Evolution As Science? Really...?

[Loudmouth]

"By the end of the 1940s the work of the evolutionists was considered to be largely completed, as indicated by the robustness of the Evolutionary Synthesis. But in the ensuing decades, all sorts of things happened that might have had a major impact on the Darwinian paradigm. First came Avery's demonstration that nucleic acids and not proteins are the genetic material. Then in 1953, the discovery of the double helix by Watson and Crick increased the analytical capacity of the geneticists by at least an order of magnitude. Unexpectedly, however, none of these molecular findings necessitated a revision of the Darwinian paradigm--nor did the even more drastic genomic revolution that has permitted the analysis of genes down to the last base pair." --Ernst Mayr, 2004. ref.

The discovery of DNA put the Modern Synthesis to the test. It came through in spades. Sorry Edmond, you are grasping at straws again.

 

[Edmond]

Translation:
.... Mankind from apes is a lie!

Valkhorn..apparently you are either not aware of where your own science tells you you come from or you just play the game of trying the falsify your opponents claims by saying they are a lie....which I have seen a lot of from evolutionist 'defenders' on this site. In either case your response is false.

This will begin to makes it very clear....Humans on same branch as old world monkeys, gorillas (that seems appropriate), orangutans, gibbons, chimpanzees. Is that close enough for you? See .... 'Picturing Evolutionary Trees
Common Descent Described Graphically'... http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/trees.htm
The rest of you implied 'lie' conclusions can be discussed after you state a correction your this conclusion ....

<snip>

Edmond. Look at your translation. You dance around the obvious question which you NEVER answered:
How is common descent from apes a lie?

Answer, or forever hold your peace.

----------------------

------------------------------------------

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Origional post:

Edmond:
The absurd assumption that humankind evoluted from an ape is the deception. That is the lie. I can assure you that far less then 'the entire world' is included in accepting that lie. In America alone 2/3 of the people don't believe that lie. Evolution is a minority belief even after 150 years of beong dogmatically pounded into people's heads through public education. That's always the problem with a lie. It takes 10 times the effort to try to make anyone believe it and after all that....most people are smart either not to believe it. That the fun of a good story anytime. The true ALWAYS prevailing in the end. So sayanara....

Valkhorn:

Translation:

• Mankind from apes is a lie!
• That is a lie!
• I can assure you that not everyone believes this lie.
• 2/3 of Americans don't believe the lie
• The lie is dogmatically pounded into people's heads (even though 2/3 of americans don't know what it is? how does this add up?)
• That's the problem with the lie - no one believes it.
• It takes too much effort for those to believe said lie.
• The truth prevails and is not the lie.

Edmond. Look at your translation. You dance around the obvious question which you NEVER answered:




Edmonds quote mine and response:




Quote Originally Posted by: Valkhorn

Translation:
.... Mankind from apes is a lie!



Edmond:
Valkhorn..apparently you are either not aware of where your own science tells you you come from or you just play the game of trying the falsify your opponents claims by saying they are a lie....which I have seen a lot of from evolutionist 'defenders' on this site. In either case your response is false.

This will begin to makes it very clear....Humans on same branch as old world monkeys, gorillas (that seems appropriate), orangutans, gibbons, chimpanzees. Is that close enough for you? See .... 'Picturing Evolutionary Trees
Common Descent Described Graphically'... http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/trees.htm
The rest of you implied 'lie' conclusions can be discussed after you state a correction your this conclusion ....




Edmond, why did you so blatently quote valkhorn out of context? Have you no shame or can't you read properly?

 

[Caphi]

Valkhorn..apparently you are either not aware of where your own science tells you you come from or you just play the game of trying the falsify your opponents claims by saying they are a lie....which I have seen a lot of from evolutionist 'defenders' on this site. In either case your response is false.

This will begin to makes it very clear....Humans on same branch as old world monkeys, gorillas (that seems appropriate), orangutans, gibbons, chimpanzees. Is that close enough for you? See .... 'Picturing Evolutionary Trees
Common Descent Described Graphically'... http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/trees.htm
The rest of you implied 'lie' conclusions can be discussed after you state a correction your this conclusion ....


----------------------

------------------------------------------

Quoting out of context is against the forum rules, Edmond. Aren't you the one who usually enforces the rules? Or is that only when it suits you?

1.4 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.

I think that your glib torturations of Valkhorn's post count as misquotes. If you insist they are not, consider that I can do this.

I... 'lie'

Either retract your post and apologize to Valkhorn or I shall report it as a blatant misquote. Of course, if you agree that you have misquoted I shall edit this post.

 

[Edmond]

Origional post:

Edmond:
The absurd assumption that humankind evoluted from an ape is the deception. That is the lie. I can assure you that far less then 'the entire world' is included in accepting that lie. In America alone 2/3 of the people don't believe that lie. Evolution is a minority belief even after 150 years of beong dogmatically pounded into people's heads through public education. That's always the problem with a lie. It takes 10 times the effort to try to make anyone believe it and after all that....most people are smart either not to believe it. That the fun of a good story anytime. The true ALWAYS prevailing in the end. So sayanara....

Valkhorn:

Translation:

• Mankind from apes is a lie!
• That is a lie!
• I can assure you that not everyone believes this lie.
• 2/3 of Americans don't believe the lie
• The lie is dogmatically pounded into people's heads (even though 2/3 of americans don't know what it is? how does this add up?)
• That's the problem with the lie - no one believes it.
• It takes too much effort for those to believe said lie.
• The truth prevails and is not the lie.

Edmond. Look at your translation. You dance around the obvious question which you NEVER answered:




Edmonds quote mine and response:




Quote Originally Posted by: Valkhorn

Translation:
.... Mankind from apes is a lie!

Edmond:
Valkhorn..apparently you are either not aware of where your own science tells you you come from or you just play the game of trying the falsify your opponents claims by saying they are a lie....which I have seen a lot of from evolutionist 'defenders' on this site. In either case your response is false.

This will begin to makes it very clear....Humans on same branch as old world monkeys, gorillas (that seems appropriate), orangutans, gibbons, chimpanzees. Is that close enough for you? See .... 'Picturing Evolutionary Trees
Common Descent Described Graphically'... http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/trees.htm
The rest of you implied 'lie' conclusions can be discussed after you state a correction your this conclusion ....

Edmond, why did you so blatently quote valkhorn out of context? Have you no shame or can't you read properly?

My interpretation of this context is that Volkhorn's response to my statement that humankind decsending from apes in my initial statement was a lie... That is what I based my rebuttal on in the post that followed.

In his undefined comment ...Translation.... I thought he meant 'his translation' menaing interpretation of what I said since it was placed with no context around it.

He then summarized at the bottom of his post that I should then look at 'my' translation. That again implied to me that the top 'Translation list' was his intrepretation of what I had originally stated. His post has no clear introduction.

If he was referring to my initial inference that humankind from apes is a lie I have no problem whatsoever identifying that area of confusion. The purpose of my subsequent post has no application then if Valkhorn does understand that evolution concludes that humankind did evolve from ape kind.

As for the confusion...i have no probelm apologizing. As for the clarity of the post... It would be heplful to put it in an brief introductory context of even a couple of words. One word like translation with no context can easily be interpreted in our vanacular be be any abreviation for ....' my interpretation of what you said ...and his first statement to follow... Mankind from apes is a lie!
Which said to me... What you said about evolution concluding that mankind descended from an ape...is a lie. Hence my rebuttal with proof to affirm that such a conclusion by evolution was not a lie in the post that followed. ...

-------------------------------------------

 

[HairlessSimian]

It is a well known fact that empirical sciecne has worked overtime for the past 150 to take every drop of information possible and fit it or try to squeeze it if necesary into the evolutionary presuppositional mold. Science has NEVER, to my present knowledge, set out to faslify the theory that was brought to them by the initial modern evolutionists. Give me some quotes if you can find them ANYWHERE to affirm that they have done this. Of course there will be more evidence 'claiming' the ToE to be true. That is ALL thay have been doing. ...

-----------------------------------

So, according to you, Edmond, everything that physicists, chemists, computer scientists, biologists, psychologists, engineers, mathematicians, etc. have been doing for the past 150 years has been to shore up the failed theory of evolution?

Silly response:
Well, Edmond, since we've been making such great scientific and technological progress in the past 150 years, then I guess it was a very productive thing to have shored up the ToE in this way and we can all thank Darwin for it.

Rebuke:
Either you do not measure your words or it is clear that you have no real idea what has in fact been going on in the world of science and technology over the past 150 years. Either way, your claim is too silly. How seriously do you want to be taken?