|
 youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
 I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... 
#11410503 - 11/08/09 10:44 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I was out at this lecture regarding intelligent design. The speaker is a cell biologist on the faculty at Brown University. He was one of the expert witness back when that awful debacle happened at that school board in Pennsylvania in which the school board tried to teach kids intelligent design in the class room. So the guy had credibility. Also he was an excellent speaker. Next he presented a line of thought and reasoning that was pretty sharp. He talked about the fact that we have fossil evidence for transient species. He went in depth on a particular case for us. Since he was a cell biologist he also included genetic evidence in his talk. He kept it pretty dumbed down for the masses and still presented a pretty concise and clear cut case for evolution.
So anyway....at the end it was time for Q & A. Guess what? It was like nobody had been paying attention to the points he had been making! Some of these people were almost personally affronted by the evidence he had given. Some were asking his personal beliefs about the soul, yada yada. Why? He's a biologist. A naturalist that has no observation of a "soul." The guy made a point to shed some light on the tensions between persons of faith and evolutionists. I agree with his point that faith in god (or whatever) and trust in the truth of evolution are not mutually exclusive ideas.
I don't think people like hearing ideas that don't jive with their "rational" experience. A lot of what I posted here is just rhetorical, but i guess the following is my point: People like to think that they are rational creatures. And to an extent, they are. But always, always, (always!) there's a fallacy deep upstream of the current mode of thought that discredits the rationalizations that follow after. And then people (and I'm no exception get all wrapped up in their conclusions and won't bother to rethink their position/conclusion. They aren't willing to adapt their beliefs and behaviors to the situation at hand.
As natural selection tells us, those that don't adapt don't survive.
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
 Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
 Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410542 - 11/08/09 10:51 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
yup
--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.
" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.
With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Lakefingers
Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... *DELETED* [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410554 - 11/08/09 10:52 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by Lakefingers
Reason for deletion: Reason enough.
Edited by Lakefingers (11/08/09 10:55 AM)
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Lakefingers]
#11410559 - 11/08/09 10:54 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.
" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.
With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Techn9cian
Grower
Registered: 02/01/09
Posts: 407
Loc: Seattle, Wa
Last seen: 10 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410671 - 11/08/09 11:20 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
nobody knows shit.
how could scientists say they know when the universe was created or whatever.if it was created what was it created from if there was nothing before it?
Well what was the universe before it was here?
....some shit just doesnt make sense.
I think the universe evolves, and then regresses or whatever.
or maybe peaks and collapses, and then restarts.like another big bang after this one collapses
cause SOMETHING has to exist forever(right?),like everything cant just turn into nothing. and that gives things a long time to change, and repeat
--------------------
Go stoopid dumb retarded  
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Techn9cian]
#11410682 - 11/08/09 11:24 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
As far as I know scientists don't say they know anything for sure. They make a best guess on available evidence knowing they will revise their guesses once new info comes in.
--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.
" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.
With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Life Upon Death
Stranger
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 3,225
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Icelander]
#11410734 - 11/08/09 11:35 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
you all talk about evolutionary theory as if its fact
and you think a scientist stringing together a clever sounding argument with big intelligent sounding words makes him correct
evolutionary theory is filled with holes and with each new discovery the theory has to be altered and what you were once told was fact has to be rethought out
I can't imagine there being a theory that discredits itself on a more consistent basis
consider this:
what scientists believe happened today will be changed tomorrow when forced to adapt to new evidence
"Each new revelation in genetic research, no matter how bizarre and unforeseen, can be construed as a ringing confirmation of the theory of evolution, or so evolutionary biologists would have us believe. With this book, Dr. Lee Spetner risks the wrath of the evolution establishment by challenging the validity of the neo-Darwinian theory, or "dogma" as he calls it. Evolutionists assume that the observed ability of organisms like finches and bacteria to adapt to altered environments is clear proof of the NDT, which holds that random mutations in the DNA molecule are a prime factor in these adaptations. But this inference is negated by compelling new evidence at every level of biology according to Spetner, whose credentials include an MIT doctorate in physics, expertise in molecular biology, and published papers on biology in prestigious scientific journals. Numerous experiments are cited indicating many of these survival modifications are linked to a particular class of nonrandom mutations responding on cue to specific changes in the environment. A given external stimulus will trigger the same chain reaction of hormone-induced DNA mutations every time, yielding an identical adaptive response.
Spetner claims research findings like these which don't fit approved doctrine are simply ignored by evolutionary biologists. That charge is echoed with gusto by renowned biologist Lynn Margulis, who issues scathing denunciations of their obscurantist tactics in "Slanted Truths." She believes the "stranglehold" of the Darwinian "religious movement" can only be broken by a rational counter-force from outside the fold. Spetner's authoritative book is an ideal instrument for this deliverance. Critics of the NDT will savor the hard-science rigor of molecular arguments adduced against a theory they believe is largely based on speculative just-so stories.
In a historical overview, the author reminds us that when the so-called synthetic theory was first crafted fifty years ago, DNA had yet to be discovered. Darwin himself was blissfully ignorant of the functions and structure of the cell. We now know that mammals are composed of trillions of cells, each containing an information-packed DNA molecule and hundreds of interacting organelles. It is therefore not unreasonable to ask: What if Darwin's quaint theory were advanced today for the first time? The proposal that a clumsy hypothetical mechanism modeled on eighteenth century economic theories and pigeon breeding practices could possibly account for the origins of EVERY SINGLE ELEMENT in the incredibly complex universe of microbiology unfolding before our eyes would be laughable. The hodgepodge theory of evolution has become a religious faith so deeply ingrained in its adherents they appear oblivious to its absurdities. This book relates how stunning advances in biotechnology in just the past two decades have dramatically widened the gulf separating the realities of empirical science from the myths of neo-Darwinism.
A number of these myths are spun in "The Blind Watchmaker" by one of evolution's high priests, zoologist Richard Dawkins. Spetner searched this work for traces of solid science and found mainly false assumptions and technical inaccuracies instead. He notes that, "like many passionate believers, Dawkins did not examine his evidence critically." Indeed, his vaunted cumulative selection thesis is riddled with unfounded assumptions. He built his case for it entirely on the power of the concept, with not one word of proof. His biomorph and lexical computer simulations are demonstrated not to represent natural selection as his uncritical disciples may believe, only artificial selection, as in pigeon breeding.
The author's diversified background, which also includes lectureships in information theory and communication theory at Johns Hopkins University, enables him to speak expertly on a host of technical issues surrounding this subject. Laymen who've fallen behind the dazzling pace of microbiology will be intrigued by his lucid account of the counter-intuitive adaptive strategies in Nature's arsenal. The architecture and mechanisms of the DNA molecule are examined in depth, introducing lay readers to a host of basic concepts like introns, transitrons, point mutations, mutation rates, genetic information and heritable genetic switches. This potent brew is spiced with liberal doses of humorous asides and amusing anecdotes.
It should be noted that Spetner's work is narrowly focused on the purely secular, scientific aspects of his topic. It rarely strays into the domains of metaphysics or theology. Amazon reviewers of this book who parrot mindless shibboleths about creationism and gods of the gap as they did with Michael Behe's ground-breaking "Darwin's Black Box " will clearly establish they either didn't read the book or have been hopelessly brainwashed in orthodox biology classes.
To appreciate the extent of evolutionists' distortions in the classroom, one has only to browse through a current biology textbook after reading Spetner. To cite one case, he has found thousands of examples of convergence, or parallel evolution, buried in the literature, so one might assume they are a significant fact of biological life. He demonstrates mathematically the impossibly long odds against these uncanny near-identities of features in unrelated species, like wings in birds and bats, being evolved by any feat of natural selection. Evidently academic biologists prefer not to dispute this conclusion. A typical nationally distributed college text, "Biology " by N.A. Campbell, contains 1200 pages saturated with evolution mythology, but just one short paragraph on convergence. An equally inextricable companion phenomenon, mimicry, is completely ignored. Other slanted omissions and distortions abound.
Spetner's definitive treatise on what many consider an extremely important issue deserves a much wider audience than it presently commands. Whereas the shelf space afforded the evolutionist tomes of Dawkins and Steven J. Gould in the mega book stores Barnes & Noble and Borders is measured in linear feet, "Not by Chance" is nowhere in sight, not even in inventory. These giant outlets are rapidly driving out alternative book sellers. The inability of an author of Spetner's stature to address a substantial segment of the population that would be sympathetic to his message amounts to de facto censorship by a quasi-monopolistic distribution system. Although most of them will never have the opportunity, avid evolutionists would find this slender volume an eye-opening read. "
http://www.amazon.com/Not-Chance-Shattering-Modern-Evolution/dp/1880582244/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257705194&sr=8-1
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Techn9cian]
#11410741 - 11/08/09 11:39 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
But you see, I'm thinking of evolution. Which is very much verifible using current technology and analysis techniques. If you understand the basis of it all. Which I def don't.
You're talking about existence. Which an entirely different metaphysical conundrum IMO. Your comparing apples and oranges.
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
Life Upon Death
Stranger
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 3,225
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410753 - 11/08/09 11:42 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
youbreakyoubuy said:
But you see, I'm thinking of evolution. Which is very much verifible using current technology and analysis techniques. If you understand the basis of it all. Which I def don't.
You're talking about existence. Which an entirely different metaphysical conundrum IMO. Your comparing apples and oranges.
verifiable how exactly?
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Life Upon Death]
#11410803 - 11/08/09 11:54 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
oooo....you spelled that right! I couldn't figure it out. kudos. 
Anyway, I'd say it's verifiable through DNA/genetic analysis. For instance, humans have 23 individual chromosomes the other primates have 24. Wtf, right? Well upon analysis it turns out that there is a somewhat common chromosomal mutation called Robertsonian Translation that can account for this. Our #2 chromosome is a combination of two primate chromosomes. The two fused to become one somewhere in our genetic past and became one. We can analyze the genetic sequences of our #2 with these other two chromosomes and notice that there is much striking singularity between the three.
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410822 - 11/08/09 11:59 AM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
And I know that one instance doesn't verify such a broad, over arching theory like evolution, but it's the small things that add up to the great big one thing, right?
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
Life Upon Death
Stranger
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 3,225
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410835 - 11/08/09 12:02 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
youbreakyoubuy said:
oooo....you spelled that right! I couldn't figure it out. kudos.
Anyway, I'd say it's verifiable through DNA/genetic analysis. For instance, humans have 23 individual chromosomes the other primates have 24. Wtf, right? Well upon analysis it turns out that there is a somewhat common chromosomal mutation called Robertsonian Translation that can account for this. Our #2 chromosome is a combination of two primate chromosomes. The two fused to become one somewhere in our genetic past and became one. We can analyze the genetic sequences of our #2 with these other two chromosomes and notice that there is much striking singularity between the three.
whats your source?(I'm asking cause I wanna check it out)
|
Life Upon Death
Stranger
Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 3,225
Last seen: 14 years, 3 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410837 - 11/08/09 12:03 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
youbreakyoubuy said:
And I know that one instance doesn't verify such a broad, over arching theory like evolution, but it's the small things that add up to the great big one thing, right?
I'm all about connecting the dots...
I'm just not sure these dots truly connect
I don't know enough to say either way but I'm very skeptical
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: youbreakyoubuy]
#11410847 - 11/08/09 12:05 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
And besides all this stuff about evolution is off-topic. I only posted that info about the lecture as context for the Q & A that followed after. Please, don't believe that my paltry description of that guy's lecture does it justice. Nor should it convince you of anything. I guess my main point was that people are close minded and unwilling to see themselves in that light until it's too late. It was mainly an observation. The only thing this thread needed was the one word answer that icelander posted secondly.
While evolution is indeed a dead horse in this forum, I was more referring to the dead horse that is the curious peculiarities of human behavior and belief.
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
Edited by youbreakyoubuy (11/08/09 12:13 PM)
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Life Upon Death]
#11410860 - 11/08/09 12:07 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Life Upon Death said:
Quote:
youbreakyoubuy said:
oooo....you spelled that right! I couldn't figure it out. kudos.
Anyway, I'd say it's verifiable through DNA/genetic analysis. For instance, humans have 23 individual chromosomes the other primates have 24. Wtf, right? Well upon analysis it turns out that there is a somewhat common chromosomal mutation called Robertsonian Translation that can account for this. Our #2 chromosome is a combination of two primate chromosomes. The two fused to become one somewhere in our genetic past and became one. We can analyze the genetic sequences of our #2 with these other two chromosomes and notice that there is much striking singularity between the three.
whats your source?(I'm asking cause I wanna check it out)
My genetics textbook! Genetics: A Conceptual Approach. Pierce, Benjamin A. 3rd Edition. 2008.
I've got to apologize. It's Robertsonian TransLOCation. It's also a mechanism for some cases of Down syndrome.
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Life Upon Death]
#11411218 - 11/08/09 01:19 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
you all talk about evolutionary theory as if its fact
Icelander = You all?
Who here spoke of it as fact or do you just make shit up? 
BTW, please communicate your 'ideas' to us without using electron theory.
--------------------
|
learningtofly
Ancient Aliens
Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 15,105
Loc: Out of this world
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Lakefingers]
#11411329 - 11/08/09 01:39 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Lakefingers said:
Sorry he forgot to point out like Bruno Latour does at his lectures "no one here will understand this anyhow...", plus add "being a biologist I know that most of you don't have the mental capacity to understand me", plus "my sociologist colleagues inform me that your reading level is estimated at an 8th grade level, yet that is, statistically two or three grades to high", plus "and to top it off, I know that, you, as Americans, are on average the most malicious as well as misinformed, under- and miseducated people of any industrial nation. However, being an optimist I'll hold this lecture in hope of paving just a speck of evidence that may help to accumulate in your minds with the other empirical specks, something resembling an emergence of logical and discursive rationale".
Why did you post something so incredibly irrelevant?
--------------------
|
youbreakyoubuy
Monkey Mouth
Registered: 10/16/05
Posts: 2,632
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: learningtofly]
#11411407 - 11/08/09 01:55 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
for funsies? 
--------------------
Let that which doesn't matter truly not matter.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#11411685 - 11/08/09 02:46 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said:
Quote:
you all talk about evolutionary theory as if its fact
Icelander = You all?
Who here spoke of it as fact or do you just make shit up?
BTW, please communicate your 'ideas' to us without using electron theory.
Don't ever remember saying in all these years that evolution was a fact.
--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.
" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.
With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: I know this is a dead horse around these parts, but... [Re: Icelander]
#11411698 - 11/08/09 02:49 PM (14 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Once again (like a hundred times per day) the Reading Comprehension Monster rears its ugly head.
--------------------
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
CBD Concentrates 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order 
Bulk Substrate 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder
Edit 
Reply 
raytrace
jahfeelirie
1 2 3 all )
amanita3
Swami
Huehuecoyotl
Jellric
Sinbad