|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,478 Year: 3,735/9,624 Month: 606/974 Week: 219/276 Day: 59/34 Hour: 2/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How do you define the word Evolution? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
The medical profession concerns itself with the real world - to wit: helping the sick; it has no good reason to replace "become" with a contrived word like "evolved".
Evolutionary biologist, on the other hand, don't concern themselves with the real world; their "job" is to promote atheist theology - to wit: prop up the utterly useless theory that all life evolved from a common ancestor. Hence their use of the word "evolved" when it's not necessary to.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 95 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
The thought of that creepy nutter, Dr. Eugenie Scott, being let loose on clueless university students is truly disturbing,
-------------------------------------------------------- dwise1: "Science was fun! And still is." Now here is something you and I can agree on.-------------------------------------------------------- dwise1: "That is what evolution does for biology." I look at biology and see the wondrous complexity of God's incredible creation. Naturalistic evolution reduces it to a meaningless accident. Sorry. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The medical profession concerns itself with the real world - to wit: helping the sick; it has no good reason to replace "become" with a contrived word like "evolved". The medical profession concerns itself with the real world - to wit: helping the sick; it has every reason to concern itself with phenomena such as the evolution of bacteria which threaten human health, which is why looking at medical journals reveals that they do in fact concern themselves with this.
Evolutionary biologist, on the other hand, don't concern themselves with the real world ... What a bizarre, stupid, insane lie. Whom is it intended to deceive?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2128 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Evolutionary biologist, on the other hand, don't concern themselves with the real world; their "job" is to promote atheist theology - to wit: prop up the utterly useless theory that all life evolved from a common ancestor. Hence their use of the word "evolved" when it's not necessary to. Statements like this reduce your credibility to about the vanishing point.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity. Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
Is there some inherited trait - I dunno, maybe, stupidity - that prevents creationists using the quote system that this board provides so we can see who's responding to what easily?
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "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. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Here's one example of a secular trained geologist who made the switch to YEC. That appears to be one. One is not impressive. Any more, or is that all?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9145 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.3 |
How about you address my post, not make a comment on my signature.
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. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member
|
Have a refrigerator in your house? Where do all of those low entropy ice cubes come from? Ice is a result of The Fall... Before The Fall, there was no ice. Everything was all warm and happy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
A lot in biology makes perfect sense without evolution. E.g. the physical adaptations of the giraffe to cope with its height are functional requirements ... Further to my previous remarks, I would point out that only evolution makes sense of the fact that these are adaptations. Why should the neck of the giraffe, which is long and goes up, bear such a striking resemblance to the neck of, say, a pig, which is short and goes along? (If we found two analogous designed objects, such as a footbridge across a short stream and a radio mast, which had the same basic plan, which were so obviously variations on the same theme, this would not make sense to us, we would be deeply puzzled.) Now evolution does make perfect sense of the pig and the giraffe: they have common ancestry, they are adaptations of the same thing, and per the theory of evolution, evolution cannot scrap a design and go back to the drawing board. Without evolution, how would you make sense of it? A creationist might get as far as "God chose to do it that way for some reason", but what is the reason?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
And this, CRR, is why "god did it" strikes us as a cop-out. You can always imagine that God did anything, earthquakes, rainbows, giraffes, whatever. He can do anything, he's God. But you then can't explain why God did it, or why he did it that way. But science can explain why things are that way.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
CRR writes: OTOH I believe in some cases an environmental stressor can trigger an increase in mutations in certain parts of the genome to help the organism to adapt. This appears to be controlled as an adaptive mechanism. I can't give you a reference off the top of my head. The examples I have seen are pretty dubious since they only increase the random mutation rate. They don't mutate a specific base in response to a specific environmental stimulus. It is equivalent to a desperate poor person buying more lottery tickets. It may increase their chances of winning, but it is still a random process.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
Dr Adequate writes: And this, CRR, is why "god did it" strikes us as a cop-out. You can always imagine that God did anything, earthquakes, rainbows, giraffes, whatever. He can do anything, he's God. But you then can't explain why God did it, or why he did it that way. But science can explain why things are that way.
One of my favorite quotes: "[They say] 'We do not know how this is, but we know that God can do it.' You poor fools! God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so."--William of Conches
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
CRR writes: A theory that attempts to explain the origin of species without explaining the origin of the first species is incomplete. How so? You don't need to know how the first life came about in order to determine life evolved after that point. Do we have to prove abiogenesis in order to use a DNA paternity test? Do you reject the Germ Theory of Disease because the theory does not tell us where the first germ came from? I suspect that you don't use the same argument for the theories you do accept.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10045 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3
|
CRR writes:
Unless of course God actually did it, in which case excluding the possibility before examining the evidence is intellectual laziness and materialistic conceit.
No such thing is excluded. That isn't how science works. Please learn how to use the scientific method. There is no step in the scientific method that says to exclude unevidenced claims at the beginning. Instead, you create a hypothesis that makes positive predictions, and then you look to see if those predictions hold up. it isn't the fault of "materialists" that supernaturalists can't come up with testable hypotheses. The rules of science are known, but creationists refuse to even play the game. No one is stopping them from playing other than themselves.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The examples I have seen are pretty dubious since they only increase the random mutation rate. They don't mutate a specific base in response to a specific environmental stimulus. It is equivalent to a desperate poor person buying more lottery tickets. It may increase their chances of winning, but it is still a random process. I'm not sure CRR was trying to suggest anything more than that.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024