Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discovery Institute's "400 Scientist" Questionaire
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 22 (244408)
09-17-2005 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by arachnophilia
08-28-2005 4:36 AM


one question
I think we should cut to the chase and only ask one question:
Do you think this statement:
"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged"
(1) Is a normal statement of scientific skepticism, and that similar statements can be made about any scientific theory, that it is not any more critical of evolutionary theory than most other sciences, and that it in no way promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative,
(2) Is a normal statement of scientific skepticism, that some similar statements can be made about other scientific theories, that it is critical of some aspects of evolutionary theory more than most other sciences, but that it in no way promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative,
(3) Is a more than normal statement of scientific skepticism, that similar statements cannot be made about most other scientific theories, that it is critical of some aspects of evolutionary theory more than other sciences, but that it in no way promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative,
(4) Is a more than normal statement of scientific skepticism, that similar statements cannot be made about most other scientific theories, that it is critical of some aspects of evolutionary theory more than other sciences, and that it promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative,
(5) Is a normal statement of scientific skepticism, that some similar statements can be made about other scientific theories, that it is critical of some aspects of evolutionary theory more than most other sciences, and that it promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative,
(6) Is a normal statement of scientific skepticism, and that similar statements can be made about any scientific theory, that it is not any more critical of evolutionary theory than most other sciences,and that it promotes Intelligent Design as a valid alternative.
And let the cards fall where they may.
{{edited to add radio buttons, thanks ben}}
This message has been edited by RAZD, 09*17*2005 08:28 PM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by arachnophilia, posted 08-28-2005 4:36 AM arachnophilia has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Monk, posted 09-17-2005 7:32 PM RAZD has replied
 Message 8 by Ben!, posted 09-17-2005 7:45 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 22 (244473)
09-17-2005 8:15 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Ben!
09-17-2005 7:45 PM


Re: one question
I realize that, but I was trying to create a spectrum of possibilities and allow only one {answer set} per person out of 6 possibles (now 16?) to simplify analysis.
Nice radio buttons.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Ben!, posted 09-17-2005 7:45 PM Ben! has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 10 of 22 (244474)
09-17-2005 8:20 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Monk
09-17-2005 7:32 PM


Re: one question
That's a totally different question than what the ID statement is promoting.
And if you ask evolutionary biologists you will likely get a {No} answer -- there are other mechanism proposed, especially in the early bacterial stages of life formation of a lateral transmission of genes between different individuals (viruses may be a left over of this process).
This also raises the question of how sex came to be a part of the equation.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Monk, posted 09-17-2005 7:32 PM Monk has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 21 of 22 (265151)
12-02-2005 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Belfry
12-02-2005 6:54 PM


Re: one question
In addition to the above, I would include a big one: endosymbiosis.
welcome to the fray Belfry.
you can learn to do coding tricks for your quotes just by using the peek button to see how other do things.
type [qs]it's easy[/qs] and it becomes:
it's easy
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Belfry, posted 12-02-2005 6:54 PM Belfry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Belfry, posted 12-02-2005 9:27 PM RAZD has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024