Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

One of the best answers ever ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Jorge's claim: "Matzke read/absorbed/understood the entire 500+-page book in less than a day..."
    Was it a picture book? Maybe like a picture dictionary with one letter per page?
    sigpic1 Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω

    Comment


    • #32
      If Roy has blatantly broken any rules (which I haven't seen any evidence of), then report him.
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Jorge View Post
        Originally posted by Roy View Post
        Emphasis mine: Lying again, Jorge? You know Matzke didn't produce his critique in less than a day. You've made this claim before, and it's been shot down before. Last time you tried to wriggle off the hook by saying that you meant 24 hours and didn't include time for eating/sleeping etc. It didn't work then and it definitely won't work now. So what's you excuse this time?

        Roy
        False, unsupported accusations of "lying" again.
        I must ask the Mods, why hasn't Roy been banned?
        Because whether or not I agree with Roy's conclusions as to whether or not you are lying he has offered support for his accusation in the very portion of text you are quoting.

        The fact that you were able to, in this post, offer evidence as to why Roy's accusation may be incorrect does not mean he didn't offer some support for the accusation.
        "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it"
        -Ravi Zacharias, The New Age: A foreign bird with a local walk

        Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.
        1 Corinthians 16:13

        "...he [Doherty] is no historian and he is not even conversant with the historical discussions of the very matters he wants to pontificate on."
        -Ben Witherington III

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Raphael View Post
          The fact that you were able to, in this post, offer evidence as to why Roy's accusation may be incorrect does not mean he didn't offer some support for the accusation.
          Jorge's evidence doesn't show that I am incorrect. It actually refutes Jorge's claim.

          Roy
          Last edited by Roy; 07-11-2014, 07:17 AM.
          Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

          mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

          Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
          Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

          Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Roy View Post
            Jorge's evidence doesn't show that I am incorrect. It actually refutes Jorge's claim.

            Roy
            And let's not forget that Matzke, however long he spent reading or writing his review, nonetheless got it right. Nobody to my knowledge has ever taken Matzke to task for a single sentence of his review, even after months of opportunity to study both the book and his review of the book.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Roy View Post
              Jorge's evidence doesn't show that I am incorrect. It actually refutes Jorge's claim.

              Roy
              I did say "may be incorrect" I'm not taking sides in the argument just pointing out to Jorge that you were still well within the rules
              "If you can ever make any major religion look absolutely ludicrous, chances are you haven't understood it"
              -Ravi Zacharias, The New Age: A foreign bird with a local walk

              Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.
              1 Corinthians 16:13

              "...he [Doherty] is no historian and he is not even conversant with the historical discussions of the very matters he wants to pontificate on."
              -Ben Witherington III

              Comment


              • #37
                Oh. Ok.

                Roy
                Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by phank View Post
                  And let's not forget that Matzke, however long he spent reading or writing his review, nonetheless got it right. Nobody to my knowledge has ever taken Matzke to task for a single sentence of his review, even after months of opportunity to study both the book and his review of the book.
                  There've been some attampts, e.g. here, but not having read Meyer's opius I can't say whether their criticisms are valid.

                  One thing I do know is that there were positive reviews of Darwin's Doubt that came out before Matzke's essay, but no-one ever criticised the authors of those reviews of not having read the book.

                  Roy
                  Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                  mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                  Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                  Mountain Man on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                  Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Roy View Post
                    There've been some attampts, e.g. here, but not having read Meyer's opius I can't say whether their criticisms are valid.
                    I think when the Discovery Institute criticizes Matzke, we can be pretty sure Matzke got it right.

                    One thing I do know is that there were positive reviews of Darwin's Doubt that came out before Matzke's essay, but no-one ever criticised the authors of those reviews of not having read the book.

                    Roy
                    Yep, what a surprise. Creationists praised a creationist tract before reading it, and other creationists had no problem with this. I admit I should have said no non-creationist mouthpiece to my knowledge has criticized Matzke. I know of no qualified evolutionary biologist who has had anything good to say about the book.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      The creationists may have gotten advance copies.

                      But their argument against Matzke is just another God of the gaps.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        The problem here for YECs is that it is overwhelmingly against them and continues to be even more so as new evidence keeps coming in.
                        "New evidence keeps coming in"?

                        Did you see the look on the faces of the New Horizons team in July 2015 as the Pluto images came in that they described as "shockingly young"? It's only shocking if you start with a totally unevidenced belief that Pluto is 4 billion years old. Be very clear about this: until July 15, 2015, old-worlders believed this without evidence, and since then they believe it against evidence.

                        This is why YECs don't just have a beef with biology and genetics which keeps demonstrating again and again that evolution is real.
                        The classic bait-and-switch. Nobody has ever observed any organism evolve into one with a quite different body plan - evolutionists acknowledge that this would have taken far longer than the span of human observation, so it remains a matter of conjecture.

                        They also have a problem with geology because it keeps demonstrating that the world is incredibly ancient.
                        "Keeps demonstrating"? Can you point to something distinctive discovered during, say, the last five years, that would justify this claim?

                        Whereas many of the creation evidences have come to light during the time I've been a creationist - the mounting testimony re. C14, dino soft tissue, various solar system discoveries (Titan, Enceladus and now Pluto) and I have every confidence that advancing science will reveal more.

                        "Science is decided by the evidence" - yes, in an ideal world, but not in one run by corrupt mankind unfortunately. It certainly wasn't for Lyell, midwife to millions of years even though much of his method is now generally disallowed....

                        Since you get upset and start whining that a post is too long if it is over a certain length [slur deleted] this should do for now.
                        That might be true for some, though not me. In fact I'd rather have that than the stock-in-trade elephant hurling that pervades your post.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Vertetuesi View Post
                          "New evidence keeps coming in"?

                          Did you see the look on the faces of the New Horizons team in July 2015 as the Pluto images came in that they described as "shockingly young"? It's only shocking if you start with a totally unevidenced belief that Pluto is 4 billion years old. Be very clear about this: until July 15, 2015, old-worlders believed this without evidence, and since then they believe it against evidence.
                          Thanks for ranting at a three year old post.

                          What was "shockingly young" wasn't the planet itself but features on its surface. And at an estimated 100 myo that still doesn't help the YEC model since they would be over 16,666 times older than it permits
                          Originally posted by Vertetuesi View Post
                          The classic bait-and-switch. Nobody has ever observed any organism evolve into one with a quite different body plan - evolutionists acknowledge that this would have taken far longer than the span of human observation, so it remains a matter of conjecture.
                          "Conjecture" based on a mountain of fossil evidence as well as genetics. If we ignore the evidence then any claim can seem reasonable.

                          Still the fact remains that evolution happens and even the dreaded boogeyman that keeps YECs awake at night, MACROevolution has been observed taking place both in the lab as well as in the field (nature). So much so that very recently that Creation Ministries International (CMI) added "Creationists believe in microevolution but not macroevolution" to their "What arguments are doubtful, hence inadvisable to use" section on their "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use" page. They claim "we do observe quite ‘macro’ changes that involve no new information," but in fact we do see increases in information[1], but the important thing here is at long last YECs are finally conceding that macroevolution does occur.

                          Originally posted by Vertetuesi View Post
                          "Keeps demonstrating"? Can you point to something distinctive discovered during, say, the last five years, that would justify this claim?

                          Whereas many of the creation evidences have come to light during the time I've been a creationist - the mounting testimony re. C14, dino soft tissue, various solar system discoveries (Titan, Enceladus and now Pluto) and I have every confidence that advancing science will reveal more.
                          What is YECs fascination with carbon dating? It can only date things up to something like 50,000 years old. It is other types of radiometric dating that shows that the earth is by many factors older than what YECs claim.

                          And other types of dating techniques show that carbon 14 dating is accurate...


                          ...something YECs never seem to doubt whenever it is used to demonstrate the age of something that they like such as the age of the Dead Sea scrolls, the age of Hezekiah's tunnel in Jerusalem, or when it shows that various copies of Biblical texts come from the 3rd or 4th century AD rather than the Medieval period as some fringe scholars claimed. But the moment that it shows that something is older than 6 or 10,000 years it magically morphs into a tool of the devil never to be trusted.

                          As for "dino soft tissues" all that has shown is that scientists don't know everything to know about the fossilization process. Imagine that. They don't know everything. I guess that explains why they keep examining and analyzing things.

                          And again, that features on the surface of Pluto are only 100,000,000 years old hardly helps the case for YEC (it in fact is yet another indication it is wrong). You can't say a planet is only x years old by the age of of something on the surface or else we should be saying that the earth is only a couple months old since an island has just formed off North Carolina's Cape Hatteras in April of this year. All you can do is say that the planet is at least x years old (and in Pluto's case that is as noted over 16,666 times older than the YEC model permits).

                          Originally posted by Vertetuesi View Post
                          "Science is decided by the evidence" - yes, in an ideal world, but not in one run by corrupt mankind unfortunately. It certainly wasn't for Lyell, midwife to millions of years even though much of his method is now generally disallowed....
                          Do tell.












                          1. An ability to digest and gain nutrition from new food sources counts as a gain in information. For instance, most people lose the ability to digest milk when they hit puberty but several thousand years ago, after the domestication of cattle and goats, various groups of people in Europe and Africa independently acquired mutations that permitted them to continue digesting milk into adulthood.

                          Ask any biologist about this and he will confirm that the genetic mutation that allowed this constitutes a gain in information. Similarly, when different bacteria have a mutation that allows them to digest things that they could not consume previously -- and in some cases were toxic to them -- that is a gain in information.

                          Or take a look at Old World monkeys have a mutation in a protein called TRIM5 that resulted in the formation of a new protein called TRIM5α or TRIM5alpha that prevents them from getting infected by HIV and several other retroviruses. A similar mutation in some New World monkeys that created a new protein called TRIMCyp (or TRIM5-CypA) isn't as effective as the one in Old World monkeys but also appears to grant some immunity to HIV.

                          In both cases though we are looking at new proteins with new functions thanks to new information.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                            What was "shockingly young" wasn't the planet itself but features on its surface. And at an estimated 100 myo that still doesn't help the YEC model since they would be over 16,666 times older than it permits
                            Oh, but the number "666" is in there. That just proves "millions of years" is of the devil.
                            "When the Western world accepted Christianity, Caesar conquered; and the received text of Western theology was edited by his lawyers…. The brief Galilean vision of humility flickered throughout the ages, uncertainly…. But the deeper idolatry, of the fashioning of God in the image of the Egyptian, Persian, and Roman imperial rulers, was retained. The Church gave unto God the attributes which belonged exclusively to Caesar."

                            — Alfred North Whitehead

                            Comment

                            Related Threads

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by rogue06, 09-18-2021, 08:59 AM
                            19 responses
                            87 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by Sparko, 09-15-2021, 11:13 AM
                            18 responses
                            68 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by rogue06, 09-14-2021, 07:34 AM
                            1 response
                            18 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by shunyadragon, 09-13-2021, 09:25 PM
                            11 responses
                            60 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by lee_merrill, 09-06-2021, 09:40 PM
                            19 responses
                            107 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post shunyadragon  
                            Working...
                            X