RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (25) < ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... >   
  Topic: Jerry Don Bauer's Thread, Lather, Rinse, Repeat< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
JohnW



Posts: 2319
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,12:23   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 03 2012,10:14)
Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 03 2012,11:50)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:45)
 
Quote
Jerry in your idea, species poof into existence, they don't evolve from ancestral lines!


It's true that they don't evolve from ancestral lines, but there is no poofing involved. I know that they were designed.

Lawn Mowers are designed too by design engineers, do you think they ALSO just poof into existence? If you do, we have some discussions awaiting us... :)

This could be interesting, Jerry. You're the first creationist to claim to have details of the species-manufacturing process.

If there was no poofing involved, how was it done? A factory?

Hey Jerry, what's the fundamental difference between lawn mowers and living things (say dogs, for example)?

Lawn mowers aren't in Teh Bibble?

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,12:25   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Dec. 03 2012,13:20)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 03 2012,11:41)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,12:21)
I'm afraid there is no such thing as a theory of evolution...a hypothesis of evolution, yes, but a theory....no.

fuck i guess we are all out of a job then

hey jerry don't tell anyone OK just post it on blogs that way no one will ever give a shit but you

anyone else here think this idiot is deliberately trolling? Which of one you is billybob again? PM me you cretinous doppelganger you

I'm tempted to say he's trolling - incoherent posts, lots of "LOLs" and "WINKs", it screams troll.
That's why I find it increasingly hard to even discuss his ideas, and I admire those who still do. I mean, I love to talk about evolution with my neighbours' kids aged 10 and 12, but Mr Bauer ???

Well, those kids are probably both 1) curious and 2) not completely stupid.

Billy Jim I am not so sure about but I don't think he qualifies under either criterion.

--------------
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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3350
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,12:52   

Quote (Quack @ Dec. 03 2012,12:15)
Quote
And I agree that I would need to show populations coming into existence all at once...but I ALREADY have that evidence. It's in the fossil record...You seem like an educated man, do I really need to walk you through the Cambrian Explosion?

Why stop at the so-called Cambrian explosion? It is such a short time, on the order of millions of years or something like that. Was the factory closed down when the Cambrium "ended"?

Why not walk us all the way from Cambrium to Holocene?

BTW - holes in the fossil record doesn't really constitue proof that species was not evolving in the interim.

Yes, please do walk us through the 55 million years of the cambrian.

In doing so, please be sure to explain, at length, the process of fossilization and why soft-bodied organisms are highly unlikely to fossilize.

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

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

   
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:10   

Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 03 2012,11:50)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:45)
 
Quote
Jerry in your idea, species poof into existence, they don't evolve from ancestral lines!


It's true that they don't evolve from ancestral lines, but there is no poofing involved. I know that they were designed.

Lawn Mowers are designed too by design engineers, do you think they ALSO just poof into existence? If you do, we have some discussions awaiting us... :)

This could be interesting, Jerry. You're the first creationist to claim to have details of the species-manufacturing process.

If there was no poofing involved, how was it done? A factory?

Really? Maybe on here, but most surely not in many circles. But let's discourse on this for a bit since you asked.

Let's start at the bottom rung so to speak...How do chemicals come into existence?

I learned much from chemical engineer, Edward J. Maginn, University of Notre Dame, on this subject and often borrow heavily from his work and his teachings:

http://www.nd.edu/~ed........ns.html

A read of his papers and some of his class notes gave me an understanding of how molecular design is understood by design engineers. Maginn states throughout his teachings that the understanding of chemical/molecular design hinges on reductionism--the microscopics of design explain the macroscopics of the final product.

If I were to build a complete football stadium out of lego blocks and wanted to explain to another how I did it, I would pass over explaining the structure itself and hone in on the microstates ...forget the stadium and look at each little lego block and determine how it is placed, because, once again, the microscopics are going to determine the macroscopic.

So here is what we know about chemical and molecular synthesis......It, as well as everything else, begins with quantum mechanics as it's ultimate microstate....particles...

Of course, in the field of QM, research goes on. In fact, we are just NOW beginning to understand that science with any sense of insight...but this much we know....EVERYTHING that IS begins HERE in it's ultimate microstate.....

So if this is the EVERYTHING...is there a methodology that we can grasp to suggest that INTELLIGENCE might control these microstates and the outcome of them which will dictate a final macrostate?

If intelligence DID control the formation of these microstates, it could certainly explain how life was was created by that intelligence.

And so I introduce quantum entaglement at this point. What is it?

Read a bit then let me give it to you in a nutshell:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/article....ent.htm

When partcles...electrons, photons etc are created at the same time, by the same system, they tend to become entangled. But what does this mean?

It means that if I take two of these entangled particles to study, something weird happens...anything I do to one affects the other.

I could keep one on earth and send the other to mars. Then if I did something to the one on earth...say...change it's spin or momentum, the one on mars will also be affected. No one know HOW or WHY...but we know that's the way it is....research continues.

But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

And haven't I said that I also believe the Creator to be quantum mechanics....particles? Yes.....then I can logically draw a conclusion.....That creator can begin to manipulate quantum mechanics, the building blocks of life simply by manipulating itself because it is entangled with ALL in the universe. This would be done without labs or ever even lifting a test tube...

I believe it did so...and the steps of that synthesis are recorded in the fossil record.

First came simple cells, then clusters of cells, then more complex organisms and finally the ultimate product: homo sapiens with fine minds that make us doctors, lawyers and engineers.

I call that manipulator God...BTW...you can call it anything you wish....

  
Henry J



Posts: 4112
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:20   

Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:20   

Jerry, in your opinion, when was the last time God fired up the old conveyor belt and made something?  What was it?

--------------
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

   
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:24   

Quote (blipey @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Jerry, in your opinion, when was the last time God fired up the old conveyor belt and made something? What was it?

I dunno....could the great manipulator also be......SANTA? :)

  
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:27   

Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

WHEN.....or what came first. second and third are not really relevant, Henry

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:29   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,15:10)
Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 03 2012,11:50)
 
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:45)
Quote
Jerry in your idea, species poof into existence, they don't evolve from ancestral lines!


It's true that they don't evolve from ancestral lines, but there is no poofing involved. I know that they were designed.

Lawn Mowers are designed too by design engineers, do you think they ALSO just poof into existence? If you do, we have some discussions awaiting us... :)

This could be interesting, Jerry. You're the first creationist to claim to have details of the species-manufacturing process.

If there was no poofing involved, how was it done? A factory?

Really? Maybe on here, but most surely not in many circles. But let's discourse on this for a bit since you asked.

Let's start at the bottom rung so to speak...How do chemicals come into existence?

I learned much from chemical engineer, Edward J. Maginn, University of Notre Dame, on this subject and often borrow heavily from his work and his teachings:

http://www.nd.edu/~ed........ns.html

A read of his papers and some of his class notes gave me an understanding of how molecular design is understood by design engineers. Maginn states throughout his teachings that the understanding of chemical/molecular design hinges on reductionism--the microscopics of design explain the macroscopics of the final product.

If I were to build a complete football stadium out of lego blocks and wanted to explain to another how I did it, I would pass over explaining the structure itself and hone in on the microstates ...forget the stadium and look at each little lego block and determine how it is placed, because, once again, the microscopics are going to determine the macroscopic.

So here is what we know about chemical and molecular synthesis......It, as well as everything else, begins with quantum mechanics as it's ultimate microstate....particles...

Of course, in the field of QM, research goes on. In fact, we are just NOW beginning to understand that science with any sense of insight...but this much we know....EVERYTHING that IS begins HERE in it's ultimate microstate.....

So if this is the EVERYTHING...is there a methodology that we can grasp to suggest that INTELLIGENCE might control these microstates and the outcome of them which will dictate a final macrostate?

If intelligence DID control the formation of these microstates, it could certainly explain how life was was created by that intelligence.

And so I introduce quantum entaglement at this point. What is it?

Read a bit then let me give it to you in a nutshell:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/article....ent.htm

When partcles...electrons, photons etc are created at the same time, by the same system, they tend to become entangled. But what does this mean?

It means that if I take two of these entangled particles to study, something weird happens...anything I do to one affects the other.

I could keep one on earth and send the other to mars. Then if I did something to the one on earth...say...change it's spin or momentum, the one on mars will also be affected. No one know HOW or WHY...but we know that's the way it is....research continues.

But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

And haven't I said that I also believe the Creator to be quantum mechanics....particles? Yes.....then I can logically draw a conclusion.....That creator can begin to manipulate quantum mechanics, the building blocks of life simply by manipulating itself because it is entangled with ALL in the universe. This would be done without labs or ever even lifting a test tube...

I believe it did so...and the steps of that synthesis are recorded in the fossil record.

First came simple cells, then clusters of cells, then more complex organisms and finally the ultimate product: homo sapiens with fine minds that make us doctors, lawyers and engineers.

I call that manipulator God...BTW...you can call it anything you wish....

so, no details of the species-poofing process?

--------------
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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3350
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:48   

OMG... It IS the same as Gary.

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

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

   
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1008
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,14:51   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,11:11)
OK, Henry....And ...BTW, thanks for your intelligent, civil posts......speciation happens in small increments....I'm all over that...

But the bottom line has to speak at some point.

And the bottom line says:...at at SOME point...a new species must emerge...that's what speciation IS.

So, At that point when speciation occurs, the proginating species will have to have, by the very definition of the word speciation, give birth to an entirely new species.

That new species will then not be able to interbreed with it's predecessors and must interbreed ONLY with it's own...new...species....

Science says nope......that original birth of a viable (it can live), fertile, (it too can produce offspring) new species isn't going to happen.

Jerry,

Can you tell us about the exact moment when you felt comfortable driving a car?

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
Henry J



Posts: 4112
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,15:45   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,13:27)
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
 
Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

WHEN.....or what came first. second and third are not really relevant, Henry

My understanding is that matter particles formed from energy after the energy got cool enough for that to happen. I don't think they would have all formed at the same time. For more details than that, you'll have to ask a physicist.

  
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,15:48   

Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,15:45)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,13:27)
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

WHEN.....or what came first. second and third are not really relevant, Henry

My understanding is that matter particles formed from energy after the energy got cool enough for that to happen. I don't think they would have all formed at the same time. For more details than that, you'll have to ask a physicist.

Really no need to ask a physicist on this one because energy and particles are exactly the same thing. Remember we are at the quantum level.

  
Quack



Posts: 1802
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,16:32   

Just waiting for you to walk us through Cambrium.

Oh wait, I see reductionism is your pet. That explains a lot.

Edited by Quack on Dec. 03 2012,16:32

--------------
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.
                                                                                               Richard Feynman

  
Henry J



Posts: 4112
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,16:38   

Leptons (electrons, neutrinos, etc.) and quarks (what protons and neutrons are made of) aren't the same thing as photons.

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1006
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,16:50   

JerryJoeDonBillyBob bullshitting bloviator, jack of all things OFF and all-round idiot on any subject under the Sun, including the Sun channeling JoeG wrote:
Quote
energy and particles are exactly the same thing.


While you're channeling Gary or JoeG or GaryBillyBobJoeG perhaps you could address the following:

Is the null set a set?
Is water and ice the same thing?
Is a single molecule of H2O water?
Is hair growing on the palms of your hands?
Has a guy named Lenny ever bought you a pizza?
Do you like berries; blue, black, rasp and/or dingle?

There is a prize for correct answers.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2319
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,19:13   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Dec. 03 2012,12:29)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,15:10)
Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 03 2012,11:50)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:45)
 
Quote
Jerry in your idea, species poof into existence, they don't evolve from ancestral lines!


It's true that they don't evolve from ancestral lines, but there is no poofing involved. I know that they were designed.

Lawn Mowers are designed too by design engineers, do you think they ALSO just poof into existence? If you do, we have some discussions awaiting us... :)

This could be interesting, Jerry. You're the first creationist to claim to have details of the species-manufacturing process.

If there was no poofing involved, how was it done? A factory?

Really? Maybe on here, but most surely not in many circles. But let's discourse on this for a bit since you asked.

Let's start at the bottom rung so to speak...How do chemicals come into existence?

I learned much from chemical engineer, Edward J. Maginn, University of Notre Dame, on this subject and often borrow heavily from his work and his teachings:

http://www.nd.edu/~ed........ns.html

A read of his papers and some of his class notes gave me an understanding of how molecular design is understood by design engineers. Maginn states throughout his teachings that the understanding of chemical/molecular design hinges on reductionism--the microscopics of design explain the macroscopics of the final product.

If I were to build a complete football stadium out of lego blocks and wanted to explain to another how I did it, I would pass over explaining the structure itself and hone in on the microstates ...forget the stadium and look at each little lego block and determine how it is placed, because, once again, the microscopics are going to determine the macroscopic.

So here is what we know about chemical and molecular synthesis......It, as well as everything else, begins with quantum mechanics as it's ultimate microstate....particles...

Of course, in the field of QM, research goes on. In fact, we are just NOW beginning to understand that science with any sense of insight...but this much we know....EVERYTHING that IS begins HERE in it's ultimate microstate.....

So if this is the EVERYTHING...is there a methodology that we can grasp to suggest that INTELLIGENCE might control these microstates and the outcome of them which will dictate a final macrostate?

If intelligence DID control the formation of these microstates, it could certainly explain how life was was created by that intelligence.

And so I introduce quantum entaglement at this point. What is it?

Read a bit then let me give it to you in a nutshell:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/article....ent.htm

When partcles...electrons, photons etc are created at the same time, by the same system, they tend to become entangled. But what does this mean?

It means that if I take two of these entangled particles to study, something weird happens...anything I do to one affects the other.

I could keep one on earth and send the other to mars. Then if I did something to the one on earth...say...change it's spin or momentum, the one on mars will also be affected. No one know HOW or WHY...but we know that's the way it is....research continues.

But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

And haven't I said that I also believe the Creator to be quantum mechanics....particles? Yes.....then I can logically draw a conclusion.....That creator can begin to manipulate quantum mechanics, the building blocks of life simply by manipulating itself because it is entangled with ALL in the universe. This would be done without labs or ever even lifting a test tube...

I believe it did so...and the steps of that synthesis are recorded in the fossil record.

First came simple cells, then clusters of cells, then more complex organisms and finally the ultimate product: homo sapiens with fine minds that make us doctors, lawyers and engineers.

I call that manipulator God...BTW...you can call it anything you wish....

so, no details of the species-poofing process?

They're quantum micropoofs, Ras.  Even more sciency.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,20:37   

ah well that makes more sense.  proofs and not-proofs at the same time.

--------------
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: 3607
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,22:27   

But micropoofs cannot accumulate to make macropoofs.

--------------
lets not make a joke of ourselves.

Pat Robertson

  
Henry J



Posts: 4112
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,23:12   

Quote
Doc Bill:

Is the null set a set?
Is water and ice the same thing?
Is a single molecule of H2O water?
[...]
There is a prize for correct answers.


Uh - is anybody eligible for the prize, or just the one it was addressed to? :p

Henry

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2162
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 03 2012,23:35   

"Lather, Rinse, Repeat" indeed.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,00:25   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,14:24)
Quote (blipey @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Jerry, in your opinion, when was the last time God fired up the old conveyor belt and made something? What was it?

I dunno....could the great manipulator also be......SANTA? :)

So, you claim that God specially creates everything.  Is that right or am I wrong?  If I am right, then am I also correct in thinking that you have no way of telling us when, how, or what this creating is?

--------------
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

   
Southstar



Posts: 150
Joined: Nov. 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,01:12   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,14:10)

Jerry:
Quote
It means that if I take two of these entangled particles to study, something weird happens...anything I do to one affects the other.


Wrong, entanglement effects only quantum states and information.

Jerry:
Quote
I could keep one on earth and send the other to mars. Then if I did something to the one on earth...say...change its spin or momentum, the one on mars will also be affected.


Only with regards to its quantum state. You cannot remotely move particles through the air.

Wasn't it enough to just bullshit biologists you had to go and bullshit physics too..

Also I'd like to remind you that speciation is happening now so please show how your idea explains this.

--------------
"Cows who know a moose when they see one will do infinitely better than a cow that pairs with a moose because they cannot see the difference either." Gary Gaulin

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1165
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,03:42   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,12:27)
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

WHEN.....or what came first. second and third are not really relevant, Henry

Actually, what 'came' first, second, third, etc., is thoroughly relevant in regard to your claim:

"But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang."

The "big bang" was not an event that happened and then was completely done, all in a tiny fraction of a second. It's still happening. The evolution of the universe is still happening, just like the evolution of life forms is still happening. Show that I'm wrong, if you can, and don't bother with appeals to authority.

Edited by The whole truth on Dec. 04 2012,01:43

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1165
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,04:05   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:11)
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 02 2012,20:49)
Quote
Take the ape-like creature morphing into homo sapiens....at some point in this supposed evolution, an ape has to cross the get-go line and birth a human....the species has to change in order for speciation to occur.

No. No. No. NO!

Small changes accumulate.

The amount of change from one generation to the next isn't expected to be any more than what we see today between one generation and the next.

The reason large changes aren't expected to emerge (at least not successfully) in one generation (or even a few) is basically what you said; offspring that's too different from its relatives would have trouble finding a mate, or mating successfully if it found one.

Speciation isn't a barrier; any barrier between two species is there because they've been accumulating changes separately for long enough for some of those differences to prevent interbreeding, or at least deter it.

Henry

OK, Henry....And ...BTW, thanks for your intelligent, civil posts......speciation happens in small increments....I'm all over that...

But the bottom line has to speak at some point.

And the bottom line says:...at at SOME point...a new species must emerge...that's what speciation IS.

So, At that point when speciation occurs, the proginating species will have to have, by the very definition of the word speciation, give birth to an entirely new species.

That new species will then not be able to interbreed with it's predecessors and must interbreed ONLY with it's own...new...species....

Science says nope......that original birth of a viable (it can live), fertile, (it too can produce offspring) new species isn't going to happen.

jerry, you apparently think that speciation means that one individual speciates at a time, while all the other individuals of a population remain exactly as their ancestors were. Is that what you think?

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1165
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,04:43   

Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 02 2012,15:15)
Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 02 2012,16:41)

jerry said:

"Now, I addressed CSI in detail......"

 
Quote
Well then, since you're a self-proclaimed expert on CSI, will you tell me, in detail, how much CSI there is in a wild banana? Will you tell me, in detail, who or what specified the complex information in a wild banana? And will you tell me, in detail, what the complex information is in a wild banana?


I'm sorry, I don't know how much CSI is in a wild banana...in fact, I don't think I even know any wild bananas...I used to date a Wild Irish Rose.....lol

But what specified the information in a wild banana? A banana seed did, or a seedling....This happened when DNA recombined......

 
Quote
While you're at it, will you tell me, in detail, how it is determined that information is 'complex'? Is there such a thing as information that is not complex? If so, where exactly is the dividing line between non-complex and complex information?


It's complex of it is over 500 bits of information...if it is also specified, it then becomes CSI (and all DNA, by it's very nature is specified information).

So, yeah, I'm messing with you a bit...but I would have to have a charted genome and take about a weeks time to calculate what you want.

But (and I have pointed this out before on here), why on earth do you want to calculate the CSI of an entire organism like that.....You want to know if it is CSI? Just a few proteins in a single cell of that organism is CSI.....You KNOW the whole organism would be, and astronomically so.

So, a banana seed is the 'specifier' of a banana? Who or what specified the banana seed? QM? Intelligent molecules? yhwh-jesus-holy ghost? The FSM?

How did you come up with 500 bits as the minimum requirement for information to be "complex"? Is it because dembski or some other IDiot says so? Why not 400 bits, or 600 bits, or 3.9 bits, or 100 trillion bits?

Was there complex specified information before there were humans? If so, who or what was around to figure out the 'bits'?

"So, yeah, I'm messing with you a bit...but I would have to have a charted genome and take about a weeks time to calculate what you want."

I don't mind waiting a week.

"But (and I have pointed this out before on here), why on earth do you want to calculate the CSI of an entire organism like that.....You want to know if it is CSI? Just a few proteins in a single cell of that organism is CSI.....You KNOW the whole organism would be, and astronomically so."

Why on Earth not? In all the years that you IDiots have been pushing "CSI", none of you have ever calculated the CSI in an entire organism? I would think that you would be anxious to do so.

Edited by The whole truth on Dec. 04 2012,02:50

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,07:19   

Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 04 2012,05:05)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,09:11)
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 02 2012,20:49)
 
Quote
Take the ape-like creature morphing into homo sapiens....at some point in this supposed evolution, an ape has to cross the get-go line and birth a human....the species has to change in order for speciation to occur.

No. No. No. NO!

Small changes accumulate.

The amount of change from one generation to the next isn't expected to be any more than what we see today between one generation and the next.

The reason large changes aren't expected to emerge (at least not successfully) in one generation (or even a few) is basically what you said; offspring that's too different from its relatives would have trouble finding a mate, or mating successfully if it found one.

Speciation isn't a barrier; any barrier between two species is there because they've been accumulating changes separately for long enough for some of those differences to prevent interbreeding, or at least deter it.

Henry

OK, Henry....And ...BTW, thanks for your intelligent, civil posts......speciation happens in small increments....I'm all over that...

But the bottom line has to speak at some point.

And the bottom line says:...at at SOME point...a new species must emerge...that's what speciation IS.

So, At that point when speciation occurs, the proginating species will have to have, by the very definition of the word speciation, give birth to an entirely new species.

That new species will then not be able to interbreed with it's predecessors and must interbreed ONLY with it's own...new...species....

Science says nope......that original birth of a viable (it can live), fertile, (it too can produce offspring) new species isn't going to happen.

jerry, you apparently think that speciation means that one individual speciates at a time, while all the other individuals of a population remain exactly as their ancestors were. Is that what you think?

"think"

--------------
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

  
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,08:53   

Quote (blipey @ Dec. 04 2012,00:25)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,14:24)
Quote (blipey @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
Jerry, in your opinion, when was the last time God fired up the old conveyor belt and made something? What was it?

I dunno....could the great manipulator also be......SANTA? :)

So, you claim that God specially creates everything. Is that right or am I wrong? If I am right, then am I also correct in thinking that you have no way of telling us when, how, or what this creating is?

That would be wrong.

Also define God...According to YOUR definition, God may have created NOTHING.

I postulate that QM created life. If you wish to call that God, go for it.

  
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,09:03   

Quote (Southstar @ Dec. 04 2012,01:12)

Quote


Wrong, entanglement effects only quantum states and information.


Well Gee.......we ARE discussing QM...you really think there is some remote possibility that I WASN'T talking about quantum states and information since particles ARE information?


Quote


Only with regards to its quantum state. You cannot remotely move particles through the air.  


Oh stop. Do you think I could REALLY place a particle on Mars...lol

[/quote]
Wasn't it enough to just bullshit biologists you had to go and bullshit physics too.. [/quote]

This is a personal attack that has nothing to do with the discussion. It shows you have no logical comeback.

Your posts have been civil up until now, however, if you start, I will simply relegate your posts to the the cheap seats...those don't get read in my threads..Be nice if you wanna play..*wink*

  
Jerry Don Bauer



Posts: 135
Joined: Nov. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 04 2012,09:05   

Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 04 2012,03:42)
Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 03 2012,12:27)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 03 2012,14:20)
 
Quote
But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang.

No. Quarks and leptons would have formed out of energy after the big bang. (Composite particles would come after that, after the whole thing was cool enough for them to be stable.)

WHEN.....or what came first. second and third are not really relevant, Henry

Actually, what 'came' first, second, third, etc., is thoroughly relevant in regard to your claim:

"But were not ALL the particles in this universe created at the same time by the same system? Yes, that system is called the big bang."

The "big bang" was not an event that happened and then was completely done, all in a tiny fraction of a second. It's still happening. The evolution of the universe is still happening, just like the evolution of life forms is still happening. Show that I'm wrong, if you can, and don't bother with appeals to authority.

And let me guess...you consider referrences from journaled papers and University science departments as the argument from authority... :)

  
  740 replies since Nov. 21 2012,08:55 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (25) < ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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