• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Explaining Macroevolution to a creationist

arg-fallbackName="Led Zeppelin"/>
We are Borg said:
As do many but in science you post your findings your studies etc so that the next person can recreate everything you did. If its repeated the studie is good if not the scientist is called out for explanation. That is the beauty of science if you say something you will need to provide evidence to support the claim. But in religion i can tell bullshit stories and i will never be held accountable.
Click to expand...
Well I don't believe science is impermeable to the fact that we require monetary gains and prefer to dwell in distinguished positions, rather than shoveling shit off a sidewalk for a living. I think science can be beautiful. I think some atheists have really beautiful ideas about our origins, actually. I just don't fully agree with them.
 
arg-fallbackName="AronRa"/>
Led Zeppelin said:
Right, my point is that some of what you call "facts" are actually an extrapolation based on an interpretation of data. I would reject your evidence because I think you have a poor ability to correctly interpret data. I don't understand why you think you would even be qualified to tell someone really how our lives came to be. This is in no way meant to be personal attack against you or anyone else. I actually have recently enjoyed some of your material.
Click to expand...
Let's put that to the test, shall we? Here is my list of facts in evidence for evolution: It is a fact that evolution happens, that biodiversity and complexity does increase, and that both occur naturally only by evolutionary means. It is a fact that alleles vary with increasing distinction in reproductive populations, and that these are accelerated in genetically isolated groups. It is a fact that natural selection, sexual selection, and genetic drift have all been proven to have predictable effect in guiding this variance. It is a fact that significant beneficial mutations do occur and are inherited by descendant groups, and that multiple independent sets of biological markers exist to trace these lineages backward over many generations. It is a fact that birds are a subset of dinosaurs the same way humans are a subset of apes, primates, eutherian mammals, and vertebrate deuterostome animals. It is a fact that the collective genome of all animals has been traced to its most basal form, and that those forms are also indicated by comparative morphology, physiology, and embryological development. It is a fact that every animal on earth has definite relatives either living nearby or evident in the fossil record. It is a fact that the fossil record holds hundreds of transitional species even according to its strictest definition, and that both microevolution and macroevolution have been directly observed.

Now, which of these facts do you think can you reject because of what you imagine to be my inability to properly interpret the data?
 
arg-fallbackName="Deleted member 619"/>
AronRa said:
That may have been intended as a joke, but in this situation, it wasn't funny.
Click to expand...
It was thus intended, and I accept the rebuke. Apologies, LZ. A little gentle ribbing was the intent, but that doesn't excuse the impact. I apologise unreservedly.
 
arg-fallbackName="Led Zeppelin"/>
AronRa said:
AronRa said:
Let's put that to the test, shall we? Here is my list of facts in evidence for evolution: It is a fact that evolution happens, that biodiversity and complexity does increase, and that both occur naturally only by evolutionary means. It is a fact that alleles vary with increasing distinction in reproductive populations, and that these are accelerated in genetically isolated groups. It is a fact that natural selection, sexual selection, and genetic drift have all been proven to have predictable effect in guiding this variance. It is a fact that significant beneficial mutations do occur and are inherited by descendant groups, and that multiple independent sets of biological markers exist to trace these lineages backward over many generations. It is a fact that birds are a subset of dinosaurs the same way humans are a subset of apes, primates, eutherian mammals, and vertebrate deuterostome animals. It is a fact that the collective genome of all animals has been traced to its most basal form, and that those forms are also indicated by comparative morphology, physiology, and embryological development. It is a fact that every animal on earth has definite relatives either living nearby or evident in the fossil record. It is a fact that the fossil record holds hundreds of transitional species even according to its strictest definition, and that both microevolution and macroevolution have been directly observed.

Now, which of these facts do you think can you reject because of what you imagine to be my inability to properly interpret the data?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I don't know you personally. I would just ask you to think about some important things that you were wrong about in your life and tell us about them. I will tell you the things I have been very wrong about as well.
 
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
Led Zeppelin said:
I didn't listen to my parents when I was young, and I stole money from them.
Click to expand...

I thought Atlantis was real and that I was going to be the person to discover it.

On the plus side, my feverish pre-teen research did have the ultimate salutary effect of finally actually reading the Bible cover to cover and thereby ceasing to ever consider myself a Christian ever again.
 
arg-fallbackName="Led Zeppelin"/>
Sparhafoc said:
On the plus side, my feverish pre-teen research did have the ultimate salutary effect of finally actually reading the Bible cover to cover and thereby ceasing to ever consider myself a Christian ever again.
Click to expand...
I went through some messed up things when I was a young teen. I used to burn my hands to keep myself from jerking off. I dont think young people really have the support they need to develop normally in this day and age.
 
arg-fallbackName="AronRa"/>
Led Zeppelin said:
I don't know you personally. I would just ask you to think about some important things that you were wrong about in your life and tell us about them. I will tell you the things I have been very wrong about as well.
Click to expand...
Don't change the subject. I used to believe in God and souls and reincarnation and psionic powers, all of that fantasy nonsense. But that isn't relevant right now. You said you deny the evidence of evolution. Evidence being the facts that indicate, and facts being objectively verifiable data, not mere "interpretation". Thus denying the evidence means denying reality. So let's start with the first one on my list and go through them all sequentially. Do you accept the fact that evolution happens, that biodiversity and complexity do increase, and that both occur naturally only by evolutionary means?
 
arg-fallbackName="We are Borg"/>
Led Zeppelin said:
Well I don't believe science is impermeable to the fact that we require monetary gains and prefer to dwell in distinguished positions, rather than shoveling shit off a sidewalk for a living. I think science can be beautiful. I think some atheists have really beautiful ideas about our origins, actually. I just don't fully agree with them.
Click to expand...
Nothing is 100% but science works because for example if i claim the sun is not round but square then the burden of proof is mine. I show my data my studies and how i came by the conclusion. Now scientist x is reading my stuff and trying to replicate it, but he/she fails so he/she reports the findings if no one can replicate it then study is flawed. The study is then disregarded because it has errors as it should.

Evolution has many of those studies i think 7000+ all uphold the theory of Evolution. So to disprove evolution you will need to disprove everything, but when you do you would be famous and rich.
 
arg-fallbackName="he_who_is_nobody"/>
We are Borg said:
Well he now can not say he was banned because he was a creationist but everyone can see with own eyes he was trolling. *SD* and me give everyone a fair chance to change behavior but some are lost causes.
Click to expand...
I have always appreciated this forum giving a long rope to allow the inane to hang themselves.

However, I guarantee this pigeon has flown home to strut about how the evil evolutionists have banned him because of his creationism.
 
arg-fallbackName="*SD*"/>
He is banned for being excessively abusive to other members, not because he thinks a magical invisible floaty dude farted and then POOF! Let there be stuff!
 
arg-fallbackName="Sparhafoc"/>
I'm pretty sure he wanted to get banned so he didn't have to defend his flaccid position.

Mathematically impossible? Here, let me explain absent a single integer or value!
 
arg-fallbackName="Led Zeppelin"/>
AronRa said:
Don't change the subject. I used to believe in God and souls and reincarnation and psionic powers, all of that fantasy nonsense. But that isn't relevant right now. You said you deny the evidence of evolution. Evidence being the facts that indicate, and facts being objectively verifiable data, not mere "interpretation". Thus denying the evidence means denying reality. So let's start with the first one on my list and go through them all sequentially. Do you accept the fact that evolution happens, that biodiversity and complexity do increase, and that both occur naturally only by evolutionary means?
Click to expand...
I am not sure if complexity really increases but for the rest I would say yes. Lifeforms change. I believe humans were all the same color when we were created and then we changed, probably as we spread out into different environments and that eventually as we continue to reproduce we will all go back to being the same color again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top