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

#81  Postby theropod_V_2.0 » Jun 26, 2020 7:58 pm

Stupid is excusable, and a first cousin of ignorance. Knowing what you are posting is a Bose-Einstein condensate of wrong is trolling. Well, one genre of the art.

RS
“Sleeping in the hen house doesn’t make you a chicken”.
User avatar
theropod_V_2.0
 
Name: R.A.
Posts: 738

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

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#82  Postby Rumraket » Jun 26, 2020 9:59 pm

Holy fuck that is stupid.

Oh gee I can make up numbers. I win.
Half-Life 3 - I want to believe
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 13215
Age: 40

Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#83  Postby Fenrir » Jun 26, 2020 10:05 pm

theropod_V_2.0 wrote:Stupid is excusable, and a first cousin of ignorance. Knowing what you are posting is a Bose-Einstein condensate of wrong is trolling. Well, one genre of the art.

RS


They just made a Bose-Einstein condensate what persisted for almost a whole second.

True story.

"They" in this case being peoples on the ISS. No gravity makes the difference see.
Religion: it only fails when you test it.-Thunderf00t.
User avatar
Fenrir
 
Posts: 3608
Male

Country: Australia
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (gs)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#84  Postby Wortfish » Jun 27, 2020 9:05 pm

campermon wrote:
Wortfish wrote:

I'll just reverse it to state that if it can be shown that a complex organ can be shown to have been formed by slight successive random changes, any case for creationism or ID would absolutely break down.


Can you describe examples?

:thumbup:


I would have to say the Mediator complex: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3852498/
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 971

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#85  Postby Wortfish » Jun 27, 2020 9:13 pm

Cito di Pense wrote:
Random small changes are a fact. Selection on the basis of phenotype variation is a fact.

True. But the existence of random changes, and their selection, does not necessarily lead to the formation of complex structures.
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 971

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#86  Postby Cito di Pense » Jun 27, 2020 9:52 pm

Wortfish wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
Random small changes are a fact. Selection on the basis of phenotype variation is a fact.

True. But the existence of random changes, and their selection, does not necessarily lead to the formation of complex structures.


You're catching on, Bunky. There is no necessary outcome in evolution by natural selection, but if it happens, it must be possible.

It's one of the demons that creotards see and run away screaming: Contingency. If you want to present the Grand Plan, get to it, instead of churning out all these feeble little turds of counterpoint that do nothing to make your case.

You have all your work ahead of you to show that creation is necessary. Theologians have bullshitted the necessity of God long before you showed up, and you're not very good at it, given all the work already on the books, if all you can do is parrot whatever theology you like.

You're not very good at this, and you've given up trying to break down evolution for the purposes of arguing with me. So it was the old bait and switch, wasn't it? If you want to assume design and then use that to conclude design, you're welcome to be that much of an IDiot. You might think about what you have to do to convince me on design. Do better than bait and switch.
Хлопнут без некролога. -- Серге́й Па́влович Королёв

Translation by Elbert Hubbard: Do not take life too seriously. You're not going to get out of it alive.
User avatar
Cito di Pense
 
Name: Al Forno, LLD,LDL,PPM
Posts: 29532
Age: 23
Male

Country: The Heartland
Mongolia (mn)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#87  Postby BWE » Jun 28, 2020 2:31 am

Wortfish wrote:
The_Metatron wrote:
Agreed. Let's see that scoring rubric.


I determined the scores based on the following criteria:

1. Empirical evidence in support of the argument. (50%)
2. Logic in support of the argument. (25%)
3. The importance and relevance of the argument. (25%)

I took logarithms of the raw scores and then weighted them accordingly: all very mathematical and precise.

You seem to have some issues about which you are confused.
User avatar
BWE
 
Posts: 2498

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#88  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Jun 28, 2020 2:40 am

Mathematics application is irrelevant if you're not using a scientific framework.
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13471
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#89  Postby SafeAsMilk » Jun 28, 2020 2:53 am

It's a defining characteristic of creationism: use sciencey words to sell transparently unscientific ideas.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14529
Age: 41
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#90  Postby Fenrir » Jun 28, 2020 3:09 am

SafeAsMilk wrote:It's a defining characteristic of creationism: use sciencey words to sell transparently unscientific ideas whilst loudly decrying "scientism".


Fixt for completeness. :)
Religion: it only fails when you test it.-Thunderf00t.
User avatar
Fenrir
 
Posts: 3608
Male

Country: Australia
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands (gs)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#91  Postby Rachel Bronwyn » Jun 28, 2020 4:32 am

I am so glad I was forced to suffer through the philosophy of science/experimental implementation and design courses during my BSc right now.
what a terrible image
User avatar
Rachel Bronwyn
 
Name: speaking moistly
Posts: 13471
Age: 32
Female

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#92  Postby campermon » Jun 28, 2020 6:43 am

Wortfish wrote:
campermon wrote:
Wortfish wrote:

I'll just reverse it to state that if it can be shown that a complex organ can be shown to have been formed by slight successive random changes, any case for creationism or ID would absolutely break down.


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?
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: 17434
Age: 50
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#93  Postby The_Metatron » Jun 28, 2020 1:59 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:It's a defining characteristic of creationism: use sciencey words to sell transparently unscientific ideas.

Logarithms blah blah. Blah, blah weighted.

God.
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21026
Age: 57
Male

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

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#94  Postby Wortfish » Jun 28, 2020 4:08 pm

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

I'll just reverse it to state that if it can be shown that a complex organ can be shown to have been formed by slight successive random changes, any case for creationism or ID would absolutely break down.


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: 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.
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 971

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#95  Postby aban57 » Jun 28, 2020 4:11 pm

That's a classic dishonest creationist tactic. Focusing on an extremely specific point, avoiding answering the mountain of evidence in favor of evolution. A bit like presups.
aban57
 
Name: Cindy
Posts: 7425
Age: 41
Female

Country: France
Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#96  Postby campermon » Jun 28, 2020 6:00 pm

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


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

Hey ho

:coffee:
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: 17434
Age: 50
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#97  Postby The_Metatron » Jun 28, 2020 6:51 pm

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:

Success!
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 21026
Age: 57
Male

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

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#98  Postby zerne » Jun 28, 2020 7:29 pm

SafeAsMilk wrote:
Svartalf wrote:
SafeAsMilk wrote:
Svartalf wrote:@SafeasMilk. I'll be glad to take you to some areas on earth where there is plenty of water that is not wet at all, at least not until it is warmed.

Then that would mean it's not water then, wouldn't it?

First time I've ever been told that ice is NOT water...

You know you're playing a dumb word game here, right? If someone asks you for a glass of water, you don't hand them one full of just ice cubes.


Um, i may have done exactly this. On more than one occasion. It's amazing what becomes funny you're pished. Bars always have ice.
User avatar
zerne
 
Posts: 919
Age: 47
Male

European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#99  Postby Wortfish » Jun 28, 2020 8:02 pm

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/
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 971

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Creationist and Evolutionist hypotheses put to the test

#100  Postby Wortfish » Jun 28, 2020 8:04 pm

aban57 wrote:That's a classic dishonest creationist tactic. Focusing on an extremely specific point, avoiding answering the mountain of evidence in favor of evolution. A bit like presups.


However, it takes just one example like this and the whole house of cards could come tumbling down (like a rabbit in the pre-Cambrian).
User avatar
Wortfish
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 971

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Creationism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest