Evolution is mathematically impossible

[Queller]

Did that recently.

You have done no such thing.

 

[Queller]

Irrelevant catch-phrase that doesn't address the question.

That's all he talks in. Well that and blatant misinformation.

 

[Queller]

Perhaps there were. Lucifer may have helped to design women.

Ah, misogyny too, eh?

 

[Queller]

So whoever designed women did so with hatred for them? I know they have some problems due to their design but...misogyny?

No, you thinking Lucifer had a hand in designing women is misogynistic.

 

[Queller]

I don't understand how creatures that were evolving lived through the catastrophic events recorded in the geologic record. Especially if their 'population' was greatly reduced.

Why would you think that a catastrophic event would kill every living thing?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Why would you think that a catastrophic event would kill every living thing?

It would greatly reduce a 'population', which is needed for evolution to continue.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You have done no such thing.

I recently posted a quote attributed to Carl Sagan regard the astronomical odds against evolution.

 

[VirOptimus]

I recently posted a quote attributed to Carl Sagan regard the astronomical odds against evolution.

No, you didnt.

 

[Queller]

It would greatly reduce a 'population', which is needed for evolution to continue.

Hey, you do understand something about evolution! However, "greatly reduce" and "reduced to the point of being unable to repopulate the species" are too very different things.

Look at the cheetah bottleneck. Cheetahs survived an extinction event that reduced the population to a relative handful of individuals but they didn't go extinct.

 

[Queller]

I recently posted a quote attributed to Carl Sagan regard the astronomical odds against evolution.

A quote claiming to be attributed to Carl Sagan that didn't have anything to back it up.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

A quote claiming to be attributed to Carl Sagan that didn't have anything to back it up.

I personally saw and heard Sagan say the same thing on a science show years ago. So you have my word on it.

 

[St. Helens]

MOD HAT ON
Please address the content of the post and not poster. There is no need to tag members in a debate thread like this.
No Flaming or Goading
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[tas8831]

So no signals pass directly from the gut to the larynx?

Cool how you ignore lengthy posts explaining your errors, only to spout off these dopey one-liners.

The answer is - none that anyone knows about, and if such a pathway did exist, it would be counter to all that IS known about neurophysiology and neuroanatomy.

You seem to think that nerves are bi-directional. They are not. That nerve fibers from the gut synapse in a ganglion that fibers coming from the heart also synapse in that there must be some kind of bidirectional exchange.

Here you go, Alpha - try learning before pontificating:
How do neurons work?

But as I have documented and copy-pasted for you 4 or 5 times (and you have ignored this - religiously, one might say), even one of the very sources that YOU linked to and quoted explains how these things work in real life:

"The “afferent” (flowing to the brain) parasympathetic information travels from the heart to the brain through the vagus nerve to the medulla, after passing through the nodose ganglion. The sympathetic afferent nerves first connect to the extrinsic cardiac ganglia (also a processing center), then to the dorsal root ganglion and the spinal cord. Once afferent signals reach the medulla, they travel to the subcortical areas (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) and then to the cortical areas."​

As you are spectacularly ignorant of these areas, and do not seem to understand even the basics, I will define a couple necessary terms to help you out, maybe so that you stop making yourself look pathetic so often -

AFFERENT - going toward
EFFERENT - going outward or away
PARASYMPATHETIC/SYMPATHETIC - part of the autonomic nervous system; parasympathetic/sympathetic nuclei in the spinal cord gray matter or brain RECEIVE afferents from the gut and other organs; these nuclei then send out efferents (motor) as needed to adjust organ function (respond to stimuli)
MEDULLA - part of the brainstem, contains many autonomic nuclei
SUBCORTICAL - below the cortex, i.e., 'internal' brain structures
CORTICAL - surface gray matter of the brain - the stuff you see when you look at a brain. These parts of the brain process sensory inputs. Sensory inputs from, for example, a distended intestine may require expulsion of the gut contents (diarrhea - carried out via autonomic responses) and the cortex interprets this as pain in the gut, nausea, etc. You may moan (vocalize) or whimper or make huff breaths as a RESPONSE, via motor (efferent) output to the larynx (and diaphragm).
VAGUS NERVE - a cranial nerve that leaves the skull and provides about 75% of all parasympathetic innervation to the viscera. One branch of which is the RNL.
NUCLEUS - in neuroanatomy, a nucleus is a cluster of neurons in the brain or spinal cord that perform a common task(s)
GANGLION - in neuroanatomy, a ganglion is a cluster of neurons outside of the brain or spinal cord that perform a common task(s)

Good? Good.

By definition, afferent nerves or nerve fibers are carrying sensory impulses INTO the spinal cord and/or up to the brain. As YOUR OWN source explained (see above).
That some of these fibers dump first into a ganglion before going to the brain is IRRELEVANT as to their direction - they do NOT then send motor fibers from that ganglion out to other organs. When you had 'concluded' that the gut sends fibers To the esophagus, you were looking at biology the way a creationist engineer with no biology knowledge does - you apparently thought that nerve fibers are like copper wires in circuits, and can thus carry action potentials any which way.
I am frankly shocked that you have been going on about these things for YEARS, and STILL do not possess the most basic biological information so as to make at least plausible speculations.

Now, yet again, the stuff you ignored:

Same for vomiting. My gosh - you have the Google, yes?

Google "vomiting center".

How much research has been done on neural pathways during upchucking?

Gee, golly, I guess nobody ever thought about such a thing.

Obviously, the gut must send vocalization signals directly to the larynx via the RLN, what a grand Creation!

"The noxious stimulus may cause release of serotonin from enterochromaffin cells of the digestive tract, which activates visceral afferents. The vagus nerves mediate responses from the stomach and proximal small intestine and the splanchnic nerves and spinal cord mediate responses from the entire small intestine. Emesis-related afferents from the periphery terminate primarily in the nucleus tractus solitarius and area postrema."​

Nucleus tractus solitarius

Area postrema

Isn't it amazing how much information is actually out there, should one care to actually look for it and LEARN about it, rather than pontificating in the dark?

Oh - don't forget:

What is the purpose of the heart sending signals directly to the esophagus?
​

None, because it doesn't.

"The extrinsic cardiac ganglia, located in the thoracic cavity, have direct connections to organs such as the lungs and esophagus and are also indirectly connected via the spinal cord to many other organs, including the skin and arteries."

Does the heart have to communicate with the brain to both manage itself and the function of other organs?
​

Umm... This is sort of hilarious to me.

A cautionary tale on drawing conclusions after reading things in fields you have no demonstrable skill, education, or experience in.

You see, "cardiac" means 'pertaining to the heart', and in this context, refers to a region, i.e., 'near the heart'. Extrinsic means 'external to'. These ganglia are outside of the heart, and provide innervation to the heart AND to other organs. The heart does not use them to "manage itself and the function of other organs". Victoria Station, for example, does not allow only Victoria to get on trains...
The stomach has a 'cardiac region' (aka, 'cardia') - do you think this means that the stomach has its own heart?

Weird that you apparently stopped reading that webpage after you found your quote - a bit later, we see:

"The “afferent” (flowing to the brain) parasympathetic information travels from the heart to the brain through the vagus nerve to the medulla, after passing through the nodose ganglion. The sympathetic afferent nerves first connect to the extrinsic cardiac ganglia (also a processing center), then to the dorsal root ganglion and the spinal cord. Once afferent signals reach the medulla, they travel to the subcortical areas (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) and then to the cortical areas."​

Nothing about stopping off at other organs. Or sending motor impulses to the larynx. Tell us - did you really just stop reading that when you got the quote you wanted, or did you read the whole thing and not understand it? or not think it mattered? Or hoped that nobody would be able to find it? I don't understand how you operate. It seems rather self-defeating.
​

Are you not at least going to acknowledge that I EXPLAINED these things to you and provided sources for you to double check? Is it really that hard for a 'Christian' creationist to exhibit a little humility?

 

[tas8831]

Maybe, values tend to be very individual regardless of religion or lack thereof.

About half of the people who call themselves Christians that I know personally are hate-filled, selfish, right-wingers (this includes most of my family, I am saddened to say) who actually know very little about their precious bible.

 

[tas8831]

I recently posted a quote attributed to Carl Sagan regard the astronomical odds against evolution.

Vir is correct - you didn't.
I searched for you as member and "Sagan odds". I got 5 returns.

From oldest to newest, the posts of yours that contain either the word 'Sagan' or 'odds':

Science is fond of saying that "in spite of the overwhelming odds against it evolution did happen." from 2014

Carl Sagan was fond of saying, "Yet against all odds, it happened." from 2015
I should note that when I google just that supposed Sagan quote, the ONLY hits I get are to.. you.
https://www.christianforums.com/threads/time-for-this-challenge-again.8039310/page-7#post-72070738
"...Carl Sagan, stated that "against all odds, evolution did happen." from 2017

And the two times in this thread - funny to note that your Sagan "quote" changed over time.


So either:

1. Provide the source and the entire, accurate Sagan quote.
2. Provide the actual odds that you calculated.
3. Shut up about odds.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Cool how you ignore lengthy posts explaining your errors, only to spout off these dopey one-liners.

The answer is - none that anyone knows about, and if such a pathway did exist, it would be counter to all that IS known about neurophysiology and neuroanatomy.

You seem to think that nerves are bi-directional. They are not. That nerve fibers from the gut synapse in a ganglion that fibers coming from the heart also synapse in that there must be some kind of bidirectional exchange.

Here you go, Alpha - try learning before pontificating:
How do neurons work?

But as I have documented and copy-pasted for you 4 or 5 times (and you have ignored this - religiously, one might say), even one of the very sources that YOU linked to and quoted explains how these things work in real life:

"The “afferent” (flowing to the brain) parasympathetic information travels from the heart to the brain through the vagus nerve to the medulla, after passing through the nodose ganglion. The sympathetic afferent nerves first connect to the extrinsic cardiac ganglia (also a processing center), then to the dorsal root ganglion and the spinal cord. Once afferent signals reach the medulla, they travel to the subcortical areas (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) and then to the cortical areas."​

As you are spectacularly ignorant of these areas, and do not seem to understand even the basics, I will define a couple necessary terms to help you out, maybe so that you stop making yourself look pathetic so often -

AFFERENT - going toward
EFFERENT - going outward or away
PARASYMPATHETIC/SYMPATHETIC - part of the autonomic nervous system; parasympathetic/sympathetic nuclei in the spinal cord gray matter or brain RECEIVE afferents from the gut and other organs; these nuclei then send out efferents (motor) as needed to adjust organ function (respond to stimuli)
MEDULLA - part of the brainstem, contains many autonomic nuclei
SUBCORTICAL - below the cortex, i.e., 'internal' brain structures
CORTICAL - surface gray matter of the brain - the stuff you see when you look at a brain. These parts of the brain process sensory inputs. Sensory inputs from, for example, a distended intestine may require expulsion of the gut contents (diarrhea - carried out via autonomic responses) and the cortex interprets this as pain in the gut, nausea, etc. You may moan (vocalize) or whimper or make huff breaths as a RESPONSE, via motor (efferent) output to the larynx (and diaphragm).
VAGUS NERVE - a cranial nerve that leaves the skull and provides about 75% of all parasympathetic innervation to the viscera. One branch of which is the RNL.
NUCLEUS - in neuroanatomy, a nucleus is a cluster of neurons in the brain or spinal cord that perform a common task(s)
GANGLION - in neuroanatomy, a ganglion is a cluster of neurons outside of the brain or spinal cord that perform a common task(s)

Good? Good.

By definition, afferent nerves or nerve fibers are carrying sensory impulses INTO the spinal cord and/or up to the brain. As YOUR OWN source explained (see above).
That some of these fibers dump first into a ganglion before going to the brain is IRRELEVANT as to their direction - they do NOT then send motor fibers from that ganglion out to other organs. When you had 'concluded' that the gut sends fibers To the esophagus, you were looking at biology the way a creationist engineer with no biology knowledge does - you apparently thought that nerve fibers are like copper wires in circuits, and can thus carry action potentials any which way.
I am frankly shocked that you have been going on about these things for YEARS, and STILL do not possess the most basic biological information so as to make at least plausible speculations.

Now, yet again, the stuff you ignored:

Same for vomiting. My gosh - you have the Google, yes?

Google "vomiting center".

Gee, golly, I guess nobody ever thought about such a thing.

Obviously, the gut must send vocalization signals directly to the larynx via the RLN, what a grand Creation!

"The noxious stimulus may cause release of serotonin from enterochromaffin cells of the digestive tract, which activates visceral afferents. The vagus nerves mediate responses from the stomach and proximal small intestine and the splanchnic nerves and spinal cord mediate responses from the entire small intestine. Emesis-related afferents from the periphery terminate primarily in the nucleus tractus solitarius and area postrema."​

Nucleus tractus solitarius

Area postrema

Isn't it amazing how much information is actually out there, should one care to actually look for it and LEARN about it, rather than pontificating in the dark?

Oh - don't forget:

What is the purpose of the heart sending signals directly to the esophagus?
​

None, because it doesn't.

"The extrinsic cardiac ganglia, located in the thoracic cavity, have direct connections to organs such as the lungs and esophagus and are also indirectly connected via the spinal cord to many other organs, including the skin and arteries."

Does the heart have to communicate with the brain to both manage itself and the function of other organs?
​

Umm... This is sort of hilarious to me.

A cautionary tale on drawing conclusions after reading things in fields you have no demonstrable skill, education, or experience in.

You see, "cardiac" means 'pertaining to the heart', and in this context, refers to a region, i.e., 'near the heart'. Extrinsic means 'external to'. These ganglia are outside of the heart, and provide innervation to the heart AND to other organs. The heart does not use them to "manage itself and the function of other organs". Victoria Station, for example, does not allow only Victoria to get on trains...
The stomach has a 'cardiac region' (aka, 'cardia') - do you think this means that the stomach has its own heart?

Weird that you apparently stopped reading that webpage after you found your quote - a bit later, we see:

"The “afferent” (flowing to the brain) parasympathetic information travels from the heart to the brain through the vagus nerve to the medulla, after passing through the nodose ganglion. The sympathetic afferent nerves first connect to the extrinsic cardiac ganglia (also a processing center), then to the dorsal root ganglion and the spinal cord. Once afferent signals reach the medulla, they travel to the subcortical areas (thalamus, amygdala, etc.) and then to the cortical areas."​

Nothing about stopping off at other organs. Or sending motor impulses to the larynx. Tell us - did you really just stop reading that when you got the quote you wanted, or did you read the whole thing and not understand it? or not think it mattered? Or hoped that nobody would be able to find it? I don't understand how you operate. It seems rather self-defeating.​

Are you not at least going to acknowledge that I EXPLAINED these things to you and provided sources for you to double check? Is it really that hard for a 'Christian' creationist to exhibit a little humility?

This might be what I meant by 'smoke signals'. Perhaps you can help explain it in layman's language.

Cell Signaling | Learn Science at Scitable

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Vir is correct - you didn't.
I searched for you as member and "Sagan odds". I got 5 returns.

From oldest to newest, the posts of yours that contain either the word 'Sagan' or 'odds':

Science is fond of saying that "in spite of the overwhelming odds against it evolution did happen." from 2014

Carl Sagan was fond of saying, "Yet against all odds, it happened." from 2015
I should note that when I google just that supposed Sagan quote, the ONLY hits I get are to.. you.
"...Carl Sagan, stated that "against all odds, evolution did happen." from 2017

And the two times in this thread - funny to note that your Sagan "quote" changed over time.


So either:

1. Provide the source and the entire, accurate Sagan quote.
2. Provide the actual odds that you calculated.
3. Shut up about odds.

So there's an actual record of everything that Carl Sagan ever said publically?

 

[VirOptimus]

So there's an actual record of everything that Carl Sagan ever said publically?

If you cant support it, just say so.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

If you cant support it, just say so.

You'll just have to take my word for it.

 

[VirOptimus]

You'll just have to take my word for it.

I have already adressed that.