Micro- vis-�-vis Macro-Evolution

[Roy]

well you see...
I do not go to "anti-evolution" sites, propaganda or otherwise.

I do not need to.

I can't remember the last time I met a Darwinist who knew as much about their "science" as I know.

Cool!

6 simple questions. Simple for anyone with a thorough grounding in evolution, anyway. Or even basic research skills.

1) What is the Red Queen hypothesis?

2) What is the Hardy-Weinberg ratio for a species with 3 alleles at one locus?

3) What is a hybrid zone? How does it move if hybrids are selected against?

4) How is reproductive fitness calculated?

5) Give an example of Mullerian mimicry.

6) What is the difference between vicariance and dispersal biogeography?

Let's see if you can do better than JM or Jorge, who also claimed to know all about evolution.

Roy

[Jorge]

Cool!

6 simple questions. Simple for anyone with a thorough grounding in evolution, anyway. Or even basic research skills.

1) What is the Red Queen hypothesis?

2) What is the Hardy-Weinberg ratio for a species with 3 alleles at one locus?

3) What is a hybrid zone? How does it move if hybrids are selected against?

4) How is reproductive fitness calculated?

5) Give an example of Mullerian mimicry.

6) What is the difference between vicariance and dispersal biogeography?

Let's see if you can do better than JM or Jorge, who also claimed to know all about evolution.

Roy

• Edited by a Moderator •
Your pathological liar problem, on the other hand, remains about the same.

TO WIT: Post here and now, for all to see, where "Jorge claims to know all about Evolution".

What I have and continue to claim (because it's true) is that I understand enough about 'evolution', (real) science, philosophy, mathematics, history, etc. to know precisely what the score is in this debate.

In particular, I know enough to see right through the pack of lies, deceptions and other unethical, amoral, anti-science, anti-biblical God, anti-epistemological practices by Atheists/Humanists/Theistic Evolutionists/others. You know, people just like you and others here on TWeb.

We're waiting for you to post the evidence for "Jorge claims to know all about evolution".

Jorge

Moderated By: Littlejoe

Jorge, Stop accusing people who disagree with you with having a substance abuse problems...that goes for everyone else. We are getting tired of the Flame Wars.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

[jordanriver]

So-so attempt at a Gish Gallop. I give it a 5 out of 10.

what?
I only cited THREE examples.

Look, you cited 'consilience' THREE TIMES in this thread,

and klaus54 cited 'consilience' 2 other times, in Post 40 replying to "Pluto' and Post 91 replying to Kristian

in Post 57 YOU said "The problem for YECs is that science can explain the consilience of the data in a clear and logically consistent manner."

and you cited consilience again in Post 60 "Even more than that, evolution has consilience of the evidence - multiple lines of independent research and results that lead to one common conclusion."

and yet again in YOUR Post 71 "It's more of that consilience of evidence that YECs are so afraid of."

so all I do is cite 3 protests, and you call that the gish gallop?

[jordanriver]

Cool!

6 simple questions. Simple for anyone with a thorough grounding in evolution, anyway. Or even basic research skills.

1) What is the Red Queen hypothesis?

2) What is the Hardy-Weinberg ratio for a species with 3 alleles at one locus?

3) What is a hybrid zone? How does it move if hybrids are selected against?

4) How is reproductive fitness calculated?

5) Give an example of Mullerian mimicry.

6) What is the difference between vicariance and dispersal biogeography?

Let's see if you can do better than JM or Jorge, who also claimed to know all about evolution.

Roy

HMS_Beagle would call that "The Gish Gallop"

[Roy]

Your drinking problem is getting much, much worse, Roy.
Your pathological liar problem, on the other hand, remains about the same.

Support that accusation or retract it.

We're waiting for you to post the evidence for "Jorge claims to know all about evolution".

On the pre-crash TWeb, those questions were among those submitted following your request for questions that people would like to ask YECs. You stated that you could answer them easily enough, given time to do some research, but didn't see any point in doing so. Are you now saying that you don't know enough about evolution to be able to find the answers?

Roy

[Roy]

HMS_Beagle would call that "The Gish Gallop"

I doubt that.

Your answer is evasive, though. Can you, or can you not, answer those questions?

Roy

[JonF]

I was one of you.

where you are,

I am a "been there done that"

In 15-ish years of encountering anti-evolutionists I have yet to encounter one who claimed that and was truthful. Many do claim that. You need to provide some evidence of your understanding, not just claim it.

[jordanriver]

In 15-ish years of encountering anti-evolutionists I have yet to encounter one who claimed that and was truthful. Many do claim that. You need to provide some evidence of your understanding, not just claim it.

?
really?

why?

Is it your experience that people are born creationists, or born Darwinists?

The Bible believers I know all became Bible believers AFTER their born again experience.

IOW, who wasn't a Darwinist first??

IOW, what Baby Boomer didn't argue with the "grown-ups" about Evolution ?


how can that possibly be hard to believe??

[jordanriver]

I doubt that.

Your answer is evasive, though. Can you, or can you not, answer those questions?

Roy

Roy, I am not going to jump your hoops on your demand.

besides, how could you tell if somebody didn't just google the replies?, or wiki them , after they go to the trouble of filling out your application?

[JonF]

?
really?

why?

Is it your experience that people are born creationists, or born Darwinists?

The Bible believers I know all became Bible believers AFTER their born again experience.

Apparently you don't know many Bible believers. Many were raised that way from childhood, and there's a significant number of parents home-schooling their children to prevent them from learning about evolution.

IOW, who wasn't a Darwinist first??

Most people are don't cares or don't knows.

IOW, what Baby Boomer didn't argue with the "grown-ups" about Evolution ?

I'm a boomer and I didn't. I don't know of any who did.

how can that possibly be hard to believe??

What's the antecedent of "that"? Assuming it's your claimed knowledge, I have seen a very large sample of creationists who choose to post on message boards and claim to have extensive knowledge of the theory of evolution and every single one of them has revealed him/herself to be staggeringly ignorant of the ToE. Given that the obvious tentative conclusion is that you are just another ignoramus claiming knowledge you don't have.

I'm open to new evidence, but your response to Roy implies (somewhat weakly) that my inference is correct.

Go ahead, strut your stuff.

[Roy]

Roy, I am not going to jump your hoops on your demand.

No problem. But if you actually knew as much about evolution as you claim, you'd have been able to answer at least one or two of them immediately - as several of the Nat Sci denizens were able to do when these questions were originally posed to JM. That you've twice chosen to avoid answering them is very strong evidence that you don't know as much about evolution as the 'Darwinists' here.

besides, how could you tell if somebody didn't just google the replies?, or wiki them , after they go to the trouble of filling out your application?

That's what John Martin tried. It was very obvious that he was clueless about evolution after he managed to get them all wrong despite Googling for answers.

Roy

[Jorge]

Support that accusation or retract it.

Still waiting on your evidence for your claim ......................

On the pre-crash TWeb, those questions were among those submitted following your request for questions that people would like to ask YECs. You stated that you could answer them easily enough, given time to do some research, but didn't see any point in doing so. Are you now saying that you don't know enough about evolution to be able to find the answers?

Roy

First of all, that wasn't what I stated in the pre-crash TWeb.
It's very fiendish of you to assert something that you know cannot be verified.

The essence of what I stated (maybe using other words) is as I had written earlier:

What I have and continue to claim (because it's true) is that I understand enough about 'evolution', (real) science, philosophy, mathematics, history, etc. to know precisely what the score is in this debate.

In particular, I know enough to see right through the pack of lies, deceptions and other unethical, amoral, anti-science, anti-biblical God, anti-epistemological practices by Atheists/Humanists/Theistic Evolutionists/others. You know, people just like you and others here on TWeb.

Your attempt at baiting me to waste my time responding to a sophomoric
quiz won't fly today, Roy. Tomorrow doesn't look any better, either.

Jorge

[jordanriver]

No problem. But if you actually knew as much about evolution as you claim, you'd have been able to answer at least one or two of them immediately - as several of the Nat Sci denizens were able to do when these questions were originally posed to JM. That you've twice chosen to avoid answering them is very strong evidence that you don't know as much about evolution as the 'Darwinists' here.

That's what John Martin tried. It was very obvious that he was clueless about evolution after he managed to get them all wrong despite Googling for answers.

Roy

OK that's actually a pretty fair test.
I've used Red Queen often as example in my favorite epigenetics/stress-related mutation rate topic

[Roy]

Your pathological liar problem, on the other hand, remains about the same.

Support that accusation or retract it.

Still waiting on your evidence for your claim ......................

Since that is neither support nor retraction, I have reported your post as a violation of the TWeb account terms of use.

Roy

[jordanriver]

Apparently you don't know many Bible believers. Many were raised that way from childhood, and there's a significant number of parents home-schooling their children to prevent them from learning about evolution.


Most people are don't cares or don't knows.


I'm a boomer and I didn't. I don't know of any who did.


What's the antecedent of "that"? Assuming it's your claimed knowledge, I have seen a very large sample of creationists who choose to post on message boards and claim to have extensive knowledge of the theory of evolution and every single one of them has revealed him/herself to be staggeringly ignorant of the ToE. Given that the obvious tentative conclusion is that you are just another ignoramus claiming knowledge you don't have.

I'm open to new evidence, but your response to Roy implies (somewhat weakly) that my inference is correct.

Go ahead, strut your stuff.

what is difference, violate terms of use, calling someone "liar" outright
...or using many words to say same thing.