the self replicating watch argument

[doubtingmerle]

I am not asking them to know more than their paygrade allows.

Ah, so the secret to good weather forecasting is thorough knowledge of angelology, but weatherman aren't paid enough to study angelology?

People say the darndest things here.

 

[doubtingmerle]

You thought it did?

No, I knew that your source had to be wrong when it said the earth has four corners.

 

[doubtingmerle]

You think you do, and we know why you think that Welcome to your religion.

Do you agree that stars are millions of light years away?

Do you agree that light travels one light year in a year?

 

[doubtingmerle]

However, we need 33 different species of tigers to evolve in a few thousand years, and millions of other species.

For me, this is no problem, as I assume the nature in the past was different, and allowed such rapid evolution from the kinds.

You guys are both right!

Dad, you are right when you say the species on the ark could not have modified into all the current variety of life in a few thousand years in the current laws of nature.

Xianghua, you are right that Dads fabricated post-flood nature is pure fantasy.

I conclude that the modern variety of life did not descend from the inhabitants of an ark several thousand years ago.

 

[xianghua]

Pitabread has done an excellent job of showing how varied the trees of vehicles can be when looking at different sets of criteria.

i will continue with pitabread post then.

 

[xianghua]

. If I didn't use it as the root, it would show up in different positions.

but it always be outside cars group. right?

Except we don't. If you look at the trees I've created trucks get mixed in amongst the cars. And depending on the tree, they show up in different places.

first: were did you get the data of the real cars traits? second: i see that the truck is almost in identical position in all your trees. its make sense since a truck in general is much more different from a car.

 

[xianghua]

if I start with a knife and just continuously added parts to build a watch in the hilt, it'd never lose the original knife function and the end result would be a functional knife that can be used to tell time.

sure it will stay as knife in every step. but you cant improve it in every step toward a watch. so if we will say that we need about 10 steps to evolve a new function, what make you believe that every step can be functional?

 

[xianghua]

If you are talking only about what you consider were the kinds of animals (families) then maybe we could fit them in. However, we need 33 different species of tigers to evolve in a few thousand years, and millions of other species.

as i said: even if we assume a 100 years per new species we can get about 40 species of cats "kind" with no problem. so where is the problem again?

 

[xianghua]

The genetic evidence alone establishes that we share a common ancestor.

you mean common similarity?

 

[Skreeper]

you mean common similarity?

No, I meant common ancestor. Your unwillingness to accept that isn't my problem.

 

[dad]

No its you who use magic to try to combat reality. But invoking magic in a science debate is an auto-loss so your posts doesnt matter.

No. It's you.

 

[dad]

No, I meant common ancestor. Your unwillingness to accept that isn't my problem.

There is no common ancestor of man and beast. Your unwillingness to accept that isn't my problem

 

[dad]

as i said: even if we assume a 100 years per new species we can get about 40 species of cats "kind" with no problem. so where is the problem again?

If that math works, fine.

 

[dad]

You guys are both right!

Dad, you are right when you say the species on the ark could not have modified into all the current variety of life in a few thousand years in the current laws of nature..

Neither you nor xia have supported your belief on that issue.

 

[dad]

Do you agree that stars are millions of light years away?

NO. Of course not. Unless we had time as we know it here there could be no millions of years. All you do is sit in the fishbowl and look how fast light moves here and try to apply that to tall the universe for no reason at all.

Do you agree that light travels one light year in a year?

No. I agree that IF light stayed in the solar system for that travel, yes it would go so many miles. However, since man has not even sent a probe as far as one little light day, we can't say!!

 

[Speedwell]

NO. Of course not. Unless we had time as we know it here there could be no millions of years. All you do is sit in the fishbowl and look how fast light moves here and try to apply that to tall the universe for no reason at all.
No. I agree that IF light stayed in the solar system for that travel, yes it would go so many miles. However, since man has not even sent a probe as far as one little light day, we can't say!!

The speed of light is more than just the speed light moves, it is a fundamental parameter of the universe. If it changed, it would have an observable effect on the structure of matter, the nature of the elementary particles and their behavior.

 

[Skreeper]

There is no common ancestor of man and beast. Your unwillingness to accept that isn't my problem

 

[tas8831]

... I assume the nature in the past was different, and allowed such rapid evolution from the kinds.

Other than your unyielding need to believe this is so in order to rescue your mythological beliefs, can you provide any rationale or evidence for this assumption?

We can observe phenomena today. Lets call an example Phenomenon X. We see the sorts of evidence Phenomenon X leaves behind. When we find the same sort of evidence under many year's worth of strata, what is the logic in NOT concluding that produced by Phenomenon X?

 

[tas8831]

NO. Of course not. Unless we had time as we know it here there could be no millions of years. All you do is sit in the fishbowl and look how fast light moves here and try to apply that to tall the universe for no reason at all.
No. I agree that IF light stayed in the solar system for that travel, yes it would go so many miles. However, since man has not even sent a probe as far as one little light day, we can't say!!

Relativity tells us your notions are hogwash.


The major tenets of Relativity have been tested via observation and/or experiment. Your notions are mere repetitious mantras made on discussion fora. No need to bother.

 

[dad]

The speed of light is more than just the speed light moves, it is a fundamental parameter of the universe. If it changed, it would have an observable effect on the structure of matter, the nature of the elementary particles and their behavior.

No. It isn't. You have no idea how it moves out of the fishbowl.