RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (16) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >   
  Topic: Frontloading--Dumbest Idea Evar?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
JAM



Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2007,17:02   

Quote (VMartin @ July 18 2007,14:47)
Jam
   
Quote

Many of them. Are you denying that such events have ever occurred? If so, how much are you willing to bet on your certainty?

Get this through your thick skull--"random" is only wrt fitness. Your incoherent use of the adjective makes you look stupid.

If anyone here looks stupid it's you. Random mutation is random whatever effect it has on fitness.

Mutations don't occur at random locations or in random directions.

Why are you afraid to bet? 
 
Quote
No. Our ancestors called them dogs and they knew nothing about "common ancestor". We call them dogs because they are the same species. It is very simple.

Very simply, our ancestors had dogs long before the English language existed.
 
Quote
 
Quote
JAM: If you dumped 100 St. Bernards and 100 Chihuahuas on a large island with no other canids, would they ever interbreed? Could they interbreed?

Haven't we already met the major criterion for speciation?

Do you  mean that St. Bernards on a large island
with no other canids will be the same race  St.Bernards also after 200 generation?

No, I asked if they would interbreed. Do you not understand what the word means? If so, just ask, instead of stupidly pretending that I had asked you a completely different question.

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2007,17:10   

Dudes, you are slinging mud at a pig.

And he likes it.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2007,17:17   

I like watching VMartin make an asshole of himself.  I wish dave tard would drop by and do the same.

Watching creobots is like watching the mentally ill (at a safe distance.)

I'll be right back, the popcorn's done!

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2007,17:56   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ July 18 2007,17:17)
I like watching VMartin make an asshole of himself.  I wish dave tard would drop by and do the same.

Watching creobots is like watching the mentally ill (at a safe distance.)

I'll be right back, the popcorn's done!

But unlike VMartin, Dave Scot can be funny. Except when he mangles his English especially vividly, Martin's a snooze.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,11:24   

Quote

No, I asked if they would interbreed. Do you not understand what the word means? If so, just ask, instead of stupidly pretending that I had asked you a completely different question.


I wrote you it will take some time until both races change their phenotype and they would look alike. Of course after some generations feral dogs of those species would be able to interbreed.

But I don't see your point. Do you mean seriously your question that

   
Quote

Haven't we already met the major criterion for speciation?


Because it sounds very weird - dog can hybridize with wolf, coyote, Ethiopian wolf and golden jackal and produce fertile offspring with them. Why do you think that especially dogs are good example of speciation?


---
   
Quote

I like watching VMartin make an asshole of himself.


And we enjoy discussions with you at ISCID where John sometimes commented some posts here. Anyway  the ongoing discussion with you about dogs is really entertaining. Especially how you defend nonsensical Dawkins story about ability of St.Bernard to bear cask of brandy. You have never answered consistently any problems (except using denigration and abuses) about evolution of mimicry, coloration and now you claimed that dogs almost " met the major criterion for speciation". You make perfect fools of yourselves.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
IanBrown_101



Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,11:57   

Now, I can't say I really understand the science, but it seems to me anytime anyone replies to him with something he doesn't like, VMartin seems to do the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting "I'm not going to listen to this, I'm not going to hear this now" a la The 'burbs.



--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.

You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK

Roddenberry is my God.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,12:06   

Quote (IanBrown_101 @ July 20 2007,11:57)
Now, I can't say I really understand the science, but it seems to me anytime anyone replies to him with something he doesn't like, VMartin seems to do the equivalent of sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting "I'm not going to listen to this, I'm not going to hear this now" a la The 'burbs.


His stock reply can be summed up as "of course you are thinking that because of you are all foolish atheist Darwinist". Press him harder and he'll denounce your morality ("something bad may happen to you") and call you a Nazi. And he ignores about 90% of the serious questions put to him.

This is why no one on the internet has any use for him except Javison.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:24   

I'm sorry, Martin --- did you say something?   (yawn)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,01:35   

Becuase you didn' response to the problem of dogs I suppose you realized clearly it was incorrect inference from you - that they could speciate. Dogs cannot speciate and support your view about evolution. But if anyone here has different opinion I would like to know it and discuss the issue further.

Maybe another question.

   
Quote

And why did it (evolution) stop?


Because the human is the terminal product of the evolution and there is not other morphological "Typus" or "Form" that any organism can have. Because you are here obviously excellent linguists I would like to support  such a view and concept of directed evolution by this quotation of paleontologist Dacque:

   
Quote

»Typen - soviel wenigstens läßt sich mit übertragener Ausdrucksweise sagen - sind den wirklichen Formen zugrunde liegende, in ihnen realisierte Artpotenzen. Es sind keineswegs nur Abstraktionen aus den konkreten Formen, sondern sind letzte genotypische Realitäten und Potenzen jenseits des Gegenständlich-Phänotypischen.


Such concept is supported by the fact of saltationism and stasis what could be often in many cases observed in fossil record (puctuated equilibrium in darwinian thinking - Eldredge and Gould). The succession of indiduals in the course of the process of evolution is to be explained by this way :

   
Quote

»Die Folge der Individuen, die wir ja allein haben
und sehen, ist nicht die Entwicklung selbst, so wenig wie die Individuen die Art sind, sie sind auch nicht das, was sich entwickelt im stammesgeschichtlichen Sinn, sondern sie sind allenfalls das herausgestellte Ergebnis der Entwicklung des Lebens an sich, sind dies auch
schon als Same und Ei, so gut wie als fertige Tiere. Sie sind eben in jeder Weise Symbol eines inneren Zustandes, einer Entelechie, einer Potenz, oder wie man sonst sagen mag, da sich solches niemals konkret nennen lässt. Und deshalb können - um nun zum Stammbaum und damit zum Werden der >Arten< überzugehen - auch Formenreihen, die man historisch aus ihnen zusammenstellt, wenn man genug fossiles Material hat, nie die Entwicklung als solche zeigen,
sondern uns nur die Symbole für eine solche geben.«


So pigs can start ridicule Dacque. Go on.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
skeptic



Posts: 1163
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,02:27   

can anyone else read this stuff, or is it just me?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,03:17   

Quote (skeptic @ July 21 2007,02:27)
can anyone else read this stuff, or is it just me?

It's not just you.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,04:15   

Except denigration, abuses, lies and stupid questions you dont know anything. You cannot read German.  

I have tried to open a thread at EVC forum where the contibutors are on much higher level than stupidos here. So especially for you:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before 2nd WW German idealistic morphology had many prominent proponents. Nowadays the concept of idealistic morphology is obviously a forgotten theory of biological evolution. Neverthenless its basic concept of directed evolution lives poorly on the verge of the scientific interest (John Davisons PEH).

The basic concept of IM is that there are idealistic, non-darwinian forces behind the evolutionary process - "Zeitgeist" or "Typus" or "Urformen" (pre-existing formen). The main idea of the paleontologist Dacque is that human is final product of evolution. There are only idealistic, platonic "Formen" that underlie biological evolution. New types arouse suddenly and science doesn't have enough instruments to elucidate the process. The evolution is teleological process aimed for perfection and emergence of human. "Entelechie" of human is present from the beginning of the evolution and consequently human have no ancestors. It may be of interest that Leo Berg mentioned Dacque in his Nomogenesis - evolution directed by law. His concept is very similar of that of Dacque of development of a pre-existing Plan.



The interesting material about thinking and concepts of Naef, Dacque, Troll in German is here:

"Goethes langer Atem: »Methodologische Ideologien«
in der Deutschen Morphologie des 20. Jahrhunderts*".

http://www.evolutionsbiologen.de/goethesatem.pdf

Some materials could be found also on internet. Troll was a prominent botanist whose work was accepted world-wide.

[Wilhelm Troll (1897-1978). The tradition of idealistic morphology in the German botanical sciences of the 20th century]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites....itation

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,05:32   

Quote (VMartin @ July 21 2007,04:15)
Except denigration, abuses, lies and stupid questions you dont know anything. You cannot read German.  

I have tried to open a thread at EVC forum where the contibutors are on much higher level than stupidos here.

So why are you still here? To wave your intellect around like a de-boned fish or what?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,07:11   

I'm sorry, Martin -- did you say something?

(yawn)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2007,10:23   

Hey, V, why won't you tell us why evolution stopped or who stopped it? It seems to be very important to Javison...

Oh, right -- must be because we're all National Socialists.

Go back to John, pinhead. No one here is listening to you.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,14:22   

sweet jesus that is some high-octane stuff.  thank you, vmartin, for being such a fool. i just laughed my duodenum off.

'you are all foolish darwinist from ATBC'

roflmao

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

  
qetzal



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,15:51   

Quote (VMartin @ July 21 2007,04:15)
The evolution is teleological process aimed for perfection and emergence of human.

This is perfection? Homo sapiens?

Ho. Lee. Cr*p. How could anyone, no matter how delusional, think that man = perfection?

If I actually believed evolution was teleological and aimed at perfection, I'd be dead certain it wasn't finished yet.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,16:11   

Quote
"Entelechie" of human is present from the beginning of the evolution and consequently human have no ancestors.


V, is this what you believe? That 'human have no ancestors'?

This would seem to indicate that you do not believe in common descent. And yet, Davison said this:

Quote
There is absolutely no evidence to refute common descent,


Why exactly do you disagree with Davison on this?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,17:21   

Quote (VMartin @ July 21 2007,04:15)
Except denigration, abuses,...
<stuff>

Martin, are you here to actually argue for your PEH or just complain?

- What are the evidence for your hypothesis? You haven't shown anything yet. Sorry, "I bet you can't domesticate a lizard" or "look at those colorfull mushrooms" don't count.

- When did evolution stop and why?

*Bonus question: does "prescribed evolution" mean anything without common descent?

  
Henry J



Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,18:50   

Re ""Entelechie" of human is present from the beginning of the evolution and consequently human have no ancestors."

So he thinks what, that some bio-engineer(s) deliberately manufactured humans to be a slightly modified copy of the predecessors of chimpanzees? And that's supposed to somehow be a route to perfection?

Henry

  
IanBrown_101



Posts: 927
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,19:09   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 22 2007,16:11)
Quote
There is absolutely no evidence to refute common descent,


Why exactly do you disagree with Davison on this?

The brown noser gets his masters commands wrong!

I LOVE IT SO!










Sorry if that was overkill, but it looked like fun.

--------------
I'm not the fastest or the baddest or the fatest.

You NEVER seem to address the fact that the grand majority of people supporting Darwinism in these on line forums and blogs are atheists. That doesn't seem to bother you guys in the least. - FtK

Roddenberry is my God.

   
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2007,23:58   

Jeanot

Quote

- What are the evidence for your hypothesis? You haven't shown anything yet. Sorry, "I bet you can't domesticate a lizard" or "look at those colorfull mushrooms" don't count.


I put those examples (together with mimicry) only to show that darwinismus is unable to explain them. That's all.

Quote

- When did evolution stop and why?


Because the man is final product of evolution the evolution is now over.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,00:05   

Quote

So he thinks what, that some bio-engineer(s) deliberately manufactured humans to be a slightly modified copy of the predecessors of chimpanzees? And that's supposed to somehow be a route to perfection?


Human pre-existed before evolution started as a "Typus", "Archetype".
Evolution was directed process and nowadays human corresponds with the  pre-existed platonic "typus" or idea.

According Naeff:
Quote

»Der Typus ist also für uns eine bloß gedachte Form, die Idee eines Naturwesens.«


--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,00:11   

Quote
 
Quote
- When did evolution stop and why?


Because the man is final product of evolution the evolution is now over.

But when exactly did evolution stop and who stopped it?

And how do you know that 'man is final product of evolution'?

And why do you disagree with Davison about common descent? Is he wrong?

 
Quote
Human pre-existed before evolution started as a "Typus", "Archetype".


When did evolution start? Who started it?

Does it bother you that you have absolutely no real, uh, evidence for any of this? Or do you take that in stride?

 
Quote
darwinismus


'Darwinismus' is not an English word. Try harder.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Patrick Caldon



Posts: 68
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,01:14   

Quote (VMartin @ July 22 2007,23:58)
I put those examples (together with mimicry) only to show that darwinismus is unable to explain them. That's all.

For mimicry, I'd suggest chapter 8 of Ridley's Evolution book.  Its an accessible undergraduate text, and describes the evolution of mimicry in great detail as an example of multi-locus population genetics.

Why not buy the book, read through it, and then work through the exercises at the back of the chapter?

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,02:21   

Quote

Such concept is supported by the fact of saltationism and stasis what could be often in many cases observed in fossil record (puctuated equilibrium in darwinian thinking - Eldredge and Gould).


PE is by no means either synonymous with "saltationism", nor did Gould's essay on Richard Goldschmidt "link" PE with Goldschmidt's "hopeful monster" conjecture. Gould wrote an article that has caused much confusion. "Return of the hopeful monsters" sought to point out that a hatchet job had been done on some of the concepts that Richard Goldschmidt had formulated. The discussion of systemic mutations as mutations which affect rate or timing of development has caused many people to assume that Gould was somehow linking PE to this concept. A close reading of the article shows this to not be the case.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,08:03   

Quote (VMartin @ July 22 2007,23:58)
Jeanot

 
Quote

- What are the evidence for your hypothesis? You haven't shown anything yet. Sorry, "I bet you can't domesticate a lizard" or "look at those colorfull mushrooms" don't count.


I put those examples (together with mimicry) only to show that darwinismus is unable to explain them. That's all.

 
Quote

- When did evolution stop and why?


Because the man is final product of evolution the evolution is now over.

Well, coloration in mushrooms has hardly been studied, and the genetic mechanisms of domestication are very well explained by "Darwinismus".

Is that all you have, Martin?

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,08:11   

Quote (VMartin @ July 22 2007,23:58)
Quote

- When did evolution stop and why?


Because the man is final product of evolution the evolution is now over.

You mean descent with modification don't happen anymore?
If so, could you be more specific: have mutations stopped to happen?
And what about all those cases of speciation?

I'm afraid that your view conflicts with reality, Martin.

And also, why should the emergence or man stop the evolution of, say, Boletus?

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,08:25   

Oh, and VMartin,

Have you now abandoned your claim that 70 million year old DNA has been found? Just to remind you:

 
Quote (Alan Fox @ July 11 2007,01:10)
VMartin:

   
Quote
I am not sure of that but the fact of DNA preserved after 70. milion years is very weird, isn't it?


I suspect that DNA allegedly from dinosaur bones was actually a contaminant. But don't take my word for it.

   
Quote
I suspect that DNA allegedly from dinosaur bones was actually a contaminant.
-John A. Davison. Link

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2007,09:04   

V are you nukin futs or what?

Oh BTW did you know hysteria was treated earlier last century by surgically removing the womb (disturbances of the uterus, hystera in Greek) seriously bloke you ought to get your knob polished.

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
  456 replies since June 10 2007,22:48 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (16) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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