Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2015, 04:58 PM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2015 07:59 PM by Commonsensei.)
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
For starts thank you RocketSurgeon76 I couldn't have said it better myself.

(20-07-2015 10:21 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  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 don't have an early specie because that early specie died 375 Million Years ago. And if I could show you a video of Tiktaalik I would.

[Image: 3417834027_187dda1b82_b.jpg]

But this is a common move done by you Q. One I find rather dishonest. Changing subjects. I was responding to this statement.

Quote: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...

You will see this quotation in my original post.

I responded to your allegation that a species would need to meet all the criteria that you put forth. A new lung system, systems for motion, mating, eating, waste, reproduction, circulation, etc. In order to survive.

I responded to your allegation that a ocean species would need "Magic Legs" to get on to land. So I demonstrated two current species of fish that have the abilty to survive on land that have flippers as means of propulsion. No Magic required.

(20-07-2015 10:21 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  ...how they adapted over long periods of time while retaining survivability characteristics.

Now a response to this statement. I don't want to confuse you. I know when I learning something new, how frustrating it can be. The first thing you need to realize is magic isn't real.

For starts sometime species retain traits, or abilities that don't pertain to survival. If we look at the human body for example.

[Image: tail_bone2.jpg]

The Human Tail Bone. We don't grow tails that much any more, It's a relic from the past. But from time to time this code will come back.

[Image: main-qimg-8907b58396c92b8987e0d93cbc8a99..._webp=true]

Another example is the Appendix it's not used for anything. It been suggested it had severe a purpose when the human diet was mostly made up of plants. But now it only becomes inflamed and infected before finally rupturing when someone develops appendicitis.

These appendages are still with us but they don't help us survive in anyway. Just left overs from past ancestors. Evolution doesn't have any plan for what will work or not work. The things that work; work. The things that don't get pushed to the side, not away.

A lab test preformed at the Michigan State University have been suding the long term evolution of Bacteria. Why Bacteria? They are easily contained. And not only can they be froven to compare these changes from the first generation, they have relivily short life spans. So this experiment started in 1988 and has been running to this day. Here is a video on their discoverys and process.





I also have this other video, that I feel explains evolution very clearly.





Hopefully this will help you in the road to understanding.

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
20-07-2015, 06:42 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(20-07-2015 04:58 PM)Commonsensei Wrote:  Hopefully this will help you in the road to understanding.

Not likely. He would have to take his fingers out of his ears first.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 07:38 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
All,

I'm aware of some of the latest ideas regarding transitory forms and amphibian evolution. I have my "fingers out of my ears" because I hear y'all saying it's a done deal rather than "there are some gaps in the processes that reasonably, we are yet unsure how they evolved/adapted". That would be a more honest statement.

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
21-07-2015, 08:53 AM (This post was last modified: 21-07-2015 09:05 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
We don't say it's a done deal. We say we know how it happened because the process is pretty well nailed down.

When people point to gaps and say, "What about HERE?" they're ignoring that the question is increasingly-well-solved, and that the overall picture IS clear as to what happened and how it happens.

You're trying to make 1% look like 99%. It's fundamentally dishonest, and tends to lead to stronger-than-necessary language in return during debates, because if we do say what you're asking, just above, it leads to ignorant opponents saying "HA! See?" on the 1%.

The farther back in time you go, the fewer preserved fossils one finds, because they're harder to find. This doesn't surprise anyone. But it's unfortunately where we'd be finding the distant common-ancestors you mention at the higher taxonomic clades.

Fossils are, however, not the only way to solve the issue. Dozens of convergent lines of questioning, each of which would disprove each other if they were not the same thing, all agree and form a really solid picture.

I'll give you an analogy: If you and I found a document that suggested your grandfather had also fathered my father, making us related, it would be one line of evidence. So what would we do? We'd go look for another line of evidence! We'd talk to people who knew my grandmother and see if she even knew your grandfather, and whether they were in the same place at the same time. We'd look at one another for phenotype similarities. We'd very likely go get a DNA test to see if inherited "markers" are there that demonstrate paternity. Any one of these lines of questions could prove the document false, to varying degrees of certainty... but when all agree... it's a pretty solid case.

"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
21-07-2015, 08:25 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(21-07-2015 07:38 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I'm aware of some of the latest ideas regarding transitory forms and amphibian evolution.

Yet you display the exact opposite every day. How strange.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-07-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(21-07-2015 08:53 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  We don't say it's a done deal. We say we know how it happened because the process is pretty well nailed down.

When people point to gaps and say, "What about HERE?" they're ignoring that the question is increasingly-well-solved, and that the overall picture IS clear as to what happened and how it happens.

You're trying to make 1% look like 99%. It's fundamentally dishonest, and tends to lead to stronger-than-necessary language in return during debates, because if we do say what you're asking, just above, it leads to ignorant opponents saying "HA! See?" on the 1%.

The farther back in time you go, the fewer preserved fossils one finds, because they're harder to find. This doesn't surprise anyone. But it's unfortunately where we'd be finding the distant common-ancestors you mention at the higher taxonomic clades.

Fossils are, however, not the only way to solve the issue. Dozens of convergent lines of questioning, each of which would disprove each other if they were not the same thing, all agree and form a really solid picture.

I'll give you an analogy: If you and I found a document that suggested your grandfather had also fathered my father, making us related, it would be one line of evidence. So what would we do? We'd go look for another line of evidence! We'd talk to people who knew my grandmother and see if she even knew your grandfather, and whether they were in the same place at the same time. We'd look at one another for phenotype similarities. We'd very likely go get a DNA test to see if inherited "markers" are there that demonstrate paternity. Any one of these lines of questions could prove the document false, to varying degrees of certainty... but when all agree... it's a pretty solid case.

You are underestimating by a huge amount when you say 1% gaps and 99% smoking gun scientific evidence. You are helped in this construction by modern scientists. Unfortunately or fortunately, that is no excuse for avoiding the gospel:

1) Even if it's 1% error, no one is perfect.

2) Imperfection is "sin". Sin is "imperfection".

3) Jesus came and died and rose to cover our imperfection. Trust in His death and resurrection and you're set as far as that goes.

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
22-07-2015, 11:27 AM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(22-07-2015 10:52 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  You are underestimating by a huge amount when you say 1% gaps and 99% smoking gun scientific evidence. You are helped in this construction by modern scientists. Unfortunately or fortunately, that is no excuse for avoiding the gospel:

1) Even if it's 1% error, no one is perfect.

Tautology.

Quote:2) Imperfection is "sin". Sin is "imperfection".

So a mutation is sinful? Consider

Quote:3) Jesus came and died and rose to cover our imperfection. Trust in His death and resurrection and you're set as far as that goes.

You'll need to provide some actual evidence for that; you have not done so as yet.

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
22-07-2015, 12:05 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(22-07-2015 10:52 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  You are underestimating by a huge amount when you say 1% gaps and 99% smoking gun scientific evidence. You are helped in this construction by modern scientists. Unfortunately or fortunately, that is no excuse for avoiding the gospel:

1) Even if it's 1% error, no one is perfect.

2) Imperfection is "sin". Sin is "imperfection".

3) Jesus came and died and rose to cover our imperfection. Trust in His death and resurrection and you're set as far as that goes.

I am helped in having this conversation with you via computer/internet by modern scientists, as well. So, if that was intended as a slight against science, it's not a very good one.

As for the sin=imperfection argument, your God is a dick. It is clear that we are evolved animals. I'm sorry you don't like that fact, but it's a fact. For whatever "gaps" that remain in our origins knowledge, we have that one down really, really solidly. (I'd like to pause here a moment to contemplate my own very-mammalian nipples, penis, and bellybutton.) So to say then that we are to be held accountable for our natural heritage's "imperfection" and that in order to be "saved" from this factor, which I'd never heard about until a religious cleric/adherent told me about it, I need to believe in their particular religion about a god that became a half-human and then was blood-sacrificed on behalf of my imperfections, because apparently his father-deity couldn't simply say, "Nope, I love you just the way you are. All of it, even the imperfections." To move from that to torment in eternity for not thinking the priest/adherents and their particular holy book (out of thousands) made a coherent argument, let alone a decent argument, is insane! If that is indeed the nature of your Deity, then I would not worship it because I am a moral person and that is deeply immoral.

"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
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
22-07-2015, 12:17 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
Some entertainment, while we pause to consider our Mammalian Nature. Big Grin




"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
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
22-07-2015, 01:15 PM
RE: Nick Seldon - A Quotation
(21-07-2015 07:38 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  All,

I'm aware of some of the latest ideas regarding transitory forms and amphibian evolution. I have my "fingers out of my ears" because I hear y'all saying it's a done deal rather than "there are some gaps in the processes that reasonably, we are yet unsure how they evolved/adapted". That would be a more honest statement.

Ok, so if i'm understanding this correctly. You understand that evolution is occurring.

Now let's apply this understanding to other aspects that you've adhered to.

I still think we'll get threw your thick skull eventually Q. I don't think you would come back to a place so often, just to be mocked and ridiculed all the time.

Perhaps your under the disillusion your changing minds here, or you win debates more then you loose. Or perhaps you like hearing contradictory thoughts. If you're involved in your church as much as you say. Maybe hearing the same unthinking agreements among your pers is boring to you. I don't know.

Let me see if we can find some common ground. Something I feel we both could look at with mutual criticisms.





Scientology.

Now replace their accusations of crimes with sins. They're trying to force confessions, make the person feel minuscule. Harass them because they are the opposition, they feel they need to demonstrate anything, and need to take their word on it. Only people in the group have the true understanding. They change subjects rapidly or never asking more then one question. They push their book Dianetics and say it contains all the answers one seeks.

They hold L. Ron Hubbard to being their Messiah.

They're more of these type of in your face, video's on XenuTV.

I highly recommend looking deeper into this group. HBO just had a documentary special on them not to long ago. I honestly would like to hear your option on this matter. And what avenues you use to discredit, or rule out this "religion".

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: