slimboyfat

Joined

• started 536 topics
• posted 17,587 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by slimboyfat

• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  As the discussion shows: I was happy talking about evolution. It was you who cast up flat earth, postmodernism and worms. As usual.
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Why is the second self-evidently true?

  And if all you can offer is ridicule what makes you better than a medieval believer ridiculing disbelief in God?
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Yes of course. I do not believe that "man is the measure of all things".

  As I see it there are various options:

  1. Objectivity is defined by how God views the world.

  2. Objectivity is defined by how humans view the world.

  3. Objectivity is defined by how worms view the world.

  Cofty apparently thinks the first has been disproved, the second is self-evidently true, and the third is ridiculous.

  Personally I think they're all problematic, including the second, which just happens the be the current orthodoxy. That doesn't make it true. And when Cofty is challenged to prove it all he can do is resort to ridicule. In the same way a medieval believer might ridicule anyone who expresses doubt in God.

  If anything I am leaning toward the first option as the most viable.
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  As far as we know that's true. But it doesn't mean new information won't necessitate revision.

  Incidentally the insertion of the phrase "or more" means a creationist could agree with the statement too.
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Yes all of that makes sense of course. If other roots and branches were discovered this would be incorporated into the theory and evolution as a story adapts. But that is rather my point.

  You started by saying evolution is a fact. I said it's more complicated than evolution being a fact. You said okay but even if the details of evolution change, common ancestry of all life is a fact. But when I point out this fact may also be subject to revision you agree but insist this doesn't alter the fact of evolution.

  Which is problematic because it produces assertions that are in tension with one another:

  1. The details of evolution may change but common ancestry of all life is a fact.

  2. We may discover that not all life has a common ancestor but this doesn't alter the fact of evolution.

  So what is an unalterable fact? Apparently neither evolution nor common ancestry of all life, because as soon as you focus on one the other becomes unstable.
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  You don't think it's possible that scientists are mistaken about the evidence proving that all life on Earth that we know about has a common ancestor?

  So first: evolution is a fact.

  Then: the central fact of evolution is that all life shares a common ancestor.

  Then: but it's possible we may find life on Earth that doesn't share that ancestor.

  Nevertheless: evolution is a fact,
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  So you rule out the discovery of extant life (such as at the bottom of the ocean) with a different origin?

  Current scientific thinking is that DNA and other evidence shows that all life on Earth that we know about shares a common ancestor. But might new information refute this firm assumption? Maybe not, but is it impossible? Is it even scientific to rule out the possibility?
• 
  34

  Oct 2017 WT again shunning instructions

  by Daniel1555 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Has anyone ever heard of someone being disfellowshipped for having a disfellowshipped person on their friend list?

  Because this WT specifies social media.
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  First you said evolution is a fact.

  When I said evolution was a complex combination of different facts woven into a compelling narrative, you said the central fact of evolution is that:

  Every living thing descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.

  Now you say:

  No it's not impossible that the very deepest roots of the tree of life have more than one starting point.

  Correct me if I'm wrong, but if life had multiple starting points then it wouldn't all share a common ancestor.

  So what happened to your one unalterable central fact of evolution? Not so unalterably factual after all.

  And Darwin said God possibly started the process of evolution in a few primitive creatures. It that's not divine intervention I don't know what is.
  
  
• 
  191

  Evolution is a Fact - Index of Parts 1 - 40

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  #1 protein functional redundancy comparing the sequences of amino acids in ubiquitous proteins confirms the relationship between all living things..

  #2 dna functional redundancy comparison of the dna that codes for the amino acids of ubiquitous proteins predicts the tree of life with an astonishing degree of accuracy..

  #3 ervs endogenous retroviruses that infected our ancestors are found in the same place of the genome of our closest primate cousins..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Every living thing descended from a common ancestor over millions of years.

  This seems like a simple, stable fact, but is it really?

  Addressing it firstly in purely scientific terms.

  First of all there are some obvious problems with the statement as it stands. When you say "every living thing" I assume you probably mean every living thing on Earth. You don't intend to rule out the possibility that life arose in different parts of the universe and don't share a common ancestor.

  But even if we confine ourselves to this planet it is still presuming a lot. As extensive as our knowledge of life on earth is, is it really out of the question that, deep in the ocean, or in some other inhospitable habitat, life has arisen separately from the rest of life on Earth? Some may say it's unlikely, but I don't think many scientists would rule it out.

  And there are philosophical problems with the statement too.

  In a sense even a creationist could agree with the statement, since they believe that God is the Father of all living creatures.

  The you might want to qualify "ancestor" through reproduction of one finite living thing from another.

  Of course Darwin himself famously left open the possibility that God gave life to a few original creatures, or just one, and that evolution took over from there. So Darwin himself wasn't necessarily dogmatic about this supposed central "fact" about evolution.

  Since Darwin's time scientists have scrutinised life on our planet an concluded that all life on Earth has a common ancestor and that evolution does not have multiple starting points. There are apparrently good reasons for drawing this conclusion. But is it out of the question that new discoveries will undermine this conclusion and that in fact life on Earth had multiple starting points. However unlikely you think it might be, it would be unwise to say it's impossible.

  Plus all of this assumes a purely materialist conception of reality to begin with. How can we know that what appears as physical beings with causal and reproductive relations to one another is not the result of a mind that is external the reality as we see it? Strange and weird idea? Well yes. And there are many things about reality that are strange and weird. Frankly if the material universe is all that there is, all reality can be explained by the process of natural laws, and humans are the most intelligent beings ever to arise. Then frankly that's pretty weird and mysterious. No less miraculous that the explanations offered by many religions