Replies

Danny Denier post #346: "You just confirmed one my previous points that evolution is NOT falsifiable because EVERYTHING IS EVOLUTION!
LOL! This is hilarious!
The term "devolution" implies the breaking or loss of genes, Joey.
That will never be evolution, no matter how loudly and passionately the evolutionism apologist whines."

Sorry, but your sense of humor, like so much else, is a bit... off.

"Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.[1][2] "

Evolution by definition is any change, period.
Complexification, devolution, or something as simple as a moth changing colors -- sideways evolution.
It's all evolution/adaptation, regardless of how much you hate it and wish it to go away.

Danny Denier: "Can we assume Professor Behe left you speechless by revealing that the Polar Bear didn't evolve its unique traits?"

By definition, evolution is change, period, regardless of how much you hate it, lie about it and wish it would go away.
It is what it is.

Danny Denier: "That is what I previously explained, Joey, that evolution cannot be falsified, no matter what happens, because evolution is always true, that is, in the mind of the evolutionism cultist."

Nonsense, evolution theory could easily be falsified by confirming evidence which contradicts it.
Elephants living with dinosaurs or big whales & plesiosaurs frolicking together, come to mind.
Alley Oop flying pterosaurs... that would do it.

What else?
How about an obvious copyright written into our DNA codes by the Intelligence Who designed it?
Here is a long discussion on the subject of evolution's falsifiability.

But let's cut to the chase, shall we?
You wish desperately to redefine the word "evolution" such that every new fossil or DNA discovery "falsifies" it, as if the theory was carved-in-stone gospel to be broken by any new fact.
And it frustrates you to tears that every new fact, instead of falsifying is said to confirm evolution's predictions.

Sorry about that.

Danny Denier "Evolution is such a "great theory" to the evolutionist that it can explain everything.
That is not science, but a faith-based religion, with evolution as god."

Total lies & rubbish.

Danny Denier quoting Popper: "Adaptation or fitness is defined by modern evolutionists as survival value, and can be measured by actual success in survival: there is hardly any possibility of testing a theory as feeble as this.""

Feeble?
More nonsense, such ideas are "tested" everywhere environments change and life-forms are required to adapt or die.
Often they die out but sometimes they adapt, occasionally even in the very short term.

>>Danny Denier post #346: "You just confirmed one my previous points that evolution is NOT falsifiable because EVERYTHING IS EVOLUTION! LOL! This is hilarious! The term "devolution" implies the breaking or loss of genes, Joey. That will never be evolution, no matter how loudly and passionately the evolutionism apologist whines."
>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "Sorry, but your sense of humor, like so much else, is a bit... off." Joey quotes Wikipedia . . .

You gotta quit quoting Wikipedia, Joey, if you want to be taken seriously? {sigh}

******************

>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey said, "Evolution by definition is any change, period.

Now everyone can plainly see what I have been saying. Evolution, to the anti-God types, "proves" everything! Evolution is their god!

******************

>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "Complexification, devolution, or something as simple as a moth changing colors -- sideways evolution. It's all evolution/adaptation, regardless of how much you hate it and wish it to go away.

You do not understand evolution, Joey. There is no such thing as "sideways evolution." Evolution, by definition, requires an increase in genetic information; otherwise, common descent is impossible. Without common descent, evolution fits the special creation narrative, whereby created organism multiply after their respective families, or "kinds."

It is okay for you to hijack special creation, Joey; but please don't call it evolution.

******************

>>Danny Denier: "Can we assume Professor Behe left you speechless by revealing that the Polar Bear didn't evolve its unique traits?"

LOL! No. However, I am speechless about the extent to which you have been brainwashed. You really should read Professor Behe's books, Joey.

******************

>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "By definition, evolution is change, period, regardless of how much you hate it, lie about it and wish it would go away. It is what it is.

Then, as I have been saying all along, evolution is not science. The great journalist Melanie Phillips explained it in more scholarly terms:

"But by seeking to colonize another sphere of thinking altogether, the Darwinists have overreached themselves with disastrous results. Trying to use science to prove that religion is irrational, they have instead made science irrational by making grandiose claims for evolution that are not backed up by evidence. Their accusation that their opponents deny the facts of evolution is not true. It is more accurate to say that these critics oppose the totalizing creed of Darwinism, which makes claims for evolution that it cannot sustain." [Melanie Phillips, "The World Turned Upside Down: the global battle over god, truth, and power." Encounter Books, 2010]

******************

>>Danny Denier: "That is what I previously explained, Joey, that evolution cannot be falsified, no matter what happens, because evolution is always true, that is, in the mind of the evolutionism cultist."
>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "Nonsense, evolution theory could easily be falsified by confirming evidence which contradicts it. Elephants living with dinosaurs or big whales & plesiosaurs frolicking together, come to mind. Alley Oop flying pterosaurs... that would do it.

That is a red herring: more of "the absence of evidence is evidence" pseudoscience. Animals tend to segregate, even today. Besides, fossilization only proves that plants and animals were quickly buried by sediment, which is deposited during flooding. During global flooding, hydrologically sorting of plants, animals and sediment would occur.

How about a Coelacanth, Joey? Fossils of those large fish are found below and within the dinosaur layers, but not in the layers above. According to your logic, the Coelacanth should be extinct! But it is alive and well in the Indian Ocean, 65 million years after supposedly becoming extinct!

How do you explain blood, soft tissue, and possibly even DNA being found in dinosaur bones, Joey? How do you explain the many dinosaur bones that have been tested and found to contain significant amounts of Carbon 14?

Your religion of evolution claims that all creatures are products of common descent. Show us evidence of common descent.

******************

>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "What else? How about an obvious copyright written into our DNA codes by the Intelligence Who designed it? Here is a long discussion on the subject of evolution's falsifiability.

More left-wing Wikipedia, Joey? Is that all you have?

******************

>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "But let's cut to the chase, shall we? You wish desperately to redefine the word "evolution" such that every new fossil or DNA discovery "falsifies" it, as if the theory was carved-in-stone gospel to be broken by any new fact. And it frustrates you to tears that every new fact, instead of falsifying is said to confirm evolution's predictions. Sorry about that.

No, Joey. I simply want to see evidence for common descent. There is none, Joey. It is a fairy tale.

******************

>>Danny Denier said: "Evolution is such a "great theory" to the evolutionist that it can explain everything. That is not science, but a faith-based religion, with evolution as god."
>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "Total lies & rubbish."

LOL! In this very post you prove what I wrote, Joey. You said:

[Joey] "Evolution by definition is any change, period."
[Joey] "By definition, evolution is change, period"
[Joey] "Complexification, devolution, or something as simple as a moth changing colors -- sideways evolution. It's all evolution/adaptation"

Like I said: "To the evolutionist, everything is evolution." But there is still no evidence of common descent, after 160 years of desperate searching and digging.

******************

>>Danny Denier quoting Popper: "Adaptation or fitness is defined by modern evolutionists as survival value, and can be measured by actual success in survival: there is hardly any possibility of testing a theory as feeble as this."
>>Scientifically-Challenged Joey wrote, "Feeble? More nonsense, such ideas are "tested" everywhere environments change and life-forms are required to adapt or die. Often they die out but sometimes they adapt, occasionally even in the very short term."

The evidence produced by real scientific inquiry backs up Popper, and others who have made similar determinations. This is the great paleontologist Colin Patterson on Popper's deducement, along with Patterson's own observations:

"The difference between a scientist and a pseudo-scientist is, in Popper's view, that the first will look for the most severe tests of his theories, and will not take evasive action if they fail those tests, while the pseudoscientist will look for evidence confirming his ideas and, if he feels his theory is threatened, may avoid refutation by erecting subsidiary, defensive theories around it... If we accept Popper's distinction between science and non-science, we must ask first whether the theory of evolution by natural selection is scientific or pseudoscientific (metaphysical).... Taking the first part of the theory, that evolution has occurred, it says that the history of life is a single process of species-splitting and progression. This process must be unique and unrepeatable, like the history of England. This part of the theory is therefore a historical theory about unique events, and unique events are, by definition, not part of science, for they are unrepeatable and so not subject to test. Historians cannot predict the future (or are deluded when they try to), and they cannot explain the past, but only interpret it. And there is no decisive way of testing their alternative interpretations. For the same reasons, evolutionary biologists can make no predictions about the future evolution of any particular species, and they cannot explain past evolution, but only produce interpretations, or stories, about it." [Colin Patterson, "Evolution." Comstock Publishing Associates, 1999, Chap 12, pp. 145-146]

One other point, Joey: adaptation is not evolution.

Mr. Kalamata

Last night I recalled a video link in my Research Library to one of Joey's CNN brothers, Brian Stelter, interviewing the founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman, who tore into Stelter for labeling him a "denier." Watch:

Weather Channel Founder destroys CNN's Brian Stelter on Global Warming

LOL! I cannot help but notice the irony of the Left claiming any change in the weather is proof of "climate change," since that is exactly the way Joey defines evolution, which is, "any change is proof of evolution." See for yourself:

LOL! That is nuts! It is also meaningless. But that is the kind of pseudo-science many on the Left are teaching our children, when they are not teaching them revised history and the imagined glory of Marxism.

Evolutionary Biologist Jerry Coyne defines evolutionism in the more traditional manner:

"In essence, the modern theory of evolution is easy to grasp. It can be summarized in a single (albeit slightly long) sentence: Life on Earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive species—perhaps a self-replicating molecule—that lived more than 3,5 billion years ago; it then branched out over time, throwing off many new and diverse species; and the mechanism for most (but not all) of evolutionary change is natural selection." [Jerry A. Coyne, "Why Evolution is True." Oxford University Press, 2009, p.3]

There is no evidence in support of that claim; but that is what Coyne believes, and that is what Darwin's theory teaches.

Mr. Kalamata