Science dont know what species is-thus cant disprove bible

[ladyjane]

Sciency types like Dawkins talk about evolution as being the evolution of species and say science thus disproves the bible
but l

Australias leading erotic poet colin leslie dean schowsScience dont know what species is-thus cant disprove bible
** spam link removed by FJ **

biologist classify living organisms by a heirarchy of taxonomies
ie species phylum
but again biologists cant tell us what species is or phylums are

species is a basic concept in biology
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species

“In biology a species is one of the basic units of biological classification and a taxonomic rank”

Yet biologist don’t know what a species is-so much for a science that cant even identify its object of investigation

gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo … ection.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
“However, the exact definition of the term “species” is still controversial, particularly in prokaryotes,[2] and this is called the species problem.[3”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylum
“Although a phylum is often spoken of as if it were a hard and fast entity, no satisfactory definition of a phylum exists”

With out a definition of these terms then biologists are really talking nonsense for with out definitions to locate and identify the things they talk about they are really not talking about anything at all If the biologist talks about say speciation or this species proving natural selection but cant tell you what a species or phylum is then he is talking meaningless nonsense. He could as easily said certain gibbles prove natural selection but with out knowing what a gibble is the claim is meaningless

Thus it can be seen that biology is not a science as its classificatory systems cannot identify the objects of its science if it cannot identify the objects of its investigations it cannot be a science
all it is is a meaningless array of terms which dont identify anything

Biologist don’t know what a species is
Biology end in meaningless nonsense as its idea of species ends in self contradiction

gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo … ection.pdf

Many on here seem to think biologists know what species are

We hear biologist and such figures as dawkins gould talks about speciation ie the appearance of new species BUT biologists cannot tell us what a species or phylum is

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
“However, the exact definition of the term “species” is still controversial, particularly in prokaryotes,[2] and this is called the species problem.[3”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylum
“Although a phylum is often spoken of as if it were a hard and fast entity, no satisfactory definition of a phylum exists”

With out a definition of these terms then biologists are really talking nonsense for with out definitions to locate and identify the things they talk about they are really not talking about anything at all If the biologist talks about say speciation or this species proving natural selection but cant tell you what a species or phylum is then he is talking meaningless nonsense. He could as easily said certain gibbles prove natural selection but with out knowing what a gibble is the claim is meaningless

some argue that
species can breed with each other
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Species
“A species is often defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring… [this following part will be discussed in the appendix where it will be shown leads to nonsense and again biologist cant agree on what a species is] While in many cases this definition is adequate, more precise or differing measures are often used, such as similarity of DNA, morphology or ecological niche

yet this definition is shown to end in meaningless nonsense

take the Bactrian and dromedary camels they are different species yet they can breed with fertile off spring which should mean they are the same species- yet they are different species

camelphotos.com/camel_breeds.html

Wild camels have three more genes than domestic camels and so they have concluded that they are a completely different species.

yet these two different species can interbreed and have fertile off spring
geocities.com/plin9k/limiting-species.htm

thus we have a contradiction
dromedary and Bactrian camels are different species
yet they can interbreed , which only species can

thus the notion of species ends in self contradiction

thus because biologist cant tell us what a species is

thus all of this taxonomy is meaningless nonsense

[Flannel_Jesus]

banned for 1 week for continuing to spam this forum for your own profit.

Given the extensive history this person has of spamming, both here and elsewhere, I will announce publicly here that the next time this person posts a link which requires that a user pay money to access the content being referred to in the post, and that content has been submitted by someone under the name of Colin Leslie Dean, I will ban LadyJane permanently.

If anyone has any significant disagreement with this and thinks that even of LadyJane keeps spamming, he/she shouldn’t be banned permanently, please speak up and I will consider your thoughts. If it turns out to be a contentious issue, I will not make the decision without conferring with the other mods first. Otherwise I will go forward with it next time this happens.

[Mowk]

edited as follows

[Mowk]

Don’t know FJ. The links in the above post seem valid.

I gotta question whether the bible could know what a “species” is. I’m speaking to the many translations and updates the bible has gone through, those could have some indication of species, but not the bible. The bible categorizes all cloven hoofed animals together. That doesn’t seem like it knows what a species is either. And as far as the bible is concerned if it has a fin it’s a fish or a feather it’s a bird, so all of them are rather lumped together as well.

It’s a non-sequitur sort of argument. Science has difficulty drawing the line when one species becomes another therefore science’s notion of the distinction is fallible. Not really. Yet it is transitional. It will for always and forever be, a work in progress. It is adaptive, and attempts to account for changes, changes in circumstance of awareness and changes in what there is to be aware of.

The bible changes to catch up, it has been and continues to be edited in some effort to remain current, in so much as it can. It shouldn’t have to catch up if it were written by the hand of an all knowing creator. Two thousand years ago they should have been scratching their heads going wtf mates; what is an atom, or an electron.

The bible don’t know what a species is - thus it can’t disprove science. It’s a few thousand years out of date.

I’d categorize it as a somewhat uneasy cooperative effort.

But maybe you could take a closer look at them numerologists… LOL.

Thanks

Whether one is even trying to disprove the other is a question that really needs some looking into. I have heard mention of some sort of synergy, freaks of extremism aside.

[Flannel_Jesus]

@Mowk

Don’t know FJ. The links in the above post seem valid.

I deleted the offending link, so the ones that remain probably do seem valid. He posted a link to scribd, as he did in many of his recent posts if you look. If you try to read the article on scribd as a guest, it forces you to pay for access. He directly profits from this payment.

Ergo spam.

[Mowk]

Thanks for deleting the offending link. From what remained that wasn’t evident. Is there a way perhaps that if you edit a post that the edit could be noted, so anyone, myself included, would have a clearer picture of what has taken place? From what I could see, by the time I saw it, I was thinking you had jumped the gun. With a more accurate picture, I would like to think, my mistake could have been avoided. It was not my intention to have troubled you.

[Mowk]

I was more concerned that if evidence in support of an argument is referenced, it should be presented with the argument. That seems like fair philosophy.

In hindsight you did note the edit in a manner of speaking. spam link in bright red, why that did not seem apparent baffles me now. I did wonder what the author meant by it. Doh, the author didn’t mean anything by it.

[Mowk]

Oh and thanks for adding the spam link had been removed by FJ. That does make it more apparent the post had been edited.