The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Two: The Empiricists Strike Back!

[El_Machinae]

then why did it suddenly explode across all types all at once?

It didn't explode across all types. It exploded INTO many types.

 

[The Last Conformist]

It didn't explode across all types. It exploded INTO many types.

It explosed across some types. For instance, molluscs and arthropods were both around before the explosion, yet both exploded.

 

[El_Machinae]

The mollusks gained the HOX gene, even though their separation came before the HOX gene evolved?

Or am I misunderstanding?

 

[The Last Conformist]

The mollusks gained the HOX gene, even though their separation came before the HOX gene evolved?

Or am I misunderstanding?

You're misunderstanding.

Hox genes (note plural) in molluscs and arthopods (and you, for that matter) are homologous, ie. inherited from their common ancestor. That common ancestor, however, lived long before the Cambrian explosion (and the common ancestor of you and the mollusc-arthropod lineage yet further back). The duplication of Hox genes back in the Precambrian may have helped cause the explosion, but if so it was via a very long fuse indeed.

Personally, I think it's nearer the mark if one says Hox gene duplication made the explosion possible rather than caused it.

 

[diablodelmar]

Evolution is a load of bull. The complexity of such things as, for example, bird feathers, do not allow a "half developed version" to actually physically support a bird in flight.

Also, evoluntionists claim that dinosaurs evovled into birds. Well, the lung system of reptiles (which dinos are) makes the air go in and come out of two different systems, where as the lungs of birds simply make the air come in one side and leave the other. There is no such possibility of having a "half evolved lung" between a reptile or a bird. It is either one or the other.

Also, all "evolving" that has happened so far that there is credible proof for has also been successfully proven to be a loss of information instead of a gain.

 

[El_Machinae]

Hox genes (note plural) in molluscs and arthopods (and you, for that matter) are homologous

I considered reporting you for flaming, but then I realised that no one would think it was funny ...

So, this 'exposion' then, everything that resulted from the explosion originated from creatures that already had the HOX genes?

diablodelmar - you're kidding, right?

 

[The Last Conformist]

Evolution is a load of bull. The complexity of such things as, for example, bird feathers, do not allow a "half developed version" to actually physically support a bird in flight.

Carlos will hang you on this one, so I'll just point out you're making a logical error in assuming feathers necessarily originally evolved as flight surfaces.

Also, evoluntionists claim that dinosaurs evovled into birds. Well, the lung system of reptiles (which dinos are) makes the air go in and come out of two different systems, where as the lungs of birds simply make the air come in one side and leave the other. There is no such possibility of having a "half evolved lung" between a reptile or a bird. It is either one or the other.

You know what kind of lungs non-avian dinosaurs had because ... ?

Also, all "evolving" that has happened so far that there is credible proof for has also been successfully proven to be a loss of information instead of a gain.

Since you're not going to give me a meaningful measure of "information" in context, this claim is empty.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I considered reporting you for flaming, but then I realised that no one would think it was funny ...

So, this 'exposion' then, everything that resulted from the explosion originated from creatures that already had the HOX genes?

Unless some of the weirder Cambrian critters turn out to be outside crown Metazoa*, yes.


* = All extant animals, their last common ancestor, and all it's descendants.

 

[ironduck]

Evolution is a load of bull.

Are you a creationist? Because if you are, I'd still really like to know if there was rain and rainbows before the flood.

Apparently the answer is so obvious that we have waited over a month for anyone to tell us.

 

[El_Machinae]

"It didn't explode across all types. It exploded INTO many types."

Okay, then I think I wasn't 'wrong', I understood what you've just explained when I made my statement. I may have not communicated correctly, but at least my intuition was correct.

Thanks!

 

[El_Machinae]

I'd still really like to know if there was rain and rainbows before the flood.

Cripes. There was no rain, and there were no rainbows. Sheesh. Only infrared filtered down from the firmanent, and thus didn't refract when passing through water. After the firmament was gone, modern sunlight made it through to us, creating rainbows.

Before the flood, everyone saw in the infrared.

Happy?

 

[warpus]

Evolution is a load of bull.

Modern Biology is based on evolution. If evolution was a load of bull then we'd have to re-think our approach to all of modern Biology and start from scratch.

The complexity of such things as, for example, bird feathers, do not allow a "half developed version" to actually physically support a bird in flight.

Proto-feathers evolved on proto-birds before they could actually fly. There are plenty of fossils showing that dinosaurs (who many agree most birds evolved from) with feathers existed. They most likely evolved to provide warmth.

Also, all "evolving" that has happened so far that there is credible proof for has also been successfully proven to be a loss of information instead of a gain.

Sources? (non creationist ones please)

If you don't believe in evolution how do you explain the domestication of the dog, cat, corn, wheat, cow, etc?

We've created numerous new species by non-natural selection. It is an observed fact. I'd love to see how you explain the new species we've created if you claim that evolution isn't happening and hasn't been happening for millions of years. Did they pop out of thin air?

 

[warpus]

Cripes. There was no rain, and there were no rainbows. Sheesh. Only infrared filtered down from the firmanent, and thus didn't refract when passing through water. After the firmament was gone, modern sunlight made it through to us, creating rainbows.

Before the flood, everyone saw in the infrared.

Happy?

Kinda like Predator?

 

[ironduck]

Cripes. There was no rain, and there were no rainbows. Sheesh. Only infrared filtered down from the firmanent, and thus didn't refract when passing through water. After the firmament was gone, modern sunlight made it through to us, creating rainbows.

Before the flood, everyone saw in the infrared.

Happy?

NO!

Infrared rainbows are still rainbows!



(from http://www.firstscience.com/site/articles/rainbowsontitan.asp)

 

[El_Machinae]

FYI - God didn't invent Predator

Ironduck - it was beyond the resolving power of the human eye to see an infrared rainbow.

 

[ironduck]

Ironduck - it was beyond the resolving power of the human eye to see an infrared rainbow.

If that is true then the human eye was basically useless because the rainbow is very clear. I don't think god would put eyes in our heads and make us nearly blind!

NO! I want to know if there was water and rainbows! No mockery from unbelievers!

 

[The Last Conformist]

Invisible rainbows are still rainbows, rendering Yahweh's implied claim they didn't exist in antedeluvian times a falsehood.

 

[El_Machinae]

God's Intelligent Design (just like His concept of Mercy) has evolved over time. Except that it's always been perfect. It's a paradox.

PS: the rainbow's were there, just like Calculus has always 'been there'. The only thing special is that God made Noah aware of them at that time (which explains why a lot of animals are colourblind)

 

[Perfection]

Are you a creationist?

I'm pretty sure he's just a troller

 

[Sidhe]

If that is true then the human eye was basically useless because the rainbow is very clear. I don't think god would put eyes in our heads and make us nearly blind!!

I'm afraid I'm only agnostic so meh anyway, that is precisely what organised religion does, puts eyes in our head and makes us nearly blind. They cannot see either, get used to it, they cannot answer your questions, because they are to busy fussing over the semantics.