rossum said: Information is copied from the environment into DNA by random mutation and natural selection.

ferengi

Well-known member
It's intellectually dishonest to ask for a proof, receive a syllogism as a reply, and to then claim that no proof has been offered without identifying where the syllogism is wrong, irrelevant, or whatever
Its even more dishonest to shift the burden of proof since syllogisms are not scientific proof
- without supporting the claim that no proof has been offered.
No need to- the claimant has the burden to prove they provided proof.
 

rossum

Well-known member
They never evolved teeth.
They did. There is a saying "As rare as hens teeth". Sometimes, rarely, the genes for teeth in a hen are activated. Just as sometimes humans are born with a short tail -- we still have the genes for a tail, just as our early primate ancestors did.

Evolution can explain this. Creationism cannot.
 

ferengi

Well-known member
They did. There is a saying "As rare as hens teeth". Sometimes, rarely, the genes for teeth in a hen are activated. Just as sometimes humans are born with a short tail -- we still have the genes for a tail, just as our early primate ancestors did.
Evolution can explain this. Creationism cannot.

rossum said: Information is copied from the environment into DNA by random mutation and natural selection​


PROVE YOUR CLAIMS
 

rossum

Well-known member

rossum said: Information is copied from the environment into DNA by random mutation and natural selection​


PROVE YOUR CLAIMS
I already have proved my claim with my syllogism upthread. You have not refuted my syllogism so, as things stand, I have proved my claim.

If you think that there is an error in my syllogism, then show us where my error is.

Prove your claims, ferengi.

You needn't worry yourself too much. I am not holding my breath waiting for a substantive answer from you.
 

ferengi

Well-known member
I already have proved my claim with my syllogism upthread.
LOL- NOT - You dont prove scientific claims with logic and syllogisms are not proofs.

So again-

rossum said: Information is copied from the environment into DNA by random mutation and natural selection​


PROVE YOUR CLAIMS
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
. . . syllogisms are not scientific proof
A scientific conclusion and the evidence that leads to that conclusion can be presented in a syllogism:

1. Light travels at about 183,000 miles per second.
2. The earth is 93,000,000 miles from the sun.
3. Therefore, light takes about 8 minutes to travel from the sun to the earth.

3 is a scientific conclusion proved by 1 and 2, the entirety of which is expressed as a syllogism.
 

Gus Bovona

Well-known member
False - the premises are listed - not evidence.
A premise can be evidence.

i.e., "Socrates is a man"
ETA: I retract the Socrates example.

Rather, if evidence can't be a premise, the the notion of scientific proof is incoherent. To wit:

Is scientific proof merely logic or merely evidence?
If evidence, then premises in a scientific proof can be evidence.
If logic, then scientific proof is impossible, because science is evidence-based.
 

docphin5

Well-known member
Creationism is founded on the denial of reality. What a great creationist ferengi is! No one can deny reality so doggedly!
How can creationism deny reality when reality is creation?

Creation
the action or process of bringing something into existence.
eg, "job creation"

If creationism is defined as anything other than producing reality then it is inherently flawed. I know of no other creation than ours.

Creationism
the belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the [literal interpretation of the] biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution.

There, much better! For natural processes are the means of producing creation and the divine Mind orders nature (in this case matter) and reason to accomplish his plan to produce pious, virtuous souls.
 
Last edited:

CrowCross

Super Member
They did. There is a saying "As rare as hens teeth". Sometimes, rarely, the genes for teeth in a hen are activated. Just as sometimes humans are born with a short tail -- we still have the genes for a tail, just as our early primate ancestors did.

Evolution can explain this. Creationism cannot.
Oh boy, what next?
 
Top