• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Scientific Evidence for Universal Common Descent

Status
Not open for further replies.

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Accusing me falsely, and deflecting with ad hom fallacies, does not provide evidence for the belief in common descent. I will not constantly point this out, but will remind everyone from time to time.

You can choose the role of spoiler and heckler, or you can choose a path of knowledge and scientific inquiry.
I did not falsely accused you. Nor did I deflect.

please stop lying about those that show you to be wrong. Corrections are not ad hom, neither are observations about your thought processes.

see if you can argue without making accusations that you cannot support.
 
Last edited:

tas8831

Well-Known Member
It was in the very post you quoted. Do we have to play this game?

The FACTS are:
1. The half life of the earth's magnetic field has been calculated, based on measurements over the last couple of centuries.
From wiki:
Barnes claimed to calculate the half-life of the earth's magnetic field as approximately 1,400 years based on 130 years of empirical data.
2. 'Flipping magnetic fields!' is speculative, unevidenced, and promoted as a cop out for the REAL PROBLEM of the earth's measured half life.
Yes, but what about the EVE GENE?????
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
The oldest verified fossils are evidence for life is 3.4 billion year old bacterial fossils. Some research indicates that life may have formed earlier, but there are questions around that. I do not know when life first arose, but I accept the evidence that we do have on how old some of it is.

Tangential to this subject - I came across this paper a few years ago and found it intriguing:

Three RNA cells for ribosomal lineages and three DNA viruses to replicate their genomes: A hypothesis for the origin of cellular domain
Three RNA cells for ribosomal lineages and three DNA viruses to replicate their genomes: A hypothesis for the origin of cellular domain

What is the evidence for creation that is described in Genesis?
It is so weird - apparently, only OTHER people have to present evidence for their views.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
Yes, but what about the EVE GENE?????
You have a point in this? Or just heckling, as usual?

Straw men, out of context 'gotcha!' phrases, well poisoning, and the gratuitous ad hom.

If you grow up a bit, we can debate the science like men, but if all you're going to do is fling poo with your hominid cronies, nothing useful will come of this..

Or is that the plan? Disrupt so no information, knowledge, or understanding can take place?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
:facepalm:
Personal attacks is all you have.

Can't do reason or science, so you resort to fallacies.

Let me know if you grow up and want to talk science and reason like a man.

No, once again you are describing your activities. You can only post false claims of "ad hom" etc.. Meanwhile I have offered to have a serious discussion with you and you only ran away.

See if you can post without making false claims about the logical fallacies that you do not understand.

Would you like to go over your errors regarding how we know how old the Earth is? Right now you only look like the science denier that others have observed you to be.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
These are all false claims. This is something that I do understand fairly well and if you like to discuss this we can.
I'm always game for intelligent discussion. Make your point, support it with facts, reason, or references, and the rest of us can examine it.

..but constantly calling me a liar is not a good basis for respectful debate.. :rolleyes:
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You have a point in this? Or just heckling, as usual?

Straw men, out of context 'gotcha!' phrases, well poisoning, and the gratuitous ad hom.

If you grow up a bit, we can debate the science like men, but if all you're going to do is fling poo with your hominid cronies, nothing useful will come of this..

Or is that the plan? Disrupt so no information, knowledge, or understanding can take place?


When you won't own up to your own errors you open yourself up to "heckling". Once again you are blaming others for your flaws.

The fault once again lies with you.

Here is an idea, why not learn what scientific evidence is in the first place? It is rather clear that you do not understand the concept:

"Scientific evidence is evidence which serves to either support or counter a scientific theory or hypothesis. Such evidence is expected to be empirical evidence and interpretation in accordance with scientific method. Standards for scientific evidence vary according to the field of inquiry, but the strength of scientific evidence is generally based on the results of statistical analysis and the strength of scientific controls."

Scientific evidence - Wikipedia

Other sources are available.

Do you have a problem with that definition? It appears to be the one that scientists use. If you oppose that definition you must justify your actions.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I'm always game for intelligent discussion. Make your point, support it with facts, reason, or references, and the rest of us can examine it.

..but constantly calling me a liar is not a good basis for respectful debate.. :rolleyes:
You call for it but cannot follow the rules for it. If you want respect you need to earn it. Right now you have earned the responses given. To complain is hypocritical. This is by the way an attempt by you to deflect from the actual topic of this thread.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
No, once again you are describing your activities. You can only post false claims of "ad hom" etc.. Meanwhile I have offered to have a serious discussion with you and you only ran away.

See if you can post without making false claims about the logical fallacies that you do not understand.

Would you like to go over your errors regarding how we know how old the Earth is? Right now you only look like the science denier that others have observed you to be.
Thread**** & deflect with personal attacks all you want. It does not support your belief in common ancestry.

Show me. You say you can discuss and debate science and reason. Prove it. All i see is Bluff, Belittling, Bleating, and Belief..
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Thread**** & deflect with personal attacks all you want. It does not support your belief in common ancestry.

Show me. You say you can discuss and debate science and reason. Prove it. All i see is Bluff, Belittling, Bleating, and Belief..

No, once again that is your tactic. I have offered to have a proper discussion with you countless times. All you can do is tl make false accusations and run away.

Did you not see my post about the concept of evidence that you do not understand? Your biggest problem here is that you do not understand the concept of scientific evidence. If you understood that you would have to quickly admit that many posters have presented scientific evidence. When you deny obvious evidence you lose the right to demand any.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
The pseudoscience pretenders like to present themselves as experts in every scientific discipline, but can't seem to follow the basic concepts. So they muddy the issues with deflections.. the 4 B's, I've called it:

Bluff
Belittle
Bleat
Belief

But wait! There's more! :D

Bullying
Bloviating
Boring

They can't present a rational, fact based defense of this theory, so launch into religious and hysterical deflections, to hide their ignorance.

The only real casualty in this is Knowledge and understanding. They oppose that at all costs, to keep the propaganda drum pounding. They are frauds and charlatans, attacking anyone who dares question the sacred tenets of their pathetic 19th century religious beliefs..

These are not scientific minded people, but jihadists and cowards, who cannot reason themselves out of a wet paper bag.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Tangential to this subject - I came across this paper a few years ago and found it intriguing:
This is an obvious straw man. This thread is not about what you did a few years ago.
Three RNA cells for ribosomal lineages and three DNA viruses to replicate their genomes: A hypothesis for the origin of cellular domain
Three RNA cells for ribosomal lineages and three DNA viruses to replicate their genomes: A hypothesis for the origin of cellular domain
If you are going to heckle me by providing data, I do not see how we can have a scientific discussion. This is all hearsay, speculation, and assumption. It assumes that there is life. What about the eve virus. It mentions nothing about the eve virus. That is a gene flag marker that I have studied for nearly 40 years of studying genetic architecture of the forced domain magic tree of living genetic architecture.
It is so weird - apparently, only OTHER people have to present evidence for their views.
You call this evidence. Please. I can site well refuted studies that claim magnets are Pols with a half life and the entire universe is a dark matter that refutes Einsteins theory of plate tectonics.

Seriously, thanks for the article. I have started reading and it is fascinating.
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
I have offered to have a proper discussion with you countless times
:rolleyes:
..and you accuse me of lying..

You've been a heckler and ad hominem specialist from the very beginning, in this thread. You've NEVER presented or offered civil, scientific based debate, but go for ridicule and accusations. Your lame pretension here fools nobody... well, maybe your poo flinging cronies.
;)
 

usfan

Well-Known Member
If you are going to heckle me by providing data, I do not see how we can have a scientific discussion. This is all hearsay, speculation, and assumption.
You can turn this post, that was not presented as a discussion point, nor directed at me, and use it to mock me, but you still expose youself as an unscientific minded bobblehead. Fling poo all you want. Heckle from the sidelines. But avoid reasoned debate. You can't do that, can you?

Why do you constantly illustrate your anti-science bias?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The pseudoscience pretenders like to present themselves as experts in every scientific discipline, but can't seem to follow the basic concepts. So they muddy the issues with deflections.. the 4 B's, I've called it:

Bluff
Belittle
Bleat
Belief

But wait! There's more! :D

Bullying
Bloviating
Boring

They can't present a rational, fact based defense of this theory, so launch into religious and hysterical deflections, to hide their ignorance.

The only real casualty in this is Knowledge and understanding. They oppose that at all costs, to keep the propaganda drum pounding. They are frauds and charlatans, attacking anyone who dares question the sacred tenets of their pathetic 19th century religious beliefs..

These are not scientific minded people, but jihadists and cowards, who cannot reason themselves out of a wet paper bag.
Once more you go back to your tactic of making false claims that you cannot support about those that know better than you do.

I have offered to have a rational conversation with you. You ran away.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You can turn this post, that was not presented as a discussion point, nor directed at me, and use it to mock me, but you still expose youself as an unscientific minded bobblehead. Fling poo all you want. Heckle from the sidelines. But avoid reasoned debate. You can't do that, can you?

Why do you constantly illustrate your anti-science bias?
Now now, openly lying about others is not Christian.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top