Scientific Evidence for Universal Common Descent

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
I don’t know. I don’t feel like taking the time to search for that.

Then I have no reason to believe that your claims have any validity to them, and I can't even examine what you said for any actual meaning or nuance.

It really shouldn't be that hard to find just a couple of examples.

Jim said:
Like I said, you can think that it was all in my imagination, or that I’m lying about what I thought I saw, or whatever you want to think.

You're not really giving me any other option. You claim to hate faction-lead debates, but you are literally giving us nothing other than a personal opinion with which to assess your claims.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
ROTFL!

Please quote someone in this thread claiming that similarities are proof of common ancestry.

usfan · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
Nobody has asserted that similarities are proof of common ancestry. This is a dramatic over-simplification of the many different fields of evidence that lead to the conclusion of common ancestry.

That is the debate, here.. to examine and analyze, with scientific scrutiny, the evidence and claims of common ancestry.
1. Pick one point
2. Defend it with quotes, references, or argument.
3. Leave it to skeptical scrutiny from others.

Use layman terms, if possible, but some here can follow more industry specific terminology. Make it as simple or complex as you need, to support your point.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
... you are literally giving us nothing other than a personal opinion with which to assess your claims.

ImmortalFlame ... Do you have any friendly interest in what I think? Please be honest with me.

My interests in these forums have changed repeatedly. All I’m trying to do now is to have some friendly conversations with some people on all sides of the feuding. I don’t always succeed in keeping it friendly, but that’s what I want to do and what I’m trying to do, for now. Then I get interested in the topics that people are discussing. I post questions and comments to try to understand better what people are thinking. I go searching on the Internet for answers to some of my questions. I get new ideas and I post them, People can take them or leave them, or mock them, or vilify them, or whatever they want to do. I’m not sure that my ideas will interest anyone, but I’m not sure they won’t, so I post them. If you have some friendly interest in discussing my ideas with me, we can do that, but I don’t submit to any demands for proof, evidence, substantiation, or retractions.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
ImmortalFlame ... Do you have any friendly interest in what I think? Please be honest with me.

I'm much less concerned with what you think and more concerned with what you claim.

See, simply saying "I think x" isn't much worthy of note beyond a simple exchange of ideas. I do welcome these kinds of exchanges, and do honestly wish that there were more of them than there are flamewars, rare as they are.

However, that's not what you've done in these recent posts of yours. You have actually made very specific claims, and used those claims as justification for your position. I asked you to supply the evidence of your claims, and thus far you haven't done so. It is one thing to say "I think x" and another to say "x is the case, as is y, and that's why I think z". I have asked you to provide reason and evidence as to why x and y are the case, and you have not.

It's a worn-out saying, but it does apply here: You are entitled to your own view, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Jim said:
My interests in these forums have changed repeatedly. All I’m trying to do now is to have some friendly conversations with some people on all sides of the feuding. I don’t always succeed in keeping it friendly, but that’s what I want to do and what I’m trying to do, for now. Then I get interested in the topics that people are discussing. I post questions and comments to try to understand better what people are thinking. I go searching on the Internet for answers to some of my questions. I get new ideas and I post them, People can take them or leave them, or mock them, or vilify them, or whatever they want to do. I’m not sure that my ideas will interest anyone, but I’m not sure they won’t, so I post them. If you have some friendly interest in discussing my ideas with me, we can do that, but I don’t submit to any demands for proof, evidence, substantiation, or retractions.

You say this, but I think your claims belie your intentions. If you truly do want to just have friendly conversation and exchange of views, then you must sometimes be aware of the need to support a factual claim you have made. It is not for reasons of inconveniencing you - it's for people for themselves to assess the reasons given for your statements and see if they draw the same conclusions.

I refuse to be drawn into a debate about your intentions, as I am unable to investigate those. I would rather keep this to the issues I raised: specifically, your claim that common ancestry theory has repeatedly failed and that people on this forum have claimed similarities "prove common ancestry", and your inability or unwillingness to support these assertions.

usfan · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
I refuse to be drawn into a debate about your intentions

..this is ironic, since personal inquiry and speculation about intent, motive, education, and all manner of ad hominem based replies, seems to exemplify the evolutionist position. Producing compelling evidence seems trivial and irrelevant to the common descent Believers, while addressing the personal qualities of their opponents seems critically important.. :shrug:

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
I'm much less concerned with what you think and more concerned with what you claim.

See, simply saying "I think x" isn't much worthy of note beyond a simple exchange of ideas. I do welcome these kinds of exchanges, and do honestly wish that there were more of them than there are flamewars, rare as they are.

However, that's not what you've done in these recent posts of yours. You have actually made very specific claims, and used those claims as justification for your position. I asked you to supply the evidence of your claims, and thus far you haven't done so. It is one thing to say "I think x" and another to say "x is the case, as is y, and that's why I think z". I have asked you to provide reason and evidence as to why x and y are the case, and you have not.

It's a worn-out saying, but it does apply here: You are entitled to your own view, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

You say this, but I think your claims belie your intentions. If you truly do want to just have friendly conversation and exchange of views, then you must sometimes be aware of the need to support a factual claim you have made. It is not for reasons of inconveniencing you - it's for people for themselves to assess the reasons given for your statements and see if they draw the same conclusions.

I refuse to be drawn into a debate about your intentions, as I am unable to investigate those. I would rather keep this to the issues I raised: specifically, your claim that common ancestry theory has repeatedly failed and that people on this forum have claimed similarities "prove common ancestry", and your inability or unwillingness to support these assertions.

What we got here, is failure to communicate.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
What we got here, is failure to communicate.

I'm not so sure. I think what we have is a failure of you to actually provide reasons for what you claim.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
See, simply saying "I think x" isn't much worthy of note beyond a simple exchange of ideas.

A simple exchange of ideas doesn’t interest you?

I think your claims belie your intentions.

If you’re insinuating that I’m not being open and honest about my intentions, that’s false.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
What we got here, is failure to communicate.

ImmortalFlame said:
I'm not so sure. I think what we have is a failure of you to actually provide reasons for what you claim.

Failure to communicate.

Jim said:
I don’t submit to any demands for proof, evidence, substantiation, or retractions.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
A simple exchange of ideas doesn’t interest you?

You took that sentence out of context. See the following sentences.

Jim said:
If you’re insinuating that I’m not being open and honest about my intentions, that’s false.

I'm saying that's the impression I'm getting from your behaviour, regardless of whether it is intentional. When somebody says "x is the case" and is asked to provide the facts that support x, and then says "I could, but I can't be bothered right now", that doesn't instill confidence that the speaker is honest.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
Failure to communicate.

If you will not provide the reasoning behind your belief, what on earth are you attempting to achieve? Even if you are not interested in debate and only in exchanging views, do you not think it would aid your exchange of views if you allow yourself to provide the reasons WHY you believe a proposition?

At the moment, we have two propositions set by you that you have failed to provide any reason to be accepted:

1) The common ancestry model has repeatedly failed.
and
2) People in this forum have claimed that similarity is proof of common ancestry.

If you are not going to support these statements, then you should not make them, and surely you can understand how refusing to provide support for the above statements is antithetical to an honest, open and friendly exchange of views.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
I'm saying that's the impression I'm getting from your behaviour, regardless of whether it is intentional. When somebody says "x is the case" and is asked to provide the facts that support x, and then says "I could, but I can't be bothered right now", that doesn't instill confidence that the speaker is honest.

I see. It’s a simple exchange of ideas. Okay. My idea about that is that I am being honest.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
I see. It’s a simple exchange of ideas. Okay. My idea about that is that I am being honest.

Then please demonstrate that you are being honest by providing examples where common ancestry has failed and where posters have claimed that similarities prove common ancestry.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
... refusing to provide support for the above statements is antithetical to an honest, open and friendly exchange of views.

I disagree. Tell me honestly, are your posts to me motivated by a friendly interest in what I think, or in telling me what you think? That isn’t how it looks to me.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
Then please demonstrate that you are being honest by providing examples where common ancestry has failed and where posters have claimed that similarities prove common ancestry.

Failure to communicate.

Jim said:
I don’t submit to any demands for proof, evidence, substantiation, or retractions.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
Failure to communicate.

At this stage, this is a refusal to communicate.

If you are unwilling to submit reasoning and evidence when asked, then you cannot discuss in good faith or be truly honest.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
I disagree. Tell me honestly, are your posts to me motivated by a friendly interest in what I think, or in telling me what you think? That isn’t how it looks to me.

My posts to you are motivated by a desire to understand what you think and why you think what you think.

Not that this is relevant, because neither of us can adequately assess each other's motives, and such motives are irrelevant to the truth or veracity of what we actually say. For example, you may have perfectly honest motives for claiming the following:

1) The common ancestry model has repeatedly failed.
and
2) People in this forum have claimed that similarity is proof of common ancestry.

But that does not make either statement true, reasonable or honest in and of themselves.

Jim · Aug 15, 2019

ImmortalFlame said:
My posts to you are motivated by a desire to understand what you think and why you think what you think.

Not that this is relevant, because neither of us can adequately assess each other's motives, and such motives are irrelevant to the truth or veracity of what we actually say. For example, you may have perfectly honest motives for claiming the following:

1) The common ancestry model has repeatedly failed.
and
2) People in this forum have claimed that similarity is proof of common ancestry.

But that does not make either statement true, reasonable or honest in and of themselves.

Failure to communicate.

Jim said:
You can just think that it was all in my imagination if you want to, or that I’m lying about what I thought I saw, or whatever you want to think. Maybe it really was all in my imagination.

This is starting to bore me. You’ll have to find some new tricks if you want to keep my attention.

ImmortalFlame · Aug 15, 2019

Jim said:
Failure to communicate.

This is starting to bore me. You’ll have to find some new tricks if you want to keep my attention.

Okay then. I suppose you'd have no issue with me posting on these forums that you're a holocaust denier?

Would you have an issue with that?

Scientific Evidence for Universal Common Descent

Woke gremlin

Woke gremlin

Well-Known Member

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin

Well-Known Member

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin

Nets of Wonder

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin

Woke gremlin

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin

Nets of Wonder

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin

Woke gremlin

Nets of Wonder

Woke gremlin