Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 28, 2024, 10:08 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Darwinism
#11
RE: Darwinism
(May 20, 2009 at 8:14 pm)icthus Wrote: Kyu,as for your post, it has been my observation in the past that when 2 people have differing viewpoints and 1 must resort to namecalling it is typically for one of two reasons.
1.. Either he does not know enough about his position to even try to defend it
OR
2..He is to intimidated by the other man's viewpoint to try to defend his own.

Which one is it?????????????????????

Intimidated by you? Not at all dear boy, I am simply a realist ... if someone says something that's clever I compliment them for it, if someone says something that's really fucking stupid I tell them! I'm WYSIWYG.

Kyu
Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings!
Come over to the dark side, we have cookies!

Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator
Reply
#12
RE: Darwinism
(May 21, 2009 at 4:07 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I'm WYSIWYFG.

Kyu

Fixed Cool Shades
Reply
#13
RE: Darwinism
Quote:Let us make one thing perfectly clear, the Theory of Evolution through natural selection does not fall or stand with what Charles Darwin could and could not prove at the time.


Preciesly. Good point there Leo!
- Science is not trying to create an answer like religion, it tries to find an answer.
Reply
#14
RE: Darwinism
Evolution is very straightforward. If you're having trouble with it then may I suggest this site.

http://www.oggtheclever.com/evolution.html
[Image: cinjin_banner_border.jpg]
Reply
#15
RE: Darwinism
(May 30, 2009 at 2:02 pm)Darwinian Wrote: Evolution is very straightforward. If you're having trouble with it then may I suggest this site.

http://www.oggtheclever.com/evolution.html

Somehow I find this site lacking details. Smile
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Pastafarian
Reply
#16
RE: Darwinism
But evolution is very simple concept in it's essence.

As Dawkins said in an interview with Lawrence Kraus...it's so simple that it can even pretty much be described in a single word: "Heredity."

EvF
Reply
#17
RE: Darwinism
He has said that, but I do not agree.

In fact, if his new book "The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution" only contains the word Heredity I will be mightily pissed.
Best regards,
Leo van Miert
Horsepower is how hard you hit the wall --Torque is how far you take the wall with you
Pastafarian
Reply
#18
RE: Darwinism
Lol! - I will be surprised if it doesn't contain a few more words than that at least lmao.

EvF
Reply
#19
RE: Darwinism
Well, I was reading through the threads and I realized that the discussion just sort of stopped with the challenge to icthus to give support of his view. I'm not sure why he never responded, or what he believes other than that he is a Christian and apparently does not believe in evolution. Honestly I am quite skeptical of macro evolution (not micro) myself, so I thought I would add some positive scientific evidence to the discussion for there being a creator/designer for life since that is what the challenge was for.
Though I feel that the Cambrian explosion is still a problem for evolution and yes, I did read most of the links given, frankly I got board by the third one and stopped reading. They still don't explain the extremely rapid diversity and complexity (in Geological time scale). The diversity being the large number of phyla, which is the most diversity between species and consequently requires the most amount of genetic mutation/natural selection/evolution. The Complexity goes with that, being the change from single celled organisms to complex multi-cell organisms with complex biological systems is so short a time span, nor is a proven mechanism capable of bringing it about by natural processes given, but rather assumed.
As for positive evidence, there are two lines of argument that I find convincing: 1) the irreducibly complex systems we see in life that defy a neo-darwininan evolution of random mutation and natural selection by blind natural processes. Things like the bacteria flagellum and the eye to name a few. Yes, I know these are hot topics, but I have yet to see anything other than a fanciful story to explain them. Even if it is a "plausible" story, that says nothing of its truth value or scientific value. Once past the story telling, the actual evidence seems to make the question even harder to explain. 2) is the information that is found in life, specifically in the DNA of living organisms, not to mention the origin of DNA itself. I have yet to see any explanation for the information that is found in life or how random mutation and natural selection can attribute for a genetic language. And yes, I use the term language on purpose, because it has all the marks of being a language. This is after all a common terminology when describing the complexity and purpose of it, because it fits all the trademarks of being one.
I know I have not given many details, but I wanted to see if there would be a response and what direction the discussion would follow. I look forward to what you have to say.
"An unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates
Reply
#20
RE: Darwinism
(June 18, 2009 at 12:01 pm)SenseiOtho Wrote: As for positive evidence, there are two lines of argument that I find convincing: 1) the irreducibly complex systems we see in life that defy a neo-darwininan evolution of random mutation and natural selection by blind natural processes. Things like the bacteria flagellum and the eye to name a few. Yes, I know these are hot topics, but I have yet to see anything other than a fanciful story to explain them. Even if it is a "plausible" story, that says nothing of its truth value or scientific value. Once past the story telling, the actual evidence seems to make the question even harder to explain.
http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/icdmyst/ICDmyst.html
Roughly half way down the page, this article deals with the bacterial flagellum and has many citations which you're free to pursue also. Although it isn't conclusive, you must bear in mind that just because we aren't absolutely sure yet, this doesn't mean we won't be soon. Science has many, MANY active areas of research. Obviously we don't know everything, otherwise we wouldn't be researching still.

As for the eye: http://www.news-medical.net/news/5980.aspx

Again, not conclusive, but it gives a huge indication. When you consider all options, is it really more likely that some onmipotent being fiddled with our DNA at random intervals while purposefully leading us towards the worldwide hostility and suffering we see to today- just because we can't explain our eyes fully at this present moment?

SenseiOtho Wrote:2) is the information that is found in life, specifically in the DNA of living organisms, not to mention the origin of DNA itself. I have yet to see any explanation for the information that is found in life or how random mutation and natural selection can attribute for a genetic language.

I'm not sure I understand what you are saying here. If I'm just being slow-minded I'm sure somebody else will be able to respond without you having to clarify your point.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)