Total Posts:232|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Take the Evolutionism Challenge

medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

How about providing just one piece of evidence for a theory contrary to evolution.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 9:31:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.


And how exactly does this demonstrate that all species descended from a common ancestor?
This space for rent.
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 9:55:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The idea that all life descended from a single cell or small number of cells is an unconfirmed hypothesis. There is no evidence for it, it is a mere extension of logic. What is proven is that we can trace all life on this planet today to their ancestors about two billion years ago, as that is when our records and findings begin. Up to this point, we have literally traced nearly the entire known genome to this era, with the exceptions of those that evolved afterward. We can confidently say that all life on this planet descended from that life, which was less diverse, and evolved into the diversity that we have today.

Now, the only reason people reject this discovery and the extension built upon it is because of religious sentiment. When religious sentiment is removed from the equation, then there is no evidence to say that our logic is faulty.

Second, look up the Miller-Urey experiment. While it does not prove common decent before the aforementioned era, it clearly illustrates its probability.

Forgive me for countering a challenge with a challenge, but this is just a drop in thesea of evidence, of completely separate puzzle pieces that fit so perfectly. Please present scientific evidence to the contrary, that I cannot falsify.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 9:57:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:31:01 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.


And how exactly does this demonstrate that all species descended from a common ancestor?

He asked for evidence that supports Evolution, I gave Lenski's findings which as I already stated (....) His experiment demonstrates the kind of mutations and changes that we would expect to see in order to establish variation which leads to speciation.

There isn't one piece of evidence that demonstrates common descent, rather common descent is deduced from all the evidence, that we do in fact have common ancestry with all life.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 9:58:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

Yes I'm familiar with Lenski's work...Go ahead.

How about providing just one piece of evidence for a theory contrary to evolution.

That has nothing to do with the challenge I presented.
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 10:01:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:58:21 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

Yes I'm familiar with Lenski's work...Go ahead.

I just cited one of it's discoveries, namely how the ability to metabolize nitrates was introduced to E. coli bacteria, which was gained via random mutation. You asked for evidence, one valid piece of evidence and here is valid evidence.


How about providing just one piece of evidence for a theory contrary to evolution.

That has nothing to do with the challenge I presented.

You're not willing to answer the same kinds of questions that you present to others? What a surprise!
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 10:22:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

What makes this even more convincing is that the ability to use citrate aerobically is a defining characteristic that differentiates E. Coli and Salmonella. By the way the acteria were also asexual meaning that the only way they could change is if new information was being produced and the only way that could propagate would have been through common descent.

How about providing just one piece of evidence for a theory contrary to evolution.
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 10:41:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 10:01:14 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:58:21 AM, medic0506 wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

Yes I'm familiar with Lenski's work...Go ahead.

I just cited one of it's discoveries, namely how the ability to metabolize nitrates was introduced to E. coli bacteria, which was gained via random mutation. You asked for evidence, one valid piece of evidence and here is valid evidence.

So I should extrapolate from Lenski's experiment that all life forms evolved from a single source, based on the observation that a bacteria that could already metabolize other sources of energy, was able to metabolize a new food source??

How about providing just one piece of evidence for a theory contrary to evolution.

That has nothing to do with the challenge I presented.

You're not willing to answer the same kinds of questions that you present to others? What a surprise!

A little looking around will show you that I'm not afraid to answer questions, but this thread was started to try and make evo-heads focus on supporting their own theory, that they typically tout as scientific fact, rather than using mine as a red herring.
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 10:52:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:55:38 AM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
The idea that all life descended from a single cell or small number of cells is an unconfirmed hypothesis. There is no evidence for it, it is a mere extension of logic. What is proven is that we can trace all life on this planet today to their ancestors about two billion years ago, as that is when our records and findings begin. Up to this point, we have literally traced nearly the entire known genome to this era, with the exceptions of those that evolved afterward. We can confidently say that all life on this planet descended from that life, which was less diverse, and evolved into the diversity that we have today.

Now, the only reason people reject this discovery and the extension built upon it is because of religious sentiment. When religious sentiment is removed from the equation, then there is no evidence to say that our logic is faulty.

Second, look up the Miller-Urey experiment. While it does not prove common decent before the aforementioned era, it clearly illustrates its probability.

Forgive me for countering a challenge with a challenge, but this is just a drop in thesea of evidence, of completely separate puzzle pieces that fit so perfectly. Please present scientific evidence to the contrary, that I cannot falsify.

With all due respect, I'm challenging the "science" that you use to support your logic. If what you say is actually true, then this is a perfect example to let the evidence shine and speak for itself. Meeting the challenge with a counter-challenge doesn't sound like you're terribly confident in your case.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 11:07:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

It is a theory and there is no magic bullet that could not be disputed at this point. What is more silly at this point is to fully outright deny the possibility and claim it is a false hood.

Evidence that points:
1. The e coli study already mentioned.
2. Statistical analysis to explain the variances between protein sequences that are universal across all life.
3. Transitional evidence such as ears and jaw formations.
4. Retrovirus insertions across species. (this is when a virus inserts its genes in the hosts genes. There are instances where a specific retrovirus was found across species which is more transitional type evidence)

That is just 4 things there are many more types of evidence which indicates that a common ancestor is not out of the realm of possibility. Add that with there is no other main competing theory that explains it that can pass rigor and it starts looking as probable.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 11:11:02 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Most sophisticated Theists I debate believe in evolution, so I find it ironic when a Christian argues against evolution like that somehow defends his faith lol
v3nesl
Posts: 4,465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 11:20:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 9:57:24 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:31:01 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.


And how exactly does this demonstrate that all species descended from a common ancestor?

He asked for evidence that supports Evolution,

Actually, he didn't. So, let's take it from the top, start by actually reading what he wrote. He was quite clear that he was asking about UCA.

We're going to keep trying to help you learn to think critically - hope you won't let your ego keep you from getting an education. A free on-line university of critical thinking, what could be better?
This space for rent.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 11:29:10 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 11:07:09 AM, slo1 wrote:
...
1. The e coli study already mentioned.

Pretty much irrelevant in this context. No one is disputing the adaptation of species, the question in this thread is UCA.

2. Statistical analysis to explain the variances between protein sequences that are universal across all life.

Statistical analysis doesn't explain anything, in and of itself, it merely quantifies data.

3. Transitional evidence such as ears and jaw formations.

Circular reasoning - you merely assume the transitions you are being asked to prove.

4. Retrovirus insertions across species. (this is when a virus inserts its genes in the hosts genes. There are instances where a specific retrovirus was found across species which is more transitional type evidence)


I think this one is already in the bulging archive of bogus evo evidence. Turns out the alleged retrovirus insertions are actually boot code. In other words, code that appears irrelevant because it's primarily used in development stages. In short, it's not from a virus at all.

So, it's another case of circular reasoning - make a hypothesis based on evidence, then note how the evidence is consistent with the hypothesis (well duh!)

That is just 4 things there are many more types of evidence which indicates that a common ancestor is not out of the realm of possibility. Add that with there is no other main competing theory that explains it

And that, of course, is purely a case of sticking your head in the sand.
This space for rent.
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 12:49:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 11:11:02 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Most sophisticated Theists I debate believe in evolution, so I find it ironic when a Christian argues against evolution like that somehow defends his faith lol

Right!!
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 12:52:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 10:22:39 AM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

What makes this even more convincing is that the ability to use citrate aerobically is a defining characteristic that differentiates E. Coli and Salmonella. By the way the acteria were also asexual meaning that the only way they could change is if new information was being produced and the only way that could propagate would have been through common descent.

If that ability was already programmed into the parental DNA of the e. coli then it isn't new information. If it wasn't already programmed into the DNA that it received from the parent organism then common descent had nothing to do with it. Regardless though, what does this have to do with the e. coli's ability to evolve into anything other than e. coli??
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 12:56:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 11:20:28 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:57:24 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:31:01 AM, v3nesl wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.


And how exactly does this demonstrate that all species descended from a common ancestor?

He asked for evidence that supports Evolution,

Actually, he didn't. So, let's take it from the top, start by actually reading what he wrote. He was quite clear that he was asking about UCA.

We're going to keep trying to help you learn to think critically - hope you won't let your ego keep you from getting an education. A free on-line university of critical thinking, what could be better?

I understood what he wrote, and Common Descent is merely part of the Theory of Evolution, and to argue for evolution and it's evidence, is to also provide evidence for UCA. It's a branch off the same tree, and I was providing evidence that supports our claims of how that was accomplished naturally. That heritable variations led to the introduction of new traits and abilities in organisms that has lead us to the diversity we now see in the world.

LOL, creationists trying to help others to think critically. What a joke... your condescension does not amuse me.
TrueScotsman
Posts: 515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 1:05:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 12:52:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 1/27/2014 10:22:39 AM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

What makes this even more convincing is that the ability to use citrate aerobically is a defining characteristic that differentiates E. Coli and Salmonella. By the way the acteria were also asexual meaning that the only way they could change is if new information was being produced and the only way that could propagate would have been through common descent.

If that ability was already programmed into the parental DNA of the e. coli then it isn't new information. If it wasn't already programmed into the DNA that it received from the parent organism then common descent had nothing to do with it. Regardless though, what does this have to do with the e. coli's ability to evolve into anything other than e. coli??

You understand that these variations are simply those observed over a 20 year period. Also, where are you getting the idea that it was "programmed" (assuming much here...) into the parental DNA of E. coli bacteria. Random mutations of the sort we are talking about, are the introduction of new genetic information to the surviving descendants. The ability to metabolize citrate was based upon the environment, a favorable mutation and therefore became common among the population.

These are precisely the kinds of changes we are referring to, just spread out over billions of years and sped up by sexual reproduction.

No scientist is waiting for a chimpanzee to give birth to a human, evolution doesn't work like that. And to expect those kinds of results from an experiment is just ignorance.
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 1:53:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 12:52:27 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 1/27/2014 10:22:39 AM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 9:22:11 AM, TrueScotsman wrote:
At 1/27/2014 8:54:04 AM, medic0506 wrote:
I believe that Darwinian common descent is false, and is unscientific. I believe that any argument or alleged piece of evidence that is said to support UCA can be reduced to unscientific assumptions. As such I challenge anyone to produce a valid piece of evidentiary support, for the theory, that doesn't rely on unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

Science- Empirical knowledge of our natural world, gained through a method of testing, experimental verification, or observation.

Universal Common Ancestry (UCA)- The theory that all species are the descendants of a single common ancestor, and that biological life can be displayed as a tree with a single root.

Anyone care to take the challenge??

Lenski's 20 year experiment, which observed E. coli bacteria gaining beneficial traits via random mutation, namely the ability to metabolize citrate. This is a trait uncommon to E. coli in presented real observed evidence for the introduction of new "information" and abilities in an organism.

What makes this even more convincing is that the ability to use citrate aerobically is a defining characteristic that differentiates E. Coli and Salmonella. By the way the acteria were also asexual meaning that the only way they could change is if new information was being produced and the only way that could propagate would have been through common descent.

If that ability was already programmed into the parental DNA of the e. coli then it isn't new information. If it wasn't already programmed into the DNA that it received from the parent organism then common descent had nothing to do with it. Regardless though, what does this have to do with the e. coli's ability to evolve into anything other than e. coli??

What it has to do with is that the DNA sequences that allow aerobic citrate usage weren't there when the experiment started so new information was added and because e. coli reproduce asexually so there is no way that ability could have been added by a parent organism. The DNA sequences were entirely new genetic material that did not exist in the original strains. From a creationist perspective this is impossible but from an evolutionary perspective this is just one more piece of evidence.
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
medic0506
Posts: 13,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 2:01:30 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 11:11:02 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Most sophisticated Theists I debate believe in evolution, so I find it ironic when a Christian argues against evolution like that somehow defends his faith lol

Red herring. This has nothing to do with the purpose of the thread, which is to examine the science that evolutionists depend on.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,465
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 2:43:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 2:01:30 PM, medic0506 wrote:
At 1/27/2014 11:11:02 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
Most sophisticated Theists I debate believe in evolution, so I find it ironic when a Christian argues against evolution like that somehow defends his faith lol

Red herring. This has nothing to do with the purpose of the thread, which is to examine the science that evolutionists depend on.

Yeah, but if we were willing to accept nonsense we could be sophisticated too.
This space for rent.
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:15:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

what am I? chopped liver?
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:23:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
What about my miller-Urey experiment?

Second, I did describe the evidence. As I said we have traced nearly the entire known genome back 2.2 billion years.

The scientific studies for this number in the thousands. Unfortunately I cannot present any of them here due to copyright and paid subscription restrictions. I can, however look a few up and provide the journal names and scientists. This will take some time, as I am literally typing this from the lab. Maybe by Wednesday, if I find the time.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:54:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

Okay what's wrong with the E. Coli experiment?
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:54:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:23:06 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
What about my miller-Urey experiment?

The challenge was to provide evidence for the theory of common descent. This is what you said about it, and I quote:

There is no evidence for it
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:57:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:54:17 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

Okay what's wrong with the E. Coli experiment?

The arguments used in this thread for Universal Common Descent that used the E. coli experiment as evidence use unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 3:57:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:57:22 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:54:17 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

Okay what's wrong with the E. Coli experiment?

The arguments used in this thread for Universal Common Descent that used the E. coli experiment as evidence use unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

And what were those?
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson
GarretKadeDupre
Posts: 2,023
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 4:02:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 3:57:56 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:57:22 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:54:17 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

Okay what's wrong with the E. Coli experiment?

The arguments used in this thread for Universal Common Descent that used the E. coli experiment as evidence use unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

And what were those?

That bacteria having a mutation that allows them to eat citrate shows that all life evolved from a common ancestor using mutations.
Proof that people witnessed living dinosaurs:
http://www.debate.org...
theta_pinch
Posts: 496
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/27/2014 4:07:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/27/2014 4:02:55 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:57:56 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:57:22 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:54:17 PM, theta_pinch wrote:
At 1/27/2014 3:09:02 PM, GarretKadeDupre wrote:
So far TrueScotsman is the only one who has even tried to take on the challenge by bringing up the E. coli experiment, so I give him credit for that.

Anyone else?

Okay what's wrong with the E. Coli experiment?

The arguments used in this thread for Universal Common Descent that used the E. coli experiment as evidence use unscientific, unfalsifiable presuppositions.

And what were those?

That bacteria having a mutation that allows them to eat citrate shows that all life evolved from a common ancestor using mutations.

It's proof of common descent because multiple strains of E. Coli were grown from one strain and each of the strains produced had different changes. So multiple new strains came from one original strain.
Any sufficiently complex phenomenon is indistinguishable from magic--Me

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Niel deGrasse Tyson