1. 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!

Featured Place for Creationists to post their "reasonable tests" for their position

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by tas8831, Aug 15, 2019.

  1. siti

    siti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Messages:
    3,854
    Ratings:
    +2,887
    Not!
     
  2. MikeDwight

    MikeDwight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2019
    Messages:
    1,406
    Ratings:
    +108
    Religion:
    Presbyterian
    A Response would be getting pretty far off-topic, all due respect.
     
  3. siti

    siti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2017
    Messages:
    3,854
    Ratings:
    +2,887
    That didn't seem to worry you before!
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    1. the millions of scientists that you did NOT quote, don't "believe" so.

    2. what scientists "believe" is about as relevant as what you or I "believe".
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  5. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    It's the extremely vast majority.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    That is just false.

    Are you really this ignorant, or are you lying again, like when you claimed to have "reasonable tests" for your creationists beliefs?
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  7. ImmortalFlame

    ImmortalFlame Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    10,350
    Ratings:
    +5,978
    Could anybody provide a summary of all of the "reasonable facts" creationists have presented in this thread, so far?
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 2
  8. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    What the heck are you babbling about...................

    Mere assertions aren't tests of anything.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Ya, you're informed.......... :rolleyes:

    If you think this is what paleontologists, molecular biologists, geneticists, evolutionary biologists, etc etc etc do all day, then I got news for you......................................................
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    There's also no evidence that extra-dimensional aliens, leprechauns, unicorns or undetectable pixies "couldn't be involved" either.

    Take a hint

    :rolleyes:
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  11. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    11,656
    Ratings:
    +9,585
    Religion:
    Atheist
    So, really.... it's just a huge argument from incredulity / ignorance....


    "I don't understand or know how this would come about naturally, therefore, it didn't come about naturally".


    Thanks for playing.


    Now, as for the OP.... where are your "more reasonable tests"?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  12. Subduction Zone

    Subduction Zone Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2017
    Messages:
    47,979
    Ratings:
    +29,457
    Religion:
    Atheist
    My pleasure. Here you go:













    .
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  13. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    10,869
    Ratings:
    +8,677
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Proof read before posting, obey basic rules of logic and grammar, be consistent and accountable, familiarise yourself with the classic logical fallacies and avoid them. Hope this helps.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. RabbiO

    RabbiO הרב יונה בן זכריה

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,502
    Ratings:
    +3,484
    Religion:
    Judaism
    Have you given any thought to learning English? That may sound sarcastic or, perhaps, unkind - especially if English is your native language - but there is no getting around the fact that your posts tend to be incoherent.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Like Like x 2
  15. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,640
    Ratings:
    +4,012
    Yes:

    1.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  16. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,640
    Ratings:
    +4,012
    But no reasonable tests... Got it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,640
    Ratings:
    +4,012
    Your insights are amazing and beyond reproach. Well, not really.

    OK. Here is my case, along with the evidence (hate to be the broken record):

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I forget now who originally posted these on this forum, but I keep it in my archives because it offers a nice 'linear' progression of testing a methodology and then applying it - I have posted this more than a dozen times for creationists who claim that there is no evidence for evolution:

    The tested methodology:


    Science 25 October 1991:
    Vol. 254. no. 5031, pp. 554 - 558

    Gene trees and the origins of inbred strains of mice

    WR Atchley and WM Fitch

    Extensive data on genetic divergence among 24 inbred strains of mice provide an opportunity to examine the concordance of gene trees and species trees, especially whether structured subsamples of loci give congruent estimates of phylogenetic relationships. Phylogenetic analyses of 144 separate loci reproduce almost exactly the known genealogical relationships among these 24 strains. Partitioning these loci into structured subsets representing loci coding for proteins, the immune system and endogenous viruses give incongruent phylogenetic results. The gene tree based on protein loci provides an accurate picture of the genealogical relationships among strains; however, gene trees based upon immune and viral data show significant deviations from known genealogical affinities.

    ======================

    Science, Vol 255, Issue 5044, 589-592

    Experimental phylogenetics: generation of a known phylogeny

    DM Hillis, JJ Bull, ME White, MR Badgett, and IJ Molineux
    Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin 78712.

    Although methods of phylogenetic estimation are used routinely in comparative biology, direct tests of these methods are hampered by the lack of known phylogenies. Here a system based on serial propagation of bacteriophage T7 in the presence of a mutagen was used to create the first completely known phylogeny. Restriction-site maps of the terminal lineages were used to infer the evolutionary history of the experimental lines for comparison to the known history and actual ancestors. The five methods used to reconstruct branching pattern all predicted the correct topology but varied in their predictions of branch lengths; one method also predicts ancestral restriction maps and was found to be greater than 98 percent accurate.

    ==================================

    Science, Vol 264, Issue 5159, 671-677

    Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies

    DM Hillis, JP Huelsenbeck, and CW Cunningham
    Department of Zoology, University of Texas, Austin 78712.

    Molecular investigations of evolutionary history are being used to study subjects as diverse as the epidemiology of acquired immune deficiency syndrome and the origin of life. These studies depend on accurate estimates of phylogeny. The performance of methods of phylogenetic analysis can be assessed by numerical simulation studies and by the experimental evolution of organisms in controlled laboratory situations. Both kinds of assessment indicate that existing methods are effective at estimating phylogenies over a wide range of evolutionary conditions, especially if information about substitution bias is used to provide differential weightings for character transformations.



    We can hereby ASSUME that the results of an application of those methods have merit.


    Application of the tested methodology:


    Implications of natural selection in shaping 99.4% nonsynonymous DNA identity between humans and chimpanzees: Enlarging genus Homo

    "Here we compare ≈90 kb of coding DNA nucleotide sequence from 97 human genes to their sequenced chimpanzee counterparts and to available sequenced gorilla, orangutan, and Old World monkey counterparts, and, on a more limited basis, to mouse. The nonsynonymous changes (functionally important), like synonymous changes (functionally much less important), show chimpanzees and humans to be most closely related, sharing 99.4% identity at nonsynonymous sites and 98.4% at synonymous sites. "



    Mitochondrial Insertions into Primate Nuclear Genomes Suggest the Use of numts as a Tool for Phylogeny

    "Moreover, numts identified in gorilla Supercontigs were used to test the human–chimp–gorilla trichotomy, yielding a high level of support for the sister relationship of human and chimpanzee."



    A Molecular Phylogeny of Living Primates

    "Once contentiously debated, the closest human relative of chimpanzee (Pan) within subfamily Homininae (Gorilla, Pan, Homo) is now generally undisputed. The branch forming the Homo andPanlineage apart from Gorilla is relatively short (node 73, 27 steps MP, 0 indels) compared with that of thePan genus (node 72, 91 steps MP, 2 indels) and suggests rapid speciation into the 3 genera occurred early in Homininae evolution. Based on 54 gene regions, Homo-Pan genetic distance range from 6.92 to 7.90×10−3 substitutions/site (P. paniscus and P. troglodytes, respectively), which is less than previous estimates based on large scale sequencing of specific regions such as chromosome 7[50]. "
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CONCLUSION:

    This evidence lays out the results of employing a tested methodology on the question of Primate evolution. The same general criteria/methods have been used on nearly all facets of the evolution of living things. Other than bland, predictable, and rather lame attempts to undermine the evidence by citing 'worst-case scenario experiments' and the like, no creationist has ever mounted a relelevant, much less scientific rebuttal. And, of course, no creationsit has ever offered real evidence in support of a biblical-style creation.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  18. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,640
    Ratings:
    +4,012
    Kind of sad that this is where they eventually hang their hopes - on the mere possibility that their deity's influence has not yet been ruled out... Therefore... GODDIDIT!
     
    • Like Like x 3
  19. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    4,640
    Ratings:
    +4,012
    Yeah, totally - like that time Ben Franklin claimed to have more reasonable tests for the success of the colonies being independent than for them remaining under British rule, and after being asked to present them, he hemmed and hawed and ultimately could only provide a list of quotes.
     
    #139 tas8831, Aug 19, 2019
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Audie

    Audie Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Messages:
    19,265
    Ratings:
    +9,820
    Religion:
    None
    I guess your basic creo thinks that scientists
    and others operate on the same dim level of
    thought, study and understanding as they.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
Loading...