One cannot provide the proof requested without data that explains it. Using the work of others (cut and paste) is an absolute requirement to do so regardless of complaint or disbelief. You cannot have it both ways.
A full cut & paste from wiki is 'data that explains it?' No, that is bluff. If you cannot verbalize ONE point of evidence, but have to obfuscate with pages and pages of pseudo science, it is a substitute for reason and evidence. What evidence was presented in the big wiki cut & paste? No more than the big talk.origins cut & paste. I don't mind if a concept is complex, and needs lengthy explanations.. i am guilty of that, myself. But when page after page of pointless, irrelevant, obtuse verbiage is given under a pretext of 'scientific data!', it becomes clear that evidentiary, rational debate is not the goal. It is like the old saying, 'if you don't have the facts, dazzle them with bullshit.' Perhaps some ARE dazzled by these lengthy cut & pastes. I've seen it all before, and am not fooled by it. Don't you realize how meaningless pages and pages of obfuscating cut & paste are? I'll debate anyone here, who wants a rational, scientific discussion about universal common descent. But i have no desire to sift through volumes of drivel from web pages, designed to obscure truth, not enlighten it. Why would you defend this when it is a clear violation of forum rules?
Of course that's Untrue The page is actually much longer. Further, on my TalkOrigins Excerpt I Edited out 80% or the page and did so with intermittent cuts. I also used bolding and other highlight techniques for the even more important parts. Showing I knew/Understood the content. Nor did you answer my Intro about Vestigiality being awfully messy for an "immaculate" creation event. Regardless of whether you think vestigal organs are 'evidence' of common descent, (and they ARE) they're also evidence of UNintelligent/messy/needless/NON "Design." You did NOT address the problem in your own words. You used quote-MINES-from-nowhere, which we all know are from Kwazy Kweationist sites your are Emabarrassed to source. So What about you? Are you going to source/LINK your Quote Mines and PLAGIARISM? For instance, above Scadding there's some text appearing on a few dozen WACK-JOB creationist websites. https://www.google.com/search?ei=gIm3W6D_OOOFggeJw6HACA&q="The+'vestigial+organ'+argument+uses+as+a+premise+the+assertion"&oq="The+'vestigial+organ'+argument+uses+as+a+premise+the+assertion"&gs_l=psy-ab.3...2203.2203..2433...0.0..0.70.70.1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71.MlYY2MLkXwo And your immediately above post had no topical content, just attempted brush back. You are just full of Fallacious posts that show no undertsanding of Fallacies! (which is actually your favorite topic, obsession, and laughably misused term) `
This thread is a scam. There is not a shred of evidence against universal common descent. None. But the OP thinks he can make the counter claim and expects everyone else to prove it wrong by "posting evidence". Of course, nobody could ever post the evidence here, as it is ALL the evidence available and fills entire libraries. This thread and the OP should be summarily ignored, just as they both would be laughed out of the room in any scientific company. And the tactic used is an ages old snake oil salesmen trick.
How about one piece of compelling evidence that points to universal common descent? I'm not asking for everything, just one. If it 'fills libraries!' it should be easy to do. Don't blame me that you don't know why you believe in UCD, or can't find the evidence you believe is there. You've made the claim. Support it. Bluster, indignation, and eye rolling are not scientific arguments. Or, ignore it. Pretend you know that UCD is 'settled science!', instead of the unevidenced belief that it is. All you have is dismissal, straw men, ad hom, poison the well, and other fallacies. You have no evidence for your beliefs.
No, go waste someone else's time. I have watched you dismiss such evidence as it is presented to you, and then also rudely dismiss the efforts of those nice enough to spoonfeed you information that can be found in 7th grade textbooks. I would sooner try to teach calculus to a German Shepherd.
I knew the hecklers and religious zealots would come, defending their cherished beliefs with the passion of jihadists. I will not point this out, constantly. If anyone wants an evidentiary based discussion on the science behind universal common descent, I'm all ears. But bickering with religious zealots and bigots is of no interest to me.
How "prescient" of you, considering you are challenging a scientific theory accepted as fact without a shred of evidence or any valid logic in your toolbox. What's next? Gonna start a thread saying gravity is fake, then do your little victim tour when you are ridiculed? Miss Cleo you are not.
I would engage you but you have made it clear that you will no be bothered to read any data provided.
Correct, he will not. And you cant argue with a person about events and scientific theories in a deterministic universe, when that person is allowed to have the principle of "magic!!!" at his disposal.
I'm sure the mods will be along at any moment to smack my hand. But I would argue that mockery and ridicule is precisely what this thread deserves, and especially so because it has been placed in the science section. For one, the OP implies (and even outright states) a vast conspiracy of the global scientific community to lie to everyone. Second, the OP brings not a shred of evidence or any valid logic to the table, cementing the idea that this thread is a snake oil salesman pitch and not actually meant for civil debate. And, on top of that, the OP implies that not only has he outsmarted the entire global scientific community (despite having no education or experience in any of their fields), he implies that they are all laboring under the ignorance of their own, life's work. If someone were to post in the sports section that they weigh 90 pounds and have never boxed, yet could knockout Mike Tyson in the first round... should or would we be expected to counter this claim by posting carefully evidenced and worded treatises on boxing mechanics, boxing training, Mike Tyson's defensive and offensive prowess, and videos of 90 pound weaklings trying to punch their way out of wet paper bags? No, we should and would not be expected to do this. That thread would immediately be met with the mockery it deserves, and nobody would bat an eyelash. It would be an utter laughingstock. Yet, we allow these charlatans to behave in this same manner under the guise of "polite scientific discussion", when clearly they are not interested in such a thing. I'm not playing this game. To hell with this scam of a thread.
My, my.. such righteous indignation for a thread about science. Are you sure you're in the right place? Let's see.. i got a post about neanderthal, and one about vestigiality. I provided a sound rebuttal, refuting any compelling view of them as evidence of universal common descent. Then the religious zealots come, attacking me for daring to question their sacred beliefs. This is a 'scientific debate!' to you? Believe whatever you want. I don't care. But this is a scientific topic in a scientific subforum, and should have scientific arguments. I can only point out the fallacies. I cannot make anyone produce science or reason.
I and scientists don't get to believe "whatever we want", concerning scientific ideas. Having made the choice long ago to be evidence-based thinkers, we must believe what the evidence compels us to believe. "Believing what you want" about scientific proposals is for religious nutters and liars.
No you did NOT provide sound rebuttal of vestigiality. Your Unlinked, Partially Plagiarized Quote Mining was outed/shot down by me, and was shown to be not only quote mining (in that Scadding did acknowledge it), but corrected by others to the degree he didn't. IOW, your attempt from some Embarrassing creationist site failed. And that technique and hidden sourcing is the ultimate backing for all your bogus claims. Read quote mines (ostensible fallacies) first, then take a position which is later "Backed" by those "quotes". Talk about circular reasoning. You did not answer my further point on it. AS I noted (at least Twice now), even if you don't want to acknowledge Vestigiality as Evidence of Evo, it is Evidence that there was no "immaculate creation" (or ID) event, which would not leave remnants. There would be clearly delineated 'Species'. Of course, as we all know, despite all the Sci Talk, you don't believe in Species (either), but the Creationist term "Kinds". (aka, "that looks close to me") And Vestigiality is not "Circular Reasoning". (another of your false fallacies) It was noted and confirmed Well Before Darwin/Before Common Descent. (see my excerpt on the last page). Only Later did it come to make sense/great sense Because of Common Descent. `
You keep claiming to want science based debate while ignoring or dismissing scientific and verified data in ways that are anything but scientific or even rational. It is simply not possible to engage in scientific discussion with someone that refuses or is incapable of thinking logically and rationally. What this equates to is trying to explain something in English to someone who speaks only Japanese. Unless or until you can understand the concept and accomplishments of the science you claim to want discussed. The dismissal of vestigial organ existence and the implications is but one of the many examples, even just with Occam's razor principle as any explanation other than Evolved function requires extensive creativity. Just the leg bones deep within Whale tissue should convince you but will not. I request you offer us your alternate explanation for this:
I told you what to investigate. It's not a secret. They're not assertions but facts. Look it up yourself if you wish to know more. You just keep repeating yourself.
Like i said.. i knew this thread would be a magnet for hecklers, religious zealots, and unscientific minded True Believers. But i tire of reading the lies, disruptions, and hostile hate streams from the dishonest, disruptive 'debaters'. So i am forced to ignore them, and will not read their hysterical venom. It is too bad, that there cannot be a civil, rational discussion on this subject, but that only exemplifies the religious nature of the subject. I know of no other scientific theory where questioning the science behind it elicits such passion, hostility , and rage. I have put some of these same posters on ignore before, for the same reason. It is too bad the members and moderators of this forum do not want reasoned, scientific debate in some places, but let the hysterical polemy of political division leach into scientific discussions. It is the brave new world i find myself in, and there is little i can do about it, except adapt.. evolve to survive in this new environment. So if i don't reply to your post, it is likely because I didn't see it, because you are on ignore. If you just have snarky or ad hom filled rants, i might point it out, but i will eventually ignore you. If this thread degenerates into another 'Atheists vs Christians!' flame war, i will probably just fade away, again.
You haven't responded to the post about a snake born with legs. Here is another video of a cobra with legs.
