Jump to content


Photo

How Many Anomalies Needed...


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

#81 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 January 2010 - 04:50 PM

What evidence do you have it ever happened without fossils?

View Post


Sigh, the theory was first developed with no fossil knowledge. How can you be arguing about evolution if you don't even know that???

Have people ever found a fossil of a sphinx?
Have people found fossils of dinosaurs?
Think before posting, please.

View Post


The point was that art is not 100% proof of what humans have seen. Was my meaning not clear there???


Just because it "fits" doesn't make it evidence.
Again, think first. The fact that human artifacts depicting accurate images of dinosaurs hows that the fossil record not chronological.

View Post


Before I discuss this with you any further you need to go to wikipedia and find out what a scientific theory is.  You said, "just because it fits doesn't make it evidence", but that's exactly what it does. 



I hate to be a stickler here but we need to be cautious how we define an increase of information. Evolutionists want to believe that an increase in code equals an increase in information. Otto's example can be used as a trap if things aren't defined properly because we do see mutations where code is doubled but it still doesn't constitute an increase of information any more than copying the same dictionary page over and over again would multiply the available information.


Adam, I have asked repeatedly how exactly information is quantified, and I have yet to get an answer.

#82 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 21 January 2010 - 06:11 PM

Sigh, the theory was first developed with no fossil knowledge.  How can you be arguing about evolution if you don't even know that???

That did not answer my question. If you don't have fossils how can you be sure it ever happened?

The point was that art is not 100% proof of what humans have seen.  Was my meaning not clear there???

It is proof. Do you expect that all of these pictures of dinosaurs, some also found with pictures of real animals, are just imaginations?
Did you even click on the link?
http://www.genesispa...ent/ancient.htm

There is no logical way that those could simply be imagined, they are too similar to the real thing.


Adam, I have asked repeatedly how exactly information is quantified, and I have yet to get an answer.

a message received and understood


New information is information that wasn't there before that has a meaning, if that wasn't obvious enough.

#83 Bruce V.

Bruce V.

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,153 posts
  • Age: 54
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Northern Califiornia

Posted 22 January 2010 - 12:59 PM

This is exactly what you need to happen for evolution to be true.  You need more information. We have lots of examples of Bruce V's point. ABCD ----->ABC---->AB. ...There are no examples of Otto13"s ABCD---->ABCDABCD it does not happen.


I need a breath, and a drink.

View Post


Hi Otto,

Yes, gene duplication occurs Polyploidy

But duplicating information is not an increase in information. It adds nothing new.

Example:

It adds nothing new
It adds nothing new
It adds nothing new
It adds nothing new

#84 Bruce V.

Bruce V.

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,153 posts
  • Age: 54
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Northern Califiornia

Posted 22 January 2010 - 01:10 PM

Mendel explained diversification based on a genetic code with variation.

Evolution and natural selection results in fixation given enough time.  Fixation is a reduction in the genetic code. 

ABCD ----->  ABC --->  AB

Call it founders theory, genetic drift, non-random mating .... they all result in a loss of genetic code.

Conversely, I.D. and Mendel expect a diverse genetic code.  Which methodology fits the facts best?  Obviously we have a diverse genetic code.

View Post


Mendel had no idea there was a genetic code.
Why does ID expect a diverse genetic code?
In fact the basic code is not diverse.
In fact, we have many of the same genes that other creatures have, how is that diverse?

You still have not cite to the Mendel quote, you quoted him, I thought you would know where it came from. I guess not.

Nice use of "founders theory, genetic drift, non-random mating (whatever that is), but why does that lead to a loss of "genetic code".

ABCD--->ABC--->AB, looks great, what is the basis for that?

How about ABCD---->ABCDABCD, loss?

View Post


Mendel had no idea there was a genetic code. -Mendel the father of genetics

Why does ID expect a diverse genetic code?- Don't know that it does.

In fact the basic code is not diverse. It is, look at the diversity we have with dogs.

In fact, we have many of the same genes that other creatures have, how is that diverse? - true- I am talking about phenotype variances not genes.

I didn't see an answer on how information increased?

ABCDABCE Is gene duplication not an increase in information.

#85 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 January 2010 - 05:14 PM

That did not answer my question. If you don't have fossils how can you be sure it ever happened?

View Post


Genetics, nested heirarchies, blah blah blah. Fossils do provide evidence, but they're by no means something evolution is dependent upon.

It is proof. Do you expect that all of these pictures of dinosaurs, some also found with pictures of real animals, are just imaginations?
Did you even click on the link?
http://www.genesispa...ent/ancient.htm
There is no logical way that those could simply be imagined, they are too similar to the real thing.

View Post


Yet somehow unicorns, yetis, and space aliens have all somehow been imagined.

a message received and understood


New information is information that wasn't there before that has a meaning, if that wasn't obvious enough.

View Post


This doesn't really work for creationists. I pointed out malaria resistance as an increase in information, but it was rejected. How is information quantified???

#86 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 22 January 2010 - 06:11 PM

Genetics, nested heirarchies, blah blah blah.


Funny how you say you have evidence, but neglect to explain it in any way. Nothing but mere evobabble.


Yet somehow unicorns, yetis, and space aliens have all somehow been imagined. 

You are constantly ignoring me. We have FOUND dinosaurs. We know they are real.
If we are to find real aliens, it would give validity to those claiming to be abducted by them. However, since we have never found any, we cannot be sure those people actually saw aliens.
Since we have found dinosaur fossils, we know dinosaurs existed. Since we see images of them drawn in the past, it is only logical that they observed those dinosaurs given the closeness of the images to the real thing.

Be sure you read the last 2 paragraphs before responding, I've already stated what's written in the last 2 paragraphs, but you ignored it.


This doesn't really work for creationists.  I pointed out malaria resistance as an increase in information, but it was rejected.  How is information quantified???

Mosquitoes that are resistant to some pesticides lack the protein that the pesticide affects. That is a loss of information, I don't know about malaria resistance, maybe you can start another topic about it.

#87 M T RIVERS

M T RIVERS

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Mineral Wells, WV

Posted 22 January 2010 - 08:32 PM

I need a breath, and a drink.

I am worried about Otto13. His last post sounded like he was a bit frustrated and he hasn't been back. Not like him.

#88 M T RIVERS

M T RIVERS

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Mineral Wells, WV

Posted 22 January 2010 - 08:48 PM

It seems odd to me that evolutionists see similarity in the images of genetic structure of chimps and humans and conclude we are related. But can see no relationship between a cave drawing of a dinosaur and a fossil of one. "Just because it looks like a dino doesn't mean anything.

#89 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:21 AM

Funny how you say you have evidence, but neglect to explain it in any way. Nothing but mere evobabble.

View Post


It actually isn't evobabble, but I'm just not going


You are constantly ignoring me. We have FOUND dinosaurs. We know they are real.
If we are to find real aliens, it would give validity to those claiming to be abducted by them. However, since we have never found any, we cannot be sure those people actually saw aliens.
Since we have found dinosaur fossils, we know dinosaurs existed. Since we see images of them drawn in the past, it is only logical that they observed those dinosaurs given the closeness of the images to the real thing.

View Post


I'm not ignoring you. I'm simply pointing out the flaw in your logic. Let's go a step further, its actually fairly debatable whether those are even dinosaurs to begin with. Since we've found dinosaurs as you keep pointing out, why haven't we found fossils of humans with dinosaurs. Heck, why haven't we found a fossil of any great ape with dinosaurs???

By the way, that link you posted is trying to pass of a pig as a stegasaurus.


Mosquitoes that are resistant to some pesticides lack the protein that the pesticide affects. That is a loss of information, I don't know about malaria resistance, maybe you can start another topic about it.

View Post


So the amount of genetic material in an organism is how information is quantified??? I believe another creationist in this thread said it wasn't.

Sickle celled heterozygotes are not only healthy, but they also possess a high resistance to malaria.

#90 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:31 AM

Yet somehow unicorns, yetis, and space aliens have all somehow been imagined. 

View Post


As has evolution. I guess it's all in what you wish to place your faith.

#91 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:38 AM

Will a description of a large sauropod dinosaur suffice?

View Post


I didn't think anyone would bite Adam ;)

Side stepping these facts, even after an enthusiastic evolutheist begs the question.

#92 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:41 AM

I do know my sister at age 3 was drawing pictures of monsters though.  Is that evidence she lives with them???

View Post


Did any of these monsters so closely depict something that was supposed to be extinct millions of years before your sister was born. Something that she was never supposed to have seen?

Hmmmm

#93 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:43 AM

So all those pictures drawn by people who claim to have been abducted by aliens mean.........aliens walk among us?

View Post


Did any of these aliens so closely depict something that was supposed to be extinct millions of years before your sister was born. Something that they were never supposed to have seen, and yet we've found evidence for?

Hmmmm, nice equivocation...

#94 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 08:47 AM

fossils merely provide evidence for evoution. 

View Post


Fossils don't provide evidence for evolution. Fossils simply provide evidence that the animal the bones belonged to lived at one time. Everything else you opine on about is mere speculation.

#95 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 23 January 2010 - 09:05 AM

Posted Image
Posted Image
What do you call this? It's obviously a dinosaur.
Posted Image
What is that?
Posted Image
Posted Image
I'm waiting to see your response for that one ;)


Heck, why haven't we found a fossil of any great ape with dinosaurs???


Because this proves the fossil record is not chronological. You're basically saying that this cannot prove the fossil record wrong because the fossil record is right.

#96 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 23 January 2010 - 09:05 AM

More of them, there seems to be a 5 picture limit in posts.

Posted Image
Posted Image
Yeah.
Posted Image
The head is a bit off, but that might have been to fit the thing into the circle.
Posted Image

I really think the evidence is overwhelming. Humans lived with dinosaurs, and the fossil record is not chronologically correct.

#97 Bruce V.

Bruce V.

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,153 posts
  • Age: 54
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Northern Califiornia

Posted 23 January 2010 - 12:07 PM

Job is the oldest book in the Bible. It describes a behemoth. It sounds like he is describing a dinosaur.

Job 40:15-19

15 "Look at the behemoth, [a]
       which I made along with you
       and which feeds on grass like an ox.

16 What strength he has in his loins,
       what power in the muscles of his belly!

17 His tail [b] sways like a cedar;
       the sinews of his thighs are close-knit.

18 His bones are tubes of bronze,
       his limbs like rods of iron.

19 He ranks first among the works of God,
       yet his Maker can approach him with his sword.



#98 Guest_tharock220_*

Guest_tharock220_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 January 2010 - 02:09 PM

More of them, there seems to be a 5 picture limit in posts.

Posted Image
The head is a bit off, but that might have been to fit the thing into the circle.

View Post


That looks like a pig. Sorry, but you're seeing what you want to see in those pictures. Maybe we're both guilty of that, but I'm not trying to pass of a pig as a....well whatever its supposed to be. This is likely just drawings of fantastic creatures much like other societies have created.

We've found fossilized apes and we've found fossilized dinosaurs, but oddly never in the same sediment layers. Why is that???

#99 Cata

Cata

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 16
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Bellevue, Washington

Posted 23 January 2010 - 02:45 PM

Again, you are assuming the fossil record is chronological. This evidence is against it.
Second of all, you are ignoring all of those but one. What's up with that?

Third of all,
Posted Image

That looks like a pig

what

#100 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 23 January 2010 - 03:08 PM

Again, you are assuming the fossil record is chronological. This evidence is against it.
Second of all, you are ignoring all of those but one. What's up with that?

Third of all,
Posted Image
what

View Post


Thanks a lot Cata, you beat me to that one! B)


Looks like Rocky's the one who's "seeing what he want's to see in those pictures". I've never seen a pig with a tail like that, or plates along its back and tail ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users