|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
Please explain how the burden of proof can be on Russ, yet there is no burden to substantiate the assumptions required to generate evodates. First, you are incorrect about the burden of proof in regards to the dating systems used by geologists. The burden of proof always resides with the person who makes the initial claim. His apparant claim that harmful mutations are required build up to a beneficial mutation is not part of any evolution theory that I know of. If he got it from some biology texts or papers it would be much easier for him to provide the reference than for me to go looking at all biology texts and papers to show that it is not a part of the theory of evolution. I do not say this in order to discuss evodates here. This issue is that of an apparent double standard applying to burdens of proof. No double standard. You just seem to be unaware of the support that was required to substantiate the dating methods used. As you have not exempted them, I look forward to addressing these assumptions in the appropriate thread when it shall be convenient. Bex listed some of them in the past, but the post may have been overlooked or forgotten. Also, RAZD was fond of maintaining that there are no burdens of proof for scientific theories. Are you not already in disagreement on that point? Or is there something you'd like to clarify? RAZD stated that scientific theories are not ever completely proven. That does not eliminate the requirement of the burden of proof for particular statements within or regarding that theory. This is especially true of statements of fact...like the ratio between harmful, neutral and beneficial mutations. Thank you for responding. It may prove interesting to compare statements sometime. His statements were somewhat more unorthodox than you seem to recall. Folks might could stand reminding about your philosophy of science. If Russ can substantiate his premises, this counts as evidence that his conclusion is true, according to LinearAQ's methodology.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
