An atheists world (3)

[createdtoworship]

Yeah, it must be pure "belief"...I mean I couldn't possibly appreciate the SCIENCE.



Huh?



Don't forget CROCKODUCK!

Sorry but I believe evolutionary biology is a BIT more nuanced and detailed than that.



We do have a pretty solid Dinosaur-->Bird transition that occurs with the appropriate "transitions" and in a chronological order.

We have a nice selection of Synapsid reptiles -->Mammal transitions as well.

We have whale evolutionary steps from the ambulocetus to modern day cetaceans.



You're welcome.

But can I ask one major big honkin' question here?

How did we go from the development of the earth's atmosphere to the quest for transitional fossils?.

Was it because I cited a paper which you could easily read online and that post dated your reference by more than a quarter century?

Was the chemistry getting boring so we had to go playing "Creationist Whack-a-Mole"?

Because I'd really like to talk more CHEMISTRY (I'm not so much a biologist).

I don't know, you were the one giving a link to transitional fossils....I thought you were changing the game.

but thats what I mean for no evidence for evolution. But stellar evolution, same thing, and chemical evolution same thing. So talk about whatever you want. I was just responding with a question to your link that looks like anything but abiogenesis, but I may have missed something.

 

[createdtoworship]

What part of "Public" doesn't make sense here?

public running it and government running it are two separate ideas.

 

[lasthero]

public running it and government running it are two separate ideas.

History of education in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read.

 

[CarlosTomy]

but thats what I mean for no evidence for evolution.

So when you IGNORE the evidence provided for evolution that means there's no evidence for evolution.

Gotcha!

I was just responding with a question to your link that looks like anything but abiogenesis, but I may have missed something.

Ummmm, yeah, you kinda did. YOU posted the comment about earth's atmosphere starting off oxidizing, I provided a BUNCH of stuff about how that does not appear to comport with the evidence.

Why were you talking about an oxidizing atmosphere? Because you are having problems with your "electric mud puddle" argument and your desire to make evolution CONTAIN the concept of abiogenesis (a standard problem for Creationists...their lack of general understanding of the meets and bounds of the topic).

You just BLEW RIGHT PAST that to focus on the shiny object you want to go after.

But remember YOU started in with how I had to relearn the history of the earth's atmosphere.

So I'm asking you to respond to the counterarguments to YOUR point.

If you can't focus long enough on ONE topic at a time you'll continue to have a confused view of what the science is.

 

[createdtoworship]

I have no idea what you think evolution is, but it is the changes within a species, and the occasional splitting of a species into two populations which have difficulty or can no longer breed with one another, thus creating new species (speciation). That's it. Nothing else.

As each new species continues to change and to split, they become more and more distantly related. We organize how closly or how distantly they are related, just as we differentiate between your sister, your first cousin, a distant cousin, and someone whose connection is so distant they might as well be completely unrelated.

All taxons above species, including genus, are man-made, for this kind of organizational purpose, only.

oh hi ollie, long time no see...

anyway I realize taxonomy is man made however it is based on science and I believe the biblical kind to be a genus level transition not a species level as many species can interbreed, some cannot in that they are not the same kind but many can. (donkeys, horses, zebras etc), chiwawahs, golden retrievers, and muts (cats of various types and species).

 

[CarlosTomy]

public running it and government running it are two separate ideas.

Did they not offer a Civics class in your public school system?

 

[createdtoworship]

History of education in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read.

go ahead, and sum it up for all of us to enjoy.

 

[createdtoworship]

Did they not offer a Civics class in your public school system?

ever heard of big brother? Big brother running it and the citizens running it are very different.

 

[lasthero]

go ahead, and sum it up for all of us to enjoy.

*sigh*

From the first link about education in the new colonies.

The New England Puritans valued education, both for the sake of religious study (they demanded a great deal of Bible reading) and for the sake of economic success. A 1647 Massachusetts law mandated that every town of 50 or more families support a 'petty'(elementary) school and every town of 100 or more families support a Latin, or grammar, school where boys could learn Latin in preparation for college

 

[createdtoworship]

Pro-Tip: SCIENCE ADVANCES.

Presumably a later REVIEW article will surely support an earlier hypothesis that stood the test of time.

That's kind of how REVIEW articles work. Check 'em out some time.

thats all fine and dandy till you quote a 30 year old peer review.

 

[Subduction Zone]

thats all fine and dandy till you quote a 30 year old peer review.

There are some old articles that have been found to be wrong.

The only time creationists quote peer reviewed articles is if they find one from the past that was shown to be wrong.

Peer review is only the first step in establishing a claim or idea as "scientific". And yet creationists are afraid to do even that. They have invented their own fake "peer review".

If I took a brick and painted it gold colored. Stamped it so it said "24 karat gold" would you accept it as gold?

 

[CarlosTomy]

thats all fine and dandy till you quote a 30 year old peer review.

I'm more than willing to consider the 1980 reference valid! You'll note I said I would have to dig it up (I can't find a copy online!) OR you could use YOUR KNOWLEDGE of the 1980 article to go up against the sulfur isotope data and the banded iron formation etc.! (That's what a scientist would do if they felt their points were more valid)

Now the reason I pointed out the fact that my reference was from 2006 was that it was a REVIEW article. As such I expect it to provide an overview of the knowledge as we know it to the best of our abilities.

I get it, you are not a scientist so you are not familiar with what a "review" article is or how all this peer reviewed information works. That's not surprising...this is a "specialized world".

Your lack of familiarity with how published science works is no reason to latch onto side points that really don't have much bearing.

 

[createdtoworship]

There are some old articles that have been found to be wrong.

The only time creationists quote peer reviewed articles is if they find one from the past that was shown to be wrong.

Peer review is only the first step in establishing a claim or idea as "scientific". And yet creationists are afraid to do even that. They have invented their own fake "peer review".

If I took a brick and painted it gold colored. Stamped it so it said "24 karat gold" would you accept it as gold?

you beg the question as to what peer review entails, and what "Gold" is for that matter....

 

[Loudmouth]

thats all fine and dandy till you quote a 30 year old peer review.

A 100 year old peer reviewed article would still be a leg up on the creationist claptrap that is bandied about these forums.

 

[OllieFranz]

oh hi ollie, long time no see...

anyway I realize taxonomy is man made however it is based on science and I believe the biblical kind to be a genus level transition not a species level as many species can interbreed, some cannot in that they are not the same kind but many can. (donkeys, horses, zebras etc), chiwawahs, golden retrievers, and muts (cats of various types and species).

Cats of the genus panthera do not normally breed outside their species, but we can breed tigons and ligers, and other sterile or nearly sterile hybrids. Some leopards are panthers and can be bred with any other panther. Other leopards belong to other genera. They can be bred to panther-leopards, and to one another, but not to the larger panthers. Other large cats, like the cheetah, are from more distant genera, but still are clearly related, even though they cannot interbreed. Cougars look more like large cats than small cats, but they lack certain features of large cats, and can be interbred with several small cats.

My points being that interfertility can reach through deeper levels than just genus, and that your concept of "kind" reaches further than just interfertility or recent interfertility, and includes other indicators as well.

 

[createdtoworship]

I'm more than willing to consider the 1980 reference valid! You'll note I said I would have to dig it up (I can't find a copy online!) OR you could use YOUR KNOWLEDGE of the 1980 article to go up against the sulfur isotope data and the banded iron formation etc.! (That's what a scientist would do if they felt their points were more valid)

Now the reason I pointed out the fact that my reference was from 2006 was that it was a REVIEW article. As such I expect it to provide an overview of the knowledge as we know it to the best of our abilities.

I get it, you are not a scientist so you are not familiar with what a "review" article is or how all this peer reviewed information works. That's not surprising...this is a "specialized world".

Your lack of familiarity with how published science works is no reason to latch onto side points that really don't have much bearing.

straw man

nice try

now you want to publish peer review I have one you may like

note this is just a summary link of the article

Peer-Reviewed Scientific Paper Cites Guillermo Gonzalez's Galactic Habitable Zone as Evidence Earth is a Privileged Planet - Evolution News & Views

 

[createdtoworship]

Cats of the genus panthera do not normally breed outside their species, but we can breed tigons and ligers, and other sterile or nearly sterile hybrids. Some leopards are panthers and can be bred with any other panther. Other leopards belong to other genera. They can be bred to panther-leopards, and to one another, but not to the larger panthers. Other large cats, like the cheetah, are from more distant genera, but still are clearly related, even though they cannot interbreed. Cougars look more like large cats than small cats, but they lack certain features of large cats, and can be interbred with several small cats.

My points being that interfertility can reach through deeper levels than just genus, and that your concept of "kind" reaches further than just interfertility or recent interfertility, and includes other indicators as well.

yes I undestand some species don't interbreed, but thats fine it is just that micro evolution has not expanded the species yet. But macro evolution a cross between genra is yet to be seen, agreed?

 

[createdtoworship]

A 100 year old peer reviewed article would still be a leg up on the creationist claptrap that is bandied about these forums.

strawman

 

[createdtoworship]

There are some old articles that have been found to be wrong.

The only time creationists quote peer reviewed articles is if they find one from the past that was shown to be wrong.

Peer review is only the first step in establishing a claim or idea as "scientific". And yet creationists are afraid to do even that. They have invented their own fake "peer review".

If I took a brick and painted it gold colored. Stamped it so it said "24 karat gold" would you accept it as gold?

until a new peer review article is made the older ones from the 80's say, are still valid and used.

 

[CabVet]

strawman

That coming from someone who describes evolution as a cat giving birth to a dog is just precious.