Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals

EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" This is the post. He opined that science is mathematics."

I believe ya. I just never read it; his insistence that I *bought off on it* with my alleged silence is what irks me. He's trying his hardest to get one of us to lose our cool. It's not going to work with me. He's not even close to being worth it.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Science assumes nothing . . .

You wish.

[jec41]

I believe ya. I just never read it; his insistence that I *bought off on it* with my alleged silence is what irks me. He's trying his hardest to get one of us to lose our cool. It's not going to work with me. He's not even close to being worth it.

I've taught children before, some learned some did not. I am sure you are aware that method will always defeat opinion and that the only answer opinion has for method is another opinion.

[jec41]

Science assumes nothing . . .

You wish.

State the method of science so I can know if we are speaking of the same thing. Your opined opinion is most often not science. Then state a scientific assumption by science.

[ml1954]

State the method of science so I can know if we are speaking of the same thing.

Excuse me, but if I may Fester...just to help the discussion along...Fester argues that all is supernatural. That is, what science considers natural is supernatural.

[jec41]

Excuse me, but if I may Fester...just to help the discussion along...Fester argues that all is supernatural. That is, what science considers natural is supernatural.

I suspected as much. I am not interested in what Fester believes or in a opined opinion. However he is entitled to his philosophy that all is faith, belief, and opinion.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(Base it on induction and we'll talk.)


Induction or inductive reasoning, sometimes called inductive logic, is the process of reasoning in which the premises of an argument support the conclusion but do not ensure it. It is used to ascribe properties or relations to types based on tokens (i.e., on one or a small number of observations or experiences); or to formulate laws based on limited observations of recurring phenomenal patterns.

My attempt at inductive reasoning

The genetic code is similar to a language in the following ways.

Languages have alphabets. The genetic code has the equivalent in a chemical alphabet made from five chemicals, Adenine (A), Guanine (G), Cytosine (C), Thymine (T)DNA and uracil (U)RNA.

Languages have spelling. The genetic code uses it's alphabet in combination of three to make "code" words, an equivalent of spelling.

Languages have grammar. The genetic code has a one signal for start, and three code words to act as stop signals, the equivalent of grammar

Languages have meaning, and intended purpose. The genetic code is a set of instruction specific to the life it belongs to. It's intended purpose is the building, repairing, and maintaining that life.

All known forms of high level language (containing alphabet, spelling, grammar, meaning, and intended purpose) have been inventions from an intelligent source. Since the genetic code meets this same criteria, it must have been an invention of an intelligent source.


http://www.brooklyn.cuny.edu/bc/ahp/BioInfo/GP/GeneticCode.html
http://exobio.ucsd.edu/Space_Sciences/genetic_code.htm
http://tidepool.st.usm.edu/crswr/geneticcode.html

[Fester Chugabrew]

. . . state a scientific assumption by science.

Science assumes an intelligible universe. Can you tell me, scientifically, how such a universe can come about without intelligence or design?

[Fester Chugabrew]

Fester argues that all is supernatural.

I do not argue that "all is supernatural." I argue that the distinction between natural and supernatural is scientifically arbitrary and thus not subject to scientific method.

[hosepipe]

[ He didn't tell us absolutely everything about the manner and details of His creation in the Holy Scriptures? ]

Written 2000+ years ago, nor could he(God) have explained things.. that is physical things.. So what can be missed is that explainations have been limited to the most important things.. Spiritual things.. What good is it if you are a brilliant "scientist" and are cursed with spiritual "demons" of various sorts.. Like narcissim or selfishness.. or worse.. Successful at science but a failure at human life both personal and corporate....

There are things much more important than "science".. personally and corporately.. Arrogance says, that Jesus couldn't walk on water, but a reptile could decide to grow feathers instead of scales.. or that a stew of chemicals could form a lifeform.. When science doesn't even know what life IS, really....

For a collection of writtings(bible=library) written 2000+ years ago.. it stands alone.. Literally NO other belief in some God comes close to the bible.. written by about 39 people most of whom never knew each other..

When and If we ever find out what gravity is what good would that do.. Better transportation?.. some widget?.. more and cheaper energy?..Thats assuming we as humans could even understand the framework of this Universe, the foundation of it on our best day.. Engineered Art needs a user not a critic.. A grateful user.. Primates need to remember that they are primates.. You know a little humilty..

[hosepipe]

[ That would be inaccurate. For example, Darwin said, in the last sentence of the 6th Edition of On the Origin of Species: "There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone circling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." ]

If true then Darwin was an ID'er.. You know intelligent design.. before it was called that..

[muawiyah]

You spoke so knowledgeably about the content later on yet you breezed on past it earlier.

Were you aware that you do post contradictory material with a great deal of regularity.

[muawiyah]

What I find exceedingly pathetic is your tendency to describe as "lies" those things with which you disagree.

You're a DU troll aren't you? That's their standard technique. BTW, if you'll give me your name over at Smirking Chimp I can look up your stuff and see if you do the same thing in front of your friends.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Good post!

Intelligent design fits objective reality handily from both an inductive and deductive standpoint. It takes a philosophy of some kind to explain it away. Let an evolutionist fill in the blank: "The presence of organized matter performing specific functions is best explained by . . ."

They do not have an answer. They pretend such an answer resides outside the realm of science altogether. To a degree it resides outside the realm of absolute certitude in this life. So do many other things science contends with. Science does not even know how many rubber bands are manually discarded each year. I hardly think it capable of reconstructing genetic history on the basis of morphological similarities.

Besides, it stands to reason that common ancestry could easily be mistaken by science for a common Creator.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

We've had the miniature horses for less than two weeks. This is all new for us. We moved from Houston to Mena, AR about 6 months ago. Actually, we were planning to move a little later, then hurricane Rita came along. We weren't sure if there would be anything left to move, so we packed as much as possible during the evacuation. My dad was able to rent a moving truck in a College Station on his way down to help. We'd already bought a house, but the people were still living in it. we also had some rental property that we'd bought up here as well. We didn't have renters in it yet, so the kids and I stayed there and we unpacked our stuff between there, my husband's new office in town (he's a financial adviser) and our real home that the people were still in. They were kind enough to clear out a room. Fortunately we didn't have severe damage, and the stuff we left we were able to go back and get. It did get the move over with in a hurry!
Now we have 70 acres and are giving hobby ranching a go. We have the 7 little mutant horses, which we're going to breed. We have 11 head of cattle. It was almost 10 today, as we have a sick little calf. We thought we were going to have to put her down. My husband was actually getting ready to do it, when she stood up on her own. This was a good sign. she hasn't been able to do that for over a day. This evening she seems better. She even tried to fight a little when we had to tube feed her. We had four little dogs before we moved. Now we've picked up a stray collie, which I adore! And, our cat had kittens last Friday!

[ml1954]

I argue that the distinction between natural and supernatural is scientifically arbitrary and thus not subject to scientific method.

Fester, I can post a quote where you state that everything is supernatural. At any rate, I'll bite. Please elaborate on your distinction between natural and supernatural, assuming you now maintain there is one.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(That is your opinion. Math is used to "describe" physical and non-physical elements, and it is the very foundation of science.)

Get this! Science originated as a philosophy. It was the philosophy of nature.

[Fester Chugabrew]

I think I know the post to which you refer. If you care to find it and call it up I'll address as to whether it accurately reflects my understanding of objective reality. PH saw fit to put it in his list of "Brain on Creationism" quotes, IIRC. I am not at all averse to revising and restating my positions if, as posted, they were ill-written WRT my intentions. Just check the quote and make sure it says I say "Everything is supernatural."

At bottom, science is ill fit to determine whether everything is supernatural or not. Right? Or have you come across the scientific method for determining what is or is not supernatural?

[jec41]

Science assumes an intelligible universe. Can you tell me, scientifically, how such a universe can come about without intelligence or design?

It does? Find me such a stated assumption by science and not your opinion.

[muawiyah]

BTW, up until recently the United States Postal Service had a good approximation of the information you seek concerning rubber bands.

Bulk and presort rate mail was packaged in 10 letter units, and wrapped with rubber bands. This resulted in USPS (which has half the mail in the world, and virtually ALL of the direct mail advertising) using most of the rubberbands in the world.

In fact, entire rubber band factories were built for the sole purpose of providing sufficient rubber bands to USPS.

The number "scrapped" each year could be deduced quite readily. I vaguely recall a statistician friend of mine doing that but I don't remember how many it was.

I think you should use an example better in tune with the purpose you are attempting to serve. Rubber bands ain't it.