|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
Not only was Gould's "science" the result of an atheism-inspired, a priori commitment to evolution, his pathetic PE was just a re-hash of spontaneous generation - superstition, in other words.
Dredge writes:
The whole story is, Gould clearly saw the evidence for creation, but as a committed atheist, he tried to explain it away with his stupid PE theory. This is called "putting words in other peoples' mouths". This is as dishonest as it gets.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.0
|
Not only was Gould's "science" the result of an atheism-inspired, a priori commitment to evolution, his pathetic PE was just a re-hash of spontaneous generation - superstition, in other words. So you haven't read the Gould and Eldredge paper about Punctuated Equilibrium or any of his books or other papers. You seem pretty angry about the guy, considering you don't know shit about him. Edited by Tanypteryx, : spellingWhat if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
So when Satan communicated his will to Judas Iscariot, do you imagine he did so in an audible voice that everyone could hear, or was the communication achieved silently? If silently, how does that work? I dunno, quote the relevant passages and let's look at them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10084 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Dredge writes: Not only was Gould's "science" the result of an atheism-inspired, a priori commitment to evolution, his pathetic PE was just a re-hash of spontaneous generation - superstition, in other words. "That's just like, your opinion, man"--The Dude
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Dredge writes:
Figures of speech are habitually silent.
If silently, how does that work?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Pressie writes:
The trouble is, not all paleontologists share Gould's view that "transitional forms ... are abundant between larger groups": Stephen Jay Gould:"Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationistswhether through design or stupidity, I do not knowas admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups." "Darwin predicted that the fossil record should show a reasonably smooth continuum of ancestor-descendant pairs with a satisfactory number of intermediates between major groups ... Such smooth transitions were not found in Darwin's time ... We are now more than a hundred years after Darwin and little has changed ... and the basic situation is not much changed ... We actuallty have fewer examples of smooth tranistions than we had in Darwin's time, because some of the old examples have turned out to be invalid ...If Darwin were writing today he would still have to cite a disturbing lack of missing links or transitional forms between the major groups of organisms." - David Raup, from an essay in Godfrey's Scientists Confront Creationism. S. J. Gould: "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology."This begs the question: Why is it "a trade secret"? Does keeping things "secret" sound like what goes on in honest science? Niles Eldredge: "We paleontologist have said that the history of life supports [gradual change], all the while really knowing that it does not."Translation: Evolutionary scientists tell lies. Golly gosh, doesn't that come as a surprise! S. J. Gould: "We can tell tales of improvement for some groups, but in honest moments we must admit that the history of complex life (ie, the fossil record) is more a story of multifarious variations about a set of basis designs than than a saga of accumulating excellence."This is the same man who said "transitional forms ... are abundant between larger groups." Make up your mind! Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
ringo writes:
You've missed my point. Explaining "how" is not explaining "why".
Dredge writes:
God could make the sky and grass any colour he wants to. Science can't explain why he chose blue and green, respectively. Science can and does explain why the sky IS blue and the grass IS green. You can put any fairy-tale spin on it that you want but that's not as satisfying as knowing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CRR Member (Idle past 2271 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: |
Artificial molecule evolves in the lab , 08 January 2009 by Ewen Callaway "Joyce’s team created its own molecule from scratch, called R3C. It performed a single function: stitching two shorter RNA molecules together to create a clone of itself." In other words they started with 3 carefully constructed RNA strings and achieved ligation of the two short strings in a carefully controlled laboratory environment. Nothing like these 3 RNA strands will appear naturally. There are a lot of problems with obtaining RNA by blind undirected chemistry, but it's amazing what can be achieved by an intelligent designer. Self-replicating? Sort of. But not one that is likely to occur naturally.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
I don't know that he does - I'm saying it's entirely possible that he does.
Dredge writes:
Agree. But the existence of nested hierarchies doesn't rule out the existence of a Common Designer. How do know the Creator doesn't have a penchant for nested hierarchies? How do you know that he does? The burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate that life was created.Porsches don't fall into a nested hierarchy.
What is the difference between Porsche making a 'family' of sports cars and a nested hierarchy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanypteryx writes:
Angry? Actually Gould and Eldrige (sic*) seem to be more honest than most about what the fossil record reveals. So you haven't read the Gould and Eldrige paper about Punctuated Equilibrium or any of his books or other papers. You seem pretty angry about the guy, considering you don't know shit about him. * The correct spelling is Eldredge (think of El Dredge, which is what my many fans in Mexico call me). ----------------------------------------------------- While Gould admits that the fossil record is characterised by "sudden appearance" and "stasis', is seems that it never occurred to him that this is the exact opposite of what Darwinian theory predicts. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CRR Member (Idle past 2271 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: |
What is the difference between Porsche making a 'family' of sports cars and a nested hierarchy? Or what about a nested of heirachy of vehicles in general? Would that prove that one evolved from another? (Beware Berra's Blunder) Edited by CRR, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
NewCatsEye writes:
John 13:27: "As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. So Jesus told him, "What you are about to do, do quickly."" Dredge writes:
I dunno, quote the relevant passages and let's look at them. So when Satan communicated his will to Judas Iscariot, do you imagine he did so in an audible voice that everyone could hear, or was the communication achieved silently? If silently, how does that work?How did Judas know what to do? Satan told him, of course, but there is no evidence in the Gospel account of anyone else in the room hearing what Satan said to him, except Jesus. Furthermore, if you study accounts of demonic possession, the demon can only make itself heard in a physical, audible sense through the mouth of the human victim; otherwise it is silent. Interestingly, there are no accounts in the Bible of a demon ever appearing in the form of a human being (unlike accounts of the "good" angels who do take the form of humans). It seems demons need to possess humans or other creatures in order to manifest themselves in any physical sense. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given. Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined:
|
I wish to recant my statement that Stephen Jay Gould was an atheist. As far as I can ascertain, he was agnostic.
Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
It's more important that you retract your statement that evolution=atheism.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined:
|
Tangle writes:
It would be more accurate to say evolution = atheist theology. It's more important that you retract your statement that evolution=atheism. Michael Ruse, professor of philosophy and zoology at the University of Guelph, Canada (National Post, May 13, 2000, pp. B1,B3,B7): "Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religiona full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024