Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GourmetDan
"Again, you cannot modify evidence to fit a theory. You only modify interpretations of evidence.

When I speak of evidence in this context I am including both the data and the interpretation.

"That you believe that you can modify evidence shows that you do not understand the difference between evidence and extrapolation.

I am not talking about modifying the physical data, I am talking about modifying the collected data points and/or it's interpretation.

Those that are active in developing baraminology are primarily interested in making the classification of organisms fit the Biblical account whether or not the morphology of the organisms indicate otherwise. Following the evidence entails allowing the evidence to determine the interpretation; this is in conflict with the stated goals of the Baraminologists.

If two species have numerous morphological similarities and few differences, baraminologists will place the two in separate baramines if the Bible so dictates. In this case, whales would be placed in with fish rather than with mammals even though whales are distinctly mammals. The evidence is that whales are mammals - they have far more in common with mammals (they share diagnostic features with mammals) than with fish -, yet baraminologists can ignore that evidence and focus on the fact that whales and fish both live in the water and are classed as fish by the Bible, then decide to place them together in a single baramine. Selectively ignoring part of the data is an example of modifying the evidence to fit the theory.

I have never suggested that the physical data be modified.

259 posted on 07/04/2006 6:18:41 PM PDT by b_sharp (There is always one more mess to clean up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies ]


To: b_sharp
If two species have numerous morphological similarities and few differences, baraminologists will place the two in separate baramines if the Bible so dictates. In this case, whales would be placed in with fish rather than with mammals even though whales are distinctly mammals. The evidence is that whales are mammals - they have far more in common with mammals (they share diagnostic features with mammals) than with fish -, yet baraminologists can ignore that evidence and focus on the fact that whales and fish both live in the water and are classed as fish by the Bible, then decide to place them together in a single baramine.

You are not suggesting that there are those so out of touch with reality as to make such a claim, are you?
291 posted on 07/05/2006 6:00:05 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies ]

To: b_sharp

Ah yes, redefinition. That always helps to deceive.

Evidence is facts. Interpretation is speculation.

To equivocate speculation w/ 'evidence' is to deceive.

The basis of evolution.


297 posted on 07/05/2006 8:13:48 AM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson