John A. (Salty) Davison - The Case For Instant Evolution

If you are going to deny me the possibility of a Creator, don't read any furthere in the Manifesto. I have been driven to a Creator by my science. Finish the Manifesto and you toom might become converted.

There is nothing logical about either phylogeny or ontogeny. They both qualify as miracles. Pasteur by the way was a vitalist just like I am and probably for similar reasons. If anyone out there thinks he understands evolution he is fantasizing. About all we can do is eliminate possibilities like Selection and sexual reproduction for example. They are both history in my evolutionary book. salty

Projection, assertion, projection, assertion.

The feedback you've received about the Manifesto is that it appears to jump to conclusions across significant spans of missing evidence. Unless it presents your data out of sync with your arguments, finishing the Manifesto won't change this. Perhaps if you filled in the missing pieces we could better accompany you.--Percy

I see no evidence that anyone has even read it. My short papers also seem to be unread. I want someone to show me a fact which I have misrepresented in my papers or the Manifesto. My conclusions are based on facts. Facts don't have to be acceptable as they stand on their own. It seems to me that my views on evolution are unacceptable because members of this forum don't like them. I am not real happy about some of my conclusions either. For example, I don't care much for the conclusion that the role of the male is to bring evolution to a standstill, yet that is exactly what the facts indicate. Here are some more uncomfortable facts. The germ plasm has been discontinuous. There is no universal mechanism for sex determination, indicating that it a secondary development and probably serves to bring evolution to a halt. Incidentally, different modes of germ cell origin correlate favorably with different modes of sex determination. How anyone can adhere to a sexual, gradualist micromutational, selection model for macroevolution totally escapes me. salty

Ok, Ill read them but the only stand still I can see the Y come to is ontop of Humphries gravity well and that is certainly not possible today yet most here probably think that would never be possible.SEX may enable the organismal PROPERTY to connect thru the componenet of Earth interia only and not premitting the astronaut to land anywhere the biology takes it.

quote:

---

If you are going to deny me the possibility of a Creator, don't read any furthere in the Manifesto.

---

Salty, first off I will try a second time to be polite. If you reread my post you will see that I did not do any such thing as you claim. I merely corrected a logic error which you made, namely that the existence of a creator is not a logical conclusion based on your statements. Frankly, they do not deal with the existence or non-existence of a creator at all, ie they neither are capable of proving or disproving a creator. Second off, I will finish the manifesto as I get time. However, my studies to date appear to be leading me in the opposite direction to the one that you state.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

Salty, neither ontogony nor phylogony are miracles. I have worked with more than enough developmental biologists to know that. If you feel that you have evidence to back this up in your manifesto then I will look for it.Second, so what if Pasteur was a vitalist. Galeleo was a catholic, Newton was an anglican, as was Darwin (although maybe not a very good one at the end). Einstein was jewish, so what? And from what I have seen so far you have not eliminated selection.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

Post 200

quote:

---

I want someone to show me a fact which I have misrepresented in my papers or the Manifesto.

---

From the Manfesto

quote:

---

Perhaps the most compelling feature for the Darwinists resides in their persistent conviction that all of evolution is the result of blind chance.

---

this is false, the mutational aspect is based on the differential probability of mutation throughout the genome, the selection is based on varying levels of reproductive and environmental success based on changing environmental pressure. While these are not pre-determined (as far as we can tell) or controlled by outside forces (ditto) they are not purely random.Salty, just because you can not tell what is going to happen next does not mean that something is purely random. Please review probability, chaos and complex systems. Either that or prove that it is random.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

I made no attempt to eliminate selection. It is very real. It prevents change. As a creative element it is a joke. I don't see what your religious comments have to do with anything. I'm the one who is convinced that life in all its manifestations is miraculous. I don't see how one could feel otherwise. If others don't feel the way I do about life I can only feel sorry for them. I reached my conclusions at the laboratory bench a long time ago when I was producing chimeric frogs. I haven't always been a theoretical scientist. But now in my dotage I am offering what I feel is my most important contribution. It is too bad that no one on this forum agrees with me. The atheist materialism that characterizes the Darwinian model has failed miserably. I have offered an alternative which is derived in large part from the convictions of some great biological thinkers. Furthermore, it is testable but untested at present. Sooner or later that will change. I don't expect the Darwinists to test an hypothesis that might be the death knell to their own convictions. I guess we'll just have to wait a while. salty

Thought I better post it here, for those who don't monitor all the forums.See "A hiatus for the Salty topic?" at http://EvC Forum: Information -->EvC Forum: InformationAdminnemooseusEdit - the above mentioned has been moved to
EvC Forum: A hiatus for the Salty topic?[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 03-25-2003]

I just might read your manifesto. I haven't read a manifesto since I read the one written by the Unabomber. Of course that one was filled with paranoid delusions. I am sure that yours is nothing like that. FK

Salty, I have to say that for someone who posts as a person knoledgable about evolutionary theory you make a lot of mistake in that regard. Natural Selection is a FILTER. Look at the most recent ideas put forth by Niles Eldredge concerning larger scale systems and the role of the environment as components of selective pressure for a good example of this. The preventing of change which you refer to appears to me to be standard statistical stasis brought about by the application of Hardy-Weinburg genetics, I do not care if you disagree with the role of population genetics, you will have to do more than disagree, you will have to show data. Now honestly, I did a quick perusal of your manifesto and saw none that would ovethrough the accepted role of population genetics. Is it somplace else?As to your rather strident comments re: religion, you brought up religion and vitalism first, not I. I merely responded to a logical fallacy in your manifesto in my first post to you. Your claim that a creator is a logical neccessity is not born out by the supports of your own statements within the manifesto. You are of course free to believe what you want but I can and will call you on logical fallicies. The same holds true for your comments concerning the "atheist materialism that characterizes the Darwinian model", the study of evolution is neither pro nor anti diest, although its proponents can fall into either camp. You are mixing the private or personal beliefs of the people with the driving concepts behind the theory. As to the other biological thinkers, I have read a great number of them, most of whom agree that some form of natural selection plays a key role in evolution.By the way, I saw yout complaining earlier about the way that you were being treated on this board. I have been polite, direct and supplied reasons for my statements for the start; you have gone off onto tangents and done a number of little rants which appeared to bear little relationship to my comments. I can now see why you get so little respect from some of the normally polite people on this board, I won't go into some of the people who are normally not so polite.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

Admooseus (sounds kind of latin doesn't it). I think that you might have a point. If I get time to do a better review of this manifesto maybe I will post more on it later if the thread reopens, but reasoned discussion appears to have fled the field for the time being.------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

just keep your inner Shrike under control, OK ------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz