• 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.

Skreeper

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2017
2,471
2,683
32
Germany
✟91,021.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Are you saying a Human being is not a higher species than a Worm? Complexity alone would made people a higher species.

I do not remember who posted the link that contains,

"
Scientific theories are validated by empirical testing against physical observations. Theories are not judged simply by their logical compatibility with the available data. Independent empirical testability is the hallmark of science—in science, an explanation must not only be compatible with the observed data, it must also be testable. By "testable" we mean that the hypothesis makes predictions about what observable evidence would be consistent and what would be incompatible with the hypothesis. Simple compatibility, in itself, is insufficient as scientific evidence, because all physical observations are consistent with an infinite number of unscientific conjectures. Furthermore, a scientific explanation must make risky predictions— the predictions should be necessary if the theory is correct, and few other theories should make the same necessary predictions.

As a clear example of an untestable, unscientific, hypothesis that is perfectly consistent with empirical observations, consider solipsism. The so-called hypothesis of solipsism holds that all of reality is the product of your mind. What experiments could be performed, what observations could be made, that could demonstrate that solipsism is wrong? Even though it is logically consistent with the data, solipsism cannot be tested by independent researchers. Any and all evidence is consistent with solipsism. Solipsism is unscientific precisely because no possible evidence could stand in contradiction to its predictions. For those interested, a brief explication of the scientific method and scientific philosophy has been included, such as what is meant by "scientific evidence", "falsification", and "testability"."

I read many of those books and even had personal discussions with the authors before they were published. None of them prove my understanding of higher species. I guess you can say I am defining higher species based on complexity. If you speak with the common person on the street, I am sure they would consider people as a higher species than worms just as Theists consider God to be higher than people.

In science there is no "higher" species. Of course you think that a human is something better than a worm because you are a human!
By which criteria do you determine that a species is better or "higher" than another?
I really recommend that you attend a biology class or just talk to a biologist.
 
Upvote 0

Biologist

Regular Member
Jul 14, 2006
516
39
✟4,206.00
Faith
Pantheist
Are you saying a Human being is not a higher species than a Worm? Complexity alone would made people a higher species.

I do not remember who posted the link that contains,

"
Scientific theories are validated by empirical testing against physical observations. Theories are not judged simply by their logical compatibility with the available data. Independent empirical testability is the hallmark of science—in science, an explanation must not only be compatible with the observed data, it must also be testable. By "testable" we mean that the hypothesis makes predictions about what observable evidence would be consistent and what would be incompatible with the hypothesis. Simple compatibility, in itself, is insufficient as scientific evidence, because all physical observations are consistent with an infinite number of unscientific conjectures. Furthermore, a scientific explanation must make risky predictions— the predictions should be necessary if the theory is correct, and few other theories should make the same necessary predictions.

As a clear example of an untestable, unscientific, hypothesis that is perfectly consistent with empirical observations, consider solipsism. The so-called hypothesis of solipsism holds that all of reality is the product of your mind. What experiments could be performed, what observations could be made, that could demonstrate that solipsism is wrong? Even though it is logically consistent with the data, solipsism cannot be tested by independent researchers. Any and all evidence is consistent with solipsism. Solipsism is unscientific precisely because no possible evidence could stand in contradiction to its predictions. For those interested, a brief explication of the scientific method and scientific philosophy has been included, such as what is meant by "scientific evidence", "falsification", and "testability"."

I read many of those books and even had personal discussions with the authors before they were published. None of them prove my understanding of higher species. I guess you can say I am defining higher species based on complexity. If you speak with the common person on the street, I am sure they would consider people as a higher species than worms just as Theists consider God to be higher than people.
Trees are higher than man by your definition. Some trees have twice the number of genes than humans.

In science there are only two varieties of species, extinct and extant. No higher, no lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,866
2,671
Livingston County, MI, US
✟217,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Even when given the evidence you ask for you still refuse to accept it.
I do not have answers, I am looking for books with proof that can be examined.

But, Evolution as I was taught by Evolutionist in University requires lower species becoming higher species.

If you do not have that, then Evolution is just another Scientific Theory. What I know for sure is the Earth was here before I was born.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,866
2,671
Livingston County, MI, US
✟217,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Trees do not have eyes which alone are more complex than a tree. And, to my knowledge a Tree never even communicates with others, nor do they build things. Yes, I think animals can communicate and some may even use tools. But, what non-primates make tools?
 
Upvote 0

Skreeper

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2017
2,471
2,683
32
Germany
✟91,021.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I do not have answers, I am looking for books with proof that can be examined.

But, Evolution as I was taught by Evolutionist in University requires lower species becoming higher species.

If you do not have that, then Evolution is just another Scientific Theory. What I know for sure is the Earth was here before I was born.

There are so many mistakes in this one post.

1. There are no lower or higher species. Would you please stop repeating false things?

2. A scientific theory is the pinnacle of science. There is nothing higher or better than a scientific theory.

What I know for sure is the Earth was here before I was born.

At least one true statement. I thought we never would get here.
 
Upvote 0

Skreeper

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2017
2,471
2,683
32
Germany
✟91,021.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Trees do not have eyes which alone are more complex than a tree. And, to my knowledge a Tree never even communicates with others, nor do they build things. Yes, I think animals can communicate and some may even use tools. But, what non-primates make tools?

Humans have no echolocation. Our eyes have a blind spot. We can't see in the dark. We can't run as fast as a leopard. We aren't as strong as a gorilla.

Does that mean these animals are "higher" than we are?
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,326
10,203
✟288,346.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
If I were a betting person, I think the average person on the street would view humans as higher than most creatures.
I agree completely. The average person on the street is an ignorant, superstitious, uninformed, narcissistic fool. And these are their strong points.

If your beliefs and arguments are based upon the views of "the average person in the street" it is not surprising they are faulty.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,866
2,671
Livingston County, MI, US
✟217,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
That's a nice non sequitur you got going there.

Thank You, I have printed out the links to reread them. At one time, I knew most of the authors listed at Talk Origins. I am a ghost writer for many Evolutionists and Christian Authors, thus I am consulted at no cost from time to time. I go with it because of interesting conversations.
 
Upvote 0

Daniel Marsh

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2015
9,866
2,671
Livingston County, MI, US
✟217,896.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I did. Didn't you see them?

No, its possible one of the computer settings in my browser is wrong. I will check the settings after printing out links given in this thread.

Are there any good books that refutes the claim that man lived with dinosaurs?
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
46
Brugge
✟81,672.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You know there are rule about going off topic. If you want to start your own topic please do.

Pointing out that humans and dinosaurs lived some 65 million years apart, seems quite relevant to the topic.
 
Upvote 0

TagliatelliMonster

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2016
4,292
3,373
46
Brugge
✟81,672.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
No, its possible one of the computer settings in my browser is wrong. I will check the settings after printing out links given in this thread.

Are there any good books that refutes the claim that man lived with dinosaurs?

Any science book on the topic of dino's, humans, the evolution thereof, evolution in general, etc..; will do the trick.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Armoured
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Are you saying a Human being is not a higher species than a Worm?

Correct. All species are equally evolved because all species are equidistant from the universal common ancestor.

Complexity alone would made people a higher species.

Why? The goal of evolution is not complexity. Evolution has no goal.

I read many of those books and even had personal discussions with the authors before they were published. None of them prove my understanding of higher species.

Your understanding of higher species is wrong.

Your understanding of biology and evolution is so wrong that you think a dog giving birth to a cat would support evolution. It wouldn't. Such an observation would FALSIFY evolution.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
If I were a betting person, I think the average person on the street would view humans as higher than most creatures.

The average person probably does carry around those biases that just don't exist in actual biology.

What the average person thinks is not evidence for what reality is actually like.
 
Upvote 0