Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is evolution so controversial?
Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 106 of 969 (724086)
04-12-2014 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by ringo
04-12-2014 12:21 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
I keep asking you to stop using the term "Neo-Darwinism".
Why should I stop using it? The reason I use it to to make sure that no one misunderstand what I am talking about.
I'm arguing that the theory of evolution and common ancestry are essentially the same thing.
You clearly do not know what evolution is. So answer this, is evolution possible without common ancestry?
It's possible to be a nominal bus driver and not drive a bus; it's not possible to be an actual bus driver and not drive a bus. Your examples are nominal scientists, not actual scientists.
You do not become a real teacher the day you teach your first class, you're a real teacher when you graduate from college with a degree in education. Same goes for other professions. Sorry I don't buy your distinctions between actual and nominal!
Does a walker have to walk
This is completely different from profession, you become a real doctor the moment you graduate.
There used to be a commercial that said, "I'm not a real doctor but I play one on TV." That's what your examples are.
An actor pretending to be a doctor is not the same thing as someone with a medical degree.
Edited by Cedre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by ringo, posted 04-12-2014 12:21 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 04-12-2014 1:04 PM Cedre has replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(6)
Message 107 of 969 (724087)
04-12-2014 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Cedre
04-12-2014 12:51 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
Cedre writes:
ringo writes:
I keep asking you to stop using the term "Neo-Darwinism".
Why not?
As I said, because it means different things to different people.
I personally don't like the term for several reasons. For one, it over-emphasizes the contribution of Darwin; he's been dead for more than a century and many others have contributed improvements in the meantime. For another, the "ism" suggests something like a religious dogma instead of a scientific theory. Calling the theory of evolution "Neo-Darwinism" is the equivalent of calling the space program "Neo-Wrightism".
Cedre writes:
So answer this, is evolution possible without common ancestry?
Evolution inevitably branches out from common ancestry. There's nothing to prevent species from evolving into other species.
Cedre writes:
You do not become a real teacher the day you teach your first class, you're a real teacher when you graduate from college with a degree in education.
When you graduate with an education degree, you're qualified to become a teacher. When you turn eighteen, you're qualified to become a voter. You don't actually become a voter until you vote.
Cedre writes:
An actor pretending to be a doctor is not the same thing as someone with a medical degree.
A creationist on a website who is preaching the antithesis of science is definitely only pretending to be a scientist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 12:51 PM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 1:43 PM ringo has replied

  
Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 108 of 969 (724088)
04-12-2014 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by ringo
04-12-2014 1:04 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
As I said, because it means different things to different people.
Well that's not my fault.
Calling the theory of evolution "Neo-Darwinism" is the equivalent of calling the space program "Neo-Wrightism".
Wow really? Says who?
Evolution inevitably branches out from common ancestry.
Fascinating stuff! Now will you finally answer my question, is evolution possible without common ancestry?
When you graduate with an education degree, you're qualified to become a teacher.
Word games, my friend! When you you graduate with an education degree you are not qualified to be a teacher, you are a teacher, you are qualified to teach!
A creationist on a website who is preaching the antithesis of science is definitely only pretending to be a scientist.
Someone with a degree in science doesn't have to pretend to be a scientists, he is a scientist!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 04-12-2014 1:04 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by Theodoric, posted 04-12-2014 1:58 PM Cedre has replied
 Message 115 by Larni, posted 04-12-2014 2:11 PM Cedre has replied
 Message 143 by ringo, posted 04-13-2014 2:52 PM Cedre has not replied
 Message 146 by Percy, posted 04-13-2014 5:28 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(2)
Message 109 of 969 (724089)
04-12-2014 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Cedre
04-12-2014 10:30 AM


Re: This is becoming tiresome
So yes Dr. Zuill presents his scientific reasons for rejecting evolution in this book. I don't care if you think his reasons are scientific or not.
Your quote from the DI only asserts that their are scientific reasons given. It does not describe what they are.
You need to show what those scientific reasons are, rather than simple asserting that they exist.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 10:30 AM Cedre has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 110 of 969 (724090)
04-12-2014 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Cedre
04-12-2014 1:43 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
Word games, my friend!
YOur lack of self awareness is utterly amazing.
When you you graduate with an education degree you are not qualified to be a teacher, you are a teacher, you are qualified to teach!
You are not allowed to make up your own definitions. I have a degree in History but have never been employed in that. So does that make me a Historian. Someone that has a law degree but never passed the bar is a lawyer? You do know that an M.D. that has never practiced would not be given any rights and privileges of a trained and practicing M.D don't you.
It is amazing how you are willing to twist and manipulate facts, words and whatever in order to seem like what you ahve to say actually has any basis in reality.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 1:43 PM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 2:05 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 111 of 969 (724091)
04-12-2014 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Cedre
04-12-2014 11:19 AM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
The point Dr A is making is that is remarkable that there is so little controversy about evolution among biologists (you have asserted that this controversy exists but have yet to substantiate this) given they determination, motivation and political power the religious right has in America.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 11:19 AM Cedre has not replied

  
Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 112 of 969 (724092)
04-12-2014 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 110 by Theodoric
04-12-2014 1:58 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
I have a degree in History but have never been employed in that. So does that make me a Historian
Of course you are in fact a historian! Your attempts to vilify qualified scientists is ridiculous!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Theodoric, posted 04-12-2014 1:58 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Theodoric, posted 04-12-2014 8:37 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 113 of 969 (724093)
04-12-2014 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Faith
04-12-2014 11:26 AM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Finding a cow in a Precambrian layer would be a falsification of ToE as that would contradict one of it's predictions.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Faith, posted 04-12-2014 11:26 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 2:08 PM Larni has replied
 Message 133 by Faith, posted 04-13-2014 12:19 AM Larni has replied

  
Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 114 of 969 (724094)
04-12-2014 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Larni
04-12-2014 2:05 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Finding a cow in a Precambrian layer would be a falsification of ToE as that would contradict one of it's predictions.
What are you on about dear Larni?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Larni, posted 04-12-2014 2:05 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Larni, posted 04-12-2014 2:12 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 115 of 969 (724095)
04-12-2014 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by Cedre
04-12-2014 1:43 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
Someone with a degree in science doesn't have to pretend to be a scientists, he is a scientist!
Not so. I hold a degree in psychology and yet I am not a psychologist.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 1:43 PM Cedre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 2:15 PM Larni has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 116 of 969 (724096)
04-12-2014 2:11 PM


Boring.
Boring.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(2)
Message 117 of 969 (724097)
04-12-2014 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by Cedre
04-12-2014 2:08 PM


Re: Why Is Evolution So Uncontroversial?
Faith said that ToE was unfalsifiable. I showed how it could be falsified by find a cow in a Precambrian layer.
Hope that helps.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 2:08 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Cedre
Member (Idle past 1490 days)
Posts: 350
From: Russia
Joined: 01-30-2009


Message 118 of 969 (724098)
04-12-2014 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Larni
04-12-2014 2:11 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
Not so. I hold a degree in psychology and yet I am not a psychologist.
Well, my Aunt got her psychology degree last year and called herself a psychologist from day one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Larni, posted 04-12-2014 2:11 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by Larni, posted 04-12-2014 2:43 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Larni
Member (Idle past 164 days)
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(2)
Message 119 of 969 (724099)
04-12-2014 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by Cedre
04-12-2014 2:15 PM


Re: Why so hostile?
She should not have. A Psychologist is a protected title. To get it one must hold a doctorate.

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Cedre, posted 04-12-2014 2:15 PM Cedre has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(4)
Message 120 of 969 (724105)
04-12-2014 4:18 PM


Just on a point of information, the USA is not the world. For some weird reason, the USA is an outlier in modern Western democracies in that it has a large Christian fundamentalist legacy. The rest of us don't see any 'controversy'.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024