Wherein I catch a professional YEC in a lie

[Larniavc]

Not the Christmas tree, I hope!?

He jumped from one of the couches on to it...

I had my heart in my throat, he thought it was hilarious fun, lol.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

How many times has the theory of evolution made a prediction that HASN'T come true?

Why don't you tell us. Let's see if you can get those words out.

And for the ones that did come true, how many times did they have to try before they got it right?

Once each. Feel free to provide examples where that isn't the case.

TOE: I prediction oil will be found here.
PWN: Nope. Thumper truck says NO.
TOE: Try over there.
PWN: Nope. Thumper truck says NO.
TOE: Try this spot.
PWN: Bingo! Oil has been found!
TOE: Wohoo! Let's hear it for evolution!

TOE: I predict this drug will be a prenatal wonder drug.
PWN: Let's hope so!
* later *
TOE: Ewww. What's happening?
PWN: Don't know.
TOE: Pregnant women should be more careful what they eat.
PWN: Maybe it's something in the water?
TOE: I doubt it. It's happening all over.
PWN: Oh. Oh.
TOE: What?
PWN: It's our wonder drug.
TOE: Then blame the big pharmaceuticals.
PWN: They hired us ... remember?
TOE: Oh, ya.

TOE: Look what we found!
PWN: Shouldn't we ...
TOE: Let's call it Haroldcookii and get it out to the public!
PWN: Um ... aren't we being a little hasty?
TOE: Who cares? If it turns out to be something else, big deal. Retraction on page 16.

Guess what? None of those are predictions from ToE.

 

[AV1611VET]

Guess what? None of those are predictions from ToE.

That's because you have a myopic view of evolution.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

That's because you have a myopic view of evolution.

My view of evolution has no influnce over what predictions ToE does or does not make. Your myopic view of science influences what claims you make.

 

[AV1611VET]

My view of evolution has no influnce over what predictions ToE does or does not make.

If that was true, you would realize that biological evolution is one very small iota of evolution as a whole.

In fact, it is so small, it can't be seen from the outside (or anywhere near the edge).

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If that was [sic] true, you would realize that biological evolution is one very small iota of evolution as a whole.

In fact, it is so small, it can't be seen from the outside (or anywhere near the edge).

 

[AV1611VET]

* pic *

For your edification, biological evolution comes in sixth in cosmic evolution's chain of events:

... and seen from afar in the universe:

... life on it (the Earth) is so small, it can't be seen from near the outer marker.

In fact, our whole galaxy can't be seen.

You can call this "word salad" if you want ... but then you can call me Genghis Khan too.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

For your edification, biological evolution comes in sixth in cosmic evolution's chain of events:

... and seen from afar in the universe:

... life on it (the Earth) is so small, it can't be seen from near the outer marker.

In fact, our whole galaxy can't be seen.

You can call this "word salad" if you want ... but then you can call me Genghis Khan too.

If you don't understand the difference between Theory of Evolution and other uses of the word "evolution" then whatever you say is word salad. QED.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you don't understand the difference between Theory of Evolution and other uses of the word "evolution" then whatever you say is word salad. QED.

And if you don't understand:

. Theory of Particulate Evolution
+ Theory of Galactic Evolution
+ Theory of Stellar Evolution
+ Theory of Planetary Evolution
+ Theory of Chemical Evolution
+ Theory of Biological Evolution
+ Theory of Cultural Evolution
+ Theory of Future Evolution
-------------------------------------
= Theory of Cosmic Evolution

... then something's wrong.

 

[pitabread]

And if you don't understand:

. Theory of Particulate Evolution
+ Theory of Galactic Evolution
+ Theory of Stellar Evolution
+ Theory of Planetary Evolution
+ Theory of Chemical Evolution
+ Theory of Biological Evolution
+ Theory of Cultural Evolution
+ Theory of Future Evolution
-------------------------------------
= Theory of Cosmic Evolution

Most of those terms aren't used per a "Theory of..." context though.

I think you may be reading too much into that particular infographic.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

And if you don't understand:

. Theory of Particulate Evolution
+ Theory of Galactic Evolution
+ Theory of Stellar Evolution
+ Theory of Planetary Evolution
+ Theory of Chemical Evolution
+ Theory of Biological Evolution
+ Theory of Cultural Evolution
+ Theory of Future Evolution
-------------------------------------
= Theory of Cosmic Evolution

... then something's wrong.

Nothing wrong with my understanding. You need to look a lot closer to home for the problem

 

[AV1611VET]

Most of those terms aren't used per a "Theory of..." context though.

Either that, or they are.

I googled each one separately, and with the exception of two of them (can't remember which ones), they came up.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nothing wrong with my understanding. You need to look a lot closer to home for the problem

I'll pass.

 

[pitabread]

Either that, or they are.

I googled each one separately, and with the exception of two of them (can't remember which ones), they came up.

Given the vastness of the internet, it's possible to find any combinations of words being used somewhere. I'm talking about formal usage in scientific literature, however.

This is where searching for the "Theory of Evolution" will get you a couple hundred thousand hits (virtually all of it referring to biology), whereas things like the "Theory of Future Evolution" gets you one. Stuff like stellar evolution and cosmic evolution do get used, but not typically as formally as "The Theory of Evolution" which almost always refers to biology in both a formal and colloquial use.

 

[AV1611VET]

Given the vastness of the internet, it's possible to find any combinations of words being used somewhere. I'm talking about formal usage in scientific literature, however.

That's not my problem, pitabread.

I'm just a dumb hick when it comes to science.

Perhaps, though, you could tell me why it happens to be on HARVARD's website?

Does Harvard know something you don't?

And for the record, notice at the bottom it says "Wright Center for Science Education"?

 

[pitabread]

That's not my problem, pitabread.

I'm just a dumb hick when it comes to science.

Perhaps, though, you could tell me why it happens to be on HARVARD's website?

Does Harvard know something you don't?

Like I said, you've taken an infographic and decided to read stuff into it that isn't there.

It's simply an infographic depicting at a high level the 'stages' of history of the universe. For whatever reason you've taken that and re-interpreted that as there being a formal "Theory of..." for each stage they list, when there isn't necessarily one. And certainly nothing unified into a singular theory of "cosmic evolution".

On top of that, you seem to be mixing up various uses of the word "evolution" in general and then misinterpreting what others have written as a result.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Either that, or they are.

I googled each one separately, and with the exception of two of them (can't remember which ones), they came up.

Did you ever google "Jesus is a myth"? You need to be careful what you claim from google searches.

 

[AV1611VET]

Did you ever google "Jesus is a myth"? You need to be careful what you claim from google searches.

You and pitabread are going to great lengths to defend this doosey of a remark:

Guess what? None of those are predictions from ToE.

And unless we dispense with the bologna, I'm going to go to READ ONLY on this.

You want to call it "word salad" and act like you don't know what I'm talking about ... fine.

But don't think for a minute you've made some kind of brownie points with me.

All you've done is deny your own academia (Harvard, in this case), and frankly, I can understand why.

You think about this conversation the next time you see some acadumbic whining that we "pick and choose" Bible verses and doctrines.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

You and pitabread are going to great lengths to defend this doosey of a remark:
And unless we dispense with the bologna, I'm going to go to READ ONLY on this.

You want to call it "word salad" and act like you don't know what I'm talking about ... fine.

But don't think for a minute you've made some kind of brownie points with me.

All you've done is deny your own academia (Harvard, in this case), and frankly, I can understand why.

You think about this conversation the next time you see some acadumbic whining that we "pick and choose" Bible verses and doctrines.

I will stand by my initial statement that none of them are predictions of ToE. ToE is, in your infographic, "Theory of Biological Evolution". You know this yet you choose to feign ignorance. It's easy to demonstrate your modus operandi. So why don't you think about this conversation next time you want to wilfully misrepresent science? I'm sure there's a commandment about that sort of behaviour.

 

[AV1611VET]

So why don't you think about this conversation next time you want to wilfully misrepresent science?

I'll do that.

And I'll make sure my brothers and sisters in Christ know how evolution is compartmentalized into one little compartment out of eight.

A compartment so small, it can't be seen within the reaches of our solar system, let alone the outer edges of the universe.

I'm sure there's a commandment about that sort of behaviour.

But you won't see it displayed on the courthouse lawn, will you?

It'll get put away ... out of public view ... so that acadopes can howl and growl that we're not a Christian nation.