PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Rhetoric of the Evolution side
       What is it about at the end of the day?

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
therealdrag0

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

I'm writing a paper objectively analyzing the arguments and rhetoric of the debate (in reference to public education). I've written almost all of the paper, but I need a little more beef on the evolution side. I've done a lot more analyzing what the ID movement puts forth. And the only main thing that I talked about with the ID opponent's is they are worried that people's education would be subverted which could deter, say, a bio-engineering company from moving into the area.

So I'm not looking for 5 points to prove evolution. I'm wondering what are some things that the debate is about (for evolutionists) at the end of the day. Where can money and power factor in?

Ideas?

Thanks fellas.
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 6:25 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
EntwickelnCollin

|        |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Uh, money and power don't factor into why evolution is an accepted scientific theory.


-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official!
 


Posts: 729 | Posted: 6:38 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:


I'm writing a paper objectively analyzing the arguments and rhetoric of the debate (in reference to public education). I've written almost all of the paper, but I need a little more beef on the evolution side. I've done a lot more analyzing what the ID movement puts forth. And the only main thing that I talked about with the ID opponent's is they are worried that people's education would be subverted which could deter, say, a bio-engineering company from moving into the area.


'deter, say, a bioengineering company from moving into the area'?  I have a feeling you have a lot of misconceptions.

Let me ask you these questions:
- are astrology and astronomy the same thing?
- should medieval alchemy ideas be given equal time to atomic theory in chemistry class?
- should mysticism superstitions be taught alongside physics principles?
- should religious myths be taught in science class?


So I'm not looking for 5 points to prove evolution. I'm wondering what are some things that the debate is about (for evolutionists) at the end of the day. Where can money and power factor in?


money & power?  I can only say that you have some funny notions!
 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 8:48 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Rhetoric?

For some of us this is about facts and Science.

Power? Money?
Sounds like gansta's paradise.

Bio-engineering company moving into "the area"? What area? I'm from Argentina, and i don't think i get your lingo.

It really is about facts for some of us.

Facts, knowledge, growth, understanding, progress, education. That's what this is about to me.


(Edited by wisp 11/19/2009 at 9:05 PM).


-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 8:58 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
Fencer27

|      |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Might I suggest looking up the Dover trial that happened a few years back. It is a court case that dealt with the issue of ID being taught in science class. Here is a link to a pbs special on the court case, it has commentary from both sides, including the Judge.


-------
"So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets." - Jesus (Matthew 7:12)
 


Posts: 551 | Posted: 9:02 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from therealdrag0 at 6:25 PM on November 19, 2009 :
Where can money and power factor in?


Any country that would allow theology to override science won't have any.



-------
Pogge: This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.
Wikipedia: For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 9:29 PM on November 19, 2009 | IP
Lester10

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Any country that would allow theology to override science won't have any.


Precisely, which is why the evolution philosophy/religion must make way for the facts.

As for money/power, if you value your salaried position in academia and require government funding for research, it is infinitely better for you to continue to believe in evolution. So close your eyes to design, keep imagining the miracle of turning a land mammal into a whale quite by accident and reptiles learning to fly (and coincidentally mutating wings, hollow bones etc. while they're at it) and all will be well.

Wisp
For some of us this is about facts and Science.


It would be nice to imagine that it was that way for everybody. If you were a scientist in academia you might at some point notice that it is better for your future career not to see those facts that don't add up to evolution.

 



-------
Richard Lewontin: We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism... no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door
 


Posts: 1554 | Posted: 02:46 AM on November 20, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So close your eyes to design, keep imagining the miracle of turning a land mammal into a whale quite by accident
I'm sorry that your religion requires for you to lie like that.

You must envy our honesty.

and reptiles learning to fly (and coincidentally mutating wings, hollow bones etc. while they're at it) and all will be well.
You understand better than that. You play dumb while making your religion look bad.

For some of us this is about facts and Science.
It would be nice to imagine that it was that way for everybody.
Agreed.

Do you believe in my honesty, Lester?

Do you believe i'm deluded or do you force yourself to believe i'm dishonest?

I could be wrong about this Evolution thing. I don't see how, but that's the thing about being wrong: you don't see it.

But dishonest? I don't think i can be that without noticing.

If you were a scientist in academia you might at some point notice that it is better for your future career not to see those facts that don't add up to evolution.
Those facts you can't present?

Start a thread if there's any.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 09:24 AM on November 20, 2009 | IP
Lester10

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
-1

Rate this post:

Lester
So close your eyes to design, keep imagining the miracle of turning a land mammal into a whale quite by accident

Wisp
I'm sorry that your religion requires for you to lie like that.


And I'm sorry that your religion has made you so blind that you imagine that I am lying. Nobody has yet managed to explain how all these related co-ordinated changes all came about in a land mammal quite by accident such that the best accidents could result in the production of something as amazing as a whale.. None of you have even tried. Your imaginations are obviously not quite up to the explanation.

If you make random changes to other complex systems such as that represented by computer programs, those random changes do nothing to improve matters. That is exactly what happens when mutations occur in DNA.

Nobody puts their child in front of the x-ray machine or serves them up daily chemical mutagens in the hope that they will turn into Superman by chance accidental changes.
Somewhere inside of you Wisp, you know that a land mammal could never have turned into a whale by the mechanisms Darwinists imagine were adequate to do the job.  

You must envy our honesty.


I marvel at your blindness.

Lester
and reptiles learning to fly (and coincidentally mutating wings, hollow bones etc. while they're at it) and all will be well.

Wisp
You understand better than that. You play dumb while making your religion look bad.


I'm asking very specific questions and you have no way of explaining it and making it sound reasonable. No, Wisp, I am making your religion look bad.

Do you believe i'm deluded or do you force yourself to believe i'm dishonest?


I believe that you are deluded.

Lester
If you were a scientist in academia you might at some point notice that it is better for your future career not to see those facts that don't add up to evolution.

Wisp
Those facts you can't present?


I present them here and there and all over the place and you shout them down vigorously. What's the point in starting a new thread? You don't really listen.

Nobody has ever seen a beneficial mutation that adds information. There are about 10 000 known mutational diseases that represent genetic entropy but not one beneficial mutation that is beneficial to the organism (not to humans) and that adds information.
There should be hundreds of examples if macroevolution were true. The only beneficial mutations we have examples of are ones where information is reduced and in a particular circumstance it happens to be beneficial to the organism -in other words, no new information.
The train's going in the wrong direction.
The only thing that will ultimately happen to the land mammal is that it will become extinct. It will never turn into a whale. That is what observational, experimental science shows. The whale story is pure imagination.










-------
Richard Lewontin: We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism... no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door
 


Posts: 1554 | Posted: 03:04 AM on November 23, 2009 | IP
Apoapsis

|     |       Report Post



Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Lester10 at 03:04 AM on November 23, 2009 :


Nobody has ever seen a beneficial mutation that adds information.  


Nonsense, Lester, you've been shown explicitly, but Morton's demon keeps you from seeing it, or even admitting it.  Your "worldview" seem to result in a very poor memory.

Quote from Apoapsis at 07:51 AM on July 18, 2009 :
Quote from Lester10 at 01:55 AM on July 18, 2009 :
E coli K-12 has 4,639,221 base pairs.

Insert another and you have 4,639,222.  An increase in information.


Go ahead, deceive yourself.




   Contribution of individual random mutations to genotype-by-environment interactions in Escherichia coli
   Susanna K. Remold* and Richard E. Lenski

   Center for Microbial Ecology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824

   Edited by M. T. Clegg, University of California, Riverside, CA, and approved July 30, 2001 (received for review March 22, 2001)

   Numerous studies have shown genotype-by-environment (GE) interactions for traits related to organismal fitness. However, the genetic architecture of the interaction is usually unknown because these studies used genotypes that differ from one another by many unknown mutations. These mutations were also present as standing variation in populations and hence had been subject to prior selection. Based on such studies, it is therefore impossible to say what fraction of new, random mutations contributes to GE interactions. In this study, we measured the fitness in four environments of 26 genotypes of Escherichia coli, each containing a single random insertion mutation. Fitness was measured relative to their common progenitor, which had evolved on glucose at 37C for the preceding 10,000 generations. The four assay environments differed in limiting resource and temperature (glucose, 28C; maltose, 28C; glucose, 37C; and maltose, 37C). A highly significant interaction between mutation and resource was found. In contrast, there was no interaction involving temperature. The resource interaction reflected much higher among mutation variation for fitness in maltose than in glucose. At least 11 mutations (42%) contributed to this GE interaction through their differential fitness effects across resources. Beneficial mutations are generally thought to be rare but, surprisingly, at least three mutations (12%) significantly improved fitness in maltose, a resource novel to the progenitor. More generally, our findings demonstrate that GE interactions can be quite common, even for genotypes that differ by only one mutation and in environments differing by only a single factor.


By sticking with reality. . .





-------
Pogge: This is the volume of a sphere with a 62 kilometer (about 39 miles) radius, which is considerably smaller than the 2,000 mile radius of the Earth.
Wikipedia: For Earth, the mean radius is 6,371.009 km(≈3,958.761 mi; ≈3,440.069 nmi).
Wisp to Lester (on Pogge): Do you admit he was wrong about the basics?
Lester: No

 


Posts: 1747 | Posted: 07:39 AM on November 23, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Nobody has ever seen a beneficial mutation that adds information.
How do you know?

Can you quantify "information"?

You can only mean one of two things:

Something subjective: Is it more useful?
Apoapsis has just shown you, so shut up.

Something objective: Bits and bytes? Gene duplication adds information (even more if the duplicate mutates), so shut up.

Something other: There's nothing, so shut up.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 9:37 PM on November 23, 2009 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
+1

Rate this post:

Lester

Nobody has ever seen a beneficial mutation that adds information.  


Do you like to drink milk Lester?  I do.
 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 11:33 PM on November 23, 2009 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Lester probably won't understand that.

When you explain it to him (not likely, since he doesn't like to admit that he doesn't understand things) he'll say that we always had it, and mutational corruption took it away for some.


(Edited by wisp 11/24/2009 at 01:40 AM).


-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 11:39 PM on November 23, 2009 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

YouDebate.com
Powered by:
ScareCrow version 2.12
2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.