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.
You're really shooting yourself in the foot here, as the strength of a theory is typically based on a hypothetical discovery of what you imagine would potentially falsify the theory.
See what I mean? Now it's suddenly 'okay' for evolutionists to use hypothetical scenarios. They switch their reasoning every other post. They don't know how to argue with even a modicum of consistency. It's laughable.
We are referring to real observations. You aren't. That's the difference.
No you're not.
Yes, I am.
In the real world, violations of the nested hierarchy don't exist.
In your imaginary world, there are violations and they are ignored by scientists.
Ok, what examples of a violation of the nested hierarchy do you know of?No you're not. You're discussing hypothetical scenarios that you believe would serve as potential falsification of a theory. Do you understand what potential falsification is?
When scientists discuss potential falsification, are they discussing how they would respond to hypothetical scenarios... or not?
So they can adjust scientific knowledge based upon new information... and you think that this means that the whole idea of a nested hierarchy is a lie? That doesn't really make any sense.
Only in your make believe universe have violations of a nested hierarchy been observed. True or false?
This is all fine and dandy for the purposes of working with hypothetical models... but hopefully you now see how absurd the claim is that Evolution is somehow being rigorously 'tested' because all of life falls into a "nested hierarchy of common descent". This is yet another myth that the evolutionary community perpetuates to sell you their creation religion.
Evolution is a fog that settles around the shifting landscape of data.
It would appear that in the mind of the creationist, a "violation" of 'the nested hierarchy' produced by a new discovery warranting the rethinking of one twig of the thousands of major branches of the ToL falsifies not only the entire the entire concept of the nested hierarchy as evidence, but of evolution as such.Ok, what examples of a violation of the nested hierarchy do you know of?
It would appear that in the mind of the creationist, a "violation" of 'the nested hierarchy' produced by a new discovery warranting the rethinking of one twig of the thousands of major branches of the ToL falsifies not only the entire the entire concept of the nested hierarchy as evidence, but of evolution as such.
That's right, the 'nested hierarchy of common descent' is not evidence because it is not being tested. It is an ad-hoc model consisting of assembling and reassembling of branches as new discoveries are made, or otherwise increasing claims of what "convergent evolution" can do.
It is tested right here:
The phyologeny of ERV LTR divergence recapitulates the phylogeny based on morphology.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC17875/
That's not a test.
The ERV's could be quite scrambled from their present state and be easily accommodated by invoking incomplete lineage sorting.
Except that didn't happen. Please refer to reality instead of your make believe world.
So you believe that nested hierarchy was tested but at the same time you admit it could accommodate completely different results. That sums up the point of this thread nicely.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?