Tiktaalik vs. Bacterial Flagellum

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,216
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟292,947.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
As if strange creatures over eons couldn’t pose the appearance of a conundrum??? Look, I’m not trying to disprove evolution altogether... in fact, I think our Creator designed micro evolution parameters, but I do not believe there is evidence to support macro evolution, either in the scientific field or His written word.

Just because you can't explain it's discovery, doesn't mean that we can't.

You can't just mark off everything that doesn't fit in your world view as a "conundrum".
 
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I get the article’s point, but I couldn’t help but think as I was reading it that science has cleverly maneuvered themselves into a position where they can’t be wrong.

I'm of the opinion that you're just looking for something like that because that's the exact opposite of the what the author was trying to convey. That's every scientific proposition must have a potential falsification no matter how likely or unlikely. It is because of that potential falsification (i.e. "being wrong) that nothing is ever considered proven because once things are proven, they can never be falsified.

It appeared to be very painful though for the author to admit there was even the slightest possibility that evolution could one day turn out false.

Actually it's quite easy. Here's just a few potential falsifications off the top of my head.
- Discovering a bird with wings and arms
- Lobsters with vertebral column
- A Triassic horse
- A Permian T-Rex
- A Silurian amphibian
- A Cambrian apple tree
- Roses with melanocytes
- Primates being more close genetically to Xenarthrans (anteaters, sloths, etc.) than to rodents and rabbits
- Frogs with fur
etc. etc.

Any one of those things alone would be enough to falsify evolution.
 
Upvote 0

46AND2

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
Sep 5, 2012
5,807
2,210
Vancouver, WA
✟102,103.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
And how is this paternity test done? Do they cut the child genome up into pieces and then use an algorithm to randomly match any part of that genome to any random part of the suspected parent genome using BLAST?


Tas already completely schooled you on this point, here.

And as usual, when you were shown to be wrong, you abandoned the argument altogether. Then, since you weren't genuine enough to admit to being wrong, you feel like you're free to use the same bad argument again, as if nobody noticed what happened.

Unfortunately for you, I noticed.
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟143,395.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
But, you're arrogant enough that you have no problem telling someone with a view you don't understand they're all wrong... right?

Arrogant, would be to tell scientists, as a non-scientist, that they don't understand the field they dedicated their lives to and pretend to know better.

That's not what Jimmy does. But it is what you do...
 
Upvote 0

DogmaHunter

Code Monkey
Jan 26, 2014
16,757
8,531
Antwerp
✟143,395.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Presented in your reply is godless worldview: no God or Creator needed.

Such is based on the religions of Naturalism and Scientism. Where Nature and Science is solely Exalted to Supremacy: above all other things.

Such is wayward and foolishness.

Such is isolation of the Creation from the Creator.

Such does not fly: only the godless (without God in this world) see and view Creation that way.

Evolution doesn't require a god variable, just like E = mc ² doesn't require a god variable.
You can add one if you like:

E = mc² + god.

If you work that out, you end up with god = 0
So you might just as well leave it out.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 46AND2
Upvote 0

inquiring mind

and a discerning heart
Supporter
Dec 31, 2016
7,222
3,311
U.S.
✟652,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Evolution doesn't require a god variable, just like E = mc ² doesn't require a god variable.
You can add one if you like:

E = mc² + god.

If you work that out, you end up with god = 0
So you might just as well leave it out.
E = mc² by God's design... how does that work out?
 
Upvote 0

inquiring mind

and a discerning heart
Supporter
Dec 31, 2016
7,222
3,311
U.S.
✟652,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Let’s talk about the flagellum, and all its intricate mechanical-like working parts. No, we’ll come back to that later, first let’s talk about the common wheel. Did the wheel sort of evolve or was it designed?
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,200
3,819
45
✟917,196.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Let’s talk about the flagellum, and all its intricate mechanical-like working parts. No, we’ll come back to that later, first let’s talk about the common wheel. Did the wheel sort of evolve or was it designed?
Are there chisel or plane marks where human hands worked it? Those are pretty good evidence of design.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
E = mc² by God's design... how does that work out?
It works out just fine. Many people believe it, even mainstream scientists. But, as a proposition it is unfalsifiable which rules it out as a scientific proposition.
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
E = mc² by God's design... how does that work out?

It doesn't. At least not scientifically.

Sure it does since Energy equals matter times the speed of light squared which means that energy and mass are different sides of the same coin. Lord God/Jesus took some of the matter which God created in the beginning and changed it back into energy which cooled and became our Cosmos. Sounds scientific to me AND it's in Genesis.
 
Upvote 0

inquiring mind

and a discerning heart
Supporter
Dec 31, 2016
7,222
3,311
U.S.
✟652,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Are there chisel or plane marks where human hands worked it? Those are pretty good evidence of design.
I'm sure there were on earlier ones, but the ones today are pretty smooth and adapted to present conditions... could that mean they have evolved?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Heissonear
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
I'm sure there were on earlier ones, but the ones today are pretty smooth and adapted to present conditions...
But they show even more evidence of intentional manufacture, which is how we know they were designed.
could that mean they have evolved?
Are wheels capable of biological reproduction? I wasn't aware of it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

inquiring mind

and a discerning heart
Supporter
Dec 31, 2016
7,222
3,311
U.S.
✟652,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
That's silly of course.
No, it is not. Evolution, as we are discussing it here, requires biological evolution. In particular, it requires biological reproduction with heritable variation. Otherwise, biological evolution cannot occur.


So back to the flagellum. How does it differ?
It shows no sign whatever of intentional manufacture.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

inquiring mind

and a discerning heart
Supporter
Dec 31, 2016
7,222
3,311
U.S.
✟652,664.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
No, it is not. Evolution, as we are discussing it here, requires biological evolution. In particular, it requires biological reproduction with heritable variation. Otherwise, biological evolution cannot occur.
You misunderstood me... I was agreeing with you.

It shows no sign whatever of intentional manufacture.
Now Speedwell, you really think such a molecular machine, with a clutch, transmission, braking, and propulsion system could come together on its own???
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
You misunderstood me... I was agreeing with you.


Now Speedwell, you really think such a molecular machine, with a clutch, transmission, braking, and propulsion system could come together on its own???
I see no reason why not. I am no biologist, but I have enough of a math background to understand how a stochastic process like random variation and selection can create complex structures. In addition, I have the impression that plausible hypothetical pathways have been proposed for the evolutionary development of the flagellum, so the thing looks reasonable to me. It might have been designed (whether it evolved or was "poofed") but the thing about design is that it is unfalsifiable and so can never be ruled out. It can sometimes be concluded through the evidences of intentional manufacture but can never be ruled out.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 46AND2
Upvote 0

USincognito

a post by Alan Smithee
Supporter
Dec 25, 2003
42,058
16,810
Dallas
✟870,741.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I'm sure there were on earlier ones, but the ones today are pretty smooth and adapted to present conditions... could that mean they have evolved?

Nothing non-biological evolves. Futurama had an episode where robots evolved, but that's the only place you're going to see any non-biological thing undergoing evolution.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

46AND2

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
Sep 5, 2012
5,807
2,210
Vancouver, WA
✟102,103.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You misunderstood me... I was agreeing with you.


Now Speedwell, you really think such a molecular machine, with a clutch, transmission, braking, and propulsion system could come together on its own???

Instead of trying to impart your incredulity on others, perhaps you could come up with some ACTUAL evidence?
 
Upvote 0