Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,356 Year: 3,613/9,624 Month: 484/974 Week: 97/276 Day: 25/23 Hour: 3/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discovery or Ignorance: The Choice Is yours?
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 366 of 402 (474575)
07-09-2008 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by Dr Adequate
07-09-2008 10:27 AM


Re: Scientist
Dr Adequate writes:
72 Nobel Prize winning scientists say that:
The evolutionary history of organisms has been as extensively tested and as thoroughly corroborated as any biological concept.
So you know perfectly well what they think of evolution, don't play dumb.
Dr you first mentioned this in Message 57. And you gave no reference for the information.
In looking for your source I found this Here
EDWIN W. EDWARDS, in his official capacity
as Governor of Louisiana, et al.,
Appellants,
v.
DON AGUILLARD, et al.,
Appellees.
No. 85-1513
October Term, 1986
August 18, 1986
On Appeal From the United States Court of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF 72 NOBEL LAUREATES, 17 STATE ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE, AND 7 OTHER SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS,
IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES
ROBERT A. KLAYMAN, WALTER B. SLOCOMBE
  • , JEFFREY S. LEHMAN, BETH SHAPIRO KAUFMAN, Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, One Thomas Circle, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005, (202) 862-5000, Attorneys for Amici Curiae
    TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
    CASES:
    Aguillard v. Edwards, 765 F.2d 1251 (5th Cir. 1985)
    Aguillard v. Treen, No. 81-4787, slip op., (E.D. La. Jan. 10, 1985)
    Trust of Bingham v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 325 U.S. 365 (1945)
    Bishop v. Wood, 426 U.S. 341 (1976)
    Brockett v. Spokane Arcades, 472 U.S. 491, 105 S. Ct. 2794 (1985)
    Burns v. Alcala, 420 U.S. 575 (1975)
    Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968)
    Haring v. Prosise, 462 U.S. 306 (1983)
    Hendren v. Campbell (Superior Court No. 5, Marion County, Indiana) (April 14, 1977), reprinted in National Association of Biology Teachers, A Compendium of Information on the Theory of Evolution and the Evolution-Creationism Controversy 31 (rev. ed. 1978)
    IIT Research Institute v. United States, 9 Cl. Ct. 13 (1985)
    Lewis v. United States, 445 U.S. 55 (1980)
    Lynch v. Donnelly, 465 U.S. 668 (1984)
    McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, 529 F. Supp. 1255 (E.D. Ark. 1982)
    George Moore Ice Cream Co. v. Rose, 289 U.S. 373 (1933)
    Perrin v. United States, 444 U.S. 37 (1979)
    Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967)
    Propper v. Clark, 337 U.S. 472 (1949)
    Richards v. United States, 369 U.S. 1 (1962)
    Swain v. Pressley, 430 U.S. 377 (1977)
    United States v. Durham Lumber, 363 U.S. 522 (1960)
    United States v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84, 105 S. Ct. 1785 (1985)
    Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 105 S. Ct. 2479 (1985)
    STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS:
    Louisiana Civil Code:
    La. Civ. Code art. 14
    La. Civ. Code art. 15
    La. Rev. Stat. Ann. @ 17.286.4
    S.B. 86 @ 3704(1)
    MISCELLANEOUS:
    Biology: A Search for Order in Complexity (J. Moore & H. Slusher eds. 1970)
    R. Bliss, Origins: Two Models (1978)
    R. Bliss & G. Parker, Origin of Life (1979)
    R. Clouse & R. Pierard, Streams of Civilization (Vol. 2, 1980)
    Cole, Misquoted Scientists Respond, 6 Creation/Evolution 34 (Fall 1981)
    Distinction Between Scientific Creationism and Biblical Creationism, Acts & Facts 4 (December 1978)
    Dobzhansky, Nothing in Science Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution, 35 American Biology Teacher 125 (1973)
    K. Ernst, Fossils, Frogs, Fish and Friends (1984)
    Freske, Creationist Misunderstanding, Misrepresentation, and Misuse of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, 6 Creation/Evolution 8 (Spring 1981)
    D. Gish, Evolution: Challenge of the Fossil Record (1985)
    D. Gish, Evolution: The Fossils Say No! (3d ed. 1979)
    S. Gould, The Episodic Nature of Evolutionary Change, in The Panda's Thumb: More Reflections on Natural History 179 (1980)
    A. Hyma & M. Stanton, Streams of Civilization (Vol. 1, 1978)
    P. Kitcher, Abusing Science: The Case Against Creationism (1983)
    Z. Levitt, Creation: A Scientist's Choice (1976)
    E. Mayr, Populations, Species and Evolution (1970)
    J. Moore, How to Teach Origins (Without ACLU Interference) (1983)
    Morris, The Tenets of Creationism, Impact (July 1980)
    H. Morris, Evolution in Turmoil (1982)
    H. Morris, The Remarkable Birth of Planet Earth (1972)
    H. Morris, The Scientific Case for Creationism (1977)
    H. Morris, Scientific Creationism (pub. sch. ed. 1974)
    H. Morris, The Troubled Waters of Evolution (2d ed. 1982)
    H. Morris, The Twilight of Evolution (2d ed. 1982)
    H. Morris & G. Parker, What Is Creation Science? (pub. sch. ed. 1982)
    National Academy of Sciences, Science and Creationism (1984)
    G. Parker, Creation -- The Facts of Life (1980)
    G. Parker, Dry Bones . . . and Other Fossils (1979)
    H. Rue, Bomby the Bombardier Beetle (1984)
    W. Rusch, The Argument: Creationism vs. Evolutionism (1984)
    A. Snelling, et al., Casebook I: The Case Against Evolution, the Case for Creation (1984)
    Stebbins & Ayala, The Evolution of Darwinism, 253 Sci. Am. 72 (July 1985)
    Webster's Third International Dictionary (1966)
    R. L. Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1984)
    INTEREST OF AMICI CURAE
    Amici curiae are individual scientists, state academies of science, and other scientific organizations. Each of the 72 individual amici has received the Nobel Prize in Physics[1], in Chemistry[2], or in Physiology or Medicine[3].
    COMPLETE LIST OF REPRESENTED AMICI
    Nobel Laureates: Luis W. Alvarez, Carl D. Anderson, Christian B. Anfinsen, Julius Axelrod, David Baltimore, John Bardeen, Paul Berg, Hans A. Bethe, Konrad Bloch, Nicolaas Bloembergen, Michael S. Brown, Herbert C. Brown, Melvin Calvin, S. Chandrasekhar, Leon N. Cooper, Allan Cormack, Andre Cournand, Francis Crick, Renato Dulbecco, Leo Esaki, Val L. Fitch, William A. Fowler, Murray Gell-Mann, Ivar Giaever, Walter Gilbert, Donald A. Glaser, Sheldon Lee Glashow, Joseph L. Goldstein, Roger Guillemin, Roald Hoffmann, Robert Hofstadter, Robert W. Holley, David H. Hubel, Charles B. Huggins, H. Gobind Khorana, Arthur Kornberg, Polykarp Kusch, Willis E. Lamb, Jr., William Lipscomb, Salvador E. Luria, Barbara McClintock, Bruce Merrifield, Robert S. Mulliken, Daniel Nathans, Marshall Nirenberg, John H. Northrop, Severo Ochoa, George E. Palade, Linus Pauling, Arno A. Penzias, Edward M. Purcell, Isidor I. Rabi, Burton Richter, Frederick Robbins, J. Robert Schrieffer, Glenn T. Seaborg, Emilio Segre, Hamilton O. Smith, George D. Snell, Roger Sperry, Henry Taube, Howard M. Temin, Samuel C. C. Ting, Charles H. Townes, James D. Watson, Steven Weinberg, Thomas H. Weller, Eugene P. Wigner, Kenneth G. Wilson, Robert W. Wilson, Rosalyn Yalow, Chen Ning Yang.
  • I did not find where any of them said this:
    The evolutionary history of organisms has been as extensively tested and as thoroughly corroborated as any biological concept.
    Could you please point it out to me.
    Thanks,
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 357 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-09-2008 10:27 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 368 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 12:52 PM ICANT has replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 372 of 402 (474606)
    07-09-2008 4:08 PM
    Reply to: Message 368 by Rahvin
    07-09-2008 12:52 PM


    Re: Scientist
    Hi, Rahvin,
    Thanks for the info, I couldn't see the trees for the forest.
    But can that quote be attributed to those 70 Scientist?
    Or was it something that had been put in the brief that their names are attached to?
    Just wondering.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 368 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 12:52 PM Rahvin has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 373 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 5:14 PM ICANT has replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 374 of 402 (474616)
    07-09-2008 5:32 PM
    Reply to: Message 350 by mark24
    07-09-2008 8:04 AM


    Re: Re-Horses
    mark24 writes:
    The phylogeny is based on many morphological characters. I'm not even sure it's based on absolute size at all.
    I was referring to the small 14" beginning animal to the large horse we have today. There was for many years a picture of horses in a stepladder style showing the evolution of horses.
    How they had come from having many toes to the hoof.
    But they found that it did not work that way and that some of the smaller animals came after the larger and three toes came after two toes. So it kinda messed up the picture. No problem though that is just evolution jumping back and forth rather than the slow steady progression predicted.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 350 by mark24, posted 07-09-2008 8:04 AM mark24 has not replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 375 of 402 (474617)
    07-09-2008 5:36 PM
    Reply to: Message 373 by Rahvin
    07-09-2008 5:14 PM


    Re: Scientist
    Rahvin writes:
    Whether John agrees or not, the Earth orbits the Sun,
    The sun also orbits the earth. It just takes 200 million years to make the trip. If I am wrong feel free to correct me.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 373 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 5:14 PM Rahvin has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 376 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 5:42 PM ICANT has not replied
     Message 379 by Organicmachination, posted 07-09-2008 8:02 PM ICANT has replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 385 of 402 (474636)
    07-09-2008 9:42 PM
    Reply to: Message 379 by Organicmachination
    07-09-2008 8:02 PM


    Re: Scientist
    Here I find:
    CHICAGO -- Astronomers focusing on a star at the center of the Milky Way say they have measured precisely for the first time how long it takes the sun to circle its home galaxy: 226 million years. The last time the sun was at this exact spot of its galactic orbit, dinosaurs ruled the world.
    Since earth is in the Milky Way the sun has to go around the earth every 226 million years.
    Unless you got a better explanation.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 379 by Organicmachination, posted 07-09-2008 8:02 PM Organicmachination has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 392 by lyx2no, posted 07-09-2008 10:44 PM ICANT has replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 389 of 402 (474646)
    07-09-2008 10:28 PM
    Reply to: Message 373 by Rahvin
    07-09-2008 5:14 PM


    Re: Scientist
    Message 376
    Rahvin writes:
    Perhaps you could try responding to a relevant portion of my post, rather than latching on to a minor part of a single sentence that serves only to redirect the topic on a completely unrelated tangent?
    I am sorry I did not know we were conversing again I thought you was just being polite and answering my question. I apologize.
    I do hate to upset you so much.
    Rahvin writes:
    I don't know, ICANT. Was the Declaration of Independence something that can be attributed to all of the signatories, or is it something all of their names are "attached to?"
    Well those guys sit around and worked up the documents and knew exactly what was in them. So I would say yes since their physical signatures are on the document.
    Rahvin writes:
    And what do you mean by "their names are attached to" anyway? Do you really think some lawyer wrote up the brief and then just randomly chose the names of 72 Nobel Prize winners to "attach?" Do YOU sign documents related to court trials that you don't agree with? I know I certainly wouldn't.
    I think we could agreement that a law firm drew up this law suit.
    How many lawyers worked on it I would not know or care.
    The 72 Nobel Prize winners were specifically selected, not randomly chosen.
    Do I think they read the documents in their entirety before they allowed their names to be used since they did not sign the documents.
    No, I doubt if 2 did. They documents were explained and they agreed to allow their names to be used as they were in sympathy with the case.
    Rahvin writes:
    It's amusing that your question seems intended to cast doubt on the veracity and the support of the Nobel Prize winners of this document, in much the same way the law they were fighting intended specifically to cast doubt on the Theory of Evolution. The fact is that this was a legal brief filed witht he support (and likely authorship) of those Nobel Prize winners specifically to affirm that the Theory of Evolution is one of the strongest theories in all of science, on par with any other biological theory, and that attempts to cast doubt specifically on the Theory of Evolution because it is (in part) a theory of human origins but not on any other theory demonstrates a clear religious motivation.
    My questions are always asked to cast doubt on anything I am discussing. Unless I am just asking for information as I did in the post you first answered. If you think I am bad here you should see me when I get together with a bunch of preachers and we discuss doctrine or the Bible.
    Do you think these Nobel Prize winners took time out of their life to help put together a legal brief. No way. One may have been consulted but I doubt that.
    Rahvin writes:
    The truth is, the Theory of Evolution is considered to be as reliable in the accuracy of its predictions as the Theory of Gravity - both are theories backed by mountains of evidence, and yet no reasonable person would question the Theory of Gravity. Questions pertaining to the Theory of Evolution are solely the purview of those whose religious beliefs run counter to the predictions of the Theory of Evolution, in exactly the same way that the Heliocentric model of the solar system was once persecuted by religious authorities.
    Rahvin I know you believe what you are saying, I am sorry I don't because I can only see mole hills where there are supposed to be mountains.
    As far as evolution is concerned it does not bother me that it does not agree with what I believe. I read on here somewhere that everything must have opposites. So you have creation on one side and on the opposite side you have evolution. We can make a choice what we want to believe. The reasons don't matter what does is that we have a choice.
    The rest of your post was not addressed to me but through me.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 373 by Rahvin, posted 07-09-2008 5:14 PM Rahvin has not replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 391 of 402 (474649)
    07-09-2008 10:44 PM
    Reply to: Message 388 by subbie
    07-09-2008 10:13 PM


    Re-ToE
    subbie writes:
    Rahvin writes:
    Extrapolating the predictions of the Theory of Evolution backwards in time predicts a fossil record exactly like the one we observe in reality.
    I think that was Bluejay.
    subbie writes:
    When the predictions that the ToE makes coincide with real world observations, this is a very powerful confirmation of the accuracy of the ToE.
    Who/What decides what the predictions are that the ToE makes?
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 388 by subbie, posted 07-09-2008 10:13 PM subbie has not replied

    ICANT
    Member
    Posts: 6769
    From: SSC
    Joined: 03-12-2007
    Member Rating: 1.5


    Message 393 of 402 (474652)
    07-09-2008 10:57 PM
    Reply to: Message 392 by lyx2no
    07-09-2008 10:44 PM


    Re: A Better Explanation
    lyx2no writes:
    You assume the the galactic center lies within the limits of the ecliptic (and, likely, on the ecliptic). You assume wrongly.
    The earth revolves on its axis.
    The earth goes around the sun every 365 1/4 days.
    The sun goes around the Milky Way every 226 million years.
    My assumptions would be that the sun goes somewhere toward the outer parts of the Milky Way.
    Then again my assumptions does not make much difference.
    If the sun goes around in a 226 million year circle while the earth is going around the sun then the sun has to circle the earth once every 226 million years.
    Now please cure my ignorance.
    God Bless,

    "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 392 by lyx2no, posted 07-09-2008 10:44 PM lyx2no has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 396 by lyx2no, posted 07-09-2008 11:28 PM ICANT 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