Posts: 10670
Threads: 15
Joined: September 9, 2011
Reputation:
119
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 12, 2014 at 3:03 pm
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2014 at 3:08 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(September 12, 2014 at 12:57 pm)sswhateverlove Wrote: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this as it's simply speculation.
That's kind of my point, but sure. I'm rather interested in how you arrived at one of the alternative answers, and which one you agree with: 'probably' or 'even odds'?
(September 12, 2014 at 12:57 pm)sswhateverlove Wrote: If you read back, when I make claims about my friend's opinions, I follow it with "do you also have this opinion, why or why not"? Those are clarifying questions that seem reasonable (and respectful) to ask to determine how to proceed with the conversation.
Haven't bothered to look back, and I don't doubt you, but it sure FEELS like 'what your friends say' has been addressed multiple times. When will we have addressed it enough for you to stop bringing it up? I'm just asking for an estimate.
(September 12, 2014 at 12:57 pm)sswhateverlove Wrote: Such as the "constant" Big G?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...lide-show/
The attractive force (F) between two bodies is still directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance, r, (inverse-square law) between them, yes. The value of the constant is an approximation because it is very difficult to measure accurately. Being able to measure it more accurately is what one would hope would happen as research continues.
From the article you cited: "Most scientists think all these discrepancies reflect human sources of error, rather than a true inconstancy of big G. We know the strength of gravity hasn’t been fluctuating over the past 200 years, for example, because if so, the orbits of the planets around the sun would have changed, Quinn says."
(September 12, 2014 at 12:57 pm)sswhateverlove Wrote: A simple one would with regard to the "geocentric universe", man, did that throw people for a loop...
An idea formulated before the idea of developing descriptions of natural laws doesn't seem to fit the bill, nor is 'the universe revolves around the earth' a constant or law, and this religious teaching certainly shouldn't be laid at the foot of science, but it is interesting.
What data was misunderstood in your example? If you look up at night, it appears that the universe is revolving around the earth. To a goatherder, for all intents and purposes, that is what was happening. Did they misinterpret the data, or just not have all the information yet? They were wrong, but not as wrong as they would have been if they had concluded the universe is static. When more information was acquired, and the Church stopped persecuting those working on the science, the geocentric view was revised, and replaced with what could be called an actual scientific model. But from the point of view of an iron age goatherder, the previous model was equally useful. But it was a model, not a law or constant.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 12, 2014 at 3:50 pm
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2014 at 3:51 pm by Whateverist.)
Imagine being so important that entire threads are created just to document one or another of your alleged errors. That Darwin guy had it going on. Me, I can't hardly get through a day without being wrong once a day. And I don't care one fig. If Darwin has a made an error, I'm equally indifferent to it. But just show me another theory that better accounts for the change of life forms over time .. good luck.
(September 12, 2014 at 2:40 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: So was Darwin ever proven wrong in this thread?
Imagine being so important that entire threads are created just to document one or another of your alleged errors. That Darwin guy had it going on. Me, I can't hardly get through a day without being wrong once a day. And I don't care one fig. If Darwin has a made an error, I'm equally indifferent to it. But just show me another theory that better accounts for the change of life forms over time .. good luck.
Posts: 2962
Threads: 44
Joined: March 22, 2013
Reputation:
39
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 12, 2014 at 4:02 pm
(September 12, 2014 at 3:50 pm)whateverist Wrote: Imagine being so important that entire threads are created just to document one or another of your alleged errors. That Darwin guy had it going on. Me, I can't hardly get through a day without being wrong once a day. And I don't care one fig. If Darwin has a made an error, I'm equally indifferent to it. But just show me another theory that better accounts for the change of life forms over time .. good luck.
Well, Darwin was a theist earlier in his life and later changed to some form of agnosticism.
I suppose he was wrong about accepting theism as a valid world view.
Haha! See? Darwin was wrong!
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 13, 2014 at 2:25 am
(September 12, 2014 at 2:40 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: So was Darwin ever proven wrong in this thread?
I think he was wrong to mock those poor peruvians for not knowing that water boils at lower temperatures up on the Andes. But other than that...
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 13, 2014 at 3:38 am
(This post was last modified: September 13, 2014 at 3:45 am by Anomalocaris.)
(September 13, 2014 at 2:25 am)Alex K Wrote: (September 12, 2014 at 2:40 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: So was Darwin ever proven wrong in this thread?
I think he was wrong to mock those poor peruvians for not knowing that water boils at lower temperatures up on the Andes. But other than that...
Actually, it is often forgotten that Darwin was a noted (in his time) geologist as well as the first evolutionary biologist. But as an overarching framework, comparable to evolution by natural selection, didn't exist in geology in Darwin's time, Darwin got many things wrong.
Posts: 3837
Threads: 197
Joined: August 28, 2013
Reputation:
38
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 13, 2014 at 3:40 am
Well Darwin was certainly wrong about that beard. And also his sense that Victorian fashion was good.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Posts: 2962
Threads: 44
Joined: March 22, 2013
Reputation:
39
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 13, 2014 at 1:19 pm
(This post was last modified: September 13, 2014 at 1:20 pm by JesusHChrist.)
I knew it! Darwin was wrong about so many things.
Fashion, religion, facial hair, geology...
Isn't he the guy who said we'd see a crockoduck someday? Yeah. Right!
Still waiting Darwin ol buddy ol pal!
What else?
Posts: 3817
Threads: 5
Joined: November 19, 2012
Reputation:
54
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 13, 2014 at 7:42 pm
(September 12, 2014 at 2:40 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: So was Darwin ever proven wrong in this thread?
Not even close.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Posts: 18510
Threads: 129
Joined: January 19, 2014
Reputation:
91
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 14, 2014 at 4:25 am
And there are so many things he got right. For example, he drank Whiskey on his death bed. And that natural selection thing...
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Posts: 203
Threads: 6
Joined: September 11, 2014
Reputation:
3
RE: Darwin Proven Wrong?
September 14, 2014 at 7:05 pm
(This post was last modified: September 14, 2014 at 8:13 pm by sswhateverlove.)
Quote:Imagine being so important that entire threads are created just to document one or another of your alleged errors. That Darwin guy had it going on. Me, I can't hardly get through a day without being wrong once a day. And I don't care one fig. If Darwin has a made an error, I'm equally indifferent to it. But just show me another theory that better accounts for the change of life forms over time .. good luck.
Just saw this today. Not that it negates Darwin's theory, as Darwin did not specifically identify how natural selection occurs. I do realize that.
http://www.simonsfoundation.org/quanta/2...ame-place/
The subject of this thread was a bit provocative. I apologize. I guess it's not as bad at this one though... http://www.theguardian.com/science/2010/...enes-wrong
|
