Why Is Darwinism So Dangerous? (5)

Atheos canadensis said:

Does that mean you plan to get to it presently or not? I hope you will at least address the parsimony argument illustrated by the analogy as this is central to answering your question of how evolution could be expected to produce accurate faculties. Note that this is distinct from the point that accurate faculties improve fitness.

Click to expand...

I just don't know if there is any point to continue rehashing this.

Oncedeceived said:

I just don't know if there is any point to continue rehashing this.

Click to expand...

I would be disappointed if you terminated discussion of that analogy in this thread like you did in the last thread it was brought up. It wouldn't be rehashing if you would address the point it raises. It is in fact in the interest of moving forward that I'm encouraging you to address it.

Originally Posted by PsychoSarah

I have had plenty of pretty much indiscribable dreams. Doesn't mean they actually happened.
​

Click to expand...

Oncedeceived said:

Hey if you start dreaming when your driving, perhaps you have a condition called Narcolepsy.
You really should not drive and go to the doctor immediately!

Click to expand...

Or see a priest.........

Joel 2:28
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh;
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

Acts 2:17
'And it shall be in the last days' is saying the God, 'I shall be pouring out from the Spirit of Me upon all flesh
and shall be prophesying the sons of ye and the daughters of ye
and the young-ones of ye visions/oraseiV <3706> shall be seeing
and the elders of ye dreams shall be dreaming'.
[Joel 2:28]

Supertramp - Child Of Vision - Video


.

Have any of you completed my challenge yet?

Atheos canadensis said:

I would be disappointed if you terminated discussion of that analogy in this thread like you did in the last thread it was brought up. It wouldn't be rehashing if you would address the point it raises. It is in fact in the interest of moving forward that I'm encouraging you to address it.

Click to expand...

I addressed the analogy, I've even gone as far as assuming the point that an accurate perception for an environment would be selected over a less accurate perception of an environment. The point you seem to ignore is that one needs the Laws of Logic to do so. I don't know what point there is to discuss the analogy nor the accurate perception selective power when both have been agreed upon. It is in the fact that the laws of logic are necessary to that ability and that they are not an evolved feature.

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Have any of you completed my challenge yet?

Click to expand...

What challenge?

Oncedeceived said:

I addressed the analogy, I've even gone as far as assuming the point that an accurate perception for an environment would be selected over a less accurate perception of an environment. The point you seem to ignore is that one needs the Laws of Logic to do so. I don't know what point there is to discuss the analogy nor the accurate perception selective power when both have been agreed upon.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid you didn't actually address the analogy. You argued that acing the test would not increase fitness. Then you argued that acing the test requires the laws of logic. This missed the point of the analogy entirely. The point is that acing the test, which is analogous to increasing fitness, is more likely if one accurately perceives the questions, which is analogous to having accurate faculties. Do you agree with this? If no, why? If yes, then you have the answer to your oft-repeated question of how evolution could be expected to produce accurate faculties even though it is not strictly necessary that it should do so. In other words, I know you have conceded that accurate faculties would have an advantage over inaccurate faculties but do you also concede that, for this reason, accurate faculties are more likely to be produced by evolution than inaccurate ones?

It is in the fact that the laws of logic are necessary to that ability and that they are not an evolved feature.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Laws of Logic are not evolved. But the ability to be aware of them is. Let me lay out the terminology again just so we're clear:

Physical Laws: The nature of our reality, e.g. something cannot simultaneously be A and Not A

Laws of logic: the formal codifications of physical reality, e.g. The law of Identity

NOTE: If you disagree that Laws of Logic are merely formal codifications of Physical Law, please explain how we came to formulate something like the Law of Identity.

Accurate faculties: the means by which we are able to perceive physical laws so that they may be codified into Laws of Logic.



So I agree that the Physical Law that A cannot also be Not A is true independently of human existence. I also agree that the Law of Identity is true independently of our existence because it is simply reflecting that physical reality. And I agree that, because they are true regardless of our existence, they are not products of evolution. But this does't alter the fact that (as I think you have conceded at this point) evolution is more likely to produce accurate faculties and thus it is entirely reasonable that we have evolved faculties which accurately perceive the Physical Law that A cannot also be Not A.

As I said above, Laws of Logic are not evolved, but our ability to perceive them is.

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Have any of you completed my challenge yet?

Click to expand...

In order for there to be a challenge, you have to describe the specific anatomical features a fossil would need to have in order for it to meet the challenge. Will you be doing this any time soon?

LittleLambofJesus said:

Or see a priest.........

Joel 2:28
And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh;
and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

Acts 2:17
'And it shall be in the last days' is saying the God, 'I shall be pouring out from the Spirit of Me upon all flesh
and shall be prophesying the sons of ye and the daughters of ye
and the young-ones of ye visions/oraseiV <3706> shall be seeing
and the elders of ye dreams shall be dreaming'.
[Joel 2:28]

Supertramp - Child Of Vision - Video


.

Click to expand...

Well perhaps that too.

Loudmouth said:

In order for there to be a challenge, you have to describe the specific anatomical features a fossil would need to have in order for it to meet the challenge. Will you be doing this any time soon?

Click to expand...

Face it you can't do it and showing me a picture of an ape standing up isn't cutting the mustard.

You and I both know that isn't the apes natural posture and not how it's skeleton will be shaped.

Where is the skeleton of this half breed ape man (bent over)

Show me

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Face it you can't do it and showing me a picture of an ape standing up isn't cutting the mustard.

You and I both know that isn't the apes natural posture and not how it's skeleton will be shaped.

Where is the skeleton of this half breed ape man (bent over)

Show me

Click to expand...

Here is a smaller image along with an article explaining how later bones found from other Australopithecus Afarensis show that they walked upright. So, both the hip bones and the feet show that his ape, like us, walked upright.

Subduction Zone said:

Here is a smaller image along with an article explaining how later bones found from other Australopithecus Afarensis show that they walked upright. So, both the hip bones and the feet show that his ape, like us, walked upright.

Click to expand...

Sorry this does not make the grade, I want an image that shows the transition of the hip bone and spine from ape to ape man.

The THEORY that apes just decided to stand up and start walking upright has little to no substance, it is pure speculation (a theory)

(nice try tho, best we have had yet)

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Sorry this does not make the grade, I want an image that shows the transition of the hip bone and spine from ape to ape man.

The THEORY that apes just decided to stand up and start walking upright has little to no substance, it is pure speculation (a theory)

(nice try tho, best we have had yet)

Click to expand...

Ridiculous demands can be ignored. Try again.

All fossils support the theory of evolution. There are no other proposed ideas out there that can explain the fossil evidence. And the fossil evidence, though incredibly strong, is not the strongest evidence for evolution.

Subduction Zone said:

Ridiculous demands can be ignored. Try again.

All fossils support the theory of evolution. There are no other proposed ideas out there that can explain the fossil evidence. And the fossil evidence, though incredibly strong, is not the strongest evidence for evolution.

Click to expand...

I hear you admit defeat, don't worry about it, everyone takes a loss now and again (even Ali)

I accept your resignation that my challenge has defeated you.

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Sorry this does not make the grade, I want an image that shows the transition of the hip bone and spine from ape to ape man.

Click to expand...

That is it. It is transitional between basal apes and later ape-men, like Homo erectus. Australopithecus sediba is transitional between A. afarensis and Homo erectus, as another example.

The THEORY that apes just decided to stand up and start walking upright has little to no substance, it is pure speculation (a theory)

Click to expand...

That is not a theory held by any serious scientist. It is a strawman of your own making.

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Face it you can't do it and showing me a picture of an ape standing up isn't cutting the mustard.

Click to expand...

I can define the criteria needed for a transitional just fine. I just thought it would be more useful to use the anatomical features you were looking for, and see if you could justify them.

Are you saying that I am allowed to define what is and isn't a transitional, since you refuse to do so?

You and I both know that isn't the apes natural posture and not how it's skeleton will be shaped.

Click to expand...

Then show us what you know.

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Sorry this does not make the grade, I want an image that shows the transition of the hip bone and spine from ape to ape man.

The THEORY that apes just decided to stand up and start walking upright has little to no substance, it is pure speculation (a theory)

(nice try tho, best we have had yet)

Click to expand...

Interesting objection. So are you alleging that Australopithecus is a man instead of an ape, since it is fully upright in its walking stance?

ihavefoundgod951 said:

I hear you admit defeat, don't worry about it, everyone takes a loss now and again (even Ali)

I accept your resignation that my challenge has defeated you.

Click to expand...

No, he is just tired of your denial

ihavefoundgod951 said:

Where is the skeleton of this half breed ape man (bent over)

Click to expand...

"Half breed ape man"? I see we have yet another scientifically illiterate Creationist requesting something that wouldn't exist.

Tell you what though. Is this being "fully ape" or "fully human" and please explain why?

Loudmouth said:

That is it. It is transitional between basal apes and later ape-men, like Homo erectus. Australopithecus sediba is transitional between A. afarensis and Homo erectus, as another example.



That is not a theory held by any serious scientist. It is a strawman of your own making.

Click to expand...

Wasn't you that pointed out the view that transitional isn't ancestral?