Are you against testing claims?
No Bill, stop saying demonstrable falsehoods please. He is taking on that burden himself when he asserts these proteins could not have evolved. Anyone advancing such a claim has the burden of demonstrating it’s truth. It not not our job to prove it false when he’s the one claiming it’s a problem.
If anyone states that proteins cannot evolve they should be corrected as they are setting themselves up. This is a point I made to T.
I think you should make it to SCD instead then. He’s the one taking on that burden with his claims all the time.
1 Like
I will but please continue to police your side as well.
Already addressed:
“You can not prove that a given protein required all of its current subdomains in order to have selectable function. This is the burden of proof that needs to be met.”
You cannot prove anything in science it’s all tentative. The current available evidence supports my claim as we have reduced cells complexity to failure. This is the empirical evidence we have at this point. Reliable self replication is not a trivial process.
You are talking about cells in the past, so you need evidence of what they were like in the past. That is the evidence you lack.
I am talking about experimental evidence of simplifying cells to understand the simple to complex model. So far the model is not being supported by the evidence. Simple life is not an empirically demonstrated hypothesis.
No it doesn’t. How did you get this idea?
There are no tests that have tested the model. The only tests we do have are for modern cells, not for cells from the past.
Venter’s experiments.
These are the test we can do. Yes is is a test. How simple can we make a cell and it remain alive.
These are not tests that can test your hypothesis.
They are testing the simple to complex hypothesis. This is not my hypothesis.
What in Venter’s experiments says the organisms can’t get simpler?
I already corrected SCD according to our agreement. We are not trying to prove a negative. The test is simply trying to validate the simple to complex model.
Nice dodge Bill, but you did say: “The current available evidence supports my claim as we have reduced cells complexity to failure.”
Asked where you got the idea, you reply: “Venter’s experiments.”
Asked again what in these experiments says the organisms can’t get simpler, you now change the subject and say you’re not trying to prove a negative. But you ASSERTED a negative to begin with: You said the “available evidence” shows “we have reduced cells complexity to failure”.
You want to have your cake and eat it too. You want the freedom to make grandiose claims but you don’t want the burden of having to support them.
Then stop making claims you can’t support. Don’t just make the claims and then complain when you’re called on it and try to change the subject.
1 Like
They are testing that hypothesis for modern cells, not for cells from the past. You are making claims about cells from the past, and work done on modern cells can not be used as evidence for those claims.
1 Like
What do you think “my claim” is? Cells can’t get simpler is your claim.