Origins Thread (Uncensored)

[Tiger]

Spam, lies, ad hom, nonresponsive, strawman, more lies.. take your pick.

It's all the same to me - Spam

I contributed the only post with any substance. Post #524

And….it then defended into farce because you can’t debate, as you appear to have never read a book and know the square root of fuck all about anything.


This is how every exchange with you goes.

 

[Tiger]

#524?

And so when I asked you what did you agree with the "highly respected" scientist (who you know nothing about) about.. What was your reply?

In post #524 I say what I agree with him about.

Unfortunately because you are on the spectrum, you didn’t take that information in.

Oh yeah nothing

 

[Tiger]

You agree with him about what?

You know, you people are just so fucking slimey.. The "highly respected" scientist leaves my God of the Gaps open..

He says what he thinks at the end of video, did you even watch it?

Yes, he chooses multiverse. What’s that got to do with anything? He has no evidence for it, it’s just his choice of the two options.

I choose the other option.

Anyway, I’ve beat you up enough tonight. I’ve wasted enough time.

Tune in tomorrow for more.

 

[Tiger]

Apologies Jambo, I had promised to beat you up again today, however a fabulously busy family life got in the way.

Anyhoo, let’s not ponder too much on that, and I’ll leave you with a ‘Sunday night challenge’ to respond to, in a mature, educated way….namely….

Given the intricate complexity and irreducibility of the blood clotting cascade, how do you reconcile its evolution through gradual, step-by-step processes with the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record and the functional constraints imposed by its components?

I greatly look forward to your scientific, child-free, mature explanation.


In point of fact, let’s include a bunch of people who may be interested in the quality of your response.

@PlunkettsGhost
@Mad as Fish
@Declan
@Fishalt
@Wolf
@Coal Gas and peat
@tldr

 

[Tiger]

Wait, what?

We're talking about evolution now, what happened to fine-tuning?

I’ll ignore this deflection

Also, could you please provide the source for your quote (in italics above).

It’s not a quote, a quote would be in inverted commas. It’s in italics to differentiate it as a question.

In the meantime, I forward your "challenge" to all of the interested. Let's see that's 1,2,3,4,5,6..yes 7 of them. Surely if they would be interested in any answer I might give they could take a stab at it themselves.

Well, you are habitually referring to yourself as intelligent, so I’m not sure why you’d be “forwarding” the question anywhere. I’m sure they’d be fascinated to see your answer before they take a stab at it.

The floor is yours…

 

[Tiger]

Huh? We were talking about fine tuning and now you've changed the subject have you not?


R u saying that you wrote all of those words yourself, in that order?


What would you call someone with an immeasurable 200+ IQ?


You claimed that they would be people "interested" in any answer that I might give, why?

Back to fine tuning for a second..

Isn't this guy a big schwing in the creationist community, Craig Longley or something (I forget his name now), look at what he has to say about it and it being a God of the gaps -


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3HWB93gh_kc&t=4m34s

In the immortal words of Dr. Jim Taylor, it's over Wendy, it's over!


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KvGdllx9pJU&t=45m44s

That’s a very long winded, incoherent and vacuous way of saying that you can’t answer the question.

No surprise there.

We’ll add it to the list so. That was a surprisingly easy win.

I asked you about the irreducibly complex blood clotting system to (yet again) expose how little you know about this subject matter. Anyone even vaguely informed about this topic would be very familiar with the concept of irreducibly complex systems and the most common examples.

You however, just got flustered, clearly had never heard of it and started deflecting (badly).

So far, I’ve introduced you to pretty much every discussion topic that has been discussed. I can guarantee that in a weeks time you will pretend that you were very aware of the question about irreducible complexity in nature and that you were only pretending to not understand it.

However your reply above will be there as exhibit A that you hadn’t a clue. A mature person would have simply said something along the lines of “I’m not familiar with this area, but I’ll look into it and get back to you”. However maturity isn’t one of your strong points. So instead, you shat the bed.

 

[Tiger]

You Dunning-Kruger folks sure do live in a world of your own

Ladies and gentlemen….behold ‘Dunning-Kruger’ in action…

James ‘Walter Mitty’ Dawson claims he has a 200+ IQ (rofl ). See here:

The same guy who came up with this absolute gem…

 

[Tiger]

So James, let’s test that remarkable IQ of yours….

What evolutionary factors drive organisms to undergo senescence and aging, even though natural selection typically favours traits that promote reproductive success? How do theories like antagonistic pleiotropy and the disposable soma hypothesis contribute to our comprehension of the evolutionary roots of aging?

 

[Tiger]

Instead of asking me copy/paste questions you should try to get the basics straight

That’s not copied from anything. Did it take you all day to come up with that as a deflection?

Answer the question.

 

[Tiger]

LOFL!

Post in thread 'Origins Thread' (censored) https://www.sarsfieldsvirtualpub.com/threads/origins-thread.639/post-81262

He is now deleting the awkward challenging questions I was posing to him, as they were highlighting how out of his depth he is.

Wendy, your question is right there ^ above.

I didn't delete it (I did delete your most recent spam post).

And, FYI, any more of your 50/50 shit will be autodeleted as well.

That’s not the post I’m referring to numb nuts.

You deleted the post where I simplified the language as it made you appear stupid.

You’re a coward with an inferiority complex.

 

[Tiger]

Why do living things get old and weak even though it’s better for them to stay strong and have babies? How do some ideas like antagonistic pleiotropy and disposable soma help us understand why aging happens in the first place?

 

[Tiger]

Delete delete delete

You’re pathetic.

 

[Tiger]

Let’s test this inferiority complex theory…

James can you tell us what were the migration routes, population dynamics, and genetic interactions involved in the dispersal of early humans out of Africa and their subsequent colonisation of different continents?

 

[Tiger]

What, yours?


Wendy, there's a whole section on you not understanding the very basics of evolution in the catalogue. Why r u asking me pointless questions?

You’re a kidult and you know I’ve got your number now.

You never heard of fine tuning until I mentioned it. You don’t have a clue about the constants of the universe. Have a read of this….

https://web.archive.org/web/2017061.../~wimu/Varying-Constants-Papers/Uzan-2003.pdf

I can tell you before you even bother to open the link that you won’t be able to understand it.

The authors say that changes in one fundamental constant will indeed lead to a ripple effect that influences other aspects of physics. This is because the fundamental constants are interconnected through mathematical formulations of physical laws. For example, in certain theories on cosmology, changes in the fine- structure constant (related to strength of the electromagnetic force) will have implications for the formation of galaxies and the behaviour of light in the universe.

Similarly, variations in the gravitational constant would impact the dynamics of celestial bodies and the overall structure of space-time.

Instead of wasting people’s time on this thread, why don’t you go read a book on the subject.

I recommend ‘The Constants of Nature: From Alpha to Omega” by John D. Barrow and Carlos J. A. P. Martins.

 

[Tiger]

I mean, what sort of a question is this??

And you're going to live forever anyway, right?

I'm curious, you're teetotal so you might live to, say, 87.

What happens when you get to heaven, do you stay 87, forever? That sounds sucky.

See…..you didn’t understand the question and why scientists would be interested in this question. You’re out of your depth.

For one, examining the factors that influence senescence and aging, we gain insights into how organisms allocate resources between growth, reproduction and survival over their lifetimes.

It’s a bit too deep for you.

 

[Tiger]

I was talking about evolution, Wendy, but how and ever, your misunderstanding of fine-tuning is also in the catalogue

From 1 hour ago…

 

[Tiger]

Ah, so you want me to tear apart your kidult catalogue. You should have said earlier.

Abiogenesis

So, abiogenesis…let’s see….

Ok James, a simple question to start with - what specific sequence of chemical reactions and environmental conditions led to the formation of the first self-replicating and metabolically active protocell on early Earth, and how can we empirically demonstrate this process given the limitations of studying events that occurred billions of years ago?

Also…

What are the fundamental principles governing the emergence of biological complexity from simple chemical systems, and how can we elucidate these principles experimentally given the immense complexity and interconnectedness of living organisms?


Please avoid responding with an Oasis music video or a deflection masquerading as a question.

 

[Tiger]

Again with the f*cking irrelevant questions.

Read the catalogue, be responsive to what's said.

I mean, you're worse than the Soapbox Dunce himself (@Mods vs Roc_ers)

Ladies and gentlemen ^^^ Look at this absolute chancer. He went with yet ANOTHER deflection.

Yes James, all questions that you are unable to answer are irrelevant…..despite them being in point of fact, ENTIRELY relevant in a discussion on Origins.

However that’s not really what this thread is about, as I pointed out yesterday. The @mods should rename it as James clearly has no interest or ability to discuss the subject matter of the thread title.

It should be called the ‘James being intellectually spanked by Tiger’ thread. As that is all it is.

Anyhoo, enough time has been wasted going around in circles teaching James more of what he does not know.

 

[valamhic]

I read Dawkins's book "The God Delusion" cover to cover about 8 years ago. Then the missus found it in the bedside locker and I had to dump it out.

 

[valamhic]

Mankind ev

How we got here

Yesterday I posted a video of evolutionary biologist, Richard Dawkins, interviewing flat Earth creationist, Wendy Wright -


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Vno1lAydv-8&t=33

Description
Interview with Richard Dawkins In 2009, Richard Dawkins interviewed Wendy Wright at her office at the Concerned Women for America for his documentary, The Genius of Charles Darwin. This is one of the most frustrating interviews Dawkins gave with evolution deniers - if not the most frustrating interview to watch in the history of the origins debate. Wright, while adopting a patronizing tone, argues that evolution is wrong with tired creationist canards, misconceptions, and inaccuracies (e.g., suggesting that Haeckel's drawings are still in textbooks today, that there are no transitional forms, that evidence for evolution is nothing but hoaxes), but even after Dawkins corrects her misconceptions repeatedly, she continues to repeat the same claims and denies that there is any evidence that evolution is the means by which new species of lifeforms develop. Even when asked to look at examples of transitional forms in the form of casts of fossils in any respectable museum, she repeatedly states that she has been to the museums' and asserts that she has 'never seen the physical evidence'. Wright accuses Dawkins of personal attacks while employing ad hominem attacks against him, accusing him of being controlled by evil and deception. She proposes that Christian morality results in a better environment (as opposed to a Darwinian society) and therefore a literal interpretation of the Bible must be true while modern scientific explanations must be false. Dawkins responds (on several accounts) that he would not want to live in a Darwinian society because of ruthlessness of such a system, largely to no effect. Wright talks to Dawkins as if she has answers that he doesn't, most strikingly on the subject in which Dawkins is an established expert. She argues that it shouldn't only be scientists doing science, but that even the uneducated should be empowered to debate scientific facts and flatly deny evidence. Wright claims that 'evolutionists' are 'oppressive' because 'they won't let other ideas through', presumably ideas that are not backed up by evidence. Wright's responses rely upon logical fallacies and subjectively induced neoromantic pathos claims to 'prove' that 'we should love each human being therefore the Bible is true'. The debate actually got so absurd that, in an attempt to make even the slightest dent in Wright's titanium-plated cranium, Richard Dawkins, the great crusader for reason and against religion and superstition, began trying to explain that Evolution itself is not per se incompatible with (Christian) faith!
--

More to follow...

Man kind Evolved from earlier homos. No doubt about that. There could still be a God. I suspect Christianity
was a response to the cruelty of ancient Rome. The one society I loathe is ancient Rome. I visit Rome with interest and agree with its preservation for posterity, but I hate the whole concept. Christianity took roots in Rome, not the middle east. A few years after the death of Christ, Peter went to Rome, why? Why did he go to the centre of world power? I would have went the other way.