Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

Scoring the arguments for and against

Incl. intelligent design, belief in divine creation

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#101  Postby campermon » Jun 28, 2020 8:09 pm

Wortfish wrote:
campermon wrote:
Wortfish wrote:
I can let someone else do it: <snip>


I was trying to find out your comprehension of this topic.

Hey ho

:coffee:


Well, I prefer to let the scientists speak for themselves.

There is also the matter of the whole proofreading/editing process in molecular biology. It is paradoxical that the editing enzymes that correct replication errors are themselves believed to have evolved from the very errors that they edit out! https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6234436/


That abstract was from 1984. That was 36 years ago.

That's a long time in science.

Are you sure that no progress has been made since? I ask you, because you make out that you're confident in this subject.

:thumbup:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17372
Age: 50
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#102  Postby Hermit » Jun 28, 2020 8:51 pm

Wortfish wrote:
campermon wrote:
Wortfish wrote:
campermon wrote:

Can you describe examples?

:thumbup:

I would have to say the Mediator complex: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3852498/


Thanks.

But can you describe it?

I can let someone else do it:
[Reveal] Spoiler: Someone else's description
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrm.2017.115

In all eukaryotes, mediator of RNA polymerase II transcription (Mediator), a large (protein) complex with modular organization, is generally required for transcription by RNA polymerase II, and it regulates various steps of this process. The main function of Mediator is to transduce signals from the transcription activators bound to enhancer regions to the transcription machinery, which is assembled at promoters as the preinitiation complex (PIC) to control transcription initiation.



Also: https://www.pnas.org/content/106/39/16734

Mediator is structurally and functionally conserved across eukaryotes, comprising 25–30 subunits. Structural and biochemical studies have revealed that Mediator exists in an extended conformation, with 3 distinct modules termed the head, middle, and tail; subunits from the individual modules often share genetic properties


I would contend that nearly all of the subunits need to be present for the complex to function at all.

That is an ancient trick.
In Nathan Ausubel’s “Treasury of Jewish Folklore” appears the story of a famous preacher of Dubno whose driver stopped enroute to a lecture date and said, “Rabbi, do me a favor. For once I’d like to be the one receiving all the honors and attention, to see what it feels like. For this one engagement, exchange clothes with me. You be the driver and let me be the rabbi.”

The preacher, a merry and generous soul, laughed and said, “All right — but remember, clothes don’t make the rabbi. If you’re asked to explain some difficult passage of the Law, see that you don’t make a fool of yourself.”

The exchange was effected. Arrived at their destination, the bogus rabbi was received with tumultuous enthusiasm, and obviously loved every minute of it. Finally, however, there came the dreaded moment when an extremely tricky question was put to him.

He met the test nobly. “A fine lot of scholars you are,” he thundered. “Is this the most difficult problem you could ask me? Why, this is so simple even my driver could explain it to you.” Then he called the Preacher of Dubno: “Driver, come here for a moment and clarify the Law for these dull-witted fellows.”


Wortfish wrote:...it takes just one example like this and the whole house of cards could come tumbling down (like a rabbit in the pre-Cambrian).

You have not demonstrated how the mediator complex is analogous to the pre-Cambrian rabbit. To do that you'd have to explain how the necessity of a multiprotein complex breaks evolution. Nothing in the quotes you pasted leads to that conclusion, nor does your attempt to summarise them by writing "I would contend that nearly all of the subunits need to be present for the complex to function at all."
God is the mysterious veil under which we hide our ignorance of the cause. - Léo Errera


God created the universe
God just exists
User avatar
Hermit
 
Posts: 3719
Age: 67
Male

Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#103  Postby Rumraket » Jun 29, 2020 8:53 pm

Wortfish wrote:Well, I prefer to let the scientists speak for themselves.


FordFiesta.jpg
FordFiesta.jpg (11.46 KiB) Viewed 272 times


You mean like where you insisted on an exceedingly uncharitable interpretation of a sentence in a scientific paper,where I contacted the authors to confirm that you were, in fact, misrepresenting their position?
Half-Life 3 - I want to believe
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 13206
Age: 39

Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#104  Postby SafeAsMilk » Jun 29, 2020 8:58 pm

Oh man, can't believe I missed that :lol:
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14039
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#105  Postby OlivierK » Jun 30, 2020 12:18 am

Wortfish wrote:I had expected the evidence and arguments for evolution to be much more water-tight. Instead, I found a leaky boat.

So, let's take this from your OP as an example of your finding against evolution:
Wortfish wrote:6. The biogeographical distribution of species and the physical isolation of species provides compelling evidence for evolution. The marsupials of Australia, for example, show how an isolated region seems to produce unique animals that are not found elsewhere. (Score: 3)

Counter: Biogeographical anomalies may be caused by migration rather than by evolution restricted to a particular location on earth. African and Asian great apes, for example, are very similar anatomically but live in very different habitats and have different lifestyles. Extinction can also explain why some species are geographically restricted: Lions used to live in Greece and the Balkans 2000 years ago. (Score:4)

So what you've done here is noted that what we observe in reality is consistent with and explained by evolutionary theory. You've then noted that other explanations are possible, without evaluating the credibility of those other explanations.

After all that, you've decided that in terms of whether each theory explains geographic diversity "maybe" beats "yes", 4 to 3.

So much winning! We're going to get sick of all the winning! Wortfish has the best points! It was a landslide in the Points College the likes of which has never been seen, even though all the pundits reckoned Evolution would win. Evolution won the science vote, but it's the Points College that determines the winner!
User avatar
OlivierK
 
Posts: 9570
Age: 53
Male

Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#106  Postby Blackadder » Jun 30, 2020 7:13 pm

What Wortfish and his fellow apologists will never admit (possibly not even to themselves) is that they do not approach evolution, or indeed any science, with an objective mind.

Everything they look at is seen through the lens of pre-conceived bias towards Godditit. Every disingenuous selection of facts, every breathtaking dismissal of a mountain of evidence against their proposition, every desperate clutching of straws that may support their drowning philosophy, every tortuous argument erected in defiance of Occam, all of it demonstrates their utter lack of objectivity. It’s so glaringly obvious to everyone who isn’t pre-conditioned to look for God’s hand everywhere. Obvious to everyone except the poor sap who is trapped in a mental prison of their own making.

They can never look at the world around them with an open mind and grasp how much more amazing our world is than the pathetic, tiny celestial village dreamt up by the limited imagination of Bronze Age peasants. See how they squirm and twist to try to convince us that this sad, desultory excuse for a universe ruled by an invisible psychopath is the best explanation we have. I feel sorry for them, I truly do.
That credulity should be gross in proportion to the ignorance of the mind that it enslaves, is in strict consistency with the principle of human nature. - Percy Bysshe Shelley
User avatar
Blackadder
RS Donator
 
Posts: 3713
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#107  Postby laklak » Jun 30, 2020 7:20 pm

The popularity of Lion Moussaka in ancient Greece explains why there are no lions now. (Score: 272)

A fear of deep water sailing among Australian fauna adequately explains the relative lack of marsupials in the rest of the world. (Score: 176)
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20414
Age: 66
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#108  Postby SafeAsMilk » Jul 02, 2020 12:38 pm

Well I'm convinced!
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14039
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#109  Postby Wortfish » Jul 02, 2020 12:43 pm

Blackadder wrote:What Wortfish and his fellow apologists will never admit (possibly not even to themselves) is that they do not approach evolution, or indeed any science, with an objective mind.

Everything they look at is seen through the lens of pre-conceived bias towards Godditit. Every disingenuous selection of facts, every breathtaking dismissal of a mountain of evidence against their proposition, every desperate clutching of straws that may support their drowning philosophy, every tortuous argument erected in defiance of Occam, all of it demonstrates their utter lack of objectivity. It’s so glaringly obvious to everyone who isn’t pre-conditioned to look for God’s hand everywhere. Obvious to everyone except the poor sap who is trapped in a mental prison of their own making.

They can never look at the world around them with an open mind and grasp how much more amazing our world is than the pathetic, tiny celestial village dreamt up by the limited imagination of Bronze Age peasants. See how they squirm and twist to try to convince us that this sad, desultory excuse for a universe ruled by an invisible psychopath is the best explanation we have. I feel sorry for them, I truly do.


I have lots of points to evolutionist arguments. My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 969

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#110  Postby Svartalf » Jul 02, 2020 12:52 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:Well I'm convinced!

You shouldn't lion is gamey as all hell and the ancient Greek, never great carnivores in the first place did not relish it.

Lion Moussaka led to the extinction of lions in Greece only after the Turkish conquest.
PC stands for Patronizing Cocksucker Randy Ping

Embrace the Dark Side, it needs a hug
User avatar
Svartalf
 
Posts: 2076
Age: 50
Male

Country: France
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#111  Postby Sendraks » Jul 02, 2020 12:55 pm

Wortfish wrote:My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


Yes, we know you think that but, anyone reading your post can see that is not the case. Most of your pro-creationist points hinge on appeals to incredulity and your pro-evolution points demonstrate your lack of understanding of the science.

Regardless of what you think, it is clear that you are neither qualified enough nor impartial enough to carry out this exercise with any credibility.
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15231
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#112  Postby Wortfish » Jul 02, 2020 1:13 pm

Sendraks wrote:
Wortfish wrote:My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


Yes, we know you think that but, anyone reading your post can see that is not the case. Most of your pro-creationist points hinge on appeals to incredulity and your pro-evolution points demonstrate your lack of understanding of the science.

Regardless of what you think, it is clear that you are neither qualified enough nor impartial enough to carry out this exercise with any credibility.


Fine. You weigh the 7 arguments and score each accordingly. Don't just tell me I am wrong and not provide an alternative.
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 969

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#113  Postby Wortfish » Jul 02, 2020 1:18 pm

campermon wrote:
That abstract was from 1984. That was 36 years ago.

That's a long time in science.

Are you sure that no progress has been made since? I ask you, because you make out that you're confident in this subject.

:thumbup:


The only thing proposed since then may be ribozymes that can proofread instead of proteins: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3166488/

Still doesn't get away from the problem of assuming mistakes can generate mechanisms that limit mistakes from happening.
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 969

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#114  Postby felltoearth » Jul 02, 2020 1:41 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Blackadder wrote:What Wortfish and his fellow apologists will never admit (possibly not even to themselves) is that they do not approach evolution, or indeed any science, with an objective mind.

Everything they look at is seen through the lens of pre-conceived bias towards Godditit. Every disingenuous selection of facts, every breathtaking dismissal of a mountain of evidence against their proposition, every desperate clutching of straws that may support their drowning philosophy, every tortuous argument erected in defiance of Occam, all of it demonstrates their utter lack of objectivity. It’s so glaringly obvious to everyone who isn’t pre-conditioned to look for God’s hand everywhere. Obvious to everyone except the poor sap who is trapped in a mental prison of their own making.

They can never look at the world around them with an open mind and grasp how much more amazing our world is than the pathetic, tiny celestial village dreamt up by the limited imagination of Bronze Age peasants. See how they squirm and twist to try to convince us that this sad, desultory excuse for a universe ruled by an invisible psychopath is the best explanation we have. I feel sorry for them, I truly do.


I have lots of points to evolutionist arguments. My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


Dunning Kruger FTW.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13229
Age: 52

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#115  Postby felltoearth » Jul 02, 2020 1:44 pm

Wortfish wrote:

Still doesn't get away from the problem of assuming mistakes can generate mechanisms that limit mistakes from happening.


This sentence makes no sense WRT the science. There is no such thing a a "mistake" in genetics. Are you talking about an incorrect transcription?
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 13229
Age: 52

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#116  Postby Thommo » Jul 02, 2020 2:06 pm

felltoearth wrote:
Wortfish wrote:I have lots of points to evolutionist arguments. My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


Dunning Kruger FTW.


That is the least objective use of the word "objective" I have ever seen.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26886

Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#117  Postby newolder » Jul 02, 2020 2:16 pm

Wortfish wrote:... My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


:picard:

Wortfish wrote:...
I took logarithms of the raw scores and then weighted them accordingly: ...


:rofl:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7160
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#118  Postby Fallible » Jul 02, 2020 2:39 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Sendraks wrote:
Wortfish wrote:My scoring was fair, balanced and objective.


Yes, we know you think that but, anyone reading your post can see that is not the case. Most of your pro-creationist points hinge on appeals to incredulity and your pro-evolution points demonstrate your lack of understanding of the science.

Regardless of what you think, it is clear that you are neither qualified enough nor impartial enough to carry out this exercise with any credibility.


Fine. You weigh the 7 arguments and score each accordingly. Don't just tell me I am wrong and not provide an alternative.


You troll badly. You know no one has to provide an alternative. No one agreed to do that. You started a thread unprompted to offer this bilge. That’s it.
She battled through in every kind of tribulation,
She revelled in adventure and imagination.
She never listened to no hater, liar,
Breaking boundaries and chasing fire.
Oh, my my! Oh my, she flies!
User avatar
Fallible
RS Donator
 
Name: Alice Pooper
Posts: 51160
Age: 47
Female

Country: Engerland na na
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#119  Postby theropod_V_2.0 » Jul 02, 2020 3:55 pm

Given that points were given to fairy tales the suggestion/assertion of a fair scoring is absurd, and one would be hard pressed to find any other member of RatSkep that would be so kind. I think most people here would call the whole thread a wank fest dreamed up in a stupor of self absorption. I just call it trolling, and not top shelf work either.

Here’s what Poe’s and trolls can’t seem to come to grips with, and it’s hilarious to watch play out. Just because you have the right to an opinion, no matter how utterly fucking stupid, this doesn’t mean your opinion is right. Your fee fees do not dictate observational reality, and none of us are under any obligation to view your stinking shitpile of apologetic rhetoric as anything other that what it is.

Troll better, Wortfish, or not. I personally don’t think you can raise your game to the point of being anything other that the low quality efforts we have seen to date from you. I find it sad that the quality of trolling here ‘bouts has become so transparent. We don’t even attract the better players anymore. Sad.

RS
“Sleeping in the hen house doesn’t make you a chicken”.
User avatar
theropod_V_2.0
 
Name: R.A.
Posts: 522

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#120  Postby Sendraks » Jul 02, 2020 5:33 pm

Wortfish wrote:Fine. You weigh the 7 arguments and score each accordingly. Don't just tell me I am wrong and not provide an alternative.


The only reason I would engage in such a fatuous exercise would be to satisfy myself I could do a better job, whilst incorporating critique and observations from the members here more knowledgeable on evolution than I.

You've demonstrated time and again, both an unwillingness to listen to others and an abject failure to grasp even the simpler aspects of evolutionary theory, so providing an alternative would serve no purpose. You'd just ignore it or misunderstand, doubling down to claim your own work was better, regardless of what anyone here said or provided by way of evidence.

You've been schooled on this subject numerous times, with the same blithe ignorance in response. So why would this trip on the Troll-Go-Round be any different this time?
"One of the great tragedies of mankind is that morality has been hijacked by religion." - Arthur C Clarke

"'Science doesn't know everything' - Well science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it'd stop" - Dara O'Brian
User avatar
Sendraks
 
Name: D-Money Jr
Posts: 15231
Age: 104
Male

Country: England
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest