FACTPILE IS BACK!!!
CLICK HERE TO SEE FOR YOURSELF
Take a Tour of the Admin's Mancave

New "Ocean" Found Underground

Like the name implies, this is the place to talk about whatever’s on your noodle.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Captain Epic » Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:44 pm

It's whatever to me, I dismiss both extremes. But there is some truth to Ham's, "It's not the survival of the fittest but the survival of those that survive."

Again I don't support either side, I just feel dismissiveness leads to arrogance.
User avatar
Captain Epic
Honorary Avenger
 
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:14 pm

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby TheSorrow » Fri Jun 20, 2014 9:13 pm

Captain Epic wrote:It's whatever to me, I dismiss both extremes.

Captain Epic wrote:Again I don't support either side, I just feel dismissiveness leads to arrogance.

Okay...

Captain Epic wrote:But there is some truth to Ham's, "It's not the survival of the fittest but the survival of those that survive."

That's not exactly a well-formed observation. Especially since the evidence fits that creatures with genetic attributes that better suit their environment, more often than not live long enough to have those traits pass on to later generations.
"You can either fight at my side, or get crushed under my heel. But you will NOT stand in my way."

Image
User avatar
TheSorrow
Relentless Rebuke
 
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:51 pm
Location: Groznyj Grad

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Soulerous » Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:46 pm

Captain Epic wrote:But personally I believe science and religion aren't at odds they're just two sides of the same coin.

I would say they aren't necessarily at odds. It all depends on what the beliefs are. For example, young-earth Creationism pretty clearly contradicts known facts, yet the foundation of Christianity does not.

TheSorrow wrote:Ken Ham had a bad rap well before the Bill Nye debate, not to mention that basically at the start of it, he admitted that no amount of evidence would convince him that Bible could be wrong.

Although this is something that can easily or even intuitively be seen as closed-mindedness, it is actually an example of a disconnect; Ken Ham's answer was perfect, but without knowing why, it seems the exact opposite. Any other answer would have completely discredited the whole foundation of his belief, and this foundation is not "I think it's likely," or "I really want it to be true." Some people certainly do say those things, but acting like it's true based on that is dishonest and is not the ideal Christian.

Something Ken Ham said was "the Bible says if you come to God believing that he is, he will reveal himself to you." The basic principle is that Christians believe because they have received personal divine witness, This is the only good conceivable reason and is also why the proof cannot be bottled up and passed around. Ken says it at the beginning of that video: "I can't prove it to you, but..." Many of the Christians I've talked to give dismal explanations of this, and still others believe based off a likelihood instead, as stated above. Those that don't can be called liars or delusional, but claiming that only from opinion obviously doesn't get anyone anywhere. Beliefs are beliefs, and also as stated above, professing something as true without knowledge that it is so is dishonest.

That's why many extraordinarily intelligent people can be Christians. Though it can always be questioned, it's not some irrational non-reason, nor would it be valid if something could render it factually null. The question was comparable to asking what can convince you that you don't have legs.

Edit: Post #128 by Gluttonous-Behemoth seems like a good example of what I'm talking about.

TheSorrow wrote:
Captain Epic wrote:But there is some truth to Ham's, "It's not the survival of the fittest but the survival of those that survive."

That's not exactly a well-formed observation. Especially since the evidence fits that creatures with genetic attributes that better suit their environment, more often than not live long enough to have those traits pass on to later generations.

I don't know what he meant by it, but when I read that quote it says "what is true ultimately is not dictated by chance." That's why the 1% sometimes triumphs, and why we have the phrase "truth is often stranger than fiction."
User avatar
Soulerous
Labled Incurable
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:23 am

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Captain Epic » Fri Jun 20, 2014 10:59 pm

TheSorrow wrote:
Captain Epic wrote:It's whatever to me, I dismiss both extremes.

Captain Epic wrote:Again I don't support either side, I just feel dismissiveness leads to arrogance.

Okay...

Captain Epic wrote:But there is some truth to Ham's, "It's not the survival of the fittest but the survival of those that survive."

That's not exactly a well-formed observation. Especially since the evidence fits that creatures with genetic attributes that better suit their environment, more often than not live long enough to have those traits pass on to later generations.


lmao Poor wording on my part. But Soulerous nailed it. Throughout history there have been times where a strict Darwinian falls short thanks to chance.

But I can be a bit cocky. ;)
User avatar
Captain Epic
Honorary Avenger
 
Posts: 9919
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:14 pm

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby TheSorrow » Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:34 pm

Soulerous wrote:I don't know what he meant by it, but when I read that quote it says "what is true ultimately is not dictated by chance." That's why the 1% sometimes triumphs, and why we have the phrase "truth is often stranger than fiction."

Well evolution and natural selection aren't chance happenings, if that's what you mean. It's a repeated process of mutation in our genes, each time a generation is made.

Captain Epic wrote:Throughout history there have been times where a strict Darwinian falls short thanks to chance.

Such as? I'm afraid I'll need clarification on that point.
"You can either fight at my side, or get crushed under my heel. But you will NOT stand in my way."

Image
User avatar
TheSorrow
Relentless Rebuke
 
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:51 pm
Location: Groznyj Grad

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Soulerous » Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:01 am

TheSorrow wrote:Well evolution and natural selection aren't chance happenings, if that's what you mean. It's a repeated process of mutation in our genes, each time a generation is made.

Nah, I wasn't commenting on that. But as far as the principle's applicability to this goes, you said it yourself:


TheSorrow wrote:Especially since the evidence fits that creatures with genetic attributes that better suit their environment, more often than not live long enough to have those traits pass on to later generations.

Beyond that I have not pondered.
User avatar
Soulerous
Labled Incurable
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:23 am

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby TheSorrow » Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:15 am

Soulerous wrote:Nah, I wasn't commenting on that. But as far as the principle's applicability to this goes, you said it yourself:
TheSorrow wrote:Especially since the evidence fits that creatures with genetic attributes that better suit their environment, more often than not live long enough to have those traits pass on to later generations.

Beyond that I have not pondered.

Then I would have to ask you a question: Has there ever been a observable case where one species dominated over the other, even though the species being dominated is better suited to survive?
"You can either fight at my side, or get crushed under my heel. But you will NOT stand in my way."

Image
User avatar
TheSorrow
Relentless Rebuke
 
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:51 pm
Location: Groznyj Grad

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Deathtanker » Sat Jun 21, 2014 12:55 am

TheSorrow wrote:Then I would have to ask you a question: Has there ever been a observable case where one species dominated over the other, even though the species being dominated is better suited to survive?


Rather nebulous outline, but one could make the argument that the dinosaurs and our mammalian ancestors fit the bill. Who dominated who? Dinosaurs obviously. Who survived? Mammals.

'The fittest' has and always be not just about conquering a niche or even an environment unto itself. It's about survival. It just so happened that mammals were suited enough to survive in the global disaster that ended the dinosaurs. Were they better than dinosaurs? - of course not in a practical sense. But it just so happened that chance landed in our favor. And quite frankly chance should always be a consideration when determining the 'fittest.' Human adaptability has long proven that our ancestors survival back in the day in such a radically violent era has not been lost - it thrived.
Robert Frost wrote:The best way out is always through.

Image
User avatar
Deathtanker
Canewielder
 
Posts: 5591
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:48 pm
Location: Several.

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby TheSorrow » Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:29 am

Deathtanker wrote:Rather nebulous outline, but one could make the argument that the dinosaurs and our mammalian ancestors fit the bill. Who dominated who? Dinosaurs obviously. Who survived? Mammals.

'The fittest' has and always be not just about conquering a niche or even an environment unto itself. It's about survival. It just so happened that mammals were suited enough to survive in the global disaster that ended the dinosaurs. Were they better than dinosaurs? - of course not in a practical sense. But it just so happened that chance landed in our favor. And quite frankly chance should always be a consideration when determining the 'fittest.' Human adaptability has long proven that our ancestors survival back in the day in such a radically violent era has not been lost - it thrived.


But that's not what my intent was, even factoring in freak occurrences, survival of the fittest always wins out in the end. If nothing comes around to radically change the status quo, like an asteroid, those that have failed to adapt as well to their environment eventually die out. What I ask is when has there ever been a case where a species with fitter genetic traits just inexplicably die out, where as those with inferior genetics prosper?
"You can either fight at my side, or get crushed under my heel. But you will NOT stand in my way."

Image
User avatar
TheSorrow
Relentless Rebuke
 
Posts: 4114
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 11:51 pm
Location: Groznyj Grad

Re: New "Ocean" Found Underground

Postby Soulerous » Sat Jun 21, 2014 11:32 am

TheSorrow wrote:If nothing comes around to radically change the status quo, like an asteroid, those that have failed to adapt as well to their environment eventually die out. What I ask is when has there ever been a case where a species with fitter genetic traits just inexplicably die out, where as those with inferior genetics prosper?

I doubt such a case ever occurred inexplicably, in regards to an entire species. If they're going to die out there must be a reason for it. In some cases the reason has been us, the most adaptable species. Without something to radically change things, the answer is clear. With something, the usual answer can be changed.

The point of what happens not being dictated by chance obviously does not mean the most likely outcomes don't usually happen. We know they do. It means only that it's not a absolute rule, which is already apparent by there being split chances in the first place. We can take those chances and predict which species will die and which will live, but once the given time passes we may find there were some unaccounted for or "freak" occurrences rendering our predictions inaccurate after all. This, then, would be "the survival of those that survive."
User avatar
Soulerous
Labled Incurable
 
Posts: 1239
Joined: Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:23 am

PreviousNext

Return to ShoutBox

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests