Evolution is a well founded theory, yet many people resist the idea. (Page 5)

arnym
arnym: Just popped in to post an appropriate quote:

"Never try to kill a man when he's busy committing suicide."
(Edited by arnym)
7 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur: Given that I have no suicidal tendencies.. I hope that you will seek help for yours. Good Luck!
7 days ago Report
0
CorwinCorwin (Wireclub Moderator)
Corwin: @ Zeffur

You claim that Evolution and Science itself is based on "bad assumptions".

Well... one basic "assumption" is what Science is based on... called Naturalism.
That everything has a natural and explainable cause.
Science came up with Evolution because it explains "naturally" how simple life could evolve and become more complex life, and it fits all the available evidence.

What is the alternative theory that you are suggesting?... And does it have any bearing on "Naturalism"?
Can you use Science to support this "alternative theory", and is it Scientifically "sound"?

I have yet to hear any "alternative theory"... just rhetoric of Evolution being "wrong".

And although you deny it, your "alternative" is of supernatural origin. Hardly scientific.
It denies Naturalism. And "divine intervention" is something that would be very hard to prove... impossible to prove from a scientific standpoint... unless "divine intervention" can be qualified and quantified into a new branch of Science.

This phenomenon would have to be observed and measured.
7 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur: @Corwin:

re: "That everything has a natural and explainable cause."

Suppose for a second that my belief is valid--what would that tell you about your basis for science? If proven true, your assumption would be proven false.

You can certainly believe "That everything has a natural and explainable cause." however that may not be true. To what is the universe expanding into?? What is reality & is it independent beyond our minds? What is consciousness?? Why do we all have a conscience? How can we rationally explain sightings of spirits, angels, out of body near death experiences, etc. The old 'it's just a bunch of random brain farts or incontinuity in the brain, etc", fall woefully flat & are all essentially worthless attempts to discount/dismiss such things.

re: "Science came up with Evolution because it explains "naturally" how simple life could evolve and become more complex life, and *it fits all the available evidence*."

That is a belief--not a fact. There is no credible evidence that supports the notion that natural procreation & mutations have ever led to a speciation-level morphology or a common ancestor or to any descendants. It's all unproven & 'believed' to be true. There is no way to test/verify such a claim--which is essentially why evolution is pseudo-scientific & not scientific. Their fossil claims of B evolved from A are ALL totally subjective. They cherry pick fossils & many people believe the *claimed* progenitors are merely just unrelated extinct species that have similar physical traits (just like humans & monkeys have similar physical traits). And there is no way to credibly use DNA to prove such claims--so essentially none of what they offer is verifiable--it's all totally subjective opinions/claims.

re: "What is the alternative theory that you are suggesting?."

I have no obligation to offer any alternative theory in order to reject the ToE & 'evolution' for being non credible & unconvincing rubbish. Nevertheless, I have offered an alternative in past posts--which you are free to consider as you wish.

re: "And does it have any bearing on "Naturalism"?"

I don't know the answer to that question. We don't know if there is a supernatural or natural explanation for God. My belief is that we don't know enough about God to know that God is supernatural or not. Some people believe that He is supernatural because the Bible shows God spoke our universe into existence. I'm pretty sure we can't know that for certain unless God can prove it to us. Either way--we humans have no way of independently ascertaining that information on our own.

re: "Can you use Science to support this "alternative theory", and is it Scientifically "sound"?"

Possibly. If an alien allowed us to study it or we captured one, we should be able to use our tools to study it to some degree. We can't know if our scientific tools could be useful to prove the veracity of any story that an alien might tell us about the origin of the universe or life on earth, however.

re: "And "divine intervention" is something that would be very hard to prove... impossible to prove from a scientific standpoint... unless "divine intervention" can be qualified and quantified into a new branch of Science."

On that we agree.
(Edited by zeffur)
7 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Have a watch of these, keep ya busy for a while



1st of a series of them (14)
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
7 days ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: zeffur is tarded guys, there is literally nothing you could say that would convince him regardless of the amount of evidence you present, it has been shown to him dozens of times in various conversations and his rhetoric is identical in all circumstances regardless of the content of the actual conversation. The fact of the matter is, he is a creationist and that is the only answer he is even willing to entertain.
(Edited by If the stars fell)
7 days ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:

"New bee species discovered in Portugal
IN NEWS · 07-02-2019 10:16:00

A new species of bee has been discovered in Portugal.

The discovery was made by Portuguese biologist Ana Gonçalves in the Vale do Guadiana Natural Park.

The protosmia lusitanica, a small black and orange bee, is now logged in an international species data base, after first being spotted in 2016." TPN

7 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
7 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur: There are millions of different species of organisms on earth--discovering & cataloging a new one isn't evidence of evolution.
6 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur:
re: "...The fact of the matter is, he is a creationist and that is the only answer he is even willing to entertain"

Gotta love nitwits... The truth is that I've considered many explanations for life on earth and found all of them unconvincing. My final conclusion is that 'evolution' is worthless drivel that has ZERO sound foundation. I also believe non life + natural forces does not magically produce complex life/DNA--your delusions may differ from my rationalizations.

Believe what you will--it isn't important to what I've written for others to consider for themselves.

You only have your nuts in a bunch because you know what you believe is rubbish--but, you don't have the integrity to admit the truth.
(Edited by zeffur)
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: I do agree that discovering a previously unknown species is not evidence of evolution.
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: Zeffur, Referring to the alien visitors you postulate: What do you believe would have been the process or event that brought them into existence as a life form?
(Edited by arnym)
6 days ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: Evolution is an observable fact, bacteria and viruses evolve constantly which is why you need periodic inoculation to common diseases and why bacteria become resistant to things like antibiotics, yes, this is reality. You can also force evolution to happen through selective breeding using the same method as nature normally would for both improved genetics as well as genetic flaws for aesthetic appeal, we also know and utilize this all the time.

Scientists have also produced generations of bacteria that cannot interbreed through isolation and separation particularly in ecoli which is a clear sign of speciation which only becomes more divergent over time.

The fact that this old fart doesnt know shit and may choose to swap around labels to suit his narrative is irrelevant he can contest it until the day he dies, he will be wrong regardless.
6 days ago Report
0
If the stars fell
If the stars fell: and yes by the way... if you would make the claim of alien intervention all you are doing is moving the goal post, yes this also applies to god.
6 days ago Report
0
duncan124
duncan124:

Hold on! Something must have made the bees actually change.

If they did it once they could do it again.
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: @If the stars fell: Re. raising bacteria that cannot interbreed. Can you point me to a reference? - hopefully one suitable for reading by a lay person. I'd be interested in the details of how it's done. 'Use it or lose it' takes on a whole new dimension.

I'm not opposed to the theory of evolution but I don't see the creation of non-interbreeding individuals from a species, equating to creation of a new species. There has to be more to it than that, or I'm misunderstanding you.
(Edited by arnym)
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: @duncan124: ... "Something must have made the bees actually change. If they did it once they could do it again."

This only makes sense if you already believe the bees "did it once' - i.e. evolved, and are not "originals." So you're posing your own belief in evolution as evidence that it exists. That's circular argument & it doesn't work.

I believe evolution happens but the discovery of these bees doesn't prove it.
(Edited by arnym)
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
(Post deleted by arnym 6 days ago)
zeffur
zeffur: re: "arnym: Zeffur, Referring to the alien visitors you postulate: What do you believe would have been the process or event that brought them into existence as a life form?"

That is unknown--but I sure don't see the rubbish postulated by the ToE as having any useful merit in explaining how that may have occurred. No scientific theory can answer that question--we can only speculate about it.
6 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur: @If the stars fell:
re: "Evolution is an observable fact, bacteria and viruses evolve constantly which is why you need periodic inoculation to common diseases and why bacteria become resistant to things like antibiotics, yes, this is reality."

Every one of those changes results in just more bacteria or viruses--not any new species of duck or any other true macro morphology. What you call evolution on microscopic organisms isn't 'evolution' except in the minds of nitwits & pretenders. You know full well I've been referring to primordial soup to mankind evolution--which 'evolution' hasn't a SHRED of credible evidence/proof that any such natural procreation or mutations have caused. Stop piddling in your microbiological pool & grow a pair.

re: "You can also force evolution to happen through selective breeding "

Once again that is NOT evolution. All dogs are still dogs--they don't become dog-cats or any other species. The variations that you see in dogs just proves how much natural variation is possible within a species. There are NO common ancestors--that's total unproven caca that your kind accepts because you haven't got the good sense to understand how you've been hoodwinked. Grow a clue already. Look for the credible evidence that jibes with their claims--there isn't any!

re: "Scientists have also produced generations of bacteria that cannot interbreed through isolation and separation particularly in ecoli which is a clear sign of speciation which only becomes more divergent over time."

Once again--that isn't evolution it's down breeding (i.e. forced near-extinction) a certain strain of bacteria--NOTHING BUT BACTERIA IS THE RESULT" There are no morphological changes--those are not new species--they are just different bacteria.

re: "The fact that this old fart doesnt know shit and may choose to swap around labels to suit his narrative is irrelevant he can contest it until the day he dies, he will be wrong regardless."

That fact that you are a clueless minion is your defect, not mine.
(Edited by zeffur)
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: @zefflur: Since you have no scientific theory and can only speculate about how aliens could come to exist, yet you believe that they do exist; what IS your speculation?
6 days ago Report
1
arnym
arnym: "Once again that (selective breeding) is NOT evolution."

This part is true.
6 days ago Report
0
zeffur
zeffur: Evolution has NO credible evidence to back up their claims/conclusions. They misread the evidence & misrepresent it all the time. Their claims are untestable & therefore not based on the scientific method. They have NO SCIENTIFIC THEORY--they have pseudo-scientific rubbish.

Do some research on ET evidence throughout recorded human civilization & you will see all the hard evidence that shows humanity has indeed had many encounters with ETs. The Holy Bible is one such document, if read properly. It clearly shows how an alien being called God created Adam from the dust of the earth (which would be necessary to make a carbon base creature to survive on earth) and they put Adam to sleep, removed a rib (presumably for the rich marrow) and made a modified clone who was named Eve.
Furthermore, Jesus ascended into the clouds in the presence of many of his followers when he went to heaven to be with God. We would call that a tractor beam or something similar to that. I speculate there was a space craft of some kind hidden in the clouds to receive him & to take him into heaven--because no one can live in the clouds or space otherwise--they'd freeze to death long before exploding in low pressure orbit.

Go do some research--you'll see much evidence of ETs having been to earth.
(Edited by zeffur)
6 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver:

bye bye jebeers!
(Edited by Angry Beaver)
6 days ago Report
0
arnym
arnym: The oracle has spooken!
6 days ago Report
1