Science under attack in Texas

[Immanuel]

This isn't to get you to conform your opinions to the implication of the Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection of common ancestry or even speciation, but to demonstrate why scientists and those who believe what science is and does tend to accept why common ancestry and speciation are logical conclusions to make in light of all the evidence. If anything, I think you'll find it interesting.

This is a part of Carl Sagan's Cosmos series that deals directy with evolution (though this particular episode is about whether time travel is realistically possible and the implications of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity). This is about 6 minutes long and he doesn't get into the details but its just a rough example of what I was saying above.

Cheers!

Unless I am missing something, there is no link! Talk about me being an OLD MAN! Show me the "Missing Link"

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

That is not my position. There is room for discussion. Early on I asked for anyone to provide me with a better explanation to account for common pseudogenes in primates. Specifically humans and chimpanzees. It fits perfectly well and indeed would be expected in an evolutionary model that includes common ancestry. Pseudogenes are the markers we use all the time to determine paternity and consanguine relationships. We use them in our legal system to convict or exonerate criminals. But when the same pseudogenes also show not only humanity's relationship with other animals but matches temporal distance of kinship expected by evolution in most cases, suddenly there must be some unnamed problem with using them as evidence. I feel that if someone denies genetic evidence for evolution then it is only honestly consistent that they adamantly oppose the use of DNA in our legal system for paternity or criminal conviction since it is based on the same understanding and same types of markers.

You see, these are not just statements. The evidence is tangible in the cells of every living thing. I believe you have a responsibility put forth an effort to understand what evidence leads scientists to accept a particular conclusion. Scientists are not accepting a statement. They are observing and interpreting and then justifying the interpretation with logical inference, deductions, experimentation, etc... It is wholly different than the baptismal example you gave. An example I am familiar with since I grew up in a complete immersion church.

The most obvious way the two are different is in the results. There is no general consensus opinion on baptism in christianity. It is given different weight and different meaning by a variety of churches. I would not expect christianity to ever reach a general consensus about baptism among all the churches throughout the world. But scientists have reached a general consensus about common ancestry throughout the world. How? They're people too, just like christians- with their own opinions, doubts, and beliefs. But it works because science relies on logic and observation of the world, not on authoritative sources like leaders or scripture. People can have differing opinions. But logic generates consensus. It's the same reason we don't have differing opinions on what 2 + 2 equals.

Sure, you might throw out tons of "documentation" backing up your beliefs, but the fact remains, that I am unwilling to take a scientist's word for it until he can show me how whales become dogs or monkeys become humans. Simply saying that it happens is not sufficient for me.

Scientists have shown "how" those things could happen. As I said, I believe you must take some responsibility to educate yourself on how scientists say these things could happen if you find it doubtful. Do you accept when scientists tell you the Earth goes around the sun? Do you accept when science tells that we are made of atoms? Do you accept when science tells you that germs cause disease? It is inconsistent to only accept scientists at their word when one chooses to. It is the same sort of mentality that lets people pick and choose out of religion the parts they want to accept and just conveniently deny the uncomfortable parts.

My friend, first let me state unequivocally that I have very much enjoyed this conversation. Clearly, I have not convinced you that you are wrong... not that I even tried, because I simply do not know how life on Earth was created nor did I ever claim to know.

Second, I am not convinced in the common ancestry theory. I accept it and always have, as a possibility, but I am still not satisfied with the evidence that is laid out. You mention the similarities in the DNA between humans and chimps. I believe I have heard and read that the pig also shares a very close relationship in DNA with the human being, but despite what my mother used to say whenever she entered my room, I am not a pig!

Third, I have repeatedly stated in this thread that I believed scientists were on the right track, but that someday a break though will occur that will answer more of the questions. I fail to see the problem with waiting for that break through.

How will my remaining unconvinced affect my life or the lives of everyone with whom I come in contact?

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Your faith is blinding you (did you follow the Dover, PA trial? Apparently not) and I never suggested that it belongs in a science class. You're being disingenuous.

In reference to the Dover Trial, No, I did not follow it.

I do know what it was about and I will state that I had no problem at all with the school board's presentation about ID that was challenged by the ACLU, although, as I stated before, I would not have brought it up at all. I simply would have acknowledged it if a student asked a question about it... quite possibly with something very similar to the statements that the school board wished to use.

The fact that the court ruled that The Dover School Board could not use that statement doesn't change my opinion at all. Simply because the courts rule something as acceptable or unacceptable doesn't mean something is right or wrong. The courts have ruled that it is acceptable to kill unborn human beings. That doesn't make it right. The court has ruled that the government can confiscate personal property for the good of the corporation that want to develop the property (Kelo v. New London)... that doesn't make it right.

I am a law abiding citizen... okay, one with a heavy foot who occasionally drives faster than the posted speed limit... okay more often than not... who would of course abide by the court's decision in the matter of Kitzmiller et. al. v Dover, but that does not mean that I agree with the decision.

Immie

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Unless I am missing something, there is no link! Talk about me being an OLD MAN! Show me the "Missing Link"

Immie

Hey, I'm only 31! 31 is the new 21.

Oh, man, that's almost too much of a coincidence: that I forgot the link and you got the opportunity to say "Show me the missing" link to believe it wasn't on purpose.

Here it is:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W65ZOvJ-4ek&feature=PlayList&p=DC50E11C4B81F76B&index=54]YouTube - Carl Sagan (COSMOS TV Series) EPISODE 8/13 (PART 6 of 7)[/ame]

I hope you enjoyed that opportunity!

 

[BrianH]

Will never happen. Texans wouldn't know what to do with Mardi Gras.

They should teach in Texas public schools that Colorado is a hot bed for atheism and homosexuality so they'll stop coming here. Even though Colorado will go bankrupt from losing the majority of its tourism business, it'll still be worth it. Pretty soon, if things continue like they are, Colorado will be renamed Colorady.

Hey, with less Texans in Colorado, that might attract other tourists.

LoL... what a jackass. Do you have any reason to "hate Texas" other than it's contradiction to your assinine personality?

And by the way, Texans would call it "Colorada" and not "Colorady." Shows how much you know about Texas.

You must have gotten your ass whooped by a Texan when you were a kid. Not suprised though. They always talk about Austin, TX being full of "steers and queers", but what they forget to tell you, is that the "queers" come from Colorado.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

LoL... what a jackass. Do you have any reason to "hate Texas" other than it's contradiction to your assinine personality?

Nope, you pretty much nailed it on the head: Texans are big fuckin' idiots and that's the opposite of me. If I'm a jackass, at least I'm not a Texans, and I don't type Lol.

And by the way, Texans would call it "Colorada" and not "Colorady." Shows how much you know about Texas.

Yeah, you're right. I don't know much about'em because I try to limit my exposure to them. That way I don't catch whatever they have.

You must have gotten your ass whooped by a Texan when you were a kid. Not suprised though. They always talk about Austin, TX being full of "steers and queers", but what they forget to tell you, is that the "queers" come from Colorado.

Actually I've never even been in a fight with a Texan. When I was in the Marine Corps, they talked about ALL people from Texas being steers or queers. Never heard it about Colorado, though. I don't see any horns on you...

"OMG! LOL! Ooh, snap!"

 

[JohnStOnge]

Countless experiments have confirmed that the quantum mechanical model of the universe will time and time again predict with more accuracy than anyone could have imagined, and far more accurately than classical mechanics which could not even account for certain anomalies in the orbit of mercury.

How many experiments have demonstrated that if somebody on earth steps off of a 10 story building they failed to fall in the absence of mechanical intervention?

It's ridiculous to believe you will win the lottery. It doesn't mean it is impossible.

People win the lottery all the time. Would you care to tell me how often the "rule" I'm talking about has been violated? Hint: The answer is zero.

 

[BrianH]

LoL... what a jackass. Do you have any reason to "hate Texas" other than it's contradiction to your assinine personality?

Nope, you pretty much nailed it on the head: Texans are big fuckin' idiots and that's the opposite of me. If I'm a jackass, at least I'm not a Texans, and I don't type Lol.

And by the way, Texans would call it "Colorada" and not "Colorady." Shows how much you know about Texas.

Yeah, you're right. I don't know much about'em because I try to limit my exposure to them. That way I don't catch whatever they have.

You must have gotten your ass whooped by a Texan when you were a kid. Not suprised though. They always talk about Austin, TX being full of "steers and queers", but what they forget to tell you, is that the "queers" come from Colorado.

Actually I've never even been in a fight with a Texan. When I was in the Marine Corps, they talked about ALL people from Texas being steers or queers. Never heard it about Colorado, though. I don't see any horns on you...

"OMG! LOL! Ooh, snap!"

Snap? Are you serious? LOLOLOL Are you 12? LOL.

This is the dumbest frickin post I've ever seen. The "big fuckin' idiot" is the guy who can't distinguish between different people because he lumps them as "Texans." What a duesch-bag...lol. And since you didn't catch it, I said you're assinine, so technically, if a Texan is the opposite of you, he/she would NOT be assinine. Texans Idiots?? LoL...

As far as trash, there's more in-breeding in Colorado than Texas.

Did a Texan still your boyfriend?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Snap? Are you serious? LOLOLOL Are you 12? LOL.

This is the dumbest frickin post I've ever seen. The "big fuckin' idiot" is the guy who can't distinguish between different people because he lumps them as "Texans." What a duesch-bag...lol. And since you didn't catch it, I said you're assinine, so technically, if a Texan is the opposite of you, he/she would NOT be assinine. Texans Idiots?? LoL...

As far as trash, there's more in-breeding in Colorado than Texas.

Did a Texan still your boyfriend?

Perhaps if your reading comprehension skills were beyond that of a 12 year old you would have ascertained that my post was sarcastic. You would also have understood that my earlier posts about Texans were also meant to be funny and not taken seriously.

I have many friends from Texas and I don't honestly lump all Texans together; however, the widely-held stereotype about Texans is apparently one you fit into nicely. So go have fun driving your old beat-up truck in some mud, drinking Budweiser, smoking meth, tipping cows, handling snakes at church, and living in the trailer park. I hope, for your sake, that one day you realize that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality and you'll come to accept yourself. Good luck and God bless.

 

[N4mddissent]

Countless experiments have confirmed that the quantum mechanical model of the universe will time and time again predict with more accuracy than anyone could have imagined, and far more accurately than classical mechanics which could not even account for certain anomalies in the orbit of mercury.

How many experiments have demonstrated that if somebody on earth steps off of a 10 story building they failed to fall in the absence of mechanical intervention?

It's ridiculous to believe you will win the lottery. It doesn't mean it is impossible.

People win the lottery all the time. Would you care to tell me how often the "rule" I'm talking about has been violated? Hint: The answer is zero.

None. And nobody would expect themnot to fail. For example, you could play the lottery from the time you were born until the day you die, and the odds are that you will live your entire life never winning the lottery.

Your argument is completely fallacious. It is exactly the same as arguing that the solar system cannot orbit the galaxy or that Neptune cannot orbit the sun. Nobody has ever seen either of these happen. Obviously, this does not make such things impossible. The reason we know these things will happen is because we calculated them mathematically- just like quantum physics. This is a weak argument from which to disagree with virtually every physicist since Einstein.

As a matter of fact, the probability of not falling from the building is so low, that it would be astonishing is it happened during the expected lifetime of the universe, much less the expected existence of the earth. Just like it would be unexpected to win the lottery in your life. But an extremely low probability is not the same in fact as an impossibility.

 

[BrianH]

Snap? Are you serious? LOLOLOL Are you 12? LOL.

This is the dumbest frickin post I've ever seen. The "big fuckin' idiot" is the guy who can't distinguish between different people because he lumps them as "Texans." What a duesch-bag...lol. And since you didn't catch it, I said you're assinine, so technically, if a Texan is the opposite of you, he/she would NOT be assinine. Texans Idiots?? LoL...

As far as trash, there's more in-breeding in Colorado than Texas.

Did a Texan still your boyfriend?

Perhaps if your reading comprehension skills were beyond that of a 12 year old you would have ascertained that my post was sarcastic. You would also have understood that my earlier posts about Texans were also meant to be funny and not taken seriously.

I have many friends from Texas and I don't honestly lump all Texans together; however, the widely-held stereotype about Texans is apparently one you fit into nicely. So go have fun driving your old beat-up truck in some mud, drinking Budweiser, smoking meth, tipping cows, handling snakes at church, and living in the trailer park. I hope, for your sake, that one day you realize that there's nothing wrong with homosexuality and you'll come to accept yourself. Good luck and God bless.

Pardon, but you're not very funny, even if you tried.

I'll respond to your "characterization" one by one.

1. My truck's new and I've never "mudded" in any vehicle I've owned.
2. I drink Coors, Budweiser is bottled horse-piss.
3. I've never done any illegal drugs or even smoked cigarettes for that matter.
4. I've never tipped a cow, nor ever owned any.
5. The only "snake" I handle is my own. I attend the Catholic church with my wife.
6. And there is a trailer park a few miles from here, but I don't live in it.
7. As far as homosexuality, you're gay-dar is off...but it's good to know you're thinking about it.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got to grab my cowboy-hat and ride-my horse down to the local pantry.

And by the way, if you're not going to lump everyone together, maybe you should indicate that in your posts. Or maybe put (j/k) after your sarcasm and jokes. Considering that typed words do not have inflexion or tone, you're right, I didn't understand that your remarks were meant to be sarcastic. Maybe you should try using the roll-eyes emoticon.

 

[Diuretic]

I spent a few weeks in Texas some years ago a mix of tourist and work experience and during that time I saw various bits of it (not all of course). The variety was amazing. And I'm not pissing in anyone's pocket.

 

[catzmeow]

I spent a few weeks in Texas some years ago a mix of tourist and work experience and during that time I saw various bits of it (not all of course). The variety was amazing. And I'm not pissing in anyone's pocket.

I love Texas. There is an incredible amount of diversity there. My favorite Texas city is Houston, which has incredible food (the best Viet and Mexican anywhere in the states), a highly refined technology infrastructure, great hotels, and warm and down to earth people.

Colorado is fine, but there are every bit as many backward ass country fucks in Colorado as there are in Texas.

 

[BrianH]

I spent a few weeks in Texas some years ago a mix of tourist and work experience and during that time I saw various bits of it (not all of course). The variety was amazing. And I'm not pissing in anyone's pocket.

I love Texas. There is an incredible amount of diversity there. My favorite Texas city is Houston, which has incredible food (the best Viet and Mexican anywhere in the states), a highly refined technology infrastructure, great hotels, and warm and down to earth people.

Colorado is fine, but there are every bit as many backward ass country fucks in Colorado as there are in Texas.

Exactly...Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Colorado. Went there when I was in the 8th grade, and returned for my honeymoon. I plan on returning to hunt mule deer or elk within the next few years. But I will say this, I COULDN'T WAIT to get back to Texas. I think we all think our home state is the best state in the Union, and I'm no different. To me, when someone talks shit about Texas, it's just as bad as talking shit about my house and family. I will say that Texas is FULL of retarded, uneducated, and jackass hicks who are as ignorant as the day is long. But as Catz put it, there's loads in Colorado as well. Fortunately, I'm an educated hick.

 

[catzmeow]

I think we all think our home state is the best state in the Union, and I'm no different. To me, when someone talks shit about Texas, it's just as bad as talking shit about my house and family. I will say that Texas is FULL of retarded, uneducated, and jackass hicks who are as ignorant as the day is long. But as Catz put it, there's loads in Colorado as well. Fortunately, I'm an educated hick.

Me too.

Y'all just wish you were from Missouri.

 

[KittenKoder]

Texas is one of those states where if you don't like the political climate in one city just move to the next one.

 

[Diuretic]

I spent a few weeks in Texas some years ago a mix of tourist and work experience and during that time I saw various bits of it (not all of course). The variety was amazing. And I'm not pissing in anyone's pocket.

I love Texas. There is an incredible amount of diversity there. My favorite Texas city is Houston, which has incredible food (the best Viet and Mexican anywhere in the states), a highly refined technology infrastructure, great hotels, and warm and down to earth people.

Colorado is fine, but there are every bit as many backward ass country fucks in Colorado as there are in Texas.

Houston has some great bars too!

 

[JohnStOnge]

None. And nobody would expect themnot to fail. For example, you could play the lottery from the time you were born until the day you die, and the odds are that you will live your entire life never winning the lottery.

Your argument is completely fallacious. It is exactly the same as arguing that the solar system cannot orbit the galaxy or that Neptune cannot orbit the sun. Nobody has ever seen either of these happen. Obviously, this does not make such things impossible. The reason we know these things will happen is because we calculated them mathematically- just like quantum physics. This is a weak argument from which to disagree with virtually every physicist since Einstein.

As a matter of fact, the probability of not falling from the building is so low, that it would be astonishing is it happened during the expected lifetime of the universe, much less the expected existence of the earth. Just like it would be unexpected to win the lottery in your life. But an extremely low probability is not the same in fact as an impossibility.

Again, whether I personally win the lottery or not, various lotteries have been won numerous time. The realzation of the low probability event have been observed numerous times. I don't see how my position is the same as arguing that, say, Neptue cannot orbit the sun. We can observe that Neptune orbits the sun so taking that position can be empircally contradicted. In order to empirically contradict the position I've taken, you're going to have to find an example in which it has been contradicted. And there is no such example.

Besides, we're still taking about dramatic differences in certainty. Go ahead and think there is some miniscule doubt about stepping off a tall building and falling in the absences of mechanical intervention if you wish. But you know what will happen if you conduct 1,000 experiments as to whether or not that will happen. Now, think about what might happen if you conduct 1,000 experiments to see if populations of single celled organisms will give rise to multicellular organisms. Are you confident that even one will end in "success?"

 

[JohnStOnge]

The reason we know these things will happen is because we calculated them mathematically- just like quantum physics. .

I have a lot of respect for the intelligence of anyone who can be called a physicist. However, I do roll my eyes sometimes at the way in which they appear to think that things have to be so because "we calculated them mathematically." And I like math. In fact, I've been a research statistician. But this thing where they look at their equations and think that's necessarily the reality is something I must admit I have to shake my head at.

Like the "dark matter" and "dark energy" things. The math doesn't work so they just make something up to make it work. If they actually observe dark matter, let me know. Maybe they will. But this "it has to exists because the math says so" thing is a bit much.

 

[N4mddissent]

The reason we know these things will happen is because we calculated them mathematically- just like quantum physics. .

I have a lot of respect for the intelligence of anyone who can be called a physicist. However, I do roll my eyes sometimes at the way in which they appear to think that things have to be so because "we calculated them mathematically." And I like math. In fact, I've been a research statistician. But this thing where they look at their equations and think that's necessarily the reality is something I must admit I have to shake my head at.

Like the "dark matter" and "dark energy" things. The math doesn't work so they just make something up to make it work. If they actually observe dark matter, let me know. Maybe they will. But this "it has to exists because the math says so" thing is a bit much.

It depends on what you mean by "observe". Dark matter, by definition cannot be "seen", however they have observed gravitational lensing caused by the motion of dark matter through a region of space. Gravitational lensing will only occur when there is some mass present, bending light. The fact that they observed the lensing effect without actually being able to see the mass is strong evidence for the reality of dark matter.

Dark energy is much more nebulous, and there are some in the science community who propose alternatives to the idea of dark energy. I don't think there is any sort of confident consensus on the concept of dark energy. It is a temporary fill-in until the entire phenomenon can be better understood. Calling it dark energy is the same as saying some unknown energy, and that's about as vague as physicists who love precision can get.

Quantum mechanics on the other hand, is what has made the digital age possible. It translates into real world applications. Many researchers are right now developing true quantum computers that could be the next step in information processing. And things like the two-slit experiment with light allows one to see the weirdness of quantum physics translated into real life.