Mutations (Honest science defends Hunter and Huckabee)

Institute for Creation Research ^ | September 2007 | Barney Maddox, M.D.

[Eddeche]

The word you’re looking for is ‘hearsay’ Einstein.

[woollyone]

hey everyone...fortunately for all of us, we do have at our disposal a genetics FRexpert to help clear all of this up!

Yessiree!

Our own “Alter Kaker” has stated; “Beneficial mutations are a dime a dozen”!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1920670/posts?page=119#119

So maybe he’ll pop into this thread and educate us all on all of those beneficial mutations that turned pond scum into fish, fish into rodents, rodents into whatever, until those “dime-a-dozen” beneficial mutation finally turned chimps into humans that believe in the theory of evolution!

So...Alter Kaker...go ahead...give ‘em hell!

[3Lean]

So you would also discount much of theoretical physics as “non-scientific” and unrelated to science? It is pretty hard to do empirical research on the origins of the universe, those conditions don’t exist at this time. All those dolts like Einstein have done is just extrapolation...
One of the first things you would learn if you studied the scientific method is that there are empirical (observations) and theoretical (often mathematical) approaches.

[ahayes]

To assume that a whale crawled out of the water and became a cow is mathematically impossible in the billions of years assumed by evo’s.

Thank goodness we don't assume anything so stupid.

Anti-evolutionists would be a lot more convincing if they could actually present the theory of evolution accurately. But I guess if they could do that, they wouldn't be anti-evolutionists.

[ahayes]

They are a dime a dozen. That’s why culturing bacteria or slime molds under varying conditions and seeing what happens is so rewarding.

You probably don’t know it, but a whole heck of a lot of evolution is also due to neutral changes.

[woollyone]

...no...didn’t know it!

Then again, I don’t hang around slime.

I leave that to the slime experts.

...but thanks!

[ahayes]

See Hoyle's fallacy. When you disprove the possibility of a model that doesn't in the slightest resemble the one you're trying to attack (see straw man), you achieve nothing.

[Coyoteman]

There are so many points in your post that need refuting it is easier to just post a link that refutes them all: Index to Creationist Claims.

One-stop shopping!

[Rudder]

"Math AND Science" is the usual phrase for describing the two fields. Math, per se is not science. What you describe as theoretical approaches have been based upon empirical data gathered at one time or another, and with data collection continuing while theoretical formulations are made. That is, they are not created out of whole cloth from someone's imagination.

As far as empirical research on the origins of the universe, read astronomy publications. They're full of empirical data and most are directly or indirectly focused upon the universe's origins.

[ahayes]

Golly, I wish I were cool enough to sit around making stupid comments about stuff I know nothing about. I know, I’ll make fun of Einstein! I know that relativity stuff is garbage because it just doesn’t make sense, plus he had weird hair!

[js1138]

It’s like panning for gold... even if most of what is found is sand, the gold is still selected for.

There's nothing like the smell of creationists self-immolating in the morning.

[rawcatslyentist]

Ooooohh busted by the speal chek poolice! I’m sooo burned.

[rawcatslyentist]

The Theory of Evolution is based upon empirical research?????

Really????

Ok, empirical research does not equal facts or proof or REALITY!

empirical research is just empirical research.

Empirical EVIDINCE is another horse feather in someone else's cap.

[woollyone]

go for it!

[Eddeche]

Your spelling indicated a basic lack of understanding of the meaning of the word. I would hazard a guess you possess a similar level of knowledge in the area of evolution science.

[Eddeche]

‘evidence’

[rawcatslyentist]

So far the only empirical evedince you've presented is my inability to speel check.

Woooo Hoooo, yer soooo smark!

[Rudder]

You’re just full of nonsensical rants and you can’t spell... back to school for you.

[Eddeche]

Revel in your stupidity. It’s all yours. :-)

[ahayes]

Einstein’s an idiot (see post #50). I disproved his theory yesterday. When I walk towards you and you walk towards me, you look like you’re approaching me at the sum of our speeds. But when one spaceship flying at 90% of the speed of light is flying towards another that is flying towards it at 95% of the speed of light, the other ship’s apparent speed is less than the speed of light? Ridiculous! So Einstein’s a nitwit. :-P

I’ll tackle quantum mechanics tomorrow.