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 The Wild Experiment That Showed Evolution in Real Time

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Kangaroo Feathers, Feb 6, 2019.

  1. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    I know it isn’t with those with different religious views and come from many backgrounds. But is with those that come from many backgrounds but are all trained to answer within their little box, unable to think outside it..... they can see dogs mating right in front of their eyes producing sudden variation then propose a never once observed phenomenon is responsible in the past and they must have been separate species, despite the observational evidence....


    Who says I agree with them either????? The side I presented has been put forth by neither side, despite it fitting all observations....

    Like Dawkins who was willing to concede aliens might have created us as long as the aliens came from random causes? So he doesn’t really object to the design he sees, just the “designer”


    They are only hero’s to the next generation that grows up with the new theory, not the existing one they had to fight tooth and nail against and be ridiculed for until it became the new theory.... The existing ones hate them and call them quacks until it is forced upon them....

    Kristian Birkeland a fine example. Ridiculed for over 40 years and then the ones claiming he was wrong and ridiculing him adopt his theory as their own...

    J Harlen Bretz another in a countless series of challenging the status quo....
     
    #181 Justatruthseeker, Mar 11, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
  2. ratiocinator

    ratiocinator Strange Loop

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +1,067
    Religion:
    none
    That is much more a characteristic of religion than science.

    You're arguing here against evolution and you were arguing against an old earth on another thread (Evidence for a Young Earth (Not Billions of Years Old))...

    Hum... Einstein, Planck, Heisenberg, Dirac, Bohr, Pauli...

    The fact of the matter is that it's blindingly obvious where the bias is. You (and creationists in general) are accusing most of the world's experts, in multiple different fields, of making obvious, simple mistakes. But only when it comes to science that relates to their religious views - somehow, the rest of science has been spared from all the bias you accuse them of in those specific areas...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    You mean they are more consistent within their beliefs....


    And yet both are supported by the data, not the status quo. The observational evidence points to no change of species. The fact of time dilation supports an incorrect conclusion of age.

    Both arguments rely on observational and experimental data, not in maintaining the status quo just to maintain falsified theories.....


    Yes, they all agree with me that time dilation is real..... Planck even told you that truth isn’t accepted as fact against prevailing theory until the old believers die out....

    In fact people like you made Einstein mad.....

    "There is harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, yet there are people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me to support such views."” Albert Einstein

    Yes it is blindingly obvious. To those not ignoring the sudden appearance of a new form from mating with no missing common ancestors or change in species and not dismissing time dilation despite the proven fact it exists.....

    Science isn’t the problem, it’s you calling pseudoscience like random comparison science when the science that has been proven to work in showing relation has no randomness to it in it’s comparison... Some unable to comprehend the two have nothing in common but a bait and switch tactic....
     
    #183 Justatruthseeker, Mar 11, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
  4. ratiocinator

    ratiocinator Strange Loop

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +1,067
    Religion:
    none
    That's what happens with blind faith and ignoring evidence.

    You have neither demonstrated this nor provided any reason why almost all the world's experts would be unable to see it.

    You ignored my point. They were people who discovered new science, using actual evidence, and who were held in high regard because of it. If somebody could actually overturn evolution or the age of the earth, with actual evidence and real science, they would be too.

    BTW time dilation is real but you seem to know less about that than you do about evolution (which is saying something).
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    Agreed. So stop ignoring how new forms arise and time dilation, and stop blindly following....


    Sure I have, but you are in that confirmation bias box....


    Those scientists are trying, but they keep getting ridiculed and labeled as quaks and the data dismissed....

    That’s what those in the confirmation dissonance bubble tell themselves to lessen their anxiety......

    But all you all keep doing is arguing the twins argument who couldn’t even tell his own clocks were changing even as they did, and thought instead it was the stationary twins clocks that changed, despite his being stationary......

    So one of us doesn’t know much. Probably the one arguing the twins argument while his clocks change before his eyes. Just as clocks at the pole and equator tick at different rates, but you will continue to call different duration ticks of time seconds even when you know they change as you go from one location to another. Because you can’t tell from within the frame under observation that they change.... even when they do.....
     
    #185 Justatruthseeker, Mar 11, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
  6. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,238
    Ratings:
    +3,818
    You're just plain wrong.

    [Applications of Alu family in forensic DNA analysis]. - PubMed - NCBI

    DNA Analysis – The Forensics Library

    And don't get the impression that this is just limited to one specific type of repeating sequence. The same comparative methodology when applied to, for example, tandem repeats is extremely useful in forensic analysis. And as with SINEs, the same method shows that humans are related to other primates.

    But again, this is why I usually don't waste time showing science to creationists. All you folks do is make up bizarre reasons to deny it.
     
  7. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    Sigh......

    You still refuse to admit to yourself that the forensic DNA tests do not rely on comparing one portion of the found DNA to another random portion of the suspects genome...

    Nor do tests for relationship....

    You are in denial.......

    Leave wonderland and come back to reality.

    Not one forensic DNA test has ever used random comparison of one portion of the genome to another to prove guilt or innocence, nor has relationship testing ever done the same.....

    Learn your science....

    It’s a good excuse as to why you don’t present science, but sadly they don’t randomly compare those DNA fingerprints to just any portion of the genome..... they match because they are in the same location on both samples, not randomly compared to a match anywhere....

    If they randomly matched a portion of my DNA to any part of yours, I could be convicted of a crime you committed.
     
    #187 Justatruthseeker, Mar 11, 2019
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2019
  8. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,238
    Ratings:
    +3,818
    What in the world are you talking about? Who said anything about comparing randomly chosen portions of genomes?

    No one said they did.

    Then show where anyone has described forensic genetic testing as randomly matching portions of genomes.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    Except that is precisely what they do when they compare the Chimp and human genomes to claim relationship...... Com[pare one portion of the genome to a totally random portion of the other genome......Pseudoscience from your own admission since you seem to be aware that random comparison is NOT done in forensic science or relationship testing..... Then go right ahead on pitch the PR bait and switch because one has proven to be valid, so must the other be, when this is not a logical conclusion or random matching would be allowed in forensic testing to prove guilt or relationship....

    You seem to be confusing my stance. I totally agree that the forensic DNA and relationship testing that is non random is valid. It is your claim that the pseudoscientific test of randomly comparing Chimp and Human genome and then claiming it is valid that is highly objectionable, since no court of law would allow any such thing....
     
  10. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,238
    Ratings:
    +3,818
    Then show any instance where the methodology I cited involves comparing random portions of genomes.

    You keep saying that's what's going on, now it's time for you to show it to be so.

    You're flat out wrong. The method I cited does not involve comparing "random portions" of genomes at all.

    Then by the same token, you should be fine with doing the exact same thing to see if humans are related to other primates.

    Stop right there.

    Your next post needs to contain either a demonstration of where this "randomly comparing" is going on, or a retraction of your claim.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Justatruthseeker

    Justatruthseeker Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2018
    Messages:
    600
    Ratings:
    +36
    Religion:
    Non-Denominational
    You just admitted you understood it wasn't random with forensic or chimp.....



    Apparently you are unaware that the BLAST uses a heuristic algorithm and only looks for matches, not where the match lies in the genome...... It finds any match, regardless of it's actual position in the genome.....

    Then you should have no problem running a standard relationship test without using algorithms that just search for matches without caring about location to prove guilt....

    It's going on every single time your algorithm matches the three letter match it looks for in any part of the genome...... You just don't understand how chimp/human comparisons are done....
     
  12. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,238
    Ratings:
    +3,818
    Same as before....all you've done is make claims. I've got news for you. Things aren't so simply because you say they are.

    Show where the specific methodology I cited involves comparing "random portions" of genomes. You do understand the difference between saying something is so and demonstrating it to be so, don't you?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Kangaroo Feathers

    Kangaroo Feathers Hardline moderate

    Joined:
    May 19, 2017
    Messages:
    9,044
    Ratings:
    +6,566
    Religion:
    Catholic
    So your response to "stop strawmanning" is a strawman. Understood. I think we're done here.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    8,982
    Ratings:
    +3,831
    Evolution does not say that animals suddenly give birth to a new form of anything. Animals always reproduce the same animal. A dog didn't suddenly give birth to a bird one day. That just isn't how it works.

    Perhaps the reason you do not accept evolution is that you do not understand it. Maybe that is the problem. Science isn't the problem.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...