Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,214 Year: 5,471/9,624 Month: 496/323 Week: 136/204 Day: 6/4 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Scientific Method For Beginners
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2811 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 44 of 138 (520846)
08-24-2009 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Arphy
08-24-2009 5:46 AM


Re: Creationists Versus The Scientific Method
Hi, Arphy.
Welcome to EvC!
Arphy writes:
Evolutionists can't get their story straight!
True enough (from a certain perspective).
The thing is that scientists aren't in it to tell a story. The Theory of Evolution is simply about the mechanisms that produce diversity, and you'll find that, although there are many different stories, all the stories are based on those mechanisms that we are uncovering.
I happen to love reading the stories of evolution's history. But, these are not the basis of the Theory of Evolution: rather, ToE is the basis of these stories. So, our inability to agree with one another about the stories is not important in determining how well we understand the process.
-----
Arphy writes:
...there are many varying views on precisely how everything happened including the beginning of life, beginning (or lack of beginning) of the universe, just to name some of the most obvious!
As has already been pointed out to you, these are not part of the Theory of Evolution. One thing that you should get used to is the concept that a scientific theory is not meant to define an entire philosophy or world view: it is only meant to explain a single set of related natural phenomena. Entire philosophies often do become attached to theories by some people, but don't confuse a philosophy (or a story) based on a theory with the theory itself.
Evolution is only the change in biological populations over time due to mutation and natural selection. Everything else is just something that you, or others, associate with "evolutionism." But, science doesn't work in terms of "-isms" the way religion does: it only works in terms of explanations for specific phenomena.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Arphy, posted 08-24-2009 5:46 AM Arphy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Arphy, posted 08-25-2009 7:00 AM Blue Jay has replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2811 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 52 of 138 (521040)
08-25-2009 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Arphy
08-25-2009 7:00 AM


Re: Creationists Versus The Scientific Method
Hi, Arphy.
Arphy writes:
If this were the case then nobody would be on here, as a change in biological populations over time due to mutation and natural selection is a vital part of creation theory. The two are not opposed.
Tell that to the creationist camp: the evolutionists have known this for years.
You are correct that creationists accept natural selection.
You are not correct that creationists accept mutation.
One of the primary thrusts of creationist "research" has been the attempt to discredit the notion of beneficial mutations. You may personally accept mutation as a part of your personal views, but this is not representative of the creationist/IDist community at large.
-----
Arphy writes:
In commen language when you mention the debate creation vs Evolution to someone the thought is (or should be if they have some knowledge of the history of the debate): Old universe and old earth where life originated as a simple single celled organism which through various processes proceeded to give us the diversity of life that we have today VS Comparitively young earth, Creation by God of various kinds of organisms which diversified to the diversity of life we have today, most fossils laid down by a catastrophic world wide flood.
And, when most people see the name "Arphy," I imagine it conjures up the image of a little dog that says, "Arf! Arf!" However, your avatar is a cat. You should conform to the common perception and change your avatar to a dog.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Arphy, posted 08-25-2009 7:00 AM Arphy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Arphy, posted 08-25-2009 9:07 PM Blue Jay has replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2811 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 63 of 138 (521154)
08-26-2009 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Arphy
08-25-2009 9:07 PM


Re: Creationists Versus The Scientific Method
Hi, Arphy.
Arphy writes:
What???, I think you have misunderstood the position of creationists and IDers.
No, I have not.
-----
Arphy writes:
In fact creationists do accept mutations just not the notion of information increasing beneficial mutations, there is a difference between the two.
But this is an entirely different view of evolution than the Theory of Evolution presents, which means you were wrong that the two are not in conflict.
-----
Arphy writes:
Just because my nickname is Arphy doesn't refute my argument.
This is what's commonly referred to as a "parody argument."
You said that we should change our terminology because of the popular viewpoint.
I said you should change your avatar because of the popular viewpoint.
They are, in principle, the same argument. If you accept one, you should have no problem with the other.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Arphy, posted 08-25-2009 9:07 PM Arphy 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