Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How can Biologists believe in the ToE?
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 98 of 304 (419662)
09-04-2007 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 96 by Ihategod
09-03-2007 7:49 PM


Re: Of course I will entertain....
5. The lack of any transitional fossils. and this is hilarious:
CC200: Transitional fossils
Might as well say that their isn't any.
From your own link:
quote:
There are many transitional fossils. The only way that the claim of their absence may be remotely justified, aside from ignoring the evidence completely, is to redefine "transitional" as referring to a fossil that is a direct ancestor of one organism and a direct descendant of another.
Links work better when you actually follow them, Vash, and read the material presented to you. What you're doing is just ignoring the evidence because you have the crazy idea it's against your religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Ihategod, posted 09-03-2007 7:49 PM Ihategod has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 131 of 304 (420213)
09-06-2007 8:28 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by Q
09-06-2007 7:25 PM


not all scientists believe in ToE.
Pretty much every single biologist does, actually. There's really no debate about evolution among biologists, except in regards to its details. The last major debates about whether or not the evolutionary model was accurate were over in the 1800's, pretty much.
Evolution is essentially the unifying theory of all biology. You find the occasional crank who disputes it for crank reasons, and you find plenty of religious believers who combine scientific evolution with their personal beliefs about God, but there's no serious biologist who disputes the essential accuracy of evolution, because there's so much evidence that supports it.
If you watched the last installment of The Universe on Discovery in the first part of the show, the MIT professor even stated something to the effect that those who do not accept are generally looked at as nut-jobs.
Because they are. They're cranks. They don't have good arguments or any evidence for their views, and they certainly don't put forth anything for peer review. There's no conspiracy to silence evolution's critics beyond the universal tendency in science to ignore and marginalize people who defend views on the basis of no evidence. (Which is as it should be, don't you think? Science should only be open to those ideas that can be supported with evidence.)
Much of the same science that is done can point either way, its ones personal faith and belief that that drives those views when looking at the "facts" of the results.
That's just not true. Much of the science doesn't point both ways. For instance, there's no creationist explanation for the phylogenetic convergence between Geomyidae and Geomydoecus species. There really is no explanation for this pattern except for evolution, which is why it's accepted by scientists as the best explanation of the history and diversity of life on Earth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Q, posted 09-06-2007 7:25 PM Q has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 146 of 304 (420312)
09-07-2007 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Q
09-07-2007 12:14 PM


For example:
Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
What would these people know about biology? And since when are dentists "scientists"? These lists are invariably specious because they include people for whom biology is well outside their field of expertise - as well as individuals who, in fact, do not contend the scientific consensus of evolution, but have in fact been put on the list dishonestly.
Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
I see the Six Million Dollar Man found a new line of work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Q, posted 09-07-2007 12:14 PM Q has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 234 of 304 (426545)
10-07-2007 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by IamJoseph
10-07-2007 12:07 PM


Re: Evidence Please
[how's your mobile and pc working!].
You mean my Finnish mobile phone and my Taiwanese PC? They're great but it would be nice if the top-of-the-line hardware in America wasn't always two years behind what they have in Europe and Japan.
Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by IamJoseph, posted 10-07-2007 12:07 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by IamJoseph, posted 10-07-2007 9:36 PM crashfrog has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 242 of 304 (426600)
10-07-2007 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 240 by IamJoseph
10-07-2007 9:36 PM


Re: Evidence Please
The soft, 'relevent' parts come not from Finland, Taiwan or America.
Wha...?
I don't understand what you're getting at.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 240 by IamJoseph, posted 10-07-2007 9:36 PM IamJoseph has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 294 of 304 (440617)
12-13-2007 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by LucyTheApe
12-13-2007 9:09 PM


Re: Integrity
Flat-Earth adherents rarely keep jobs as cartographers, as well. At some point, people who are hired to do jobs can't expect to hide behind a religious exemption from doing them. What, people are supposed to be paid to do nothing at all?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by LucyTheApe, posted 12-13-2007 9:09 PM LucyTheApe has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 300 of 304 (440874)
12-15-2007 12:38 AM


I'd say integrity is not stabbing your opponent to death when you lose the debate:
quote:
A FRUIT-picking trip to southern New South Wales ended in the death of a Scottish backpacker who became embroiled in a bizarre row about creationism and evolution.
...
The couple, both biomedical scientists, had been arguing the case of evolution, while York had taken a more biblical view of history.
"Although this became perhaps a little sharp edged, it did not really amount to anything," Justice Michael Adams said during York's sentencing in the New South Wales Supreme Court today.
"For some reason, however ... the offender's mood changed suddenly and he began to abuse Mr Boa and Ms Brown.
"There was no hint of a physical confrontation and what a happened amounted to little more than a brief verbal contretemps."
Although the altercation had been defused by the time the Scottish tourists left the hotel, it became inflamed again at the caravan park when all three were quite drunk.
According to Ms Brown, York was making dinner when he attacked the couple outside his tent, stabbing Mr Boa with a kitchen knife as the argument escalated.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22924256-29277,00.html
Five years for murder. Seems a little light. Still, though, maybe he wasn't responsible for his actions, being as he was deluded and all.

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024