Oh look, more "science" falls by the wayside..unethical study

[westwall]

Westwall and Drock continue to insist that what they KNOW is irrefutable, DESPITE the lack of evidence.

Wrong. We KNOW very little (comparatively), that's why we are allways looking. I have just shown you how every year we are presented with new facts that challenge the paradigm. Why do you insist on ignoring what I post? I have also posted evidence as has Loki that refutes your contention and you CHOOSE to ignore it. I am not responsible for your close mindedness. That's all on you.

What's truly sad is we are both creationists. I just understand that nature takes a lot longer to work her magic. You "believe" that God did everything in a few days, I "believe" that it took a hell of a lot longer. You remind me of the Albigensians who were hunted down and killed by the Spanish Inquisition because they argued about how many Angels could dance on the head of a pin. Imagine that. Entire regions of southern France were exterminated over that pithy a reason. That is the type of closed mindedness you are exibiting now.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Watch the video that Loki posted. It is quite enlightening.

Based on your reaction to the Brit accent in the silly vid, I bet you've purchased a whole bunch of 'As Seen on TV' cookware, huh?


Instead, check out the following from the bulletin of the Chicago Museum of Natural History:

"We are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much -- ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information." (Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Chicago, 50:22-29)


Again?
" By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information."

Westy, stop behaving like a martinet of the ideology, the creation myth of our time, and consider what the lack of evidence implies.

The lack of evidence implys that fossils are remarkable things PC. It is so incredibly difficult for fossils to form that most people have no idea how rare they truly are. When dinosaurs were first classified it was assumed they were cold blooded, then a wonderful book came out where the scientist used powerful microscopes to view in detail the fossils we allready had. His conclusion, outlined in his book "The Dinosaur Heresies", was that in fact they were warm blooded and far more mobile then had originally been thought.

Science is allways evolving PC, that's the nature of science. We build bigger and better instruments that are able to see further into the makeup of whatever it is you want to look at.

When I was born the accepted theory of mountain building was that the Earth was shrinking and as it shrank the skin (the crust) would stretch over harder rock and thus were mountains born. After 30 years of vigorous research we now know that that is ridiculous and the theory of plate tectonics has supplanted that. Now even plate tectonics is being revised with the theory of tectono stratigraphic terranes rising to explain problems with the classical (I feel weird using that term!) plate tectonic theory.

Evolutionary theory undergoes the same changes. I am certainly not trying to coerce you into my viewpoint. You are free to believe what you do, it is wonderful that you hold your faith so clearly. Just have the courtesy to do likewise with me.

Fossils are not that hard to form in a global flood where rapid burial happens. Fact is I am sure you are aware of things fossilizing in a short period of time like the miners hat,and boots were found fossilized,as well as many other objects that were found fossilized.

What is amazing is why all the transitional fossils connecting two different families are all supposedly extinct and are missing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yes brilliant minds do argue against me.

More often than not though, it's a brilliant person educated in something besides biology, telling a biologist they're wrong about biology.

And I repeat, speciation is observable, there is no debating whether or not it happens in nature.

"...there is no debating whether or not it happens in nature."

OMG...Al Gore is back!

"Gore has refused to debate time and time again. In fact, he has been forced
to use the tired term "The Debate Is Over" so many times, he may as well
have it stamped to his head."
Archived Blog: Al Gore Ducks Warming Debate (Updated)

I've already provided proof though, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you're insinuating.

If you'd like more proof through observable speciation, I'd be happy to provide it. It's up to you.

If everything is evolving why do we have fossils dated way back in time and we have the same organisms alive today and they show no change at all . Every group of organisms have mutations but we don't see change in these organisms,why ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Westwall and Drock continue to insist that what they KNOW is irrefutable, DESPITE the lack of evidence.

They bring evidence and valid logic; you are the superstitious one.

The symptom you're exhibiting is projection. You should seek professional help.

Valid logic of evidence that does not exist

 

[Youwerecreated]

"...there is no debating whether or not it happens in nature."

OMG...Al Gore is back!

"Gore has refused to debate time and time again. In fact, he has been forced
to use the tired term "The Debate Is Over" so many times, he may as well
have it stamped to his head."
Archived Blog: Al Gore Ducks Warming Debate (Updated)

I've already provided proof though, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you're insinuating.

If you'd like more proof through observable speciation, I'd be happy to provide it. It's up to you.

Did you say proof?

Sure.

1. In “The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution,” 2007, Koonin writes “Major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity….do not seem to fit the tree pattern that, following Darwin's original proposal, remains the dominant description of biological evolution.”
So….you're was wrong? Pretty much.

"In each of these pivotal nexuses in life's history, the principal "types" seem to appear rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization. No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms between different types are detectable.” Did you get that? ‘Intermediate forms’ are …..imaginary.

Again?
'No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms.'

And you said..."And I repeat, speciation is observable,,,"
You're sounding like..what...an empty barrel?

See, this guy is a real 'Doc.'

Wanna see?



2. Eugene V. Koonin (born October 26, 1956) is a Senior Investigator at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health[1], Bethesda, MD, USA . He is a recognised expert in the field of evolutionary andcomputational biology.
Koonin gained a Master of Science in 1978 and a PhD in 1983 in Molecular Biology from Department of Biology, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia. Eugene Koonin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And your expertise is.....?

Yeah todays evolutionist have a problem with yesterdays evolutionist that was honest about the theory.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I believe we now have over 10,000 colleges, universities and community colleges worldwide that teach evoultion in Biology as fact.
And a hand full of religous universities that do not.
Of course we will now hear that all of the 10,000 Biology teachers are left wing, liberal leaning, Marx worshipping, commie, pinko reds that also steal their grandmothers social security checks.
One only has to study the Dover v. Kitzmiller case in Pa. where a conservative Republican Bush appointed Federal Judge labeled the anti evolution "scholars" as frauds, liars and kooks. Perjury charges were almost brought in that case as the court testimony was ass backwards from the depositions taken.
And the fights we have had down south this way with the religous freaks that are offended that anyone dare deny their beliefs that God himself hocus pocused Adam and Eve one day with his Mr. Junior science kit sitting on his golden throne and sent them through the clouds to Eden. We beat them back with their stickers being placed on Biology books here in every science class that taught evolution. Add in the wars of the creationists wanting their "theory" taught in science class as "an alternative to evolution" instead of being taught in philosophy or religion class and you know why we are so frustrated and POed at the anti science religous kooks.
Yes, they are crazy and will do ANYTHING, including fabricating evidence to please God as illustrated in the Dover case.
So since I have never seen them enter into any school wherethe teaching of evolution is standard without using their scorched earth policy of win at all costs and who cares about facts as Onward Christian Soldiers is blaring in the background, I play on the same field as they do with their rules.
And win every time.

They also all teach the absurdity of a designer with no evidence to support their claim that there is no creator. That is not science when you rule out design because they don't have evidence of the Almighty. Even though they have no viable explanation as to life started on it's own.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I've already provided proof though, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you're insinuating.

If you'd like more proof through observable speciation, I'd be happy to provide it. It's up to you.

Did you say proof?

Sure.

1. In “The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution,” 2007, Koonin writes “Major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity….do not seem to fit the tree pattern that, following Darwin's original proposal, remains the dominant description of biological evolution.”
So….you're was wrong? Pretty much.

"In each of these pivotal nexuses in life's history, the principal "types" seem to appear rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization. No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms between different types are detectable.” Did you get that? ‘Intermediate forms’ are …..imaginary.

Again?
'No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms.'

And you said..."And I repeat, speciation is observable,,,"
You're sounding like..what...an empty barrel?

See, this guy is a real 'Doc.'

Wanna see?



2. Eugene V. Koonin (born October 26, 1956) is a Senior Investigator at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health[1], Bethesda, MD, USA . He is a recognised expert in the field of evolutionary andcomputational biology.
Koonin gained a Master of Science in 1978 and a PhD in 1983 in Molecular Biology from Department of Biology, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia. Eugene Koonin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And your expertise is.....?

My expertise is being able to post links that show those with expertise in biology telling us about observable speciation and proving speciation happens.

I didn't get an answer, would you like MORE proof than the proof already provided for speciation?

You can point to changes within a family but not change to a new family from another family.

 

[Youwerecreated]

How many here, instead of cutting and pasting, have actually gone before a school board, seen live court cases concerning the creationist/evolution high school science curriculum/text fights and been involved in the schools because they have children?
How many have taken Biology 101 in college and were taught the theory of evolution? Was it forced down your throat or was it taught as to why and the differences and the multiciplicity of organisms? And does one question the inverse of life's diversity? How can the similarities among organisms be explained?
Does the passion of one's political ideology and bias so strongly influence their reason and common sense that they never ask those questions?
As they pass those negative, anti science mores on to their children no wonder we trail the entire industrialized world in science and math graduates.

Look people have been educated in this theory for so long even the courts don't doubt it. But if they truly saw how little evidence supports the theory it would go away.

People are taught things that have never been observed and most don't realize it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I've taken biology and genetics, in college.

PC is also well educated in the field.

And you are right and the 10,000 professors are wrong?

It wouldn't be a first.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I've taken biology and genetics, in college.

PC is also well educated in the field.

And you are right and the 10,000 professors are wrong?

What 10,000 professors?

Incidentally, "professorhood" is no guarantee of being "right" about anything. Some of the most retarded losers I've ever met have been "professors".

I have came across some pretty whacky professors that smoked to much and I am not talking tabacco.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You know, there is an easy way to resolve the "evolutionist versus creationist" debate.

For the sake of arguement, let us start with the creationist idea that there was an intelligent engineer(please bear with me for abou a couple of sentences, evos or whatever you wish to name yourselves)

Given that hyp. The question now being asked is "HOW DID GOD CREATE EACH SPIECIES?" Now we enter into the starting point of evolution. Therefore you creationists can believe in god, and entertain the idea of evolution and other theories(if you have them) at the same time.

Nope he is so brilliant the designer that he deterimined the DNA information for each family and gave them the ability to adapt to a point. If you go beyond that ability you die.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Eugene V. Koonin:

"I changed "ready-made" to "abruptly", to avoid any ID allusions and added clarifications but, beyond that, there is little I can do because this is an important sentence that accurately and clearly portrays a crucial and, to the very best of my understanding, real feature of evolutionary transitions. Will this be used by the ID camp? Perhaps – if they read that far into the paper. However, I am afraid that, if our goal as evolutionary biologists is to avoid providing any grist for the ID mill, we should simply claim that Darwin, "in principle", solved all the problems of the origin of biological complexity in his eye story, and only minor details remain to be filled in. Actually, I think the position of some ultra-darwinists is pretty close to that. However, I believe that this is totally counter-productive and such a notion is outright false. And, the ID folks are clever in their own perverse way, they see through such false simplicity and seize on it. I think we (students of evolution) should openly admit that emergence of new levels of complexity is a complex problem and should try to work out solutions some of which could be distinctly non-orthodox; ID, however, does not happen to be a viable solution to any problem." (all emph. LOki)​

"...because this is an important sentence that accurately and clearly portrays a crucial and, to the very best of my understanding, real feature of evolutionary transitions. Will this be used by the ID camp? Perhaps –"


He is validating exactly what my post stated.

Sorry you couldn't understand that, Lowest.

Oh little turnip, you should actually read the paper; he is not validating your post at all. Sorry about your retarded luck.

I demonstrated to you that speciation has been, and is, observed in nature. Nothing in Koonin's paper refutes or denies that assertion.

Consider yourself dismissed, Potatohead.

Wow you have no respect your post clearly shows it and lack intellectual honesty.

 

[koshergrl]

Westwall and Drock continue to insist that what they KNOW is irrefutable, DESPITE the lack of evidence.

Wrong. We KNOW very little (comparatively), that's why we are allways looking. I have just shown you how every year we are presented with new facts that challenge the paradigm. Why do you insist on ignoring what I post? I have also posted evidence as has Loki that refutes your contention and you CHOOSE to ignore it. I am not responsible for your close mindedness. That's all on you.

What's truly sad is we are both creationists. I just understand that nature takes a lot longer to work her magic. You "believe" that God did everything in a few days, I "believe" that it took a hell of a lot longer. You remind me of the Albigensians who were hunted down and killed by the Spanish Inquisition because they argued about how many Angels could dance on the head of a pin. Imagine that. Entire regions of southern France were exterminated over that pithy a reason. That is the type of closed mindedness you are exibiting now.

No, it's really not. What is close minded is a Creationist who thinks that God isn't capable of creating a world that confounds men who refuse to accept his Word. It's sheer arrogance that you think you have figured out the creation timeline of the world, despite the fact that there is absolutely no way to know for sure.

And we don't know for sure. We think we have it down, then another discovery comes along and puts the lie to whatever the current fad is.

 

[LOki]

"...there is no debating whether or not it happens in nature."

OMG...Al Gore is back!

"Gore has refused to debate time and time again. In fact, he has been forced
to use the tired term "The Debate Is Over" so many times, he may as well
have it stamped to his head."
Archived Blog: Al Gore Ducks Warming Debate (Updated)

I've already provided proof though, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you're insinuating.

If you'd like more proof through observable speciation, I'd be happy to provide it. It's up to you.

If everything is evolving why do we have fossils dated way back in time and we have the same organisms alive today and they show no change at all . Every group of organisms have mutations but we don't see change in these organisms,why ?

You're such an idiot.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I've already provided proof though, I'm not avoiding anything. I'm actually doing the exact opposite of what you're insinuating.

If you'd like more proof through observable speciation, I'd be happy to provide it. It's up to you.

If everything is evolving why do we have fossils dated way back in time and we have the same organisms alive today and they show no change at all . Every group of organisms have mutations but we don't see change in these organisms,why ?

You're such an idiot.

Once again you fail to understand what was asked.

 

[LOki]

I believe we now have over 10,000 colleges, universities and community colleges worldwide that teach evoultion in Biology as fact.
And a hand full of religous universities that do not.
Of course we will now hear that all of the 10,000 Biology teachers are left wing, liberal leaning, Marx worshipping, commie, pinko reds that also steal their grandmothers social security checks.
One only has to study the Dover v. Kitzmiller case in Pa. where a conservative Republican Bush appointed Federal Judge labeled the anti evolution "scholars" as frauds, liars and kooks. Perjury charges were almost brought in that case as the court testimony was ass backwards from the depositions taken.
And the fights we have had down south this way with the religous freaks that are offended that anyone dare deny their beliefs that God himself hocus pocused Adam and Eve one day with his Mr. Junior science kit sitting on his golden throne and sent them through the clouds to Eden. We beat them back with their stickers being placed on Biology books here in every science class that taught evolution. Add in the wars of the creationists wanting their "theory" taught in science class as "an alternative to evolution" instead of being taught in philosophy or religion class and you know why we are so frustrated and POed at the anti science religous kooks.
Yes, they are crazy and will do ANYTHING, including fabricating evidence to please God as illustrated in the Dover case.
So since I have never seen them enter into any school wherethe teaching of evolution is standard without using their scorched earth policy of win at all costs and who cares about facts as Onward Christian Soldiers is blaring in the background, I play on the same field as they do with their rules.
And win every time.

They also all teach the absurdity of a designer with no evidence to support their claim that there is no creator.

Nice try. There IS evidence that there is no Creator.

That is not science when you rule out design because they don't have evidence of the Almighty.

There is insufficient evidence to PROVE there's no Creator, so your strawman regarding ruling out design is invalid; science does NOT rule out a Designer or a Creator.

Even though they have no viable explanation as to life started on it's own.

No one says life started on it's own. The scientific theory of abiogenesis asserts that life is a natural process that had its origins in natural processes. Your anthropomorphizing paradigm does not apply.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Did you say proof?

Sure.

1. In “The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution,” 2007, Koonin writes “Major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity….do not seem to fit the tree pattern that, following Darwin's original proposal, remains the dominant description of biological evolution.”
So….you're was wrong? Pretty much.

"In each of these pivotal nexuses in life's history, the principal "types" seem to appear rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization. No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms between different types are detectable.” Did you get that? ‘Intermediate forms’ are …..imaginary.

Again?
'No intermediate "grades" or intermediate forms.'

And you said..."And I repeat, speciation is observable,,,"
You're sounding like..what...an empty barrel?

See, this guy is a real 'Doc.'

Wanna see?



2. Eugene V. Koonin (born October 26, 1956) is a Senior Investigator at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health[1], Bethesda, MD, USA . He is a recognised expert in the field of evolutionary andcomputational biology.
Koonin gained a Master of Science in 1978 and a PhD in 1983 in Molecular Biology from Department of Biology, Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia. Eugene Koonin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


And your expertise is.....?

My expertise is being able to post links that show those with expertise in biology telling us about observable speciation and proving speciation happens.

I didn't get an answer, would you like MORE proof than the proof already provided for speciation?

So here are the arguments of Westwall and Drock:

Westwall: There is no evidence, therefore it must be true!

Drock: It's true because I BELIEVE IT!

What amazing scholarship! What profundity!

Yes, I "BELIEVE" observable proven facts.

Now you've gotten your emotional hysterics in, I understand you have a high quota for that everyday but now that that's out of the way, can you give me specifics about the proof of speciation I provided that you take issue with?

 

[koshergrl]

You "believe" what sounds good to you, personally. It has nothing to do with fact. It has to do with what jibes best with what you've picked up here and there, and what confirms your firmly held belief that there is no possibility that the Bible holds any answers.

You discard the rest. It has nothing to do with fact, and you've shown you really have a very flimsy grasp of the science, as well as the meaning of the terms you like to throw around. All you're doing is collecting snippets that confirm your own bias, and rejecting out of hand everything that doesn't, with absolutely no regard to truth or fact or objectivity.

 

[Dr.Drock]

You "believe" what sounds good to you, personally. It has nothing to do with fact. It has to do with what jibes best with what you've picked up here and there, and what confirms your firmly held belief that there is no possibility that the Bible holds any answers.

You discard the rest. It has nothing to do with fact, and you've shown you really have a very flimsy grasp of the science, as well as the meaning of the terms you like to throw around. All you're doing is collecting snippets that confirm your own bias, and rejecting out of hand everything that doesn't, with absolutely no regard to truth or fact or objectivity.

So.........nothing about the link with proof of speciation? Sad.

I dont' discard the Bible, hence my sig. But yes i discard it scientifically as every rational science mind does.

I can't force you to "believe" scientific facts, as long as you aren't educating young minds than there's nothing to worry about.

 

[LOki]

Based on your reaction to the Brit accent in the silly vid, I bet you've purchased a whole bunch of 'As Seen on TV' cookware, huh?


Instead, check out the following from the bulletin of the Chicago Museum of Natural History:

"We are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much -- ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information." (Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, Chicago, 50:22-29)


Again?
" By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information."

Westy, stop behaving like a martinet of the ideology, the creation myth of our time, and consider what the lack of evidence implies.

The lack of evidence implys that fossils are remarkable things PC. It is so incredibly difficult for fossils to form that most people have no idea how rare they truly are. When dinosaurs were first classified it was assumed they were cold blooded, then a wonderful book came out where the scientist used powerful microscopes to view in detail the fossils we allready had. His conclusion, outlined in his book "The Dinosaur Heresies", was that in fact they were warm blooded and far more mobile then had originally been thought.

Science is allways evolving PC, that's the nature of science. We build bigger and better instruments that are able to see further into the makeup of whatever it is you want to look at.

When I was born the accepted theory of mountain building was that the Earth was shrinking and as it shrank the skin (the crust) would stretch over harder rock and thus were mountains born. After 30 years of vigorous research we now know that that is ridiculous and the theory of plate tectonics has supplanted that. Now even plate tectonics is being revised with the theory of tectono stratigraphic terranes rising to explain problems with the classical (I feel weird using that term!) plate tectonic theory.

Evolutionary theory undergoes the same changes. I am certainly not trying to coerce you into my viewpoint. You are free to believe what you do, it is wonderful that you hold your faith so clearly. Just have the courtesy to do likewise with me.

Fossils are not that hard to form in a global flood where rapid burial happens. Fact is I am sure you are aware of things fossilizing in a short period of time like the miners hat,and boots were found fossilized,as well as many other objects that were found fossilized.

What is amazing is why all the transitional fossils connecting two different families are all supposedly extinct and are missing.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj0s4-v0bPE]Rapid fossilization of hats debunked - YouTube[/ame]