Re: Why Evolution is a metaphysical hypothesis

On Dec 3, 11:55 am, Primary AL <aavery6...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 3, 10:23 am, chris thompson <chris.linthomp...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Dec 2, 5:34 pm, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 2, 9:52 am, chris thompson <chris.linthomp...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

snip

You're a liar. I never concealed or denied being a YEC and the topic
of same wasn't even introduced by me. You persist in your
misrepresentatoins which are pervasive in all these evo cult venues.

For the record the lies, distortions, personal attacks and crudity
this little pitiful band spews effects me not one iota. I expect such
from the evo cult.

I fully expect you will flee with your tail between your legs- again-
but just for the record, I said "I think" you denied being a YEC.
Since I was not sure, I did not express surety. Also as I said, you
aren't worth the effort to go looking for the exact time you did deny
it.

It was easy, though, to find where you concealed your ideology. These
are all direct quotes, cut and pasted from your posts in this thread:

"I have not expressed any religious belief so your red herring
attempts
of desparation are quite telling of your vacuous argumentation. "

'Typical of ignorant true believers in cults. I have never expressed
any religious beliefs or terminology herein. "

What were you saying about not concealing your YEC? Who's the liar?

This in no way indicates concealing anything. They were factual
statements because I had not made any religious belif
statements..simple as that.

That's hilarious. You were confronted about making certain statements
because you were ideologically motivated. You responded with
concealment and obfuscation. You deliberately attempted to let people
think you were _not_ religiously motivated (it didn't work; you were
quite transparent, as you are now) until it became too obvious to
conceal.

And now you're lying about it. Do more lies make the first ones all
right?

If anyone had asked me if I were a YEC, OEC whatever and I had
answered no..that would have been a lie.

So what?

I found those in fewer than 60 of over 300 posts in the thread. How
many more are there?

You are just pathetic. You got the crap beat out of you in this
thread, then you run away in your hissy fit, only to come back because
you think you can score some loser-points with your idiotic
persecution complex. You're a dishonest loser who cannot face facts in
the real world. Grow up, you silly prat.

Oh, get a grip on your unjustified egomania you simpleton. No one
beats me up and certainly not a lightweight little thug like you.

You are correct; compared to some in talk.origins, I am a lightweight.
Not to you though. And I'm sorry you equate telling the truth with
being a thug, but it's typical of creationists.

But since you claim you didn't get your head handed to you in this
thread, why don't you provide a link to the post where you answered
these questions:

What are the rules for assigning organisms to a particular baramin?
What rules do you use to make the dividing lines?
Are there any categories above or below baramin?
Is there a Tiger baramin and a Lion baramin, or do they fall into some
sort of Cat baramin?
If there's a Cat baramin, what makes it different from "Felidae"?
And if there's a Cat baramin, are Housecats and Jaguars and Pumas and
Lynxes all part that baramin?
If they don't all belong to the same baramin, what are the rules for
excluding them?
What about Hyeanas? Are they in a Dog baramin, a Cat baramin, or their
own?
How many Kangaroo baramins are there please, and do Kangaroo Rats and
Kangaroo Mice belong there?
Are South American Possums in the same baramin as Australian Possums?
How about Red Wolves, Gray Wolves, Tasmanian Wolves, Huskies, Akitas,
Cockapoos and Coyotes?
Speaking of Tasmanian Wolves, how does the baramin concept deal with
extinct species?

Once that's done, you can address Ernest Major's rebuttal of your
claim about the Organ of Corti in reptiles:

EP>>Of course one of the most complext organs in nature the Organ of
Corti
EP>>in mammals which is in no reptile extant has no homologue in
reptiles,
EP>>extant or fossilized.

EM>After a short perusal of the web ...

EM>fromhttp://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_08.htm

EM>"Eleventh, continuing about the soft part anatomy of the mammalian
inner
EM>ear, Gish (1995, p. 172) stated that, "The organ of Corti...has no
homologue in
EM>reptiles. There is no possible structure in the reptile from which
it could have
EM>been derived. It would have had to have been created de novo, since
it was
EM>entirely new and novel." That statement is incorrect. In fact, the
basilar papilla
EM> of the reptilian inner ear is homologous with the organ of Corti
(Romer, 1956,
EM>p. 33-38, 1970a; Sloan, 1983). The basilar papilla, or organ of
Corti, is
EM> contained in one portion of the inner ear known as the cochlear
canal
EM>(Romer, 1956, p.33-38, 1970a; Allin & Hopson, 1992). The cochlear
canal is
EM>encased in bone and endocasts can be made that deline ate its shape
EM>(Allin & Hopson, 1992). In cynodonts, the cochlear canal is a short
blunt
EM>feature (Allin & Hopson, 1992). In Morganucodon, it is elongate and
slightly
EM>curved (Allin & Hopson, 1992). In modern mammals it is long and
coiled
EM>(Allin & Hopson, 1992). Indeed, even the inner ear did not appear
fully
EM>formed but progressively evolved."

When you are done with those, you can provide a link to the post in
which you rebutted Ernest Major's list of peer-reviewed articles-
provided at *your* request, and from which you fled like Brave Sir
Robin- that describe speciation events:

* Brukaber et al, Production of fertile hybrid germplasm with diploid
Australian Gossypium species for cotton improvement, Euphytica 108:
199-213 (1999)
* Crawford & Mort,.Polyploidy: some things old to go with the new,
Taxon
52(3): 583-584 (2003)
* Rapp and Wendel, Epigenetics and plant evolution, New Phytologist
168
: 81-91 (2005)
* Abbott et al, Plant introductions, hybridization and gene flow,
Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 358: 1123-1132 (2003)
* Abbott et al, Recent Plant Speciation in Britain and Ireland:
Origins,
Estabishment and Evolution of Four New Hybrid Species, Proceedings of
the Royal Irish Academy 105B(3): 173-183 (2005)
* Lowe & Abbott, Routes of Origin of Two Recently Evolved Hybrid Taxa:
Senecio vulgaris var. hibernicus and York Radiate Groundsel
(Asteraceae), American Journal of Botany 87(8): 1159-1167 (2000)
* Abbott et al, Hybrid origin of the Oxford Ragwort, Senecio squalidus
L: morphological and allozyme differences between S. squalidus and S.
rupestris Waldst. and Kit., Watsonia 24: 17-29 (2002)
* Hegarty & His***, Hybrid speciation in plants: new insights from
molecular studies, New Phytologist 165: 411-423 (2005)
* Verne Grant, Frequency of Spontaneous Amphiploids in Gilia
(Polemoniaceae) hybrids, American Journal of Botany 89(8): 1197-1202
(2002)
* Verne Grant, Selection for Vigor and Fertility in the Progeny of a
Highly Sterile Species Hybrid in Gilia, Genetics 53: 757-773 (1966)
* Verne Grant, Linkage Between Viability and Fertility in a Species
Cross in Gilia, Genetics 54: 867-880 (1966)
* Verne Grant, The Origin of a New Species of Gilia in a Hybridisation
Experiment, Genetics 54: 1189-1199 (1966)
* Ungerer et al, Rapid hybrid speciation in wild sunflowers, PNAS 95:
11757-11762 (1998)
* Ayres & Strong, Origin and genetic diversity of Spartina anglica
(Poaceae) using nuclear DNA markers, American Journal of Botany
88(10):
1863-1867 (2001)
*Baumel et al, Retrotransposons and Genomic Stability in Populations
of
the Young Allopolyploid Species Spartina anglica C.E. Hubbard
(Poaceae),
Mol. Biol. Evol. 19(8): 1218-1227 (2002)
* Ainouche et al, Hybridization, polyploidy and speciation in Spartina
(Poaceae), New Phytologist 161: 165-172 (2003)
* Baumel et al, Retrotransposons and Genomic Stability in Populations
of
the Young Allopolyploid Species Spartina anglica C.E. Hubbard
(Poaceae),
Mol. Biol. Evol. 19(8): 1218-1227 (2002)
* Ainouche et al, Hybridization, polyploidy and speciation in Spartina
(Poaceae), New Phytologist 161: 165-172 (2003)
* Yannic et al, Uniformity of the nuclear and chloroplast genomes of
Spartina maritima (Poaceae), a salt-marsh species in decline along the
Western European Coast, Heredity 93: 182-188 (2004)
* Kovarik et al, Rapid Concerted Evolution of Nuclear Ribosomal DNA in
Two Tragopogon Allopolyploids of Recent and Recurrent Origin, Genetics
169: 931-944 (2005)
* Cook & Soltis, Mating system of diploid and allotetraploid
populations
of Tragopogon (Asteraceae). I. Natural Populations, Heredity 82:
237-244
(1999)
* Ozkan et al, Allopolyploidy-Induced Rapid Genome Evolution in the
Wheat ( Aegilops - Triticum ) Group, The Plant Cell 13: 1735-1747
(2001)
* Skalická et al, Rapid evolution of parental rDNA in a synthetic
tobacco allotetraploid line, American Journal of Botany 90(7): 988-996
(2003)
* Kulak et al, Karyotyping of Brassica amphidiploids using 5S and 25S
rDNA as chromosome markers, Hereditas 136: 144-150 (2002)
* Pontes et al, Chromosomal locus rearrangements are a rapid response
to
formation of the allotetraploid Arabidopsis suecica genome, PNAS
101(52): 18240-18245 (2004)
Abbott, R.J.; Ingram, R.; Noltie, H.J., Discovery of Senecio
cambrensis
Rosser in Edinburgh, Watsonia 14: 407-408 (1983)
* Weir & Ingram, Ray Morphology and Cytological Investigations of
Senecio cambrensis Rosser, New Phytologist 86: 237-241 (1980)
* Ingram & Noltie, Ray Floret Morphology and the Origin of Variability
in Senecio cambrensis Rosser, a Recently Established Allopolyploid
Species, New Phytologist 96: 601-607 (1984)
* Lowe & Abbott, Reproductive isolation of a new hybrid species,
Senecio
eboracensis Abbott & Lowe (Asteraceae), Heredity 92: 386-395 (2004)
* Greenleaf, Sterile and Fertile Amphiploids: The Possible Relation to
the Origin of Nicotiana tabacum, Genetics 26: 301-324 (1941)
* MacNair, MacNair & Martin, Adaptive speciation in Mimulus: an ...

read more >>

"Rules" for "assigning" "organisms"....form actual, true, real
"random" interplay with "raw" materials?
Does raw mean "no capacity to incite, or impinge upon itself;
suggestion of bias development for potential facilitation of organized
change within a finite mathematical probability?

No.


Answer this
succinctly, please, and don't stray or parse. This is a substantially
developed scientific question a tad outside of your educational
limitations.

If you can't understand the question and/or have no answer as a result
or, you can not articulate further without semantical parsing and
rhetorical roadblock (unresolvable problematics in the construction of
the dialectic then just say "I don't know."

-No 'random-ly" or "randomishness" please. Is it a pure chaotic
environment you speak of or is it an indiscernible state you
improperly use the word "chaos" and "random" to attempt to describe?
Answer please. No insults or rhetoric or lazy labeling please. I am an
Atheist. I am non divine and non god.

No spaghetti throwing please. No sentence conjugation or character
assassination or lazy religious labeling. The monster has been slain.
You must be proud.


.