Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-07-2015, 10:51 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(16-07-2015 07:55 AM)Chas Wrote:  It has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The DNA evidence sealed the deal.

Evolutionary Theory - not hypothesis. Read a book.

Read a book? I would if you would read my posts. How many times I have posted I believe in Evolution as fact? However, there are extraordinary, sweeping changes for certain steps--and those who know Evolution better than either of us account for them by placing everything up to alien assistance (read: intelligent design!) in the gaps...

Citation required because that is utter bullshit.

Quote:...How about this, Chas, since you are the master of "You know nuthin' Q... read a book... do you science?" that you refute my point, which was:

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Refute THAT so I better understand Evolutionary theory, if you would (if you can). Your knowledge is superior to mine? Go ahead, tear me a new one on THAT point of FACT.

God bless.

Amphibians are adapted to life both in and out of water. You have a cartoonish "understanding" of evolution.

But try this. And then read a book. Drinking Beverage

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
18-07-2015, 10:37 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(16-07-2015 07:48 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this...

...One does not simply walk onto the land with magic legs...


It's true. One dose not simply walk on land with magic legs...but flippers that's another story.

Let me introduce you to the Mud Skipper and the Lung Fish.













They have a modified swim balder that acts as a lung. These are Fish that have gills that breath air. You'll also note that they spend time on wet land. Which is why it's be hypothesized that life on land may have begun in swamps or coast lines. These fish are living examples of a gradual changes.

Here's another interesting species of fish called the Opah; it's Warm Blooded.





Most fish are cold blooded. Which means they're bodies temperatures are reliant on by the environment. Just like snakes. But here we see a fish with a distinct advantage.

Major overhauls are not necessary to survive in a new environment. But given time those small advantages build up. And as an environment changes the ones that have these distinct advantages will thrive. And the one that don't die off.

I'll leave you with this a documentry of a "living fossil".




Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Commonsensei's post
18-07-2015, 12:27 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Read a book? I would if you would read my posts. How many times I have posted I believe in Evolution as fact?

I've read your posts Q.

You haven't posted many. You've stated many times that the bible is irrefutable. As you cherry pick threw it.

You've insisted on the clam of there being a world wide flood. Which would mean when that should if such an occurrence would have happened. Species would have to make major changes in short amounts of time. Penguins would needed to adapt to a hot desert climate as they walked back to the arctic. Koalas would have to had found a sustainable food source out side of eucalyptus as they attempt to get back to Australia.

We would see these major adaptation in the fossil record, evidence of these species moving from the middle east to Australasia (Such as the Kangaroo fossils), or the arctic (such as any type of penguin)

You've also made clams of people being built out of clay. Which I can admit has very little to do with evolution but more with the origins of life but i digress. We have transitional forms from our ancestor. (Australopithecus)

(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  However, there are extraordinary, sweeping changes for certain steps--and those who know Evolution better than either of us account for them by placing everything up to alien assistance (read: intelligent design!) in the gaps...

...How about this, Chas, since you are the master of "You know nuthin' Q... read a book... do you science?" that you refute my point, which was:

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Refute THAT so I better understand Evolutionary theory, if you would (if you can). Your knowledge is superior to mine? Go ahead, tear me a new one on THAT point of FACT.

Q, statements like these

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Don't demonstrate to us, you understand evolution.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Commonsensei's post
20-07-2015, 10:20 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(17-07-2015 10:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Read a book? I would if you would read my posts. How many times I have posted I believe in Evolution as fact? However, there are extraordinary, sweeping changes for certain steps--and those who know Evolution better than either of us account for them by placing everything up to alien assistance (read: intelligent design!) in the gaps...

Citation required because that is utter bullshit.

Quote:...How about this, Chas, since you are the master of "You know nuthin' Q... read a book... do you science?" that you refute my point, which was:

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Refute THAT so I better understand Evolutionary theory, if you would (if you can). Your knowledge is superior to mine? Go ahead, tear me a new one on THAT point of FACT.

God bless.

Amphibians are adapted to life both in and out of water. You have a cartoonish "understanding" of evolution.

But try this. And then read a book. Drinking Beverage

Uh-huh. You act always, Chas, as if there are univocal scientific assertions in these matters and not stripes of belief:

Hopeful Monster - instantaneous great individual mutant leaps (lizard born with hair/Goldschmidt)

Punctuated Equilibrium - short rare bursts of rapid multi-species mutations (Cambrian Explosion/Gould)

Gradualism - tiny continuous incremental mutations of every species (Imperceptible/Dawkins)

Panspermia - alien life was transplanted to Earth from beyond (Hoyle/Crick/Hawking)

Theistic Evolution / Old Earth Creationism - Creator used a version of Macro-Evolution

Biblical Creation / Natural Selection is a mechanism designed for created kinds to adapt to diverse habitats

Cosmic Evolution – The origin of information, language, time, space, and matter (Eg: the Big Bang)

Chemical Evolution – The origin of higher elements beyond hydrogen and helium.

Stellar & Planetary Evolution – The origin of the stars and planets.

Organic Evolution – The origin of life from non-life.

Macro Evolution – Changing one Kind into another (Eg: lizard to bird, ape to human, pepper to potato)

Micro Evolution – Natural Selection & Variation within the Kinds (Eg: coloration, stature, hair length)

I also know what an amphibian is, but you've begged the question as to how it evolved to become one. (Note: It's here, so it must have evolved is not an answer.)

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 10:21 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(18-07-2015 12:27 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Read a book? I would if you would read my posts. How many times I have posted I believe in Evolution as fact?

I've read your posts Q.

You haven't posted many. You've stated many times that the bible is irrefutable. As you cherry pick threw it.

You've insisted on the clam of there being a world wide flood. Which would mean when that should if such an occurrence would have happened. Species would have to make major changes in short amounts of time. Penguins would needed to adapt to a hot desert climate as they walked back to the arctic. Koalas would have to had found a sustainable food source out side of eucalyptus as they attempt to get back to Australia.

We would see these major adaptation in the fossil record, evidence of these species moving from the middle east to Australasia (Such as the Kangaroo fossils), or the arctic (such as any type of penguin)

You've also made clams of people being built out of clay. Which I can admit has very little to do with evolution but more with the origins of life but i digress. We have transitional forms from our ancestor. (Australopithecus)

(17-07-2015 10:42 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  However, there are extraordinary, sweeping changes for certain steps--and those who know Evolution better than either of us account for them by placing everything up to alien assistance (read: intelligent design!) in the gaps...

...How about this, Chas, since you are the master of "You know nuthin' Q... read a book... do you science?" that you refute my point, which was:

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Refute THAT so I better understand Evolutionary theory, if you would (if you can). Your knowledge is superior to mine? Go ahead, tear me a new one on THAT point of FACT.

Q, statements like these

Consider an ocean species coming to the land. They need not only lungs but new systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. Little changes cannot do this... [simultaneously or even given time and the survival of some]

Don't demonstrate to us, you understand evolution.

As with Chas, showing to me current species and their adaptations doesn't demonstrate how they adapted over long periods of time while retaining survivability characteristics. I could have posted the same examples and said, "Look how awesome the Creator is!" but that would be as foolish as what you're posting!

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 11:14 AM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2015 11:23 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Q - What he was trying to show you is that it's not a ladder... things evolve by small groups "budding off" (to invent a metaphor on the spot) from the main population, where local conditions cause different Natural Selection pressures. Many transitional forms--all of which work perfectly well, in the moment--even survive because they're generally well-adapted, so that in extant forms we can see all three: the "parent" (original) species, preserved in more or less original form, some of the transitional forms it took on the way to something else, and the something else. These are not usually living "all in one pond", so to speak, but in geographically-separated areas, which is commonly the cause for such species divergence in any case (look up terms "allopatric vs sympatric speciation"). There are other causes, but this is a pretty well-established thing.

Fossils are often more useful in demonstrating transitionals because the transitional form often gives way to two wholly-separate daughter species, as evolutionary pressures continue to shape the two species' destinies in different directions. Chimpanzees and humans are one such example of cousin-species descended from a now-disappeared parent species, as clearly demonstrated in inheritance markers in noncoding sections of the DNA (I think of this as the long-distance paternity test). Or, ignoring chimps, perhaps the Australopiths' descendants would have gone one direction, say north, toward becoming humanity-- larger, taller, bigger-brained-- while another group of the same tribe went south, and in time their descendants stayed the same size and got no smarter because of "home"-familiar conditions where they went. In 3.5 million years between that tribe-split and now, you'd barely recognize the two groups were from the same original tribe.

Even more common is that, of the original tribe, one group goes north (becomes humans), the other south (becomes something else), and the original group of Australopiths who stubbornly stayed home die out because of the changes/pressures that caused the migrations away from the original tribe in the first place. Then you have two cousin-species (say, us and Neandertals), and an extinct ancestor.

I realize you're talking about much larger changes, at the Family or Order level of classification, but I'm trying to show you by analogy why there's really not a big issue with it, except in the minds of people who can't fully imagine how the diversification process works.

That's not an insult! I say it because it seems, from your phrasing before, that you don't appear to fully grasp the process. So I'm trying to help. Really! I love it when people love to learn. Smile

Edit to Add: "North" and "South" are not literal, there. I just used them to illustrate going in different directions. I could just as easily have said east/west, or north/east, etc.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
20-07-2015, 02:56 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(20-07-2015 10:20 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(17-07-2015 10:51 AM)Chas Wrote:  Citation required because that is utter bullshit.


Amphibians are adapted to life both in and out of water. You have a cartoonish "understanding" of evolution.

But try this. And then read a book. Drinking Beverage

Uh-huh. You act always, Chas, as if there are univocal scientific assertions in these matters and not stripes of belief:

Hopeful Monster - instantaneous great individual mutant leaps (lizard born with hair/Goldschmidt)

Punctuated Equilibrium - short rare bursts of rapid multi-species mutations (Cambrian Explosion/Gould)

Gradualism - tiny continuous incremental mutations of every species (Imperceptible/Dawkins)

All of those fall under the modern synthesis. The only contentious issues are the extreme positions.

Quote:Panspermia - alien life was transplanted to Earth from beyond (Hoyle/Crick/Hawking)

Doesn't solve anything. It just pushes abiogenesis elsewhere.

Quote:Theistic Evolution / Old Earth Creationism - Creator used a version of Macro-Evolution

Biblical Creation / Natural Selection is a mechanism designed for created kinds to adapt to diverse habitats

There is no evidence for those.

Quote:Cosmic Evolution – The origin of information, language, time, space, and matter (Eg: the Big Bang)

This has nothing to do with biological evolution, except language.

Quote:Chemical Evolution – The origin of higher elements beyond hydrogen and helium.

That is stellar evolution. The word 'evolution' is used in here, but with a different meaning. They are not the same.

Quote:Stellar & Planetary Evolution – The origin of the stars and planets.

That is stellar evolution. The word 'evolution' is used in here, but with a different meaning. They are not the same.

Quote:Organic Evolution – The origin of life from non-life.

Abiogenesis is evolution at the chemical level; pretty much the same as biological evolution. Self-replicating molecules and groups of molecules will succeed or fail based on their use of the environment in competition with the other chemicals.

There is no definite line between non-life and life. We could watch the whole process and there would be no point at which we would say "Oho - that's alive!" It would be "Hmm, that sort of looks like life; a little while later, "Hmmm, that seems even more like life."

Quote:Macro Evolution – Changing one Kind into another (Eg: lizard to bird, ape to human, pepper to potato)

The sum of small changes. When you can come up with a mechanism that limits change to "kinds", let us know.

Quote:Micro Evolution – Natural Selection & Variation within the Kinds (Eg: coloration, stature, hair length)

The sum of small changes. See above.

Quote:I also know what an amphibian is, but you've begged the question as to how it evolved to become one. (Note: It's here, so it must have evolved is not an answer.)

You can Google amphibian evolution. I'm not going to write or quote a biology text.

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
20-07-2015, 03:27 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
ignore
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
ignore
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2015, 03:28 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(20-07-2015 02:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  ... There is no definite line between non-life and life. We could watch the whole process and there would be no point at which we would say "Oho - that's alive!" It would be "Hmm, that sort of looks like life; a little while later, "Hmmm, that seems even more like life." ...

This is so vital a concept it bears special emphasis: much of nature (perhaps even the whole of nature) is continuums with no identifiable transition points. But the dichotomy of "either-or" is such a fixture in our culture that nature's fuzziness is thought abnormal. What's normal is that there's no place in a rainbow where green stops and yellow begins, even to the most discerning eye. There's no place in a river delta where the river ends and the sea begins. And so on. Until we let loose our grip of "absolutes" nature's blurriness will stay blurry to the blurry mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Airportkid's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: