- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,777
- 52,552
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
You have a higher tolerance level then? is that what you're saying?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
He obviously found you annoying enough to put on Ignore.
That's not what I asked. Remember, you said the the creationists at AiG, ICR, and the DI are intellectual giants who would put scientists like me in our place.Would you like to see a list of what creationists have given us in the past?
What more do you want?
Would you like to see a list of what creationists have given us in the past?
What more do you want?
You have a higher tolerance level then? is that what you're saying?
Their complete absence over decades speaks volumes, does it not?
Never mind.
Anyone can get a book published. Note that River_Jordan specifically mentions "giving presentations at conferences, participating in poster sessions, or even showing up and just asking questions" as examples. The first two are definitely more how scientists put information out.
Absolutely false. I gave you a link to a paper that clearly states why Haldane's original model was quite thoroughly wrong in a way that grossly overestimated the constraint imposed by the cost of selection. You didn't read it, did you? It then went on to discuss a different argument for a limit, one proposed by Felsenstein and by Nei and based in part on Haldane's reasoning, and then showed from empirical data that an assumption in that model was off by an order of magnitude, causing it again to overestimate the effect of the cost of selection.Repeated assertions aren’t the same as resolving the math. Over 300 posts, no one clearly demonstrated how Haldane’s original dilemma, regarding the speed limits of beneficial mutation fixation, has been overcome without hand-waving or invoking assumptions that just move the problem.
It's nothing more than childish trash talk like "My dad could beat up your dad", just with "If creationist scientists were here they'd kick your butts" instead. Obviously if that were so the creationists would regularly show up at science conferences and kick everyone's butts, but they never do.Anyone can get a book published. Note that River_Jordan specifically mentions "giving presentations at conferences, participating in poster sessions, or even showing up and just asking questions" as examples. The first two are definitely more how scientists put information out.
More precisely, it's when player from A is closer to B's goal/end line, and with the caveat that the A player is only in an offside position if they're also ahead of the ball. (Which is why it's impossible for anyone to be offside in a penalty kick -- they're all behind the ball.)Offside in association football is basically when a player from Team A is too close to Team B's goal than Team B's second-to-last defender. But it's only an offence in-game when the player from Team A is in active play. Penalty kicks and getting the ball back into play doesn't count as an offside offence.
More precisely, it's when player from A is closer to B's goal/end line, and with the caveat that the A player is only in an offside position if they're also ahead of the ball. (Which is why it's impossible for anyone to be offside in a penalty kick -- they're all behind the ball.)
It's nothing more than childish trash talk like "My dad could beat up your dad", just with "If creationist scientists were here they'd kick your butts" instead. Obviously if that were so the creationists would regularly show up at science conferences and kick everyone's butts, but they never do.
LOOK AT THAT! HE CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE PROPER EVIDENCE.
Now, to continue on from that, have they posted any scientific journals, papers and the like to actual scientific organizations independent of their own groups for outside commentary, verification and/or analysis?
... if Haldane's Dilemma was an actual dilemma for the theory of evolution in 1957, then why does the theory of evolution still stand as a scientific theory?
Sure can.
That's like submitting a paper against prejudice to the Ku Klux Klan for their verification.
Oh it's because all us scientists, even us Christian ones, just looooooove our sins and evil ways. Or something.Hence why I asked the question of @1Tonne a while back that was basically: if Haldane's Dilemma was an actual dilemma for the theory of evolution in 1957, then why does the theory of evolution still stand as a scientific theory?
Maybe he was put on IGNORE?
Oh it's because all us scientists, even us Christian ones, just looooooove our sins and evil ways. Or something.
If they acknowledge a creator, then they would be accountable to him. But they love their sin, and so they do not want to acknowledge Him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?