RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (265) < ... 161 162 163 164 165 [166] 167 168 169 170 171 ... >   
  Topic: Joe G.'s Tardgasm, How long can it last?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,19:57   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 12 2012,10:55)
BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,19:59   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 12 2012,12:24)
Umm hail is made up of ICE, dumbass. RAIN is made up of water.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/diction........ain

1 a: water falling in drops condensed from vapor in the atmosphere

http://education.yahoo.com/referen........ail

1 Precipitation in the form of spherical or irregular pellets of ice larger than 5 millimeters (0.2 inches) in diameter



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:01   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 12 2012,12:37)
Water is melted ICE- the water here allegedly came from ICE locked away in asteroids, comets and meteors.

joanne don't ever change, sweatheart!



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:06   

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 12 2012,19:45)
As for the "discussion" about whether water and ice are the same material or not, that strikes me as a disagreement over word usage rather than being about the underlying chemistry, i.e., I don't see anybody saying that water and ice aren't made of the same kind of molecules.

Henry

errrr, Henry you are always too nice.  and punny

LMAOOOOO

Joanne is a water essentialist. Ice, water, two different baramin.  In other words, Joe don't know what the fuck you are talking about LOL

It's so cute when he talks about stuff!



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:08   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 12 2012,20:45)
I think he maybe took a step back, realised he was making up personas, threatening people with violence, being moderated by both sides and posting pictures of women's genitals to get a reaction and thought it wasn't good for him. At least I hope that's what happened. Maybe he can channel his considerable energies into something more positive.



She is gonna be so butthurt

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3568
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:30   

I gave the reasons for removal page four stars. I intended give five, but I hit the wrong  star using a tablet.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:33   

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 12 2012,18:45)
Quote
Hey remember when DaveScot declared:

"?By the way, gravity is the strongest force in nature.?

IIRC, the first sentence of the paper he cited read "Gravity is the weakest force in nature."

Good times.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3568
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:41   

Is it back?

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:43   

Yay(?!) It's back up again. He must have threatened Teh_googlewebs with a meet up.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
eigenstate



Posts: 76
Joined: Nov. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:45   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 12 2012,19:45)
I think he maybe took a step back, realised he was making up personas, threatening people with violence, being moderated by both sides and posting pictures of women's genitals to get a reaction and thought it wasn't good for him. At least I hope that's what happened. Maybe he can channel his considerable energies into something more positive.

Had to go look to see for myself. Amazing.

I thought I felt a disturbance in the tard-force... as if a million epithets and confused hostilities all cried out at once.


Seriously, though, my instinct on this was that someone (like an employer, or prospective employer) got wind of his blog, forcing Joe to take it down post haste (along with the copy/backup site).

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,20:57   

>employer
>implying



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3568
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,21:00   

Could have been an accidental deletion.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,21:03   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Aug. 12 2012,20:57)
>employer
>implying


She's a stay at home mum.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,21:05   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 12 2012,20:43)
Yay(?!) It's back up again. He must have threatened Teh_googlewebs with a meet up.

I'm sure the details are forthcoming!

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3568
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,21:13   

Alderaan shoulda had a undelete button.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1490
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 12 2012,22:51   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 12 2012,20:43)
Yay(?!) It's back up again. He must have threatened Teh_googlewebs with a meet up.

Fatty JoeTard's folly is back up but UD seems to have taken a dump.

--------------
JoeG: And by eating the cake you are consuming the information- some stays with you and the rest is waste.

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,13:51   

Joe, you need a different set  criteria to lie about.  You don't promote any of my comments on your blog.  So, you do not in fact promote all on topic comments.  Can you help the lying?  Even a little?

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:05   

Joe is having a moan that a book a cited

Quote
Is NOT about biology, evolution nor mutations.


the title of the book?

Quote
Random Walks in Biology


He works hard at stupid.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Joe G



Posts: 1497
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:05   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 12 2012,12:07)
Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 12 2012,11:17)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 12 2012,10:23)
So Joe, you haven't answered my questions on your blog, so I'll repost them here.  That way you can run from them in two places.

1) Since certain areas of DNA have a higher than average mutation rate and certain areas of DNA have a lower than average mutation rate, are the mutations over all of the DNA still random?  Explain your answer (you, not a link).

2) Assume two mutations occur.  In one organism, the mutation results in a 10% greater efficiency in oxygen transport in the blood.  In another organism, a mutation results in a 10% greater vulnerability to a particular common virus.  Is the differential survival of one organism over the other random?  Explain your answer (you, not a link).

Fuck you Kevin. YOU need to answer my questions


What questions?  You consistently ask questions that make no sense and have no bearing in reality.  I correct you and then you cry because I don't answer your questions.

Your questions are either unanswerable or meaningless because they don't actually mesh with what the actual science is.  For example, the question "Why don't you support your blind watchmaker hypothesis?"  

The reason I don't answer that question (as has been pointed out to you many, many times) is because I don't have that
'hypothesis'.  Therefore, I don't have to support it.

The fact that you THINK (hah!) that's what my hypothesis is, is of no actual concern to me.

But, I note that you can't actually shut up and you contradict yourself... again.  So, let's explore that OK?
 
Quote


kevbo:
   
Quote
So if one section of DNA has a higher likelihood of mutation than another section... is it still random?


Most likely that is by design.


And you evidence of this is?  
 
Quote

However, in the context of the OP and the theory of evolution, ALL genetic changes are random/ happenstance.


Wrong... sort of.  It depends on how you define your terms, which, you never do.

Certain areas of the bacterial genome can be influenced by outside factors to radically increase the mutation rate.  That is not random, that is a fact of biology.  Further, it only applies to certain areas of the genome, so that's not really random either.

The actual mutation that results.  Yes, that's random.  However, as we shall see, the survival of the bacteria is not random.

 
Quote

Tha is if we listen to evolutionary biologists such as Jerry Coyne, Dawkins and Ernst Mayr.


Quote them, with page numbers, links, and full paragraphs.
 
Quote

   
Quote
if one organism survives because it was born with a gene that increased its muscle efficiency by 0.1%


What is the mutation or mutations?


Doesn't matter.  Why do you think it does?  Because you read the rest of my question and realized that you better start backtracking and distracting as fast as possible?
 
Quote

Or is this just hypothetical?


Doesn't matter.  It's possible, that's all that matter.  And yes, it does happen.  I suggest you start exploring the various differences between the varieties of hemoglobin.
 
Quote

And what does it have to do with the OP? Be specific


Because, you made a very specific claim and your answers to these questions show that you're an idiot.  That's why.

You made the claim that everything with respect to evolution is random.  It isn't, but you can't admit that without realizing that your entire argument is built on a bed of very, very loose sand.
 
Quote


   
Quote
another organism died because it was born with a mutation that left it susceptible to a particular virus



What is the mutation or mutations? And if the virus is never present in that organism's eco-system the organism has no worries.



So, you're saying that the presence of the virus it's vulnerable to is what determines it's survival... I thought you said it was all random?

 
Quote

Survival depends on many variables, Kevin.


No, according to you, survival is completely random.  According to you, evolution is completely random.  I know that you think this because every freaking time over the last 3 years anyone has brought up the concept of differential survival as being non-random, you freak out and cry that it is.

The simple fact that survival is non-random (i.e. based on deterministic factors) destroys your entire view of evolution.

Mutations are random, the locations of mutations may or may not be, selection (by definition) is not random.  Which you have just admitted to.  
 
Quote

However you don't understand genetics not evidence so it is all moot.


I can't even parse this sentence.  I assume it's some kind of mental cutdown.  Coming from someone who thinks "mol" = "molecule" and 'mya' = "millennia years ago", I think everyone will agree that it isn't that much of a cutdown.
 
Quote

That way YOU can run from that in two places.


You think I run?  Seriously?  I've been begging you to have an adult conversation on the subject for 3 years, but you can't.  As we observed during our debate.  I think we both mostly handled that like adults.  The fact that you got your ass handed to you, just made you cry and rant and rave like a 5-year-old who doesn't get his cake.
 
Quote

Why is it that you are too much of a coward to stick with the actual TOPIC?


This IS the topic, stupid.  I'm showing you that you are wrong.  Heck, you yourself made an own goal.

As soon as you admit that not everything in evolution is completely random, then you have destroyed your own entire structure.  Yep, you just added a hurricane's worth of water to the sand your entire argument is built on.

I think you actually understand that.. However, your massive ego and megalomanical complex prevents you from admitting to a mistake or even admitting that you don't know everything already.

Joe, there's a reason that several hundred million scientists disagree with you.  And it's not a global conspiracy to keep your massive intellect down.

Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.

However it can easily be said that natural selection, a result of three random inputs, is also random.

Ya see if that virus isn't present then the organism is OK with that mutation. And if that small increase in muscle efficiency comes at a cost of lost sight, then it ain't so beneficial.

What is beneficial one day isn't beneficial the next- ecosystems change.

AND as I have supported with actual references, according to the theory of evolution ALL genetic changes are random/ happenstance. YOU don't get to tell me I am wrong and then not support it. I have supported MY claims you fucking moron.

All that said your spewage about your position being "evolution", that your position is NOT the blind watchmaker and ID is anti-evolution, is exposed as ignorance for the mere fact that the ONLY way ID could be considered anti-evolution is if "evolution" is defined as the blind watchmaker thesis!

IOW Kevin- you are one confused and ignorant fuck.

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t

Smilodon's Retreat is a place for ignorant cowards

BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Joe G



Posts: 1497
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:07   

Quote (blipey @ Aug. 13 2012,13:51)
Joe, you need a different set  criteria to lie about.  You don't promote any of my comments on your blog.  So, you do not in fact promote all on topic comments.  Can you help the lying?  Even a little?

Erik- You are a pathetic piece of shit who is NEVER on-topic.

So fuck off...

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t

Smilodon's Retreat is a place for ignorant cowards

BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:10   

Joe:

Quote
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


the title of the post?



http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2012.......nd.html


Quote
"Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution
-
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.


Joe works real hard at stupid


Edited for format.

Edited by Richardthughes on Aug. 13 2012,16:12

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Joe G



Posts: 1497
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:11   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 12 2012,12:32)
Hey Joe,

Tell us, what is the difference between one molecule of water in liquid form and one molecule of water in solid form?

Oh wait, I forgot... there's no such thing as one molecule of water.  (grr... I'd put a link here, but I can't stand this system's search function)

eta: close enough

oh and BTW, I know how to determine if a molecule of water is solid, liquid, or gas... why don't you?

There isn't any such thing as one molecule of water, ice nor steam. It is the way molecules of H20 react with each other that determines whether or not you have water, ice or steam.

So no, if you only have one molecule to work with it can't be water, steam nor ice.

--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t

Smilodon's Retreat is a place for ignorant cowards

BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:12   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,17:05)
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.

However it can easily be said that natural selection, a result of three random inputs, is also random.

Ya see if that virus isn't present then the organism is OK with that mutation. And if that small increase in muscle efficiency comes at a cost of lost sight, then it ain't so beneficial.

What is beneficial one day isn't beneficial the next- ecosystems change.

AND as I have supported with actual references, according to the theory of evolution ALL genetic changes are random/ happenstance. YOU don't get to tell me I am wrong and then not support it. I have supported MY claims you fucking moron.

All that said your spewage about your position being "evolution", that your position is NOT the blind watchmaker and ID is anti-evolution, is exposed as ignorance for the mere fact that the ONLY way ID could be considered anti-evolution is if "evolution" is defined as the blind watchmaker thesis!

IOW Kevin- you are one confused and ignorant fuck.

beautiful!  dance, muppet!



--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Joe G



Posts: 1497
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:13   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10)
Joe:

 
Quote
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


the title of the post?



http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2012.......nd.html


Quote
"Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution
-
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.


Joe works real hard at stupid


Edited for format.

Read the OP you fucking maggot:

Quote
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.

As plain as can be, with respect to biology and the theory of evolution, the word random means, happenstance, not planned, no purpose nor objective, haphazard, accidental.

That's it. So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about. (bold added for the morons)


--------------
Chromosomes. are. all. connected. It is one long polymer. Called the DNA. - oleg t

Smilodon's Retreat is a place for ignorant cowards

BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.-Kevin McCarthy, ignorant of genetics

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:17   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:13)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 13 2012,16:10)
Joe:

 
Quote
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.


the title of the post?



http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2012.......nd.html


 
Quote
"Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution
-
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.


Joe works real hard at stupid


Edited for format.

Read the OP you fucking maggot:

Quote
People, evos in particular, seem to have a difficult time understanding the what the word random means with respect to biology and the theory of evolution. Let me see if I can help them out.

As plain as can be, with respect to biology and the theory of evolution, the word random means, happenstance, not planned, no purpose nor objective, haphazard, accidental.

That's it. So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about. (bold added for the morons)

And you do you think this helps you, Josephine?

You've clearly addressed, by your own tard hand:

Quote
Random", with Respect to Biology and Evolution


Giving

Quote
So when someone says something about random mutations that is what they are talking about


is of course:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wki....osition

You're possibly the most stupid IDer, which is quite the accomplishment!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,16:38   

Serious face time!




In all seriousness, although Joe is probably one of the stupidest people on the fucking planet, even this stupid person is not so stupid that she still does not understand how wrong her use of "random" is.  It's just attention whoring look at me trollery

And that makes me feel soooooo sorry for little josephina!  It needs a buddy! awwwww

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10226
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,17:02   

Crosspost:

Quote
Joe, cupcake:

cell motility - the direction cells move in and how they move, is not "Random mutations".

You arguing:
"So if one section of DNA has a higher likelihood of mutation than another section... is it still random?

Most likely that is by design."

Just shows that you don't understand random. Random does not have to be equiprobable, Fatty.

Me:

"If some outcomes of the summation of two dice have a higher likelihood of occurrence than other outcomes... is it still random?

LOL@JOEFAIL. Go cry into your donuts, Gossip Queen."

So you don't understand:

"Random", "Biology", "Evolution" and "Mutation". That's quite a good list for one posts!


--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3314
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,17:23   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:11)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Aug. 12 2012,12:32)
Hey Joe,

Tell us, what is the difference between one molecule of water in liquid form and one molecule of water in solid form?

Oh wait, I forgot... there's no such thing as one molecule of water.  (grr... I'd put a link here, but I can't stand this system's search function)

eta: close enough

oh and BTW, I know how to determine if a molecule of water is solid, liquid, or gas... why don't you?

There isn't any such thing as one molecule of water, ice nor steam. It is the way molecules of H20 react with each other that determines whether or not you have water, ice or steam.

So no, if you only have one molecule to work with it can't be water, steam nor ice.

So the kinetic energy of the molecule actually doesn't have anything to do with it?

Seriously?  Damn son, we're going to have to rewrite an awful lot of textbooks.  Unless you don't actually know what you're talking about.  Which is much, much, more likely.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3314
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,17:40   

Quote (Joe G @ Aug. 13 2012,16:05)
Kevin, you ignorant slut. My post pertained to the "random" in random mutaions ONLY.
[/quote]

Then perhaps you should state that explicitly.

Quote

However it can easily be said that natural selection, a result of three random inputs, is also random.


What are the 3 random inputs for natural selection?  I can't wait to hear this one.

Quote

Ya see if that virus isn't present then the organism is OK with that mutation. And if that small increase in muscle efficiency comes at a cost of lost sight, then it ain't so beneficial.


Wow, so now you need to make up stuff to make your case.  Please explain where 'lost sight' comes from and explain, in detail, the genetic linkage between increase in oxygen transport efficiency and development of sight.

Of course, you can't do that because you're just making shit up... as usual.

But let's get to the crux of the matter here.  In your first statement you admit that some mutation are harmful and some mutation are neutral.  In your second sentence you state that some mutations can (indeed) be beneficial.

Which pretty much goes against the entire group of intelligent design notionists.  Ya see, if mutation can generate beneficial effects, then there's no need for a designer.  Oh and you might talk to that clown on UD who's always spouting off about genetic entropy, because you jsut refuted everything he's said on the subject.

Thanks BTW.

And at last, we keep demanding why we stay on the subject of the OP, because whenever you talk about one thing, you invariably destroy the arguments used before on other subjects.

Ya see, unlike ID, science is this vast interconnected framework.  Everything from fossils, to genetics, to distribution of animals and geology supports the principles of evolution.  On the other hand, one post might support some small part of ID, but it refutes 4 or 5 other arguments.

Quote

What is beneficial one day isn't beneficial the next- ecosystems change.


Which, is what evolution has been saying all along.  You really need to explain this to the other IDists.  They have it all bass ackwards.

Quote


AND as I have supported with actual references, according to the theory of evolution ALL genetic changes are random/ happenstance. YOU don't get to tell me I am wrong and then not support it. I have supported MY claims you fucking moron.


You have quotemined people.  That's not support.  

My claims are so fundamentally basic that they aren't even discussed anymore.  You're about 50 years behind the times here dear boy.

Quote

All that said your spewage about your position being "evolution", that your position is NOT the blind watchmaker and ID is anti-evolution, is exposed as ignorance for the mere fact that the ONLY way ID could be considered anti-evolution is if "evolution" is defined as the blind watchmaker thesis!


True, but then, that's what all the ID people (including you) define ID as.  So, that works out now doesn't it.

The only time you don't define evolution as the blind watchmaker hypothesis is when you start trying to talk about science.

[quote]
IOW Kevin- you are one confused and ignorant fuck.

No Joe.  I'm not.  You haven't done anything, ever, that might even suggest that.

Do we need to go over our debate again?  Have you forgotten the sound drubbing you got... so sound you didn't even bother with a conclusion?

But let's get back to this idea of randomness.

What are the three 'inputs' to natural selection?

How are they random?

I am willing to grant that some aspects of selection appear to be random, but then, I'm pretty sure you don't really know what random means.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3314
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 13 2012,17:44   

BTW JOE:

Applied usage in science, mathematics and statistics recognizes a lack of predictability when referring to randomness, but admits regularities in the occurrences of events whose outcomes are not certain. For example, when throwing 2 dice and counting the total, we can say 7 will randomly occur twice as often as 4. This view, where randomness simply refers to situations in which the certainty of the outcome is at issue, is the one taken when referring to concepts of chance, probability, and information entropy. In these situations randomness implies a measure of uncertainty and notions of haphazardness are irrelevant.

eta:

The modern evolutionary synthesis ascribes the observed diversity of life to natural selection, in which some random genetic mutations are retained in the gene pool due to the non-random improved chance for survival and reproduction that those mutated genes confer on individuals who possess them.

from wikipedia (because it's the same source Joe appears to have used)

Edited by OgreMkV on Aug. 13 2012,17:46

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
  7920 replies since Feb. 24 2010,12:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (265) < ... 161 162 163 164 165 [166] 167 168 169 170 171 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]