As a general rule the ToE, as I understand it, predicts that animals behave in their own genetic self-interest.
The key, of course, is the first 4 words of that sentence. Since it is in fact a general rule, there are exceptions. One obvious area where one might expect to find exceptions would be in an intelligent organism with the ability to reason beyond their instincts. Does that description remind you of any organism in particular?
On the face of it, self-sacrificing behavior would seem to falsify the TOE.
Only if the ToE absolutely required that all organisms always act in their own self interests. If you can find one single biologist who claims that the ToE requires that, I'd be amazed and question the intelligence and/or sanity of that person.
But to dismiss the evidence and say it needs no explanation strikes me as an unscientific position.
It certainly would. Please point to one person who has done that and I'll set them right. On the other hand, it's also quite unscientific to assume that the ToE requires something that it doesn't, then point to the absence of that thing that the ToE doesn't require and claim that it falsifies the ToE. I've run into someone who actually does say that and I'm trying to set them right.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
™ Version 4.2
(1)
