Terrible news for the Creation Science museum (and Republicans)

ThatOwlWoman said:
Darth Omar said:
Not sure about that since experiments with those are repeatable.

You can’t repeat the past. Evolution is part historical account so the ‘story’ analogy is inevitable regardless of who makes it. It’s a biological historical narrative. Btw, I’ve never said I reject it. Though I am skeptical of some it’s more broader claims.
Click to expand...
You actually *can* do experiments that show evolution happening in real time. Ask any microbiologist.
Click to expand...

"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig." -- Robert A. Heinlein

:)

I strongly doubt there are any sane, educated, mature adults who don't accept modern science views on evolution, space exploration, vaccines or any other modern tech various scientific fields have produced. While we can question the morality of things like nukes and cloning, denying those things exist is insane.
 
Darth Omar said:
Whether it’s the same process that explains how man evolved [you catch the assumption?] is maybe correct—maybe not.
Click to expand...

It's correct to the best of our modern knowledge. When I signed up to take the anthropology class I knew that there are been two hominid species alive at the same time -- us and the Neanderthals. Turns out there were lots more. We survivors still carry traces of some of them in our DNA. Denisovans, Neanderthals, the Red Deer Cave people, H. erectus, H. floresiensis, H. luzonensis, H. heidelbergensis were all alive at the same time as H. sapiens sapiens.

https://www.livescience.com/how-many-human-species.html
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
It's correct to the best of our modern knowledge. When I signed up to take the anthropology class I knew that there are been two hominid species alive at the same time -- us and the Neanderthals. Turns out there were lots more. We survivors still carry traces of some of them in our DNA. Denisovans, Neanderthals, the Red Deer Cave people, H. erectus, H. floresiensis, H. luzonensis, H. heidelbergensis were all alive at the same time as H. sapiens sapiens.

https://www.livescience.com/how-many-human-species.html
Click to expand...

Not to mention you can see evolution in the growth of a mammalian fetuses. There's also the presence of vestigial organs in humans and other animals. The tailbone being just one.

Example: https://microbenotes.com/evolutionary-embryology/
  • Embryology, the study of embryos, is an important cornerstone of biological evolution and can be used to help determine similarities and differences between various species.
  • An embryo of an organism is the fertilized egg as it goes through the processes of development that is specific to that species.
  • When looking at how the animal develops from an embryo to an adult, you can compare the processes with those of other organisms to help determine evolutionary similarities.
  • Most embryos look similar in their early stages, but as they develop, the differences between species become more obvious.
  • Embryos of organisms that have a closer genetic relationship to one another tend to look similar for a longer period of time since they share a more recent common ancestor.
  • Thus, embryology is frequently used as evidence of the theory of evolution and the radiation of species from a common ancestor.
  • For example, vestigial structures such as tails or gills in humans can be found in embryos early during their development.



homology_vertebrate_embryos.jpg



FWIW, Heinlein's comment about pigs and singing stands. :)
 
Darth Omar said:
Not sure about that since experiments with those are repeatable.

You can’t repeat the past. Evolution is part historical account so the ‘story’ analogy is inevitable regardless of who makes it. It’s a biological historical narrative. Btw, I’ve never said I reject it. Though I am skeptical of some it’s more broader claims.
Click to expand...

Evolution by natural selection has been demonstrated in real time under laboratory conditions using the principles of genetics.

The fossil record is only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the theory.
 
Darth Omar said:
The evidence is actually abundant. The apparent fine tuning of the physical constants, for example. It just can’t be pigeon holed into science because science can only accept purely naturalistic explanations for any phenomena.
Click to expand...

The fine tuning argument is the best one that creationists have, but it is still a weak and fatally flawed hypothesis.

The crux of the hypothesis is that life could not exist if the physical constants of the universe were different.

That is a major assumption which is not substantiated by evidence. I do not accept the premise of this assumption.

Humans and other animals would not exist if the gravitational constant, Boltzmann constant, etc. were different. But that neither proves that life could not exist under different physical conditions, or that the physical constants we currently know could not exist elsewhere in a Multiverse.
 
Cypress said:
The fine tuning argument is the best one that creationists have, but it is still a weak and fatally flawed hypothesis.
Click to expand...

There were at least six other hominid species alive at the same time as early H. sapiens sapiens. As mentioned earlier we carry some of these vanished people's DNA in our own chromosomes. So did some deity's "fine tuning" kill off all the other human species but ours? If so, why would anyone want to worship such a deity?
 
Wolverine said:
What they are are facts!
Click to expand...

That does not cut the mustard.

If I ask for a credible medical opinion, you refer me to a trained, qualified, and reputable doctor.

You do not refer me to a plumber or obscure intent quack.

If you have a point to make about evolutionary science, you are obligated to use links to reputable scientific organizations or peer reviewed publications.

Not to some obscure quack websites.
 
So I will just ask the question not one evolutionist can answer, how, and where did it all begin?
Now it will get good!
 
Cypress said:
That does not cut the mustard.

If I ask for a credible medical opinion, you refer me to a trained, qualified, and reputable doctor.

You do not refer me to a plumber or obscure intent quack.

If you have a point to make about evolutionary science, you are obligated to use links to reputable scientific organizations or peer reviewed publications.

Not to some obscure quack websites.
Click to expand...

You calling them that when their facts back up their hypothesis makes you incorrect!
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
There were at least six other hominid species alive at the same time as early H. sapiens sapiens. As mentioned earlier we carry some of these vanished people's DNA in our own chromosomes. So did some deity's "fine tuning" kill off all the other human species but ours? If so, why would anyone want to worship such a deity?
Click to expand...

I like the way your brain works.

Fine tuning has way to many assumptions to even be given credence as a good hypothesis.

Then there is the matter of who did the fine tuning, even if we accept the assumption. It would not even remotely establish proof of a Judeo-Christian God.

It might be Vishnu.

Or Brahman.

Ahura Mazda

A pantheon of polytheistic gods

Or even some non-divine creative power.
 
Wolverine said:
You calling them that when their facts back up their hypothesis makes you incorrect!
Click to expand...

If it is not in a reputable peer reviewed scientific journal or vetted through a credible review and referee process, it ain't science and it ain't facts.
 
Dutch Uncle said:
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig." -- Robert A. Heinlein

:)

I strongly doubt there are any sane, educated, mature adults who don't accept modern science views on evolution, space exploration, vaccines or any other modern tech various scientific fields have produced. While we can question the morality of things like nukes and cloning, denying those things exist is insane.
Click to expand...

What parts of evolution am I required to accept in order to be part of ‘the club’?

Be specific.
 
Cypress said:
I like the way your brain works.

Fine tuning has way to many assumptions to even be given credence as a good hypothesis.

Then there is the matter of who did the fine tuning, even if we accept the assumption. It would not even remotely establish proof of a Judeo-Christian God.

It might be Vishnu.

Or Brahman.

Ahura Mazda

A pantheon of polytheistic gods

Or even some non-divine creative power.
Click to expand...

Can you give a short list of the assumptions behind radiometric dating lol?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top