tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post1406528157469390948..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: IDiots exploring evolutionLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger152125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-3286248136744583132018-02-09T15:13:26.160-05:002018-02-09T15:13:26.160-05:00I don't understand why this has to be an argum...I don't understand why this has to be an argument, science and theology are not mutually exclusive nor are they even remotely related. Isn't that what it means to have faith? To believe in your god and accept that it is impossible to provide evidence for your belief? There should literally NEVER be religious discussions about scientific matters, and vice versa. Science cannot disprove gods, and gods cannot disprove science, and personally I feel that those who engage in this petty and tired debate impair their credibility on both sides. Science does not care what you believe, whether you're religious or not, and surely whatever god(S) one chooses to believe in has better things to concern themselves with than their creation learning about them and what they did and how they did it. <br />This debate has got to stop because it is doing harm to both science and religion which are both beautiful and intriguing in their own right. The less science attacks the idea that a god exists, the less religious people will reject scientific evidence for things we have observed to be accurate. Conversely, the less religious people try to justify their faith using science the better off we will ALL be. If one feels like they must justify their beliefs for or against god using science there is clearly a seed of doubt in their heart regarding the matter, and perhaps they should spend more time in introspective thought, and less time slinging petty insults on scientific blogs. <br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18345910068197536738noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-24479090414603759922014-10-20T15:17:28.413-04:002014-10-20T15:17:28.413-04:00Larry, this post is proof that you lie about IDist...Larry, this post is proof that you lie about IDists. You sure as hell didn't support your tripe and the reason is you cannot because it is all a lie. You are a dishonest chump.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-86556501974100193632014-09-11T07:51:08.368-04:002014-09-11T07:51:08.368-04:00"This proves that IDiots have a function. By ..."This proves that IDiots have a function. By interacting with knowledgeable people, they elicit explanations which are wasted on them, but from which interested onlookers can profit."<br /><br />Yes! Thanks to all involved. Fun tidbits here and there for the experienced, and for the beginners entire new ideas to research on their own time.<br /><br />I must say though, Quest surprised me by literally responding with "blah blah blah" after asking for evidence/explanation. That's just a new pathetic low.Uncivilized Elkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12876539220615373258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-39215433771689634842014-09-10T09:54:50.434-04:002014-09-10T09:54:50.434-04:00Quest: "I have paid a great deal of money in ...Quest: "I have paid a great deal of money in order to try to understand your stupidity"<br /><br />How many ellipses did you use in your master's thesis...?Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-54728143949103217412014-09-10T09:35:20.557-04:002014-09-10T09:35:20.557-04:00Acartia Tonsa says,
Except for maybe the evolutio...Acartia Tonsa says,<br /><br /><i>Except for maybe the evolution of photosynthesis. Which, of course, did not involve endosymbiosis... Oh, yah. Chloroplasts.</i><br /><br />I hate to be picky but just in case there's any misunderstanding we should remember that photosynthesis evolved more that one billion years before there was such a thing as a chloroplast. Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-52126774295234951272014-09-09T03:24:25.198-04:002014-09-09T03:24:25.198-04:00Quest deserves nothing but plain mockery
Sure, bu...<i>Quest deserves nothing but plain mockery</i><br /><br />Sure, but it is kind of amusing in its own way to see a serious explanation get the Quest treatment. Look on it as reverse-trolling. AllanMillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955231828424156641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-66901401639634241552014-09-08T19:18:44.253-04:002014-09-08T19:18:44.253-04:00Autotrophy has evolved multiple times. Autotrophy has evolved multiple times. Georgi Marinovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12226357993389417752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-18811262748964683402014-09-08T18:48:57.743-04:002014-09-08T18:48:57.743-04:00Georgi: "This was the second most important e...Georgi: <i>"This was the second most important even in the history of life after its origin"</i><br /><br />Except for maybe the evolution of photosynthesis. Which, of course, did not involve endosymbiosis... Oh, yah. Chloroplasts. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17989141381412901927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-40478348175734982022014-09-08T18:31:38.059-04:002014-09-08T18:31:38.059-04:00I appreciate the explanations you guys give though...<i>I appreciate the explanations you guys give though. Even if the intended recipient, Quest the IDiot, could not care less.</i><br /><br />This proves that IDiots have a function. By interacting with knowledgeable people, they elicit explanations which are wasted on them, but from which interested onlookers can profit. Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-27199916425325982902014-09-08T18:30:37.393-04:002014-09-08T18:30:37.393-04:00"I have paid a great deal of money in order t...<i>"I have paid a great deal of money in order to try to understand your stupidity"</i><br /><br />I this cost was for a formal education, I would be demanding a refund because it was not effective. Maybe you should have gone to a school other than the Canada Christian Colledge (or other like institute). Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17989141381412901927noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-69795531143929232882014-09-08T17:18:01.915-04:002014-09-08T17:18:01.915-04:00LGT is well known with non-extinct organisms as th...<i>LGT is well known with non-extinct organisms as the source, so why discount that possibility out of hand, and gibber about space?</i><br /><br />Because Quest doesn't care one bit about explanations. Quest is not trying to learn anything. Quest is not trying to have a discussion or to understand. Quest just trolls. Quest deserves nothing but plain mockery.<br /><br />I appreciate the explanations you guys give though. Even if the intended recipient, Quest the IDiot, could not care less.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-79345895176400528882014-09-08T15:21:43.177-04:002014-09-08T15:21:43.177-04:00I guess those genes must have come from outer-spac...<i>I guess those genes must have come from outer-space.. anything will do if you choose to believe it....</i><br /><br />Or maybe they came by LGT from unsequenced or now-extinct organisms, a perfectly reasonable possibility Doolittle mentions a mere sentence later - the bit you keep accidentally omitting when you offer that quote (handy thing, Google). <br /><br />LGT is well known with <i>non</i>-extinct organisms as the source, so why discount that possibility out of hand, and gibber about space?AllanMillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955231828424156641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-84545487141289921992014-09-08T14:26:05.957-04:002014-09-08T14:26:05.957-04:00Quest attempts a standard type of dishonest quotin...Quest attempts a standard type of dishonest quoting out of context: the "It Seems" Quote Mine [ISQM]. A scientist writes a sentence of the form, "It seems like X, but actually it's not X." The creationist chops off the "but actually it's not X" and just copies the first part. Many examples of ISQM's, the most famous being Darwin quoted on the step-by-step evolution of the complexity of the eye, "it seems, I freely admit, absurd in the extreme." Then creationists cut off the part where Darwin says "but it's actually not."<br /><br />Always be on the lookout for "It seems." That and ellipses.Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-66303048604528864632014-09-08T13:59:37.446-04:002014-09-08T13:59:37.446-04:00It occurs to me that citing a controversy from 25 ...It occurs to me that citing a controversy from 25 years ago as somehow problematic for current evolutionary theory is like pointing to the DynaTAC phone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_DynaTAC) and saying its lack of easy portability is a problem for Apple today.judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-72558207019875327812014-09-08T13:28:35.926-04:002014-09-08T13:28:35.926-04:00And who is an idiot now...?
You are, if you think...<i>And who is an idiot now...?</i><br /><br />You are, if you think citing Ford Doolittle (who said ENCODE was quite wrong - there is definitely lots of junk in our genomes) for the now well accepted fact that microbes exchange DNA causes any problem for evolutionary theory.<br /><br />This is standard IDiot stuff - Darwin wrote about the Tree of Life, so anything that shows this metaphor wasn't absolutely accurate for all time is supposed to cause a problem. Microbial exchange of DNA means some of the "branches" can affect the genetic makeup of other "branches," whereas in natural tree growth two branches will not ordinarily combine. So? Do tell us, Quest, beyond silly quote mines, what exactly in current evolutionary theory does this contradict? Be specific, please.judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-41986422190945489522014-09-08T12:49:10.152-04:002014-09-08T12:49:10.152-04:00Right... You have enough impudence, but unfortunat...Right... You have enough impudence, but unfortunately your opponents are neither shy nor stupid. Try doing your number somewhere else.Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-8514783997453441862014-09-08T12:34:59.698-04:002014-09-08T12:34:59.698-04:00W. Ford Doolittle on endosymbiosis:
"...Man...W. Ford Doolittle on endosymbiosis: <br /><br />"...Many eukaryotic genes turn out to be unlike those of any known archaea or bacteria; they seem to have come from nowhere..."<br /><br />www.icb.ufmg.br/labs/lbem/aulas/grad/evol/treeoflife-complexcells.pdf<br /><br />I guess those genes must have come from outer-space.. anything will do if you choose to believe it....<br /><br />Buhahahahahahaha!<br /><br />And who is an idiot now...?<br /><br />By-bye...<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-24200946757745546972014-09-08T10:27:29.244-04:002014-09-08T10:27:29.244-04:00A stunning refutation, Professor Quest.
It's ...<i>A stunning refutation, Professor Quest.</i><br /><br />It's Schopenhauer's <b>Stratagem XIV</b> ("Claim Victory Despite Defeat"):<br /><br /><i>This, which is an impudent trick, is played as follows: When your opponent has answered several of your questions without the answers turning out favourable to the conclusion at which you are aiming, advance the desired conclusion, - although it does not in the least follow, - as though it had been proved, and proclaim it in a tone of triumph. If your opponent is shy or stupid, and you yourself possess a great deal of impudence and a good voice, the trick may easily succeed. It is akin to the fallacy</i> non causae ut causae.<br /><br />But Quest has a feeble voice and a speech defect. Most of what I can hear sounds like "Blah, blah, blah..."Piotr Gąsiorowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06339278493073512102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-56591982852593659852014-09-08T06:57:49.649-04:002014-09-08T06:57:49.649-04:00And of course we should expect this from evolution...<i>And of course we should expect this from evolution! Sudden appearance of flagella.</i><br /><br />Only if the E. coli have faith will the Deity reward them by giving them the propellers all the cool microbes are sporting this year.judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-22501153896123108822014-09-08T06:54:27.897-04:002014-09-08T06:54:27.897-04:00the new genes and new information arose from pre-e...<i>the new genes and new information arose from pre-existing bits of DNA that were already in the genome….</i><br /><br />Since this is of course exactly what evolutionary theory would predict (rather than some magical entirely new stuff poofing into existence, as ID requires) - a new function evolving from "pre-existing bits of DNA" - I think we must congratulate Quest on becoming the most recent Darwinist here at Sandwalk! Welcome aboard! :)judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-65518355751775861232014-09-08T06:37:33.871-04:002014-09-08T06:37:33.871-04:00He's deliberately trying to keep scientists fr...<i>He's deliberately trying to keep scientists from their research by trolling.</i><br /><br />I tend to doubt his thinking is that strategic. He asks his non-serious questions, which are either answered or not. If answered, he says the evidence is inadequate and declares victory. If not answered, he says science has no answer and declares victory. Or even if answered, he says science has no answer and declares victory. It's the "declares victory" part that's most important, as a look at any ID web site will tell you.judmarchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03111006189037693272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-15178341234669291872014-09-08T03:55:20.934-04:002014-09-08T03:55:20.934-04:00Here again was the question I asked Professor Ques...Here again was the question I asked Professor Quest, because I knew the outcome-- we would present evidence, he would falsely state that no evidence was presented:<br /><br />Me: "Let's test whether you can understand or remember evidence-- and <i>whether you'll ever admit that we presented evidence to you</i>. Your "chicken and egg" abiogenesis question was once answered in detail by SLC/Colnago. Please summarize briefly the evidence he presented."<br /><br />As we see from the above, Georgi takes considerable time to describe some, not all of the evidence for endosymbiosis, and Quest <b>falsely implies that no evidence was presented</b> ("Blah, blah, blah... <b>no science involved" says a NON-scientist to an actual scientist.</b>) Scientists don't know everything, but <i>what they do know, creationists lie about.</i><br /><br />Quest has proven our point: that we present evidence to creationists, and immediately, they falsely deny that we did so. We should all save hyperlinks to this thread to demonstrate in the future why we no longer answer Quest's questions. It's reasonable that we should answer questions <i>ONCE</i>, but we should not answer them over and over to people who deny the facts about what we just wrote. He's deliberately trying to keep scientists from their research by trolling.Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-40012846293539257312014-09-08T03:52:05.094-04:002014-09-08T03:52:05.094-04:00Don't be too hard on Quest, he's merely de...Don't be too hard on Quest, he's merely demonstrating the quintessential creationist's relationship to evidence: "blah blah blah". Mikkel Rumraket Rasmussenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07670550711237457368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-77752864896871820572014-09-08T03:24:47.841-04:002014-09-08T03:24:47.841-04:00A stunning refutation, Professor Quest.A stunning refutation, Professor Quest.AllanMillerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05955231828424156641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-68048305782510350012014-09-07T22:21:38.694-04:002014-09-07T22:21:38.694-04:00Really, after all this you are just going to decla...Really, after all this you are just going to declare vistory and call us lame?<br /><br />And then call us arrogant and narcissistic?<br /><br />Geez, Quest, project much?<br /><br />I come to these discussions to discuss science, not get bogged down in a by troll bait. <br /><br />You have been a huge disappointment.Chris Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04778164246719803780noreply@blogger.com