If Evolution were true...

[Tinker Grey]

I find it perplexing that someone's response to science's imperfect knowledge is to posit the unknowable.

 

[Delphiki]

Oh no, I live by faith. I find it very confusing, that you would hold to that because what I have been told is that you guys never believe in anything you do NOT see and yet it seems you are believing something you do NOT see. Let's take the tire tracks, OBSERVABLE evidence as you point out, that gives us the starting point of the race, but surely you cannot tell the owner of the vehicle or what facility it was parked in or where that facility was located or what the original color of the vehicle was, or the brand of the tires it used to have etc. etc. by those tire tracks. Yes, they do give us evidence of the vehicle having wheels and that possible someone was driving and where the race "could" have started but they certainly are not enough. In the real world we know that all these things can be found out because the race car did not evolve it was created and made and we have records for it. It all goes back to the creator though and the original intent or pattern.

For those same reasons, we have no idea on things like what colors dinosaurs were. However, you're really veering far off the point I was making. If you want to get into every tiny detail of how a car is made then feel free to humor me in private messages as I am an enthusiast. Incidentally, tire marks at the starting line will tell you what brand the tires were, the torque/weight of the vehicle, and

Point is, you asked how we can use evidence that we find today to determine the past. I gave an analogy to explain this. It really doesn't need to be more complicated than that.

As to your justice system example, I suppose it is as vague as science and yet it all hangs on evidence. It has been proven though, that just because the victims blood was on the defendents shirt and the defendent was holding the knife over the victim, and someone saw that whole scene. Though it is evidence, it can sometimes prove NOT to be evidence that the defendent actually commited the crime.

Right -- but usually due to additional evidence, not testimonies in a 2000 year old book.

 

[Awesome_Frog]

Okay, I see that but it seems to all point forward. How does this translate back to Common Descent?

Yes, natural selection always points forwards. How Evolutionary biologists track backwards is through phylogeny, archeology, and genetics.

Phylogeny is how we order organisms and how they are categorized. With the addition of genetics, we can analyze the genomes of organisms and then work backwards with extinct species to see when what genes and traits around.

For instance we have tracked Human ancestry back to where we split off with chimps, because the last great ape to share the genetic information with us and chimps was Orrorin tugenensis.

Since then we have discovered several Hominids ( Species Homo/ human) including Australopithecus afarensis, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo heidelbergensis.

For a really good video describing phylogeny in Caniforms (Dogs, bears, weasles), and Feliforms ( Big Cats, Cats, Hyenas) I would suggest these videos by AronRa on youtube who is also a Biologist.

YouTube - ‪Foundations of Feliforme Families‬‏ (Feliformes)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ-DawQKPr8 (caniforms) Skip the first 5 minutes ( Ray bashing)

I hope this helps.

 

[Inan3]

Yes, natural selection always points forwards. How Evolutionary biologists track backwards is through phylogeny, archeology, and genetics.

Phylogeny is how we order organisms and how they are categorized. With the addition of genetics, we can analyze the genomes of organisms and then work backwards with extinct species to see when what genes and traits around.

For instance we have tracked Human ancestry back to where we split off with chimps, because the last great ape to share the genetic information with us and chimps was Orrorin tugenensis.

Since then we have discovered several Hominids ( Species Homo/ human) including Australopithecus afarensis, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo heidelbergensis.

For a really good video describing phylogeny in Caniforms (Dogs, bears, weasles), and Feliforms ( Big Cats, Cats, Hyenas) I would suggest these videos by AronRa on youtube who is also a Biologist.

YouTube - ‪Foundations of Feliforme Families‬‏ (Feliformes)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ-DawQKPr8 (caniforms) Skip the first 5 minutes ( Ray bashing)

I hope this helps.

Thanks, AF. I appreciate your efforts and attitude. It is very informative.

 

[Orogeny]

...We have no idea on things like what colors dinosaurs were.

True-Color Dinosaur Revealed: First Full-Body Rendering

Abstract here (full text available upon registration):
Plumage Color Patterns of an Extinct Dinosaur

 

[Nabobalis]

True-Color Dinosaur Revealed: First Full-Body Rendering

Abstract here (full text available upon registration):
Plumage Color Patterns of an Extinct Dinosaur

*cough*

 

[rjc34]

Thanks, AF. I appreciate your efforts and attitude. It is very informative.

AronRa's channel! Have you been watching his videos? If so - giant internet high five!

 

[Inan3]

AronRa's channel! Have you been watching his videos? If so - giant internet high five!

I have mixed emotions in answering this, rjc. While I have watched a few of AronRa's videos (I am even featured in one), because of your encouraging attitude, I feel somewhat sorry to tell you that AronRa is not one of my favorite people to watch. When I first came on CF I had the not so pleasurable experiance of talking with him. I find him to be very bigoted and pompous and in my mind not one that I enjoy listening to. It's obvious that he is very educated but I find him to be offensive and manipulative of information. In my book he is very suspect and therefore, I don't give him much attention. His videos are slanted and too fast for me to actually verify any of his information. In fact, I actually believe that is his intent... to come in both guns loaded expecting people to come on board with him or he'll shoot you down. Due to this slant and his obvious agenda I do not trust him and really prefer NOT to watch his videos. Now if there is ANYthing I could learn from AronRa, his attitude and total make-up prevents that for me. I realize that many of you probably find him a hero but in my eyes while he may be an advocate for atheism he is actually a bruise for science. I don't see that he wants to advance science as much as he wants to put down God. Science is just a tool he uses to do so.

I appreciate your thumbs up to me and ask you not to take it personal that I don't see it as you in the case of the infamous AronRa.

 

[Jro]

I'd like to also vouch for AronRa. Very good information and very well structured presentations.

 

[rjc34]

I have mixed emotions in answering this, rjc. While I have watched a few of AronRa's videos (I am even featured in one), because of your encouraging attitude, I feel somewhat sorry to tell you that AronRa is not one of my favorite people to watch. When I first came on CF I had the not so pleasurable experiance of talking with him. I find him to be very bigoted and pompous and in my mind not one that I enjoy listening to.

Bigoted and pompous? I can see why he might come across like that (seeing as his views are diametrically opposed to yours), but I can assure you the intellectual honesty in his videos is top notch. If you look through his videos, he's even got a couple where he corrects mistakes that were pointed out to him, fully admitting his fault. How many creationist youtubers would ever do that?

It's obvious that he is very educated but I find him to be offensive and manipulative of information.

I can understand why you'd find some of what he says offensive, as he holds no punches when it comes to blowing down creationism. He is very educated, and his knowledge of biology shows wonderfully in his videos. I'm curious though about your claim of being 'manipulative of information'... could you provide me a specific example from anything he's posted or said in a video?

In my book he is very suspect and therefore, I don't give him much attention. His videos are slanted and too fast for me to actually verify any of his information.

So pause them after you hear a claim and go look it up. I'm sure there's also dozens of members here who would be happy to help you on that task if you posted it in this thread and asked for citations.

In fact, I actually believe that is his intent... to come in both guns loaded expecting people to come on board with him or he'll shoot you down.

He crams a LOT of information into his videos, and he does talk pretty fast. He only shoots down claims with no evidence, as he definitely listens for it.

Due to this slant and his obvious agenda I do not trust him and really prefer NOT to watch his videos. Now if there is ANYthing I could learn from AronRa, his attitude and total make-up prevents that for me. I realize that many of you probably find him a hero but in my eyes while he may be an advocate for atheism he is actually a bruise for science.

Not a hero, just a guy who makes interesting and informative videos. I don't see how an 'agenda' of making videos explaining science could ever be a bad thing, but to each their own I guess.

I don't see that he wants to advance science as much as he wants to put down God. Science is just a tool he uses to do so.

In most of his science videos, he isn't 'putting down God', he's putting down creationism. There is a difference.

I appreciate your thumbs up to me and ask you not to take it personal that I don't see it as you in the case of the infamous AronRa.

I would like to ask you though... have you heard of QualiaSoup and TheraminTrees? They both make very, very good videos with very little bias, and no flaming/bigotry. One of my favourites on evolution is from QualiaSoup, here's the link, and I'd very much encourage you to watch it.

 

[Inan3]

Bigoted and pompous? I can see why he might come across like that (seeing as his views are diametrically opposed to yours), but I can assure you the intellectual honesty in his videos is top notch. If you look through his videos, he's even got a couple where he corrects mistakes that were pointed out to him, fully admitting his fault. How many creationist youtubers would ever do that?

Well rjc, I'm not going to argue whether he is bigoted or pompous. You can look it up for yourself. I'll even take away pompous because bigot describes him to a "t".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

It's not because his views are opposite than mine. I don't ever mind that. It's definitely not science, either. It is that his life is dedicated to oppose those who are opposite his. Anyone can disagree with me or others but when they vehemently pursue it trying to prove them wrong on every turn, then yes, I'd say, they are bigoted.

I can understand why you'd find some of what he says offensive, as he holds no punches when it comes to blowing down creationism. He is very educated, and his knowledge of biology shows wonderfully in his videos. I'm curious though about your claim of being 'manipulative of information'... could you provide me a specific example from anything he's posted or said in a video?

I can see why you might think he is just blowing creationism down, but I believe it goes much deeper than that. I think he is manipulative because he USES science to forward his agenda. His agenda is to knock down peoples belief in God. I think that is very different from just believing in science and disagreeing with those who believe in creation. I would even suspect that he got his education in science to support and further his agenda. Yep, I believe his agenda is more important to him than science.

So pause them after you hear a claim and go look it up. I'm sure there's also dozens of members here who would be happy to help you on that task if you posted it in this thread and asked for citations.

He crams a LOT of information into his videos, and he does talk pretty fast. He only shoots down claims with no evidence, as he definitely listens for it.

I'll pass

Not a hero, just a guy who makes interesting and informative videos. I don't see how an 'agenda' of making videos explaining science could ever be a bad thing, but to each their own I guess.

In most of his science videos, he isn't 'putting down God', he's putting down creationism. There is a difference.

I know it is hard for you to see what I am saying but once again, I believe it goes much deeper than science. I think he is manipulative in that he USES science to front and forward his true agenda which I believe is exactly that, trying to put down God, and those that believe in Him. I don't think his agenda is to make science videos as much as it is to discredit the creation. It's obvious if one will just look at the title of his video series. For you it may be more about science for him it is more about knocking God. I do suspect he chose his education as a cover and support for that very agenda.

I would like to ask you though... have you heard of QS and TT? They both make very, very good videos with very little bias, and no flaming/bigotry. One of my favourites on evolution is from QualiaSoup, here's the link, and I'd very much encourage you to watch it.

I had not heard of these before you added them but I did listen to the video. The links to QS and TT I didn't find anything regarding evolution standing out so I didn't watch anything. I thought the video was very good though. I liked it and he did a good job explaining evolution. Thank you. I will listen to it again after I submit this but I have no problems with this video.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

AronRa makes wayyyy less anti-religion videos than other YouTube atheists. You must have thin skin if you think AronRa is out to get Christianity. AronRa's videos are typically exclusively evolution-based videos highlighting paleontology and taxonomy. Only in his Foundational Falsehoods series does he ever make any serious criticisms of religion, and in doing so he really is pretty tame because it's all directed at fundamentalism.

 

[rjc34]

I had not heard of these before you added them but I did listen to the video. The links to QS and TT I didn't find anything regarding evolution standing out so I didn't watch anything. I thought the video was very good though. I liked it and he did a good job explaining evolution. Thank you. I will listen to it again after I submit this but I have no problems with this video.

I'm glad you like it

It's what I usually point my friends to if they don't have any base in evolution or science. It usually gets the information across.

Moving on though, any questions or comments from the video? Do you accept what it says, or are there any points it makes you'd like further backed up?

I'm also curious, since I think you were a YEC when this discussion started... where are you at now? Still YEC? OEC? Theistic evolution?

 

[Inan3]

AronRa makes wayyyy less anti-religion videos than other YouTube atheists. You must have thin skin if you think AronRa is out to get Christianity. AronRa's videos are typically exclusively evolution-based videos highlighting paleontology and taxonomy. Only in his Foundational Falsehoods series does he ever make any serious criticisms of religion, and in doing so he really is pretty tame because it's all directed at fundamentalism.

Well, thank you LH.

 

[OllieFranz]

AronRa makes wayyyy less anti-religion videos than other YouTube atheists. You must have thin skin if you think AronRa is out to get Christianity. AronRa's videos are typically exclusively evolution-based videos highlighting paleontology and taxonomy. Only in his Foundational Falsehoods series does he ever make any serious criticisms of religion, and in doing so he really is pretty tame because it's all directed at fundamentalism.

Alas, those last five words are the crux of Inan3's problem. She feels that a swipe at the snake-oil salesmen pushing the same long discredited lies on uncritical Christians is a swipe at the faith Christians that believe their lies, and a swipe at her faith is a personal attack on her.

Of course it doesn't help that the snake-oil salesmen foster exactly that reaction, since then the Christians will hand over all their money "to make it possible for us (the snake-oil salesmen) to get the 'TRUTH' out." Meanwhile only a tiny fraction of that money is used for that purpose, the rest just lines their pockets.

 

[Inan3]

I'm glad you like it

It's what I usually point my friends to if they don't have any base in evolution or science. It usually gets the information across.

Moving on though, any questions or comments from the video? Do you accept what it says, or are there any points it makes you'd like further backed up?

I'm also curious, since I think you were a YEC when this discussion started... where are you at now? Still YEC? OEC? Theistic evolution?

Well, before I make any specific comments on the video, I want to watch it again but I will say from what I remember I pretty much accepted it. That really hasn't changed much for me, though. I mostly have my exception with common descent and the time lapse it takes for evolution to go forward.

Now, when it comes to specifics regarding evolution , there might be many things I wouldn't agree with, but I do not know enough about it to know exactly what that could be. But for now I don't see anything wrong with it's premise, EXCEPT when it brings in common descent or the millions of years it needs to bring about the evolutionary changes. This is always where I have had my issues. That just does not agree with the Bible and I agree with the Bible. I understand why common descent is hypothesized but I do not believe it proves its point for common descent above and beyond the case for creation.

I have never really been a YEC. I've pretty much always been OEC. Now I don't think that will help your case any because I still believe man and animals are only 6-10 thousand years old and from what I understand you need the millions of years to make it work.

 

[Inan3]

Alas, those last five words are the crux of Inan3's problem. She feels that a swipe at the snake-oil salesmen pushing the same long discredited lies on uncritical Christians is a swipe at the faith Christians that believe their lies, and a swipe at her faith is a personal attack on her.

Of course it doesn't help that the snake-oil salesmen foster exactly that reaction, since then the Christians will hand over all their money "to make it possible for us (the snake-oil salesmen) to get the 'TRUTH' out." Meanwhile only a tiny fraction of that money is used for that purpose, the rest just lines their pockets.

Well, little OllieFranz, I guess I should sign over my identity to you seeings you think you can speak for me and possibly my money for it seems you think you can handle it better than I. I find this pretty ironic because you attempt to do what you suggest others do to me and my kind. Pretty funny and quite hypocritical don't you think? I do. But thanks anyway, I think I know exactly how to speak for myself and handle my own money and when it comes to me and my stuff you can just ... I think the phrase goes like this.... TAKE A HIKE!!!

 

[Greg1234]

It's not because his views are opposite than mine. I don't ever mind that. It's definitely not science, either. It is that his life is dedicated to oppose those who are opposite his. Anyone can disagree with me or others but when they vehemently pursue it trying to prove them wrong on every turn, then yes, I'd say, they are bigoted.

To see where the evidence is really taking us, look into this kind of stuff,

Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria Did Not Evolve

But the same authors admitted that the essential Cfr enzyme looks like it was produced by some kind of designed adaptability. And this would mean that it did not evolve by chance.
​

 

[MaynardGKrebbs]

To see where the evidence is really taking us, look into this kind of stuff,

And if you're going to look at that kind of stuff, might as well see what the researchers themselves have to say about it, from here:
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria have evolved a unique chemical mechanism, new discovery reveals

"What had perplexed scientists is that the locations to which RlmN and Cfr add molecular tags are chemically different from all others to which tags routinely are appended, and should be resistant to modification by standard chemical methods," Booker said. "What we've discovered here is so exciting because it represents a truly new chemical mechanism for methylation. We now have a very clear chemical picture of a very clever mechanism for antibiotic resistance that some bacteria have evolved."

The evidence clearly supports evolution no evidence of anything else.

 

[VehementiDominus]

To see where the evidence is really taking us, look into this kind of stuff,

Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria Did Not Evolve

But the same authors admitted that the essential Cfr enzyme looks like it was produced by some kind of designed adaptability. And this would mean that it did not evolve by chance.
​

Lol @ Institute for Creation Research link.

They're one of the worst known Creationist propaganda mills. Their site is filled with innacuracies, quote mining, unfounded assertions, and a whole plethora of other logical fallacies, intellectual dishonesty and outright lying, all by crazed Christian fundies that care more about £$£$£$ and promoting their own agenda than actual science.

The fact that you'll reference them and believe that they have any valid points to make only serves to highlight ignorance, gulliability and your own confirmation bias. Anyone who takes you seriously after that does so at the risk of being laughed at.

Try showing me a published peer-review paper that claims the same thing. Or at least a paper from a party that's not obviously making feeble attempts at brainwashing people.