Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How can evolution explain body symmetry?
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 206 of 284 (226962)
07-28-2005 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by iano
07-28-2005 7:11 AM


Re: Darwin revisited?
I read your post and I'm depressed for the future. Honestly.
So very depressed.
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 07:21 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 7:11 AM iano has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 212 of 284 (226992)
07-28-2005 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 211 by iano
07-28-2005 9:06 AM


Admin release of topics
sign.....
One of the problems we have as a forum is that we are a target for hit and run posters, you know the type "if EVILoution was true it would be a fact not a theory!", "I don't come from no dirty monkey and let me tell you...."
and so on.
So as a community, we decided that the best way forward was to have an approval process that cut out much of the dross that you find on other sites. We as a COMMUNITY like it like that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 211 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 9:06 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by Parasomnium, posted 07-28-2005 9:32 AM CK has not replied
 Message 214 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 10:14 AM CK has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 215 of 284 (227036)
07-28-2005 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 214 by iano
07-28-2005 10:14 AM


Re: Admin release of topics
Well you'd need to ask the american posters about that.
My apologies for jumping the gun on that one.
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 10:17 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 214 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 10:14 AM iano has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 219 of 284 (227115)
07-28-2005 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 218 by iano
07-28-2005 2:06 PM


Re: What's up Indoc...?
quote:
make all the difference between, for example Evolutionary biochemistry and ID biochemistry
That the page is blank when we turn to that section?
quote:
There isn't a time from birth, when a person is free of being told Evolution is the way it happened. At every stage of development, at every stage of life, that's the message. I'm not implying that scientists are robots, incapable of free thought. I just don't think the thought is as free as some like to believe. Maybe there's a way by which this indoctrination could be resisted by men and woman. If there is, I wonder by what mechanism?
But we are even MORE strongly "indoctrinated" about gravity from an early age. If what you say is true we should have a nice simple theory for that and no argument.
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 02:23 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 218 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 2:06 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 221 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 2:27 PM CK has replied
 Message 230 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 3:31 PM CK has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 222 of 284 (227121)
07-28-2005 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by iano
07-28-2005 2:27 PM


Re: The kings new clothes
Oh sorry - the smiley was for fun but the message wasn't, the page really is blank. Iders don't actually do experiments or perform anything that resembles research. They just publish blogs about whatever current idea they have.
I know you may think I'm pulling you leg but I'm not!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 2:27 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 3:22 PM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 225 of 284 (227137)
07-28-2005 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by iano
07-28-2005 3:00 PM


Re: In Doctor, In Nation.
And it occurs to me that your argument is one against the truth of the christian religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 3:00 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 226 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 3:10 PM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 231 of 284 (227147)
07-28-2005 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by iano
07-28-2005 3:31 PM


Gravity - more serious answer to follow
by Ellery Schempp
quote:
All physics textbooks should include this warning label:
This textbook contains material on Gravity. Universal Gravityis a theory, not a fact, regarding the natural law of attraction. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.
he Universal Theory of Gravity is often taught in schools as a fact, when in fact it is not even a good theory.
First of all, no one has measured gravity for every atom and every star. It is simply a religious belief that it is universal. Secondly, school textbooks routinely take false statements. For example,the moon goes around the earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would show that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Anybody can look up at night and see the obvious gaps in gravity theory.
The existence of tides is often taken as a proof of gravity, but this is logically flawed. Because if the moon's gravity were responsible for a bulge underneath it, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are 2 -- not 1 -- high tides every day. It is far more likely that tides were given us by an Intelligent Creator long ago and they have been with us ever since. In any case, two high tides falsifies gravity.
There are numerous other flaws. For example, astronomers, who seem to have a fetish for gravity, tell us that the moon rotates on its axis but at the same time it always presents the same face to the earth. This is patently absurd. Moreover, if gravity were working on the early earth, then earth would have been bombarded out of existence by falling asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk. Furthermore, gravity theory suggests that the planets have been moving in orderly orbits for millions and millions of years, which wholly contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Since everything in the Universe tends to disorder according to the 2nd Law, orderly orbits are impossible. This cannot be resolved by pointing to the huge outpouring of energy from the sun. In fact, it is known that the flux of photons
from the sun and the solar wind actually tends to push earth away.
There are numerous alternative theories that should be taught on an equal basis. For example, the observed behavior of the earth revolving around the sun can be perfectly explained if the sun has a net positive charge and the planets have a net negative charge, since opposite charges attract and the force is an inverse-square law, exactly as the increasingly discredited Theory of Gravity. Physics and chemistry texts emphasize that this is the explanation for electrons going around the nucleus, so if it works for atoms, why not for the solar system? The answer is simple: scientific orthodoxy.
The US Patent Office has never issued a patent for anti-gravity. Why is this? According to natural law and homeopathy, everything exists in opposites: good-evil; grace-sin; positive charges-negative charges; north poles-south poles; good vibes-bad vibes; etc. We know there are anti-evolutionists, so why not anti-gravitationalists? It is clearly a matter of the scientific establishment elite protecting their own. Anti-gravity papers are routinely rejected from peer-reviewed journals, and scientists who propose anti-gravity quickly lose their funding. Universal gravity theory is just a way to keep the grant money flowing.
Even Isaac Newton, said to be the discoverer of gravity, knew there were problems with the theory. He claims to have invented the idea early in his life, but he knew that no mathematician of his day would approve his theory, so he invented a whole new branch of mathematics, called fluxions, just to prove his theory. This became calculus, a deeply flawed branch having to do with so-called infinitesimals which have never been observed. Then when Einstein invented a new theory of gravity, he, too, used an obscure bit of mathematics called tensors. It seems that every time there is a theory of gravity, it is mixed up with fringe mathematics. Newton, by the way, was far from a secular scientist, and the bulk of his writings is actually on theology and Christianity. His dabbling in gravity, alchemy, and calculus was a mere sideline, perhaps an aberration best left forgotten in describing his career and faith in a Creator.
To make matters worse, proponents of gravity theory hypothesize about mysterious things called gravitons and gravity waves. These have never been observed, and when some accounts of detecting gravity waves were published, the physicists involved had to quickly retract them. Every account of anti-gravity and gravity waves quickly turns to laughter. This is not a theory suitable for children. And even children can see how ridiculous it is to imagine that people in Australia are upside down with respect to us, as gravity theory would have it. If this is an example of the predictive power of the theory of gravity, we can see that at the core there is no foundation.
Gravity totally fails to explain why Saturn has rings and Jupiter does not. It utterly fails to account for obesity. In fact, what it does explain is far out-weighed by what it does not explain. When the planet Pluto was discovered in 1930 by Clyde Tombaugh, he relied on gravitational calculations. But Tombaugh was a Unitarian, a liberal religious group that supports the Theory of Gravity. The modern-day Unitarian-Universalists continue to rely on liberal notions and dismiss ideas of anti-gravity as heretical. Tombaugh never even attempted to justify his gravitational calculations on the basis of Scripture, and he went on to be a founding member of the liberal Unitarian Fellowship of Las Cruces, New Mexico.
It is safe to say that without the Theory of Gravity, there would be no talk about a Big Bang, and important limitations in such sports as basketball would be lifted. This would greatly benefit the games and enhance revenue as is proper in a faith-based, free-enterprise society.
The theory of gravity violates common sense in many ways. Adherents have a hard time explaining, for instance, why airplanes do not fall. Since anti-gravity is rejected by the scientific establishment, they resort to lots of hand-waving. The theory, if taken seriously, implies that the default position for all airplanes is on the ground. While this is obviously true for Northwest airplanes (relying on A Wing and a Prayer), it appears that Jet Blue and Southwest have a superior theory that effectively harnesses forces that overcome so-called gravity.
It is unlikely that the Law of Gravity will be repealed given the present geo-political climate, but there is no need to teach unfounded theories in the public schools. There is, indeed, evidence that the Theory of Gravity is having a grave effect on morality. Activist judges and left-leaning teachers often use the phrase what goes up must come down as a way of describing gravity, and relativists have been quick to apply this to moral standards and common decency.
It is not even clear why we need a theory of gravity -- there is not a single mention in the Bible, and the patriotic founding fathers never referred to it. Finally, the mere name Universal Theory of Gravity or Theory of Universal Gravity (the secularists like to use confusing language) has a distinctly socialist ring to it. The core idea of to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass is communist. There is no reason that gravity should apply to the just and the unjust equally, and the saved should have relief from such universalism. If we have Universal Gravity now, then Universal health care will be sure to follow. It is this kind of Universalism that saps a nation's moral fiber.
Overall, the Theory of Universal Gravity is just not an attractive theory. It is based on borderline evidence, has many serious gaps in what it claims to explain, is clearly wrong in important respects,and has social and moral deficiencies. If taught in the public schools, by mis-directed educators, it has to be balanced with alternative, more attractive theories with genuine gravamen and spiritual gravitas.
by Ellery Schempp posted by Kiri 2/18/2005 on the ARN Intelligent
Design discussion board
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 03:46 PM
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 03:55 PM
This message has been edited by Charles Knight, 28-Jul-2005 03:56 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 3:31 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 5:23 PM CK has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 252 of 284 (227319)
07-29-2005 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 251 by iano
07-29-2005 11:32 AM


About gravity
In regards to gravity (this is the slimmed down slummers guide) - we have no real idea how it works or what it does. Yet you would never get that impression from school. We know far less about it than we do about the TOE.
How come you are more concerned about Evolution than gravity considering our knowledge about the one is more extensive than the other? Surely you should take care of gravity first and then come back to evolution in schools once you have sorted that one? I mean if you are working at this from a rational angle...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 11:32 AM iano has not replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 257 of 284 (227328)
07-29-2005 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by iano
07-29-2005 11:43 AM


Re: Drivers.....Re-start your engines...
But what makes TOE specifically different?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 11:43 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 259 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 11:58 AM CK 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