Nested sets of life and AV's "false positive"

[In situ]

Meh.

I can handle it.

No you can't: "I'm getting sick of the term "dinosaur,"".

Besides that, this is no an attack on the person, but an claim the person did. And that claim is demonstrable false, the nested set of life is an observation, and that is not enough, we can run statistical test to see if it is a false positive (a coincident) or not. And it is not, it is real. However, if we include traits that is not inherent, coevolved, or try to make nested set with human artifacts such as cars, bridges, etc, i.e. created things, the tests indicates a false positive.

 

[In situ]

Yes..

And your evidence for this claim is? Mine is peer-reviewed journals. Have you seen the pictures, have you read the studied that confirms this is indeed fossil feathers? (just as fossil bones are fossil bones and not interpretations).

They may be accurate interpretations though.

Are you saying the claimed fossil feathers not really are fossil feathers but are interpretation of imprints in rock?

Btw, by cutting away everything else I wrote after "NO", you do not acknowledge the topic of this thread. Are you trying to drag around a red herring in the discussion?

 

[In situ]

That's to our credit.

Imagine scientists out and about looking for witches, people working on the Sabbath, and/or committing acts of genocide.

Do not project when it is not reasonable to do so. You story is a projection of Biblical ideas on how to live life onto those that does not hold or share those ideas. I am not saying all Biblical ideas are valid for Christians today, I am just saying you are making an incorrect projection.

 

[Loudmouth]

They're actually interpretations of fossils...

How is that interpretation incorrect?

 

[AV1611VET]

we can run statistical test to see if it a false positive or not.

All you can do with nested hierarchies at the macro level is draw fancy connect-the-dot charts that mean nothing.

If I make a snow ape and a snowman, can you claim the snowman came from the snow ape?

Only on paper.

God created apes from the surface of the earth, then He created Adam from the surface of the earth.

He could have just as easily made Adam first, then the apes.

To claim He made the apes, then took DNA from the apes and made Adam is ludicrous.

He made Eve that way, but He did not make Adam that way.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do not project when it is not reasonable to do so. You story is a projection of Biblical ideas on how to live life onto those that does not hold or share those ideas. I am not saying all Biblical ideas are valid for Christians today, I am just saying you are making an incorrect projection.

I beg your pardon?

 

[In situ]

All you can do with nested hierarchies at the macro level is draw fancy connect-the-dot charts that mean nothing.

If I make a snow ape and a snowman, can you claim the snowman came from the snow ape?

Only on paper.

God created apes from the surface of the earth, then He created Adam from the surface of the earth.

He could have just as easily made Adam first, then the apes.

To claim He made the apes, then took DNA from the apes and made Adam is ludicrous.

He made Eve that way, but He did not make Adam that way.

I made my point AV (I believe what I see). You made yours (I cannot believe what I see)..
I do not need any more elaboration on your part to understand what you are telling me.

I am finished with my argument.

Now I would like you to look at this post of mine while you keep your as well as my point in your mind.

 

[Loudmouth]

All you can do with nested hierarchies at the macro level is draw fancy connect-the-dot charts that mean nothing.

Why do they mean nothing?

If I make a snow ape and a snowman, can you claim the snowman came from the snow ape?

Since the snowman is not a biological organism, there is no reason to make such a conclusion. The snowman doesn't have DNA, either.

God created apes from the surface of the earth, then He created Adam from the surface of the earth.

Why would that result in a nested hierarchy?

 

[In situ]

All you can do with nested hierarchies at the macro level is draw fancy connect-the-dot charts that mean nothing..

Incorrect, parent-offspring relations are real - they do exists - it has been observed. Are your kids your kids or not - are your parents your parent or not? Is your mother a false positive? It is this relation that creates, and still creates, the nested set. We know this is true because we know how inheritance works from genetics. We know why God made us with two legs, and arms, and five fingers on the hand.... We know God. Do you? If you do, tell me why God made man have 5 fingers. Why did God not made us Yetis?

Are you so desperate denying the truth (who God is) that you are prepared to abandon your own tenet that life only comes from life?

 

[In situ]

Why would that result in a nested hierarchy?

It wont, but it can result in the false positive AV is looking for. The point is though that AV tells me I cannot believe in the evidence I see - they are deceptions. He have made that very clear to me.

 

[In situ]

I beg your pardon?

Then why else would you conjunct Biblical reason with someone being against someone elses doings?

 

[In situ]

If I make a snow ape and a snowman, can you claim the snowman came from the snow ape?

If snow apes gave birth to little snow apes, and snowmen gave birth to little snowmen, and if you can trace an lineages of (unique) inherent characteristic between them, yes, then I can claim that. But we know snow apes and snowmen does not so you analogy is false. It is a falsehood! All you do is speaking falsehoods! You do not want me to believe in that which is true, but you want me to believe in that which is not true. You claim you speak the truth. But you do not speak the truth, because you do not know what truth is. If you don't know the truth then you do not know who God is.

 

[AV1611VET]

All you can do with nested hierarchies at the macro level is draw fancy connect-the-dot charts that mean nothing.

Incorrect, parent-offspring relations are real -

Did I not stipulate: "at the macro level"?

Why then are you bringing up parent-offspring relations?

 

[AV1611VET]

But you do not speak the truth, because you do not know what truth is. If you don't know the truth then you do not know who God is.

And with that, I'm done here.

 

[Loudmouth]

Did I not stipulate: "at the macro level"?

Did you not fail to present any evidence that the macro level is different from the micro level?

 

[TheBear]

Why is this topic an attack on the person?

Even though I don't agree with AV much, I will come to his defense here. It is really bad form to call out an individual member in an OP title.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

For some, that's a blessing.

I've seen some dooseys of interpretations by unbelievers and frankly, I wouldn't want them living next door to me and deciding to live by how they interpret the Bible.

Else I'd be shot in my backyard picking up sticks on Saturday.

I would venture to guess the unbelieving Jews of today are rather glad that neither the Pharisees or Sadducees exist today........

[URL='http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/23-25.htm']Deuteronomy 23:[/URL]
[URL='http://biblehub.com/deuteronomy/23-25.htm']25 If you enter your neighbor's grain field, you may pick kernels with your hands, but you must not put a sickle to their standing grain.[/URL]

Matt 12:
1 At that time Jesus went through the grain fields on the Sabbath, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat.
2 But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples do what is not lawful to do on a Sabbath."…
3 But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he became hungry, he and his companions,…

Matt 23:
33 "Serpents! brood of vipers! how? ye may be fleeing from the judging of the geennhV <1067>

Revelation 14:11
And the smoke of the tormenting of Them is ascending into Ages to-Ages.

http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/index.cfm?page_name=Lazarus
JESUS VS THE PHARISEES

............If the Pharisees and scribes understood Yeshua's prophetic parable, it must have astonished and infuriated them. How could the Jews become alienated from God while the elect Gentiles became the "seed of Abraham"? The implication that the House of Judah and those called from the Gentile nations were to change places would have been almost impossible for the Pharisees and scribes to believe................................





.

 

[In situ]

Did I not stipulate: "at the macro level"?

It is implied. Implication are implicit statements, you know. Therefore you don't have to state them, to state them.

Why then are you bringing up parent-offspring relations?

Because you persist in denying it is relevant/exists by claiming the nested set is a "false positive", i.e. an "coincident", while in fact it is relevant. Since only because of the parent-offspring relation, i.e. unique inherent characteristics, can we understand why life forms a nested set in the first place - as explained to us by Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species. It was Darwin that firts understood this and solved the deep mystery why, on Earth and heaven sake, life forms a nested set. Until Darwin everyone know (i.e. it is an observed fact) life was a nested set, but they did not know why and could not explain it. And that this has been properly explained by Darwin is what all creationists, in all times, refuses to admit....

i.e. all creationists, explicit, or implicitly, deny the tenet that "life can only come from life" (which is a basic tenet of the Theory of Evolution). Creationists insists in claiming that life must had be magically created as "kinds", but there is no evidence that this ever happen, on the contrary the evidence says that life only comes from life and unique inherent characteristics with common descent explains both the diversity and the similarities we see in the nested set of life.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because you persist in denying it is relevant/exists by claiming the nested set is a "false positive", i.e. an "coincident", while in fact it is relevant.

How were the angels able to circumvent evolution?

And how was the earth suddenly populated with so many animals who never had parents?

Zebras, giraffes, serpents, fish, even plants -- all came on the scene without one act of procreation ever having occurred anywhere.

 

[VirOptimus]

How were the angels able to circumvent evolution?

And how was the earth suddenly populated with so many animals who never had parents?

Zebras, giraffes, serpents, fish, even plants -- all came on the scene without one act of procreation ever having occurred anywhere.

Your create a scenario that demands magic, not a rational approach.

The science clearly show that no magic is necessary to explain biodiversity.