly disordered.- Denton, “Evolution: A Theory in Crisis” page 136 (X, Y and Z are hypothetical parental node populations)
The goals of scientists like Linnaeus and Cuvier- to organize the chaos of life’s diversity- are much easier to achieve if each species has a Platonic essence that distinguishes it from all others, in the same way that the absence of legs and eyelids is essential to snakes and distinguishes it from other reptiles. In this Platonic worldview, the task of naturalists is to find the essence of each species. Actually, that understates the case: In an essentialist world, the essence really [I]is[/I] the species. Contrast this with an ever-changing evolving world, where species incessantly spew forth new species that can blend with each other. The snake [I]Eupodophis[/I] from the late Cretaceous period, which had rudimentary legs, and the glass lizard, which is alive today and lacks legs, are just two of many witnesses to the blurry boundaries of species. Evolution’s messy world is anathema to the clear, pristine order essentialism craves. It is thus no accident that Plato and his essentialism became the “great antihero of evolutionism,” as the twentieth century zoologist Ernst Mayr called it.- Andreas Wagner, “Arrival of the Fittest”, pages 9-10
Pathetic, just pathetic.


  • At 4:47 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…

    Hi Joe. Just a quickie - KeithS asks:


    Has Joe said anything lately about the book he’s writing? it might be time to remind him."

  • At 5:12 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Hi Richie- Tell Piotr that he is a cowardly gasbag and that I definitely won my bet about nested hierarchies. And the obsession is due to the fact that evoTARDs misuse the term because they are obviously ignorant as to what it means.

    As for the book there isn't anything to say until it's finished.

  • At 5:20 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    And what "fantasy" am I having, exactly? I am the only one who has actually provided references to support my claims. Strange, that...

  • At 5:31 PM, Blogger Rich Hughes said…


    Those questions are for future research programs to answer.

  • At 5:46 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Some questions are, cupcake. Unguided evolution doesn't have any answers so you should be familiar with that phrase as your entire position is hoping that future research will uncover something to support it.

    Loser- nice own goal.


Post a Comment

<< Home