My Daisy Chain Challenge

[AV1611VET]

28.58% of what exactly?

Evidence on hand.

Let's simplify Post 15, shall we?

Let's lay 3,499,500,000 empty shoeboxes down, side-by-side.

Let's label the first shoebox 3,500,000,000 BC, the next one 3,499,999,999 BC, and so on; all the way to 500,000 BC.

Got it?

Shoeboxes, representing each year, from 3,500,000,000 BC - 500,000 BC.

Here's my challenge -- simplified.

Fill each shoebox with evidence from the year written on it.

The evidence has to have three qualities:

1. it is physical evidence
2. it is biological evidence
3. it is currently on display somewhere

 

[StormanNorman]

Evidence on hand.

Let's simplify Post 15, shall we?

Let's lay 3,499,500,000 empty shoeboxes down, side-by-side.

Let's label the first shoebox 3,500,000,000 BC, the next one 3,499,999,999 BC, and so on; all the way to 500,000 BC.

Got it?

Shoeboxes, representing each year, from 3,500,000,000 BC - 500,000 BC.

Here's my challenge -- simplified.

Fill each shoebox with evidence from the year written on it.

The evidence has to have three qualities:

1. it is physical evidence
2. it is biological evidence
3. it is currently on display somewhere

So, your 28.35% is one billion pieces of evidence out of 3.5 billion shoe boxes?

 

[AV1611VET]

So, your 28.35% is one billion pieces of evidence out of 3.5 billion shoe boxes?

Yes.

To complete my new analogy of the shoeboxes in light of Post 15, I would then fill 1 billion shoeboxes in for you.*

* The reason I'm doing that, is because I do not know how many actual pieces of evidence are on display for each separate year, and I have asked and asked here, and no scientist has enough vertebrate to tell me they don't know. So I'm just allowing for 1 billion pieces, even though I don't think there is nearly that much.

 

[StormanNorman]

Yes.

To complete my new analogy of the shoeboxes in light of Post 15, I would then fill 1 billion shoeboxes in for you.*

* The reason I'm doing that, is because I do not know how many actual pieces of evidence are on display for each separate year, and I have asked and asked here, and no scientist has enough vertebra to tell me they don't know. So I'm just allowing for 1 billion pieces, even though I don't think there is nearly that much.

Well, I can tell you that I don't know, but I'm not a scientist. But, for evidence, quantity is only one aspect. You also have quality and, perhaps more importantly, there is consistency. Take a look at the graphs below. Although the one of the left has less data points (less evidence), it certainly creates a more consistent pattern (linear) than the one on the right even both were drawn from the same distribution, but with different error variances.

I think most scientists would argue that the evidence for evolution looks more like the one on the left especially when you consider the number of scientific disciplines that the evidence transcends.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I can tell you that I don't know, but I'm not a scientist. But, for evidence, quantity is only one aspect. You also have quality and, perhaps more importantly, there is consistency. Take a look at the graphs below. Although the one of the left has less data points (less evidence), it certainly creates a more consistent pattern (linear) than the one on the right even both were drawn from the same distribution, but with different error variances.

I think most scientists would argue that the evidence for evolution looks more like the one on the left especially when you consider the number of scientific disciplines that the evidence transcends.

If you say so.

Those graphs fail this challenge though, don't they?

 

[StormanNorman]

If you say so.

Those graphs fail this challenge though, don't they?

Of course. I've already said that a) they don't have that many individual pieces of evidences and b) in most cases, they wouldn't know exactly which shoe box to the put the evidence in ... in some cases, the piece of evidence doesn't belong in any shoe box, e.g., genetics.

But, my graphs do tell us that the theory of evolution is still very valid when you look at the evidence from a more holistic point of view.

 

[AV1611VET]

But, my graphs do tell us that the theory of evolution is still very valid when you look at the evidence from a more holistic point of view.

I'm not doing that though, am I?

This thread isn't about looking at evolution from a holistic standpoint.

I'm very familiar that others use everything from astronomy to zoology to evidence evolution.

I realize I'm trying to make Weebles fall over with this, but I think I'm making a very good point with this thread.

Agreeing with my point, then going on to advertise for the solidity of evolution in other areas is ... well ... your prerogative, I guess.

 

[StormanNorman]

I'm not doing that though, am I?

This thread isn't about looking at evolution from a holistic standpoint.

I'm very familiar that others use everything from astronomy to zoology to evidence evolution.

I realize I'm trying to make Weebles fall over with this, but I think I'm making a very good point with this thread.

Agreeing with my point, then going on to advertise for the solidity of evolution in other areas is ... well ... your prerogative, I guess.

Actually, I don't think your point is a very good one or even a very logical one. Why every year? Why not a shoebox for every month or day, etc.? Then you can knock that percentage down even further.

In reality, every fossil represents a infinitesimal moment in time right when the creature died. So, in truth, adding up the amount of time represented by the fossils is actually zero because the sum of a finite number of infinitesimals is still an infinitesimal, i.e., 0%.

So, did I just disprove evolution?

 

[nuttypiglet]

With regards to slavery. Slaves were generally treated very well, even roman servants/slaves contrary to belief. In the bible we read about a centurion who is most upset because his servant falls ill, and he asks Jesus to heal him. Anyway, the whole issue is with regards to Jesus. He came here and served God with no question, he did exactly as he wanted him to, to save us. He was humiliated, persecuted, tortured and killed. Did he complain? no. Those texts are earthly matters and it says slaves are following in the footsteps of Jesus. We are not to be concerned with earthly matters, but the coming heavenly matters where things are very different. When God created Man he said "he does not know what is in his heart, but I do". He knew he would fall to sin and he knew what he was capable of. Many people seek power and to have power you need slaves. We are all slaves now to money, we cannot live without it. I think we should be grateful that God didn't just give up on us, and destroy all creation. He has sacrificed his only Son to save many, and some people just complain and say God is mean, sheesh.
Would you sacrifice your Son for someone else? I doubt it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Actually, I don't think your point is a very good one or even a very logical one.

That doesn't surprise me at all.

Why every year? Why not a shoebox for every month or day, etc.? Then you can knock that percentage down even further.

If you can't handle a year, you certainly aren't going to be able to handle a month or day.

In reality, every fossil represents a infinitesimal moment in time right when the creature died.

If you say so.

If you have one, put it in the proper shoebox please.

So, in truth, adding up the amount of time represented by the fossils is actually zero because the sum of a finite number of infinitesimals is still an infinitesimal, i.e., 0%.

You get the fossils first, and then we'll worry about addition.

So, did I just disprove evolution?

I'll do that, myself, here; but thanks for trying.

Truth be told though, I may not disprove evolution with this thread, but I can at least pwn the "we have evidence" meme.

 

[AV1611VET]

With regards to slavery.

Could we please not discuss slavery here?

Thanks!

 

[nuttypiglet]

Our claims come from your Bible. Haven't you been checking out the links?

Your Bible supports slavery. It tells how to make a fellow Hebrew your slave for the rest of his life. It tells you how badly you can beat your slaves and not be punished for it.

Do you not believe us?

It says that if a slave can be free, but chooses to remain because he loves his wife and children too much, he can be taken back as a slave for good. THINK about it. He has the choice to have a free life, yet chooses his family over that offer. It's meant to signify our choices in life. In other words, Atheists choose not to trust God, so will be slaves of the Earth forever. Those with faith in Christ will leave their family to join him, and know they will follow if they too keep their faith. Jesus said you must love God ABOVE ALL OTHERS. If you can't trust him, then who can you trust. When the Angels destroyed Soddom, they warned the escapees NOT TO LOOK BACK. Trust God to do his work and let go of that sinful place. Well, someone looked back didn't they, and they were turned to salt. This slavery thing is very complicated and would take hours to explain properly, but God is not saying to hurt people with no reason. Very often when reading scripture you have to look deeper and pray.

 

[StormanNorman]

but I can at least pwn the "we have evidence" meme.

Only for the gullible, my friend .... or the ones who are so predisposed.

 

[nuttypiglet]

Well, I can tell you that I don't know, but I'm not a scientist. But, for evidence, quantity is only one aspect. You also have quality and, perhaps more importantly, there is consistency. Take a look at the graphs below. Although the one of the left has less data points (less evidence), it certainly creates a more consistent pattern (linear) than the one on the right even both were drawn from the same distribution, but with different error variances.

I think most scientists would argue that the evidence for evolution looks more like the one on the left especially when you consider the number of scientific disciplines that the evidence transcends.

If you are not a scientist, and you cannot provide the evidence, why do you believe in that nonsense? Is it because a teacher told you that it's true?
Let's put it all into a new perspective.
Is reality real? No one knows. Quantum is starting to show that everything is probably some kind of illusion.
If nothing is real, and is an illusion, how can we claim to know anything? we can't.

 

[Loudmouth]

In other words, Atheists choose not to trust God, so will be slaves of the Earth forever.

False. We choose not to trust the men who wrote the Bible and creationists.

The real question is why you don't trust God's creation and the evidence found in it.

 

[Loudmouth]

If you are not a scientist, and you cannot provide the evidence, why do you believe in that nonsense? Is it because a teacher told you that it's true?
Let's put it all into a new perspective.
Is reality real? No one knows. Quantum is starting to show that everything is probably some kind of illusion.
If nothing is real, and is an illusion, how can we claim to know anything? we can't.

We have the evidence, chief. We have both genetic and fossil evidence demonstrating that humans share a common ancestor with other apes.

So why do you ignore this evidence?

 

[Loudmouth]

If you say so.

Those graphs fail this challenge though, don't they?

Your challenge is a failure.

 

[StormanNorman]

If you are not a scientist, and you cannot provide the evidence, why do you believe in that nonsense? Is it because a teacher told you that it's true?
Let's put it all into a new perspective.
Is reality real? No one knows. Quantum is starting to show that everything is probably some kind of illusion.
If nothing is real, and is an illusion, how can we claim to know anything? we can't.

What, dude? Sounds like you have been out back spliffing up a big fat one....

 

[nuttypiglet]

Near death experiences.
It was reported for a long time how patients who suffered short periods of death had experienced the afterlife. However, no matter how they tried to convince science it was a true experience, science would not accept such a thing. In came the theory. When pilots are trained to handle G-forces, they black out but some were experiencing tunnels of light etc. Conclusion by Science "When the brain has insufficient Oxygen, this causes chemical reactions to give the illusion of tunnels of light and a feeling of floating". Hmm.
In steps a Cardiologist who studied thousands of cases. A Cardiologist gets more than his fair share of surgical deaths temporarily on the table. He noticed something very odd, during their experiences, there was no brain activity. With no brain activity, you cannot dream or think in any way which means those experiences were not in the brain at all.
Quantum is showing that the mind is far more complex than we believe, in fact the leading Quantum physicists are saying the mind could expand the whole Universe and we are all actually connected rather than individual. Science used to laugh at how a being could possibly be in an infinite number of places at the same time, and not restricted by 'time'. Quantum is showing this is of course very possible. I'm glad science is getting closer to God and his wonderful design. Still a long way to go, but eventually it will get there.

 

[CabVet]

Near death experiences.

Near death experiences. Did you know that people from different religions have near death experiences that are compatible with their religions? Isn't that strange? Wouldn't you expect similar near death experiences for everyone if they were evidence for the existence of just one "right" God?