Conquer Club

An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

What are the facts? Please keep an open mind and read the article first before casting your vote.

 
Total votes : 0

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby comic boy on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:15 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:I realize that you're just making a joke Andy, and it is humorous, but still, museum buildings are not free to construct and the land that they are built on also has value. The exhibits cost money to maintain and staff needs to be paid. Not to mention utilities, insurance and a whole host of expenditures like sending people to dig for bones. So some one must be paying for it all. Don't you think? It can't possibly be paid for by free passes to the museum?

Whether it's our tax dollars at work or private donations, if there is money involved, you can bet your bottom dollar that the decision to keep the truth from the public is not that difficult a choice make. And so, The Rise of Ignorance.

To Lootifer:
I have as much right to be here as anyone else. And to express my opinions and beliefs. And if what I express happens to be the truth that folks don't want to hear then that is too bad. You Lootifer, are the one who does not have to be here posting on this thread if you do not like what I am saying. So why don't you just take your own advice. Please!


The Rise of ignorance;
www.creationmuseum.org
A perfect example of what Viceroy is railing against.
Im a TOFU miSfit
User avatar
Brigadier comic boy
 
Posts: 1738
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:54 pm
Location: London

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:17 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Perhaps you could argue that evolution from a common ancestor is a theory


This is precisely what is being discussed. Viceroy didn't seem to object to the idea of microevolution.


Ok. It's really a wasted question.


Sure, debating about whether the idea of common descent is accurate, isn't going to get anywhere. But I find it very necessary to speak up when someone suggests that despite being the scientific consensus, it should not even be taught in school, because that is a dangerous proposal.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:22 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:I have enough time to verify that what scientists say is correct. In fact, most of my non-CC time is spent doing just that.

Also, metsfan, evolution is a fact.

When a bacterium in a hospital all of a sudden becomes antibiotic resistant, that is evolution. It happens, we have seen it happen. Evolution is a word to describe a process which we know exists. Perhaps you could argue that evolution from a common ancestor is a theory, but I don't have any more time for this stupid thread.


DoomYoshi; The theory of Evolution that Darwin postulated is what I am talking about and not genetic mutations. The Theory of Evolution attempts to explain the rise and diversity of life on the planet. It postulates that species of animals evolve from other lower forms of animals or species thereof.

What is described in a laboratory with germs and viruses are still germs and viruses. Now if you were to say the same thing about say, Cat's and Dogs, two totally different species of animals then I could understand that Evolution is real. Or even if you showed me a half dog and half cat, then I would agree that there is evidence to support the Theory of Evolution. But viruses and germs mutating into other viruses and germs is not the same thing. They may use the same name, "Evolutionary Biology," but they are not the same thing. Perhaps this is where people get off the tracks.

To date there is no evidence to support the Theory of evolution that postulates that our species arose from some other species of animal. There is no missing link found between our species and some other. And that states a lot all by itself.
Last edited by Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:24 pm

Viceroy, you are welcome to interpret the data as you please. But will you please agree that the consensus of professional scientists is what should be taught in science class?
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:25 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:Viceroy, you are welcome to interpret the data as you please. But will you please agree that the consensus of professional scientists is what should be taught in science class?


What consensus is that? That man evolved from apes? Then show me the homo-erectus ape?
Last edited by Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby DoomYoshi on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:26 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:I have enough time to verify that what scientists say is correct. In fact, most of my non-CC time is spent doing just that.

Also, metsfan, evolution is a fact.

When a bacterium in a hospital all of a sudden becomes antibiotic resistant, that is evolution. It happens, we have seen it happen. Evolution is a word to describe a process which we know exists. Perhaps you could argue that evolution from a common ancestor is a theory, but I don't have any more time for this stupid thread.


DoomYoshi; The theory of Evolution that Darwin postulated is what I am talking about and not genetic mutations. The Theory of Evolution attempts to explain the rise and diversity of life on the planet. It postulates that species of animals evolve from other lower forms of animals or species thereof.

What is described in a laboratory with germs and viruses are still germs and viruses. Now if you were to say the same thing about say, Cat's and Dogs, two totally different species of animals then I could understand that Evolution is real. Or even if you showed me a half dog and half cat, then I would agree that there is evidence to support the Theory of Evolution. But viruses and germs mutating into other viruses and germs is not the same thing. They may use the same name, "Evolutionary Biology," but they are not the same thing. Perhaps this is where people get off the tracks.

To date there is no evidence to support the Theory of evolution that postulates that our species arose from some other species of animal. There is no missing link between our species and some other.


Dogs and cats haven't shared a common ancestor for 30 million years.

How about a half-dog/half-wolf? Or half-dog/half-coyote? Or half-dog/half-dingo?
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:26 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:I realize that you're just making a joke Andy, and it is humorous, but still, museum buildings are not free to construct and the land that they are built on also has value. The exhibits cost money to maintain and staff needs to be paid. Not to mention utilities, insurance and a whole host of expenditures like sending people to dig for bones. So some one must be paying for it all. Don't you think? It can't possibly be paid for by free passes to the museum?

Looking into the museum system as something other than a histo-tainment for a few bucks puts a smile on my face. I don't mean to poke too much fun, but I've honestly never heard the museum cover-up/conspiracy/what-have-you idea before, and I found it great fodder for semi-amusing post in the late afternoon.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:27 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Viceroy, you are welcome to interpret the data as you please. But will you please agree that the consensus of professional scientists is what should be taught in science class?


What consensus is that? That man evolved from apes?


No, that man and the other apes evolved from a common ancestor.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby DoomYoshi on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:28 pm

Viceroy, let's postulate that man did not evolve from a common ancestor of the apes. Why would our DNA share 98% sequence similarity with chimpanzees? Why is our DNA closer to apes than to muskox, cnidarians or fungus?
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby AndyDufresne on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:28 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:Dogs and cats haven't shared a common ancestor for 30 million years.

How about a half-dog/half-wolf? Or half-dog/half-coyote? Or half-dog/half-dingo?

Image

Solved. You can thank me, world.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:29 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Dogs and cats haven't shared a common ancestor for 30 million years.

How about a half-dog/half-wolf? Or half-dog/half-coyote? Or half-dog/half-dingo?

Image

Solved. You can thank me, world.


--Andy


This thread has just been won.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:35 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
Viceroy63 wrote:
Metsfanmax wrote:Viceroy, you are welcome to interpret the data as you please. But will you please agree that the consensus of professional scientists is what should be taught in science class?


What consensus is that? That man evolved from apes?


No, that man and the other apes evolved from a common ancestor.


But where is the intermediate species between us and this common ancestor? if it does not exist then how can we teach it. We might as well be teaching Santa Claus as he does not exist either. Or am I also wrong about that?

DoomYoshi; Wolf and Dog are the same species, Cats and Dogs are not. It is not too much of a stretch for Wolf to mutate into Dog but it would be for a Wolf to mutate into a Tiger or a lion.

Andy; It's cool. I just had to make that point. I also made that point in the OP at the end.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Metsfanmax on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:38 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:But where is the intermediate species between us and this common ancestor? if it does not exist then how can we teach it. We might as well be teaching Santa Claus as he does not exist either. Or am I also wrong about that?


Look, you misunderstand what macroevolution is all about. We can get into that if you really want. But it doesn't matter. No matter how difficult this is for you to comprehend, the idea that humans and other apes evolved from a common ancestor is what scientists believe. So, can you agree that what scientists believe is what should be taught in class? Or should we stop teaching them about quantum mechanics, because you don't understand that either?
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:38 pm

AndyDufresne wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Dogs and cats haven't shared a common ancestor for 30 million years.

How about a half-dog/half-wolf? Or half-dog/half-coyote? Or half-dog/half-dingo?

Image

Solved. You can thank me, world.


--Andy


More scientifically speaking: Tapocyon

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.actio ... 4977041872

Image
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:41 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:Viceroy, let's postulate that man did not evolve from a common ancestor of the apes. Why would our DNA share 98% sequence similarity with chimpanzees? Why is our DNA closer to apes than to muskox, cnidarians or fungus?


When it comes to DNA, it turns out there's not that much difference between mice and men.

Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.

"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."
(http://articles.cnn.com/2002-12-04/tech ... _s=PM:TECH)
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:45 pm

crispybits wrote:
AndyDufresne wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Dogs and cats haven't shared a common ancestor for 30 million years.

How about a half-dog/half-wolf? Or half-dog/half-coyote? Or half-dog/half-dingo?

Image

Solved. You can thank me, world.


--Andy


More scientifically speaking: Tapocyon

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.actio ... 4977041872

Image


It's the same Theory of Evolution. But again, show me the intermediate species between them all? You can't because none exist.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:48 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:It's the same Theory of Evolution. But again, show me the intermediate species between them all? You can't because none exist.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivora

Carnivora were the family that evolved from the Miacids, which included the animal pictured. On that wikipedia page you can see the tree braching out from that containing the different forms that evolved from the common ancestor (most of which have links that allow you to learn more)

And in your previous post, you say the genes in humans for a tail are "turned off". If we were to try and show an intermediary species between the gene being turned off and turned on what would that look like? Something with half a tail?
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Neoteny on Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:53 pm

Viceroy63 wrote:
DoomYoshi wrote:Viceroy, let's postulate that man did not evolve from a common ancestor of the apes. Why would our DNA share 98% sequence similarity with chimpanzees? Why is our DNA closer to apes than to muskox, cnidarians or fungus?


When it comes to DNA, it turns out there's not that much difference between mice and men.

Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.

"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."
(http://articles.cnn.com/2002-12-04/tech ... _s=PM:TECH)


Synteny is another topic you should maybe Google. It is often even explained with a mouse model.
Napoleon Ier wrote:You people need to grow up to be honest.
User avatar
Major Neoteny
 
Posts: 3396
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 10:24 pm
Location: Atlanta, Georgia

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby DoomYoshi on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:01 pm

Doesn't answer the question viceroy. As similar as we are to mice, we are even more similar to chimpanzees. I want you to provide a reason for why that might be.

And yes, amazingly, you figured out that the molecular toolkit is small. So small that almost all of the 6000 yeast genes have a similar gene in mammals. So small that mice proteins work not only in humans, but also in fruitflies.
░▒▒▓▓▓▒▒░
User avatar
Captain DoomYoshi
 
Posts: 10715
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:30 pm
Location: Niu York, Ukraine

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby betiko on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:21 pm

viceroy, you do realize that by saying that we are that similar to mice genetically you are making the whole cc win the argument against you? :)
why do you think you have a coccyx? is it not a remain from some of our tailed ancestor primates?
just let it go. Why do you think all mamals have 4 members, 2 eyes, 1 nose, 2 ears, 1 tail, 1 mouth and reproduce thanks to an ovula fecundated by a male inside the female and share so much dna? what are the odds for that?
Image
User avatar
Major betiko
 
Posts: 10941
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:05 pm
Location: location, location
22

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:23 pm

DoomYoshi wrote:Doesn't answer the question viceroy. As similar as we are to mice, we are even more similar to chimpanzees. I want you to provide a reason for why that might be.

And yes, amazingly, you figured out that the molecular toolkit is small. So small that almost all of the 6000 yeast genes have a similar gene in mammals. So small that mice proteins work not only in humans, but also in fruitflies.


The question is did man evolve from apes or do any species evolve from any other species. That we all have compatible genes is not the issue. We have much in common with an Oak Tree. But that is not the question. Is the Theory of Evolution a Fact? If it is then show me an intermediate species that shows it.

If Evolution takes millions of years to happen then there should be plenty of intermediate species all around us. Where is it? That is the question.

The apes are obviously still here with us so why not the intermediate species between us and the ape? Are we to believe that the intermediate species died out upon our arrival? Why did not the ape as well?
Last edited by Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:30 pm

I'm gonna quote you from the PMs we exchanged in the last few days. I hope you don't mind.

Viceroy63 wrote:Now first, please forgive me if I sound insulting when I say that about the open mind but the only reason why, and I mean the only reason why people don't see the evidence all around them is because they do not have an open mind.


Viceory63 wrote:Prove or test all things. Look into for yourself and test everything and see for yourself if it is good or true or not and figure it out and not just to go with the religious or intellectual crowd. That is what blinds you to the evidence all around you when you think that you have to pick and choose.


Obviously snipped greatly.

Look around and you will see an intermediary species every time you see a living thing.
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby Viceroy63 on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:33 pm

Well you see, Darwin would disagree with your statement and so would a lot of scientist. The consensus among scientist is that there is no intermediate species. Read my OP again. It's in there.
Image
An Unproven Hypothesis; The Rise of Ignorance.
Ultimate Proof of Creation. Click the show tab below.
show
User avatar
Major Viceroy63
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 8:34 pm
Location: A little back water, hill billy hick place called Earth.

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby crispybits on Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:47 pm

OK - hyenas

Image

It's a dog right?

Except it's not - it's a cat. Honestly, it's part of the feliformia sub-order, and is demonstrably related to other cat forms rather than dog forms.

There's your half cat half dog. And it's out there alive and well today.

Did you visit the links I gave? Did you actually read them? Did you see how they described how you had one order, the miacids, and from that you get evolution into the carnivora. Then from the carnivora you get bears and cats and dogs and raccoons and all sorts of other creatures?

How about the Amphicyonidae. It's extinct now, but it is half way between a bear and a dog. Google it.

Also, I don't quite understand something. You say that science says that intermediaries don't exist, and then you tell us to show you intermediaries or you won't believe science. There's a bit of a contradiction there don't you think?
User avatar
Major crispybits
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 4:29 pm

Re: An Unproven Hypothesis, The Rise of Ignorance.

Postby jonesthecurl on Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:05 pm

There are four sorts of Viceroy "scientist" -
(i) those who are members of a secret world-wide conspiracy to fund museums without rewriting all the labels again;
(ii) those who exist only in his mind and tell him what "science confirms",
(iii) those that he misunderstands but he can quote what someobody else said that they said, and
(iv) those that are noted as "renowned scientists" by Intelligent Design sites.
instagram.com/garethjohnjoneswrites
User avatar
Lieutenant jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 4436
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users