Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-06-2013, 02:06 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(06-06-2013 12:11 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Your post was very interesting.

What about it specifically has to do with the irreducible complexity of macro-changes and abiogenesis?

And we've already agreed (or some of us have) regarding there are no realistic ways to falsify Evolution (one would to prove Creation), which proves its unfalsifiability and the fact that it's just so many just so stories...
oh for fuck's sake are you really that dumb or are you so biased that this stuff just comes out naturally? I honestly don't know which it is.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2013, 02:41 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(06-06-2013 02:06 PM)devilsadvoc8 Wrote:  
(06-06-2013 12:11 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Your post was very interesting.

What about it specifically has to do with the irreducible complexity of macro-changes and abiogenesis?

And we've already agreed (or some of us have) regarding there are no realistic ways to falsify Evolution (one would to prove Creation), which proves its unfalsifiability and the fact that it's just so many just so stories...
oh for fuck's sake are you really that dumb or are you so biased that this stuff just comes out naturally? I honestly don't know which it is.

Nothing is irreducibly complex. Just because you are too simple to get complex things, does not mean they are "irreducibly complex" Actually a possible mechanism for the beginning of life has been offered to you. Of course you never watch it. You really are a troll. Have you nothing better to do ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2013, 03:32 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(06-06-2013 12:11 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Your post was very interesting.

What about it specifically has to do with the irreducible complexity of macro-changes and abiogenesis?

And we've already agreed (or some of us have) regarding there are no realistic ways to falsify Evolution (one would to prove Creation), which proves its unfalsifiability and the fact that it's just so many just so stories...

Sure there are ways to falsify evolution. Rabbit fossils in the Pre-Cambrian geological strata would do the trick. Or just any fossil found in a strata that is earlier than it's supposed to be, say a bird before dinosaurs for example.

Just because evolution hasn't been falsified doesn't mean that it can't be. But it does mean that it isn't very likely to be.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-06-2013, 04:00 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(06-06-2013 12:11 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Let me put it this way, PJ, you're denying evolution on the basis that it makes specific testable predictions. It predicts that animals won't become plants and vice versa. It predicts no mammal will ever have feathers and no non-mammal will ever have fur (or at least not the same toe). It predicts the order of fossils in rock strata. It predicts vestigial organs, traits, and DNA fragments based on an animal's place in the tree of life. It predicts intermediate fossils between related species and where to find them in the geology. It predicts the traits of newly discovered bacterial and viral infections.

You laugh at these predictions because you don't quite understand and things don't quite make sense to you and they don't fit with your narrow reading if God's word. You laugh because it doesn't make sense to you and you think that by asking the right questions others will begin to see the same flaws you see.

Except those predictions are how science confirms hypotheses. They are how we have confirmed evolution. It there are so many ways you could disprove or significantly modify the theory, so many predictions that must hold true for evolution to hold true, and it does. Can you say the same for your model? Can you list the predictions it makes that if false would prove your model false? Can you list the original kinds and describe some of their properties? Can you make predictions that disagree with evolution and that we can test? So far all I have seen are craton models that have been trimmed to fit the predictions of evolution, because those are the only predictions that hold true.

Your post was very interesting.

What about it specifically has to do with the irreducible complexity of macro-changes and abiogenesis?

And we've already agreed (or some of us have) regarding there are no realistic ways to falsify Evolution (one would to prove Creation), which proves its unfalsifiability and the fact that it's just so many just so stories...

You continue to display your deep ignorance of evolution. There are any number of ways to do so. A classic is "rabbit fossils in the Pre-Cambrian", but there are so many others.

Try reading a book.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
07-06-2013, 11:10 AM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
Quote:Sure there are ways to falsify evolution. Rabbit fossils in the Pre-Cambrian geological strata would do the trick. Or just any fossil found in a strata that is earlier than it's supposed to be, say a bird before dinosaurs for example.

Just because evolution hasn't been falsified doesn't mean that it can't be. But it does mean that it isn't very likely to be.

**

Quote:You continue to display your deep ignorance of evolution. There are any number of ways to do so. A classic is "rabbit fossils in the Pre-Cambrian", but there are so many others.

Try reading a book.

You two win PJ's award for "Most Thoughtful Reponses Of The Day". Seriously! Go back and read everyone else's notes. See how towering they are in intellectual depth? "You are an idiot and a butthead" are no answer.

My issue is that it's comfortable for us to say "Good thing there are no rabbits in Pre-Cambrian strata," but we're all (including me in this thread) ignoring hundreds of other objections that have been raised. These objections are in nature and at varying times based on logic, fossil evidence, irreducible complexity, objections and issues with carbon dating especially in a world that according to the same scientists has faced catastrophism and evolving conditions, etc.

No worries, you have just so stories to cover every objection. There are Christian pages that post issues with evolution weekly if not daily. I'd be interested in a thread that posted same objections and refuted them just to keep both parties on their toes.

The difference here, and isn't it lovely, is how a good Bible apologist can cover each and every objection with nary a "You're an idiot" or "Read a book" response. YOU read a book. The Holy Bible! Smile

Seriously, in my search for wisdom on this thread, I've been presented in the main with just so stories.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2013, 12:36 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(07-06-2013 11:10 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  My issue is that it's comfortable for us to say "Good thing there are no rabbits in Pre-Cambrian strata," but we're all (including me in this thread) ignoring hundreds of other objections that have been raised. These objections are in nature and at varying times based on logic, fossil evidence, irreducible complexity, objections and issues with carbon dating especially in a world that according to the same scientists has faced catastrophism and evolving conditions, etc.

Irreducible complexity is not a valid objection to anything. As a subset of intelligent design, it has been proven in a court of law to be a cover for promoting a religious view of reality, specifically an Xian view (Edwards v Aguillard and Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District). Your big star Behe is, frankly, a laughingstock in the scientific community - but that probably fits your Xian conspiracy theories just fine, as we all know the devil controls science and uses it to ensnare baby-eating sinners like us.

No true scientific proof exists for intelligent design (ID) or irreducible complexity (IC). Perhaps that's because IC is an argument from ignorance, and every time we have learned more and more about nature and cosmology, examples of IC have been found to be reducible and quantifiable. IC is a barrier to scientific inquiry (as exemplified by the vilification of Galileo by the Catholic Church), and should thus be relegated to the ashbin of history where it belongs.

Carbon dating is another creationist straw man that needs to be put to rest. Sure, it's only good to a certain period of history, but that's why we have radiometric dating, which is used for older items like rocks (with the accompanying fossils). While there is certainly a standard deviation in any form of dating, I haven't heard of any compelling discrepancies that lean towards a young earth scenario.

As for fossil evidence, so far it has overwhelmingly proven evolution vs. creationism. What fossil or set of fossils are there that pose a serious challenge to evolution? That would be a big fat Nobel prize in the making, but so far nothing on the horizon for that old saw, aside from creationists grasping at straws and relying on confirmation bias.

One compelling bit of evidence for evolution is that it can be observed in the present day. That's how Darwin came up with the idea (ever heard of Darwin's Finches?), and various other scientific disciplines like biology and genetics have only served to validate his ideas and expand upon them. From these modern-day observations, we can build a framework of how evolution worked in the past - again, validated by geology, cosmology, and the fossil record. Care to name any modern-day examples of created life forms?

Quote:No worries, you have just so stories to cover every objection. There are Christian pages that post issues with evolution weekly if not daily. I'd be interested in a thread that posted same objections and refuted them just to keep both parties on their toes.

Why don't you post some of these sites here? We have TTA atheists who have gone to Xian sites and been banned for posting scientific evidence that the Xians ultimately couldn't handle. Indeed, from what I saw all they could do was wring their hands and blame sin and satanic deception for the atheist poster's obviously warped ideas. So far you haven't been banned here despite your hard-headed ramblings...wonder why that is? Guess we must be more tolerant and loving than your biblical buddies.

Quote:The difference here, and isn't it lovely, is how a good Bible apologist can cover each and every objection with nary a "You're an idiot" or "Read a book" response. YOU read a book. The Holy Bible! Smile

Which translation? I've read the Bible through three times, as well as various books of the bible more than that, listened to it on tape/CD many times, and studied it in seminary. While there are some good parts, on the whole it is filled with problems, including a vengeful God in the OT who kills tens of thousands and an impotent one in the NT that can't seem to return as promised. But we aren't debating Biblical relevance here, we are dealing with evolution, and if you refuse to read the books recommended here, then you are full of shit.

Plus, who is to say that another religion's creation account isn't the right one? Your god isn't very active these days like he supposedly was back in the bible times (funny how so many pastors and theologians claim to speak for him, but can't seem to agree on much - so much for God not being the "author of confusion"), so how are we to prove that he created anything? Maybe Odin or Allah or Ganesh or Buddha or Zeus made the world, and you Xians are the heretics. If so, at least you can hang with us in whatever underworld we all wind up in!

Quote:Seriously, in my search for wisdom on this thread, I've been presented in the main with just so stories.

So far, everything of yours I've seen is, at best, "just so". Grow a pair, read the recommended books (that YOU asked for in the first place), and then come back and debate armed with actual facts and knowledge vs. "wisdom" which is more rooted in philosophy than science. Or are you afraid that you'll find actual truth and lose your precious faith? I lost mine, and I'm thankful to be free of holier-than-thou types like you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Atheist_pilgrim's post
07-06-2013, 01:50 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
(17-04-2013 08:00 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I'm looking for a book recommendation:

1. I totally believe in evolution, adaptation and speciation

2. I'm aware that we can see microevolution now in nature and in labs

3. I'm looking for a recommended paper or book on macro-evolution

4. I'm utterly not interested in any book or paper whose main tenet is "we assume small changes over time added up to macroevolution" ... really? If it's a proven fact and not a conjecture I'm interested in empirical evidence more than assumptions.

5. A component of macroevolution is the ascendancy of ancillary organs, etc. I'm likewise uninterested in any text whose MAIN thrust is "we can see macroevolution" in the fossil record and "look at all these transitional forms" because we cannot see them in the fossil record. I know about archaeopteryx and flying reptiles, etc. I also know darn well there are no fossils of any kind that demonstrate any evidence of half-formed appendages. A small bone is a small bone, not an incomplete bone. A small appendage is a small appendage, not a vestigial appendage IMHO.

6. I guess I'm looking for statistical analysis, DNA evidence, and well-reasoned conjecture more so than baloney Paleontology and philosophical diatribes from Hitchens and Dawkins.

Please don't try to "prove" Evolution to me on this thread. You all appeal to authority many times, go ahead and give me a book(s) written by a real PhD in biology, DNA research, etc. and appeal again--I will read it in full if it is a science text and not more of your philosophy.

Thanks!

I will answer this in the simplest way. So you believe in evolution. That is great so do you believe the theory of Abiogenesis as well?

Now at one point if you go far enough you won't find apes. They won't exist in a certain slot of time of the planet so where did these apes arise from so humans could exist? Where did they appear? Do you believe they simply popped into existence or what is your proposition? I am insanely curious on how you believe humans could develop without macro evolution. Did we simply just exist or did life continue to change and mold continuously into the life that appeared today. We can see dinosaurs living in a certain period of time, same with invertebrate and the same with mammals today. So please inform me how humans could have existed without it because the counter arguments for that seem always ridiculous and filled with excuses. I want an answer that can change opinions not the irreducible complexity argument which holds nothing. I need answers and I want to believe in as few false things as possible not because I just want to believe in a God to simply feel good.

"Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind." -John F Kennedy

The way to see by Faith is to shut the eye of Reason.” -Benjamin Franklin

It has been a long time. How have you been?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2013, 03:15 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
just ignore him guys, he's just a bible thumper. He never was, and never will be, interested in actual debate, he'll just repeat his stupid babbling about IC and ID.

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-06-2013, 03:20 PM (This post was last modified: 07-06-2013 03:29 PM by Hafnof.)
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
Objections are only marginally interesting in science, PJ. What's really interesting is prediction. It's prediction and testing that sifts false ideas from true ones. Human reason is not good enough to rely on. We must use reality as our final guide. In science we make predictions and we test. If your prediction was wrong your idea was wrong. You have to change it out let it go. Evolution's predictions have held up for 150 years and evolution became the accepted model by proving its predictions true while the predictions of intelligent design failed to hold up. If you've been able to modify those ideas so they make new predictions that differ from those of evolution I'm sure we'd all love to hear about them. What are your predictions that differ from those of evolution?

What can we expect to observe in modern ecosystems under your model? What can we expect to find in the fossil record? What can we expect to find in the genome of various species? Most importantly, how do your predictions differ from the predictions of evolution?

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hafnof's post
07-06-2013, 03:40 PM
RE: Book Recommendation for PleaseJesus
nach_in is right. This guy has to check his drivers license to properly spell his own name!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: