![]() |
![]() |
#561 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
As to the rest I'll wait for you to respond to my last two posts regarding your difficulties with speciation as related to populations in variable environments.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#562 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
If you're disagreeing with the facts that I related, please state which ones, and later on today I'll try and get back to you with quotes from the article I was using. Quote:
Anyway, these are just my own viewpoints. I'm still not going to fall into the trap of arguing with you on this. During nearly all of your recent posts, you've been trying to slam my own point of view and draw me into the trap of arguing with you over it. It's my own opinion and I'm not using that to influence my evidence, and the evidence I'm giving and the thing I'm talking about is the current scientific model. You accused me of changing the subject earlier whenever things got rough? You're doing it yourself, trying to bash my own opinions, invalidate my evidence and make my own opinions look stupid while ignoring the contradiction in science. I'm going to not discuss my own opinions with you any further. I appreciate the ideas posted by Dunadan earlier on. At least he was willing to discuss possible solutions for the dilemma. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#563 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#564 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Could you post links to the addresses of those articles?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#565 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
Link
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#566 | |||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Well, since my proposal:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() My final summary, if anyone's interested: (I'll use ToE for th. of ev., ToCBID for th. of creation by intelligent design, since we all love typing shortcuts! ![]() (1) ToE (AND ToCBID) are both theories ABOUT facts; they are not themselves provable scientific facts; (2) Neither ToE (NOR ToCBID) are infinitely adjustable - if their basic testable tenets are shown by new data to be incorrect, then a new theory should be formulated. (3) Atheism is ABSOLUTELY NOT a neutral scientific position! Atheism is also a belief, just like a religious belief (or call them ideologies if you want to, but neither position is scientifically proveable) (4) The ToCBID is a REASONABLE theory based on a REASONABLE premise from observing the world around us! And a final note - I seem to see on this thread what I call the "neener-neener" approach to data - in other words, like "the fossil record proves MY theory, so YOU can't have it!! neener-neener!" (And Earniel, I would be interested in the Flemish equivalent! It's the sound that the kid that ends up with the toy makes when he/she is successful grabbing it away from someone else.) (and I'm trying to make this a bit funny, BTW, to keep things in good humor - I'm NOT at all angry, just extremely puzzled and sad). However, data can fall into many categories. In other words, it may be neutral, it may support one theory, it may support both theories, it may contradict one theory, it may contradict both theories. Do you see what I mean? If, for example, (and don't lose your shirts, people! It's an example, ok!) the fossil record consists entirely of one type of bone from one type of animal, then it would support neither and would contradict neither. If it consists of all fully-formed animals, it would support ToCBID and not support (but not DIRECTLY contradict) ToE. If it consisted of hundred of intermediate types in addition to the fully formed types, it would support ToE and contradict ToCBID. And the same applies to DNA, 2nd law of thermodynamics, etc. The problem, at least with the fossil record, is that IMO it contains scads of fully formed animals and a very small amount, and those debatable, number of intermediate types. (Now please don't quote and argue this - I'm just trying to show WHY this thread gets so long!) 2nd law of thermo. - same thing - STRONGLY supports ToCBID, but there is a footnote to it, discussing the formation of crystals, that may be interpreted to support ToE (but I believe incorrectly, because net entropy is STILL increased, but you can refer back to the first few pages). Same with DNA - why shouldn't an intelligent designer use DNA to store info? No reason for ToE people to claim similarity between man and chimps and say ToCBID people can't use DNA!! I hope you see my UNDERLYING idea here - PLEASE don't look at data as solely belonging to one side or the other. Anyway, this has been very intellectually stimulating, and probably has set records for civility on a topic like this. I hope we all learned some things, and again, hope to see you all on other threads soon! There's a great new discussion project that just opened up on the Sil forum.... Best regards -- RÃ*an
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! ![]() "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! Last edited by RÃan : 11-13-2002 at 02:24 AM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#567 |
Hobbit
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Pangea
Posts: 15
|
Sahara-Gobi Deserts
I appreciate the information that Cirdan and Jersey have posted. It's nice to have some real sources. The posts show a considerable complexity in the way living things actually survive. The article showing the genetic linkage of crocodiles that look and behave very differently shows that living things may be able to adapt to environmental changes much more easily than we sometimes imagine. Obviously, ability to adapt is something that would have to be "selected" in an environmental model. It seems possible that species can have greater ability to adapt to environment than we sometimes imagine. Each chromosome has many genes, out of which many of the genes are not active. It may not require a big change for certain genes to be activated and other genes to be deactivated. The African crocodile may be an example where environmental stimuli trigger the activation and deactivation of some genes, resulting in different phenotypes and behavior patterns suitable to their environments.
I think it is known, and I hope that this isn't something you ask me to back up with proof, that generally genetic information in a population group is usually lost rather than gained. With regard to the genetic diversity issue -- why are certain fossils widespread geographically while the continuum appear often lost -- it may be that certain global environmental conditions permit "faster" evolution. Such would seem necessary to fit with the fossil record if what I hear of the fossil record is true. The results discussed show that evolution is complex, and that all living things are complex (even a fly!). It is too early to rule out changes to the evolutionary model, any more than can we rule out that their could be an underlining design in the creation (whether via evolution or not). It seems possible that new species could develop via gaining genes or via losing genes or via activating or deactivating certain genes. Mutation may not be the only way that a specie evolves. I still think that the model that proceeds from a "Dick and Jane" early reader to a Tolkien trilogy one character at a time is too slow to account for all of the major changes. I look for some mechanisms where more significant changes can occur, such as perhaps a viral theory. If the chemical constituency of the air altered at all, we should also be open to the possibility of phenotype changes due to environmental influences alone. Environment + genes produce the resulting phenotype. I also think we should keep open to the possibility of radiocarbon levels increasing at a more rapid rate in prehistory, which could also explain the long stretch of "dry" conditions and sparsity of data. There are many things in the archaeological record that could be explained better by increasing radiocarbon levels. For example, archaeology works as a principle on the fact that change in behavior occurs from generation to generation. However, cave art dated from 20,000 BC to 5000 BC shows little stylistic change. Human settlements in Jericho appear to be nomadic over a period of about 5000 years before villages were begun, with the nomadic settlements continuously occurring in the same exact location. Anyway, I think the bottom line is that we have to keep an open mind about things. It is exciting to live at a time when there is so much research being undertaken that we can access. I don't think evidence from the current time frame can rule out the possibility of long stretches of environmental conditions in the past that might have been more conducive to a protected evolutionary development of early life. Dispersion was probably a very early development that relates to practically all living things. Here is the link to the article that Lief has referenced. http://www4.gvsu.edu/lioubime/person...ange_on_ca.htm |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#568 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
ps - Earniel, thanks for being open-minded, and I'll PM you tomorrow with some info for you to think about. I could use some virtual Belgian chocolate now - was on a very long field trip today - we saw a play with about 800 or so kids ages 5 to 9 or so in the audience - my ears are still ringing from the noise!!
![]()
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! ![]() "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#569 |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I agree with you, Cirdan, that massive scale migration is really the only way (By the current model) to explain the inconsitency.
The primary difficulty, then, is between the evidence that is being uncovered and has been uncovered that shows these massive and swift environment changes, and the current scientific theory that all creatures have been evolving slowly along with an extremely slow changing environment. The conflict is between the theory of a slow changing environment and the evidence of a fast changing one. We cannot accept both views, unless we assume some large change having happened to effect only the last two or three hundred thousand years. If any of you are determined to accept both views, then evidence must be found to demonstrate a cause of such a change. Personally, I think that finding such evidence is unnecessary. We all know that science can make errors, and that more will be discovered over time. Science, in the years to come, will probably resolve these conflicting theories, and I'll be interested to see what their solution is when they do. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#570 |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
There wasn't any indications in the data that indicated any "mass migrations". You would need to evaluate the data before making that assumption. There was one statement regarding a Faunal migration. It seemed to indicate a regional move which is very common. There is no conflict or inconsistency.
I think the last link I posted documented pretty well that while there were changes in climate the most arid parts of the desert were not greatly changed. Also it is not shown that there were great changes in the flora and fauna in these areas. The region became wetter but the vegatation changes are well within expectations of gradualism. The climate changes are no more extreme than glaciation. The effects of these changes, if anything, show a large extinction pattern as opposed to rapid adaptation. More extinctions and large reductions in populations point to dispersion and incremental adaptation. The fact that the croc example is associated with large reductions in population associated with behavioral adaptations like cave dwelling actually prove that they are not adapting biologically on any kind of rapid rate. The people with the data dont' see any anomalies. Any suggestion that they aren't looking for them is illogical. Who would want to be the one to find the exception? Never under-estimate the desire for recognition by researchers. Science may make mistakes but it is very late in the game for evolution to be disproved. After 150 years of research and new discoveries, one would think that someone would have found something. It is not 1850 and the time of imprecise science passed away under the torrrent of analytical tools available today, the large and ever increasing body of physical evidence., and the huge numbers of people involved in research.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#571 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I'm not trying to disprove evolution. But I thought that it had been demonstrated rather thoroughly that massive, quick environmental changes do take place, and the environment of one location changes too swiftly for slow changing creature to keep up with, unless they migrate to another similar area and keep evolving while they're there. The only assumption that I'm making in this is, as I said before, that these changes haven't been confined to the last two or three hundred thousand years.
I suppose, to emphasize my point, I'll have to pull out several quotes from the different areas that links have been posted to. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Lief Erikson : 11-13-2002 at 06:41 PM. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#572 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
All of the links thus far given have been in support of swift and widespread environmental changes. You are transforming the words of the scientists and changing their discoveries from the surface meaning. You're shrinking everything that they've found to force it to fit. Inconsitency is there. If you aren't advocating mass migrations, I don't know how you're going to explain the inconsitency. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#573 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Re: Sahara-Gobi Deserts
Quote:
If this is in relation to radiocarbon then it must be noted that the changes in available carbon and carbon14 change proportionally. The reduction of increase in total available carbon doesn't indicate a change in the ratio of carbon to carbon 14.
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#574 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#575 |
Enting
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 57
|
Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah Blah Blah Blah Blah ......Blah Blah Blah blah....
Oh wait, and BLAH! ![]()
__________________
Nothing is as real as a dream. The world can change around you, but your dream will not. Responsibilities need not erase it. Duties need not obscure it. Because the dream is within you, no one can take it away. --Unknown What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us. --Ralph Waldo Emerson Don't judge each day by the harvest you reap, but by the seeds you plant. --Robert Louis Stevenson Impossible is a word to be found only in the dictionary of fools. --Unknown Love your enemies. It really pisses them off! --Unknown Age does not protect you from love. But love, to some extent, protects you from age. --Jeanne Moreau, French Actress We are never so helplessly unhappy as when we lose love. --Sigmund Freud |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#576 | ||||||
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[quote] (3) Atheism is ABSOLUTELY NOT a neutral scientific position! Atheism is also a belief, just like a religious belief (or call them ideologies if you want to, but neither position is scientifically proveable) /quote] It's not even scientific and neither is theism. Agnosticism is neutral to ideas, but your are right theists and atheists are predisposed to bias, which is not meant to imply that either is automatically bias. Quote:
[b][quote] And a final note.... However, data can fall into many categories. If it consisted of hundred of intermediate types in addition to the fully formed types, it would support ToE and contradict ToCBID. [b][quote] The term "intermediate" is used quite a bit here in a way of saying not unique or viable. This seems to be an extension of the "missing link" arguement. I guess as more human "intermediates" are found the idea has become more generalized. I have posted examples of species going through incremental changes. I'm not sure why this general concept is not understood. Quote:
![]() Maybe you'll come back and discuss ID, perhaps. I was only hoping to avaoid the rancore about whether it should be taught in schools to allow a more focused discussion. See you around the Moot, Rian. ![]()
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#577 | |
Elf Lord of the Grey Havens
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 2,381
|
Quote:
![]()
__________________
There exists a limit to the force even ther most powerful may apply without destroying themselves. Judging this limit is the true artistry of government. Misuse of power is the fatal sin. The law cannot be a tool of vengance, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. You cannot threaten any individual and escape the consequences. -Muad'dib on Law The Stilgar Commentary |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#578 |
the Shrike
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA <3
Posts: 10,647
|
LOL! I guess we must all seem like cantankerous old gits...
![]()
__________________
"Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#579 |
The Buddy Rabbit
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Trapped in the headlights..
Posts: 3,372
|
BLAH!!!!!
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#580 | ||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not going to argue that the creatures couldn't have migrated in or out of their surroundings. If you want to go that way, I'm not going to contradict you. But I still see the theory of slow environment in tandem with slow evolution to be in contradiction with current evidence. No opinions I have observed up to this point show reasonable explanations for the contradiction. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evidence for Evolution | jerseydevil | General Messages | 599 | 05-18-2008 02:43 PM |
Catholic Schools Ban Charity | Last Child of Ungoliant | General Messages | 29 | 03-15-2005 04:58 PM |
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution | RÃan | General Messages | 1149 | 08-16-2004 06:07 PM |
A discussion about Evolution and other scientific theories | Elvellon | General Messages | 1 | 04-11-2002 01:23 PM |
Evolution | IronParrot | Entertainment Forum | 1 | 06-19-2001 03:22 AM |