Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How can evolution explain body symmetry?
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 243 of 284 (227294)
07-29-2005 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 236 by iano
07-28-2005 6:20 PM


Re: In Doctor, In Nation.
Iano writes:
most people have come to believe it simply because they were repeatedly told so - not becasue they have critically analysed the data for themselves. Do you agree?
I don't agree either. I was raised in a strict religeous household. Up until the age of 16 I had never even heard of evolution other than from my mother who claimed that it was some evil Godless scheme to undermine religion. I had this view repeatedly beaten into me for more years than I care to remember. As soon as I had any degree of freedom at all I went to the library and started taking out books on evolution and other sciences. I wanted to find out what all the fuss was about and why the evil scientists were trying to screw us all over.
Guess what I discovered. The whole field of Evolution, Chemistry, Biology and Physics all just began to fall into place as a perfectly merged whole. Suddenly everything made sense and at about this time I decided to continue my education into college and beyond.
Could you also agree that at least up until the time they entered science college, the average scientist is really in no better position to evaluate the data for themselves, free of 'exterior forces' than the man in the street?
Absolutely not!
Anyone entering college to study any of the sciences has to have a very inquisitive nature and has to be able to formulate their own questions and find their own answers right from the start. These are exactly the kind of people with the greatest resistence to any kind of "indoctrination".
In order to reach PHD level and beyond, students usually have to come up with a completely novel idea and pursue it to its conclusion through postulation and experimentation. They are given guidence where needed but on the whole they are on their own. No indoctrination is going to survive that.
The only indoctrination that I was ever exposed to was the church and due to my inquisitiveness and sheer pigheadedness, it didn't stick.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by iano, posted 07-28-2005 6:20 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 11:32 AM PurpleYouko has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 263 of 284 (227348)
07-29-2005 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 251 by iano
07-29-2005 11:32 AM


Re: MI
Hi to you too Iano.
Why someone would continually beat a view into someone to convince of something they had never heard of? Never heard of evolution; no tv, no books, nobody outside the household...see defintion of MI for a more complete list then re-evaluate. I take your statement to be a little hyperbolic. If it's not hyperbole and you've really never ever heard of evolution, yet lived in an average scientifically exposed society, then you would form a very tiny minority.
I did say "other than from my mother". Seriously she was the only source of information wrt evolution until about the age of 16. It was never mentioned in school and I don't remember seeing anything about it in any of the books I read as a child. I was 10 before my dad bought our first B&W TV and the only thing we watched on the 2 available channels was news, sport and re-runs of Charlie Chapelin and Buster keaton. (Incidentally we were one of the first families in the village to actually have a TV so I think I was pretty typical of kids in my area in the early 60s.)
The fact is that my mother did a pretty good job of keeping me isolated from any prejedicial outside influences. However it only served to fuel my need for knowledge. Many of my friends just accepted what they were told and grew up to become farmers or mechanics or factory workers. Nothing wrong with that but it was never enough for me.
"Uranium dating methods have shown that the earth is in fact 4500 million years old"...and said to yourself "but my mother told me it was only 4000 years old!!" Impressive it may have been, but at this point you were not yet at the level of knowledge to understand the intricacies of Uranium dating to know if it was accurate or whether the folk applying it where using it accurately. In other words, whether Uranium dating is accurate or not is not the point here.
I was around 16 and had long since begun to see problems with the biblical timescale. None of it made sense, even internally. That was why I went looking for science.
point is, you assumed it was true before you knew it to be true. That's EI at work.
No I didn't assume anything was true. The first thing the science texts taught me was that science is based on evidence and observations (OK I may have assumed that was true) which are then used to construct theories etc. etc.
As an example, I would read a book on local Geology then go to the places that it described and see if my observations agreed with what the text told me. In science you can't assume that anything is true, no matter who told you it was. I try my best to question everything until I am good and sure that it works the way it is claimed to. That included my professors at college. I must have driven them nuts with my questions.
In other words, intensive EI but BEFORE you got the education which may have allowed you to evaluate for yourself.
Then just how do you propose it is possible to get the necessary education to allow one to properly evaluate the evidence since that very education appears to equate to EI?
This just makes no sense to me at all.
Common sense, a basic understanding of scientific methodology and an inquisitive nature are all you need to sidestep any of this EI stuff that you propose. I would like to think that all students of science would have these attributes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 251 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 11:32 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 265 by iano, posted 07-29-2005 1:13 PM PurpleYouko has not replied
 Message 272 by Peter van der Hoog, posted 07-30-2005 12:04 PM PurpleYouko has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 266 of 284 (227390)
07-29-2005 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 264 by Omnivorous
07-29-2005 12:52 PM


Re: Topic: How can evolution explain body symmetry?
Topic: How can evolution explain body symmetry?
Is that really supposed to be the topic here?
We have got so far away from it that I had forgotten.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Omnivorous, posted 07-29-2005 12:52 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Omnivorous, posted 07-29-2005 1:38 PM PurpleYouko has not replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 276 of 284 (228374)
08-01-2005 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by Peter van der Hoog
07-30-2005 12:04 PM


Re: MI
Peter van der Hoog writes:
Suppose you suddenly heard a voice saying: "Hello PurpleYouko, here is God, the creator of the universe, your mother was right, the world was created only 5000 years ago." How to deal with such a voice and in addition: don't you agree with me that Iano is a true scientist, because:
HUUHH?
1) Iano observes that God behaves regularly and he observes a pattern to this phenomenon.
I don't recall him mentioning God at all.
2) Iano studies God and tries to figure out how God works
What? Are you reading the same thread as me?
3) Iano tries to figure out how God works by coming up with ideas that explain what we see.
UUHH? No he doesn't. A least not in his messages to me.
4) Iano is testing his ideas about God by noting what else we should see if his ideas are correct and then checking if we see those ideas.
No he isn't and what does any of this have to do with the thread anyway?
What I want to say: How to deal with people who feel the existince of a God?
I don't have the faintest idea seeing as how feelings of any kind are not scientifically defensible.
Besides which this is even way off topic for the OT part of the thread and it has absolutely zip to do with body symmetry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by Peter van der Hoog, posted 07-30-2005 12:04 PM Peter van der Hoog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Peter van der Hoog, posted 08-06-2005 7:02 PM PurpleYouko has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 278 of 284 (230910)
08-08-2005 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by Peter van der Hoog
08-06-2005 7:02 PM


Re: MI
You never feared God’s voice?
Nope! Never feared the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy either.
Iano is testing his ideas about God by noting what else we should see if his ideas are correct and then checking if we see those ideas. Read all his messages and you will agree with me.
I don't see this. Iano was suggesting that science in general and evolution in particular is indoctrinated into our children at school. What does this have to do with God?
Your reactions have no relation with symmetry, so who is blaming who? At least I am thinking of symmetry, while typing these sentences.
Granted that my responses were off topic but I attempted to correct that by discontinuing my discussion with Iano while he took it to a new thread. As I said before, your questions are even off topic for the OT bit of the thread. I just don't see the connection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Peter van der Hoog, posted 08-06-2005 7:02 PM Peter van der Hoog 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