The Problem With Evolution- Part 1, Ape to Man Ridiculousness

[teddyv]

8 minutes ago, FJK said:

I think it should be obvious that I'm talking about understanding, not knowledge.

I cannot give understanding, only knowledge can be given and knowledge is not understanding.  You must develop understanding for yourself.

If you seek it, God will guide you to it.

 

Thank you for this Gnostic nonsense.

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, FJK said:

That seems to be concentrated in certain ethnicities and cultures with the opposite occurring in others.

Flynn effect seems to be pretty much worldwide and not focused on any particular ethnicities.   (Barbarian checks)

Apparently, it is not:

Intelligence. 2010 Jul 1; 38(4): 367–384.

The Flynn Effect within Subgroups in the U.S.: Gender, Race, Income, Education, and Urbanization Differences in the NLSY-Children Data
We test for subgroup Flynn Effect differences by gender, race/ethnicity, maternal education, household income, and urbanization. No subgroups differences emerged for three demographic categories. However, children with more educated (especially college educated) mothers and/or children born into higher income households had an accelerated Flynn effect in their PIAT-M scores compared to cohort peers with lower educated mothers or lower income households. We interpret both the positive and the null findings in relation to previous theoretical explanations.

(my emphasis) 

It's  been long noted that the three most important predictors for academic success of children are, in order of importance:

1. Mother has a postgraduate degree

2. Father has a postgraduate degree

3. High economic status

But there is no detectable difference among different ethnic groups.

1 hour ago, FJK said:

As Wittgenstein might say "“Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”".

This looks like another body blow against racism.   Whatever causes the Flynn effect seems to be unrelated to ethnicity.

 

[The Barbarian]

1 hour ago, Starise said:

IQ tests are not really fair on some levels at acertaining all levels of intelligence.

IQ tests are primarily concerned with the ability of solve problems.   There are other forms of intelligence, and it's not clear if we are becoming more intelligent in those ways.   We're just getting better at figuring things out.

 

[Starise]

7 minutes ago, The Barbarian said:

IQ tests are primarily concerned with the ability of solve problems.   There are other forms of intelligence, and it's not clear if we are becoming more intelligent in those ways.   We're just getting better at figuring things out.

 

I see what we have as a snowball effect. Buildng on large amounts of gathered data, stored on server farms everywhere.

Daniel 12:4 

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

 

[Marathoner]

4 hours ago, teddyv said:

Thank you for this Gnostic nonsense.

Apparently you aren't familiar with what Gnosticism is. You're accusing a member of the forum of being Gnostic arising from a simple disagreement. That's nonsense.

This is why I steer clear from "debates" such as these. Nothing good comes of it unless displays of snarky impatience are the goal. Conduct like that doesn't support an argument, it reveals the quality of the argument instead. 

[The Barbarian]

6 hours ago, Starise said:

I see what we have as a snowball effect. Buildng on large amounts of gathered data, stored on server farms everywhere.

Knowledge is not intelligence; I am assuming that you are pointing out the difference.

[teddyv]

2 hours ago, Marathoner said:

Apparently you aren't familiar with what Gnosticism is. You're accusing a member of the forum of being Gnostic arising from a simple disagreement. That's nonsense.

This is why I steer clear from "debates" such as these. Nothing good comes of it unless displays of snarky impatience are the goal. Conduct like that doesn't support an argument, it reveals the quality of the argument instead. 

I am not calling him an adherent of Gnosticism, but is demonstrating qualities associated with it. The poster refuses to answer what I though to be a simple question/clarification. I was met with nonsensical spiritual-sounding gobbledy-gook.

I am reasonably familiar with Gnosticism, such that there is a deep undercurrent in the posting as some sort of secret knowledge and/or understanding than only a properly enlightened person can attain. Perhaps the use of capital "G" Gnosticism was an error on my part, and should have used small letter (neo-)gnostic. The latter is rampant all through Evangelicalism - just look at the constant conspiracy theories that only the ones with their "open eyes" or "open minds" can see so clearly, while the rest of us are cloaked in delusion. 

 

 

 

[Sparks]

2 hours ago, teddyv said:

The latter is rampant all through Evangelicalism - just look at the constant conspiracy theories that only the ones with their "open eyes" or "open minds" can see so clearly, while the rest of us are cloaked in delusion.

Haven't you noticed that theistic evolutionists have to twist scripture into something it isn't to make way for man-made ideas like evolution, specifically the 6 days of Creation equaling millions of years each. 

I have mentioned before that there were 10 authors who wrote Genesis with God being the first author and He didn't mention evolution, nor did He even hint at it.

Try reading Genesis while allowing a day to equal a day, and you should be able to arrive at the conclusion that evolution didn't happen.

Genesis Toldoths (meaning generations):

– Creation – Genesis 2:4
– Adam – Genesis 5:1
– Noah and his sons – Genesis 6:9; 10:1, 32
– Shem – Genesis 11:10
– Terah – 11:27
– Ishmael – Genesis 25:12-13; 1 Chronicles 1:29
– Isaac – Genesis 25:19
– Esau – Genesis 36:1, 9
– Jacob – Genesis 37:2

... and of course, Moses, who seemed to be the editor for them all.

[Starise]

16 hours ago, The Barbarian said:

Knowledge is not intelligence; I am assuming that you are pointing out the difference.

There needs to be a certain capacity to begin to gather knowledge and make use of it, so yes, thanks for making that clarification.

Knowledge is a tool that only intelligence can use.

In my opinion we are becoming overly dependent on the web, especially as it pertains to accurate sources of information. The web has potential to 'direct' us to certain conclusions.

In some persuasions this works very well, in others we need a working model and not a model the system says will work. Since apart from robotics, computers are incapable of physically testing models, the conclusions often arrived at are unproven.

Using any interface between us and reality has potential to lead to inaccurate conclusions.

Much deeper subject than I should attempt to delve here.

[Starise]

15 hours ago, teddyv said:

I am not calling him an adherent of Gnosticism, but is demonstrating qualities associated with it. The poster refuses to answer what I though to be a simple question/clarification. I was met with nonsensical spiritual-sounding gobbledy-gook.

I am reasonably familiar with Gnosticism, such that there is a deep undercurrent in the posting as some sort of secret knowledge and/or understanding than only a properly enlightened person can attain. Perhaps the use of capital "G" Gnosticism was an error on my part, and should have used small letter (neo-)gnostic. The latter is rampant all through Evangelicalism - just look at the constant conspiracy theories that only the ones with their "open eyes" or "open minds" can see so clearly, while the rest of us are cloaked in delusion. 

 

 

 

In my opinion asking for  clarification would have been the better route. That's all I'll say.