Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

How Do Living Things Morph Over Time?

Expand Messages
  • Charles Palm
    Stewart: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/29952 Evolution is the process that results from the interaction of genetic strains over many
    Message 1 of 7 , Nov 10, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Stewart: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/29952 Evolution
      is the process that results from the interaction of genetic strains over
      many generations. It does not submit that creatures metamorphose from one
      species into another.

      Charles P: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/lines_03
      Stewart is correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence
      that a
      gray whale of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.

      Charles P: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pakicetus_BW.jpg Stewart is
      correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a gray whale
      of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.

      Charles P: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrHpLEUo0lI Stewart is correct.
      There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a featherless chicken
      is the descendant of a dinosaur.

      Jack Horner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QVXdEOiCw8 Time 9:00 to
      10:40. Birds are living dinosaurs. We actually classify them as
      dinosaurs. We now call them non-avian dinosaurs and avian dinosaurs.
      Avian dinosaurs are our modern birds. So, we don't have to make a
      dinosaur. We already have them. The chicken is a dinosaur. You can't
      argue with it because we are the classifiers and we classified it that way.

      Charles P: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/28565 The
      20th Century version of The Theory of Evolution can't be falsified. It is
      based on definitions that are not supported by empirical and verifiable
      evidence that has been tested and reproduced by others.

      Science: http://www.geosociety.org/positions/position1.htm Science, by
      definition, is a method of learning about the natural universe by asking
      questions in such a way that they can be answered empirically and
      verifiably. If a question cannot be framed so that the answer can be
      tested, and the test results can be reproduced by others, then it is not
      science.

      http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-View-Century-Press-Science/dp/0132780933
      James A. Shapiro's Evolution: A View from the 21st Century proposes an
      important new paradigm for understanding biological evolution. Shapiro
      demonstrates why traditional views of evolution are inadequate to explain
      the latest evidence, and presents a compelling alternative. His
      information- and systems-based approach integrates advances in
      symbiogenesis, epigenetics, and mobile genetic elements, and points toward
      an emerging synthesis of physical, information, and biological sciences.

      James A Shapiro:
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-shapiro/bob-dylan-encode-and-evol_b_1873935.html
      Thinking of the genome informatically and of mobile DNA as a potent
      force
      for genome organization are central to the arguments presented on this blog
      and in my book.


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • stewart8724
      Stewart: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/29952 Evolution is the process that results from the interaction of genetic strains over many
      Message 2 of 7 , Nov 11, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Stewart: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/29952 Evolution
        is the process that results from the interaction of genetic strains over
        many generations. It does not submit that creatures metamorphose from one
        species into another.

        Charles P: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/lines_03
        Stewart is correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence
        that a
        gray whale of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.

        Charles P: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pakicetus_BW.jpg Stewart is
        correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a gray whale
        of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.

        Charles P: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrHpLEUo0lI Stewart is correct.
        There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a featherless chicken
        is the descendant of a dinosaur.

        Stewart: Charles you're embarrassing yourself, you have shown that you fail to understand not only what I tried to tell you, but that you also have no appreciation of how evolution works.
        The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of individuals, but of the evolution of species.


        Charles P: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/28565 The
        20th Century version of The Theory of Evolution can't be falsified. It is
        based on definitions that are not supported by empirical and verifiable
        evidence that has been tested and reproduced by others.

        Stewart: The 19th century Darwinian Theory of Evolution could be falsified simply by showing that a species that evolved from another lived before it. The 19th century theory is based on observable evidence on a broad range of sciences including geology, biology and zoology. It is testable and verified and has not been successfully challenged in 153 years. The biological mechanisms of evolution have also been used by individuals to reproduce the effects of natural selection for many generations, this is known as selective breeding.
        Everything you have posted here is false and without any scientific evidence to suppose that it's true. Do you consider yourself exempt from the rules you set out for the rest of us?


        ..

        --- In OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com, Charles Palm <palmcharlesUU@...> wrote:
        >
        > Stewart: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/29952 Evolution
        > is the process that results from the interaction of genetic strains over
        > many generations. It does not submit that creatures metamorphose from one
        > species into another.
        >
        > Charles P: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/lines_03
        > Stewart is correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence
        > that a
        > gray whale of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.
        >
        > Charles P: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pakicetus_BW.jpg Stewart is
        > correct. There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a gray whale
        > of today is the descendant of Pakicetus.
        >
        > Charles P: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrHpLEUo0lI Stewart is correct.
        > There is no empirical and verifiable evidence that a featherless chicken
        > is the descendant of a dinosaur.
        >
        > Jack Horner: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QVXdEOiCw8 Time 9:00 to
        > 10:40. Birds are living dinosaurs. We actually classify them as
        > dinosaurs. We now call them non-avian dinosaurs and avian dinosaurs.
        > Avian dinosaurs are our modern birds. So, we don't have to make a
        > dinosaur. We already have them. The chicken is a dinosaur. You can't
        > argue with it because we are the classifiers and we classified it that way.
        >
        > Charles P: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OriginsTalk/message/28565 The
        > 20th Century version of The Theory of Evolution can't be falsified. It is
        > based on definitions that are not supported by empirical and verifiable
        > evidence that has been tested and reproduced by others.
        >
        > Science: http://www.geosociety.org/positions/position1.htm Science, by
        > definition, is a method of learning about the natural universe by asking
        > questions in such a way that they can be answered empirically and
        > verifiably. If a question cannot be framed so that the answer can be
        > tested, and the test results can be reproduced by others, then it is not
        > science.
        >
        > http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-View-Century-Press-Science/dp/0132780933
        > James A. Shapiro's Evolution: A View from the 21st Century proposes an
        > important new paradigm for understanding biological evolution. Shapiro
        > demonstrates why traditional views of evolution are inadequate to explain
        > the latest evidence, and presents a compelling alternative. His
        > information- and systems-based approach integrates advances in
        > symbiogenesis, epigenetics, and mobile genetic elements, and points toward
        > an emerging synthesis of physical, information, and biological sciences.
        >
        > James A Shapiro:
        > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-shapiro/bob-dylan-encode-and-evol_b_1873935.html
        > Thinking of the genome informatically and of mobile DNA as a potent
        > force
        > for genome organization are central to the arguments presented on this blog
        > and in my book.
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • Charles Palm
        Stewart: The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of individuals, but of the evolution of species. Charles P: Thank you, Stewart, for your
        Message 3 of 7 , Nov 11, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Stewart: The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of
          individuals, but of the evolution of species.

          Charles P: Thank you, Stewart, for your ideas.

          Kathryn Schulz:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88&feature=relmfu Time
          10:00 to 15:55. You think that your beliefs perfectly reflect reality.
          How do you explain it to those who disagree with you? Most of us make a
          series of unfortunate assumptions.

          1 The Ignorance Assumption.

          2 The Idiocy Assumption.

          3 The Evil Assumption.

          Kathryn Schulz: We generate these incredible stories about the world
          around us and then the world turns around and astonishes us.


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • stewart8724
          Stewart: The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of individuals, but of the evolution of species. Charles P: Thank you, Stewart, for your ideas.
          Message 4 of 7 , Nov 13, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Stewart: The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of
            individuals, but of the evolution of species.

            Charles P: Thank you, Stewart, for your ideas.

            Stewart: You're welcome.

            Kathryn Schulz:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88&feature=relmfu Time
            10:00 to 15:55. You think that your beliefs perfectly reflect reality.
            How do you explain it to those who disagree with you? Most of us make a
            series of unfortunate assumptions.

            1 The Ignorance Assumption.

            2 The Idiocy Assumption.

            3 The Evil Assumption.

            Kathryn Schulz: We generate these incredible stories about the world
            around us and then the world turns around and astonishes us.

            Stewart: Exactly. Take heed of these words Charles and with hard work you need not continue making such mistakes in the future. You have succeeded in identifying that you are prone to these crazy assumptions, which is a good sign that you are capable of dealing with your problem. This is a big step forward, well done Charles. One day at a time mate, one day at a time.


            ..

            --- In OriginsTalk@yahoogroups.com, Charles Palm <palmcharlesUU@...> wrote:
            >
            > Stewart: The examples you mention are not of the metamorphosis of
            > individuals, but of the evolution of species.
            >
            > Charles P: Thank you, Stewart, for your ideas.
            >
            > Kathryn Schulz:
            > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88&feature=relmfu Time
            > 10:00 to 15:55. You think that your beliefs perfectly reflect reality.
            > How do you explain it to those who disagree with you? Most of us make a
            > series of unfortunate assumptions.
            >
            > 1 The Ignorance Assumption.
            >
            > 2 The Idiocy Assumption.
            >
            > 3 The Evil Assumption.
            >
            > Kathryn Schulz: We generate these incredible stories about the world
            > around us and then the world turns around and astonishes us.
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.