Another poor response to ERV evidence for common ancestry by a creationist.

[Doveaman]

Supernova are caused by the slowing of hydrogen fusion in stars. As hydrogen fusion slows, the star contracts, providing enough heat to begin helium fusion. And so the cycle repeats through carbon, neon, oxygen and silicon. Since energy loss through neutrino byproducts is significant in all stages from carbon on, each stage is shorter than the last due to a higher reaction rate to maintain equilibrium. Eventually, the star begins producing iron. Iron fusion does not produce positive net energy, so a core of iron, under immense pressure, begins to develop.

It continues until it reaches the Chandraesekhar limit, at which point inward pressure outweighs outward pressure from electron degeneracy and the star catastrophically collapses. Since matter cannot all fit into the same space, it heats up, causing more reactions as it collapses, and then it gets exploded outwards.

It's not wise to believe everything you learn in school. Especially when your teacher cannot prove it.

"It is written, therefore it is true" is only true if it is written in the Bible.

 

[Delphiki]

It's not wise to believe everything you learn in school. Especially when your teacher cannot prove it.

"It is written, therefore it is true" is only true if it is written in the Bible.

...because the bible says so. Don't forget that part.

I suppose if we added the same circular qualification in all our textbooks, you guys would believe them?

 

[Doveaman]

You do realize that incessantly howling "prove it!" to everything just makes you look ignorant, right?

God exist. The Bible is true. Adam and Eve had no belly-buttons.

 

[Loudmouth]

It's not wise to believe everything you learn in school. Especially when your teacher cannot prove it.

"It is written, therefore it is true" is only true if it is written in the Bible.

I am going to go out on a limb and call "POE" on this one. I have suspected it for a while now, but this post has convinced me. Perhaps my faith in humanity is a bit too high, but I can not accept the idea that someone can be blinded by cognitive dissonance to such an extreme degree.

 

[Incariol]

It's not wise to believe everything you learn in school. Especially when your teacher cannot prove it.

Doveaman. What are you talking about?

"It is written, therefore it is true" is only true if it is written in the Bible.

Remember that next time you find yourself wanting to assert that your personal interpretation of the Bible trumps empirical science.

 

[Naraoia]

Firefox was being tiresome last night and refused to let me right click the URL, so I had to click the "Share" button under the video and copy the worthless share link that doesn't auto-embed the video.

Lovely. I hate auto-embed.

Awesome video, by the way. dad's calling it worthless makes me want to weep for humanity.

 

[Doveaman]

Anyone else have a rebuttal to the ERV argument that doesn't involve Last Thursdayism?

Hominid Adam.

 

[Doveaman]

Doveaman. What are you talking about?

Scientific indoctrination.

Remember that next time you find yourself wanting to assert that your personal interpretation of the Bible trumps empirical science.

Empirical science is personal interpretation.

 

[Loudmouth]

Hominid Adam.

What evidence do you have for this? How do you differentiate between the DNA we inherited from our common ancestor with chimps, the DNA that was the product of mutation and selection since our lineage diverged from the chimp lineage, and the DNA that was produced by God? How do you test this idea?

 

[Incariol]

Scientific indoctrination.

Empirical science is personal interpretation.

If I stain a slide of nervous tissue with anti-sertonin antibodies, and then it fluoresces green under a dark light, that means serotonin is present in that mount. So no it isn't, but nice try.

 

[Loudmouth]

Scientific indoctrination.

Science is a method.

Empirical science is personal interpretation.

Empirical science is the opposite of personal interpretation.

Of course, these are things every Poe would say. They claim that terms are actually the exact opposite of what they are. Next you will tell us that up is down, black is white, and wet is dry.

 

[Doveaman]

Science is a method.

I reject your scientific method and substitute it for my own scientific method.

Empirical science is the opposite of personal interpretation.

Empirical science involves observations followed by personal interpretation of observations.

Age + Fossils + Genes = Observations.

Macro Evolution = Personal Interpretation of Observations.

 

[Incariol]

I reject your scientific method and substitute it for my own scientific method.

So don't complain when the rest of us don't take your "science" seriously.

Empirical science involves observation followed by personal interpretation of the observation.

No, it doesn't, did you not read my example?

 

[Doveaman]

If I stain a slide of nervous tissue with anti-sertonin antibodies, and then it fluoresces green under a dark light, that means serotonin is present in that mount.

Yes, serotonin would be the interpretation of the result.

 

[Doveaman]

So don't complain when the rest of us don't take your "science" seriously.

Likewise.

No, it doesn't, did you not read my example?

Yes.

 

[Phred]

I reject your scientific method and substitute it for my own scientific method.

You'll excuse me if I just laugh at you. That's why the scientific method was established. To stop morons from just inventing evidence and making claims.

Empirical science involves observations followed by personal interpretation of observations.

Followed by publishing that interpretation and opening it up to others to verify and validate. If they don't agree then consensus is not reached. You get to give your take on the data. You don't get to just publish it and claim you're right.

Age + Fossils + Genes = Observations.

No. Age = data. Fossils = data. Genes = data

Macro Evolution = Personal Interpretation of Observations.

Evolution = inescapable conclusion reached from the available data.

 

[Incariol]

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

Empirical science is personal interpretation.

The whole point of empirical science is that it is the same for everyone, and that the results are repeatable. There is nothing "personal" about it.

 

[Loudmouth]

I reject your scientific method and substitute it for my own scientific method.

Definitely a Poe.

Empirical science involves observations followed by personal interpretation of observations.

No, it doesn't. Empirical science involves constructing testable hypotheses and then testing those hypotheses with observations.

Macro Evolution = Personal Interpretation of Observations.

False. Macro-evolution = thousands of hypotheses that have been tested and have passed testing.

 

[sandwiches]

I reject your scientific method and substitute it for my own scientific method.

Just so we're all clear here, you're saying that the inductive science that uses intersubjective evidence isn't what you consider science? At least you understand that what you believe isn't what scientists use or apply.