Still don't believe in evolution? Try this!
- Thread starter MVP
- Start date
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
Here's a good one for ya! I love the name of his institution! "Global Brain Institute"!
Not only is this complete hogwash......there is NO evolution here! If anything, under man's pathetic rulership things continue to deteriorate so fast that, if not for divine intervention, the whole planet would be unfit for human or animal habitation!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...rent-species-evolved-2050-scientist-says.html
Not only is this complete hogwash......there is NO evolution here! If anything, under man's pathetic rulership things continue to deteriorate so fast that, if not for divine intervention, the whole planet would be unfit for human or animal habitation!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...rent-species-evolved-2050-scientist-says.html
I agree that the information in that link presented nothing about evolution, and there was no evolution there.
Meaning you don't change? Any change is evolution.
Thanks for clearing that up.
MVP
Well-Known Member
https://www.foxnews.com/health/2014...ssing-cerebellum-went-unnoticed-for-24-years/
I am sometimes wondering what part of the brain is missing in CJ.
I am sometimes wondering what part of the brain is missing in CJ.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
That's what the cultists say, but a few have reluctantly conceded to preserve their scientific integrity.
Tom Cavalier-Smith (Evolutionary Biologist): For none of the cases mentioned by Behe is there yet a comprehensive and detailed explanation of the probable steps in the evolution of the observed complexity.
Robert Dorit (Yale Molecular Biologist): In a narrow sense, Behe is correct when he argues that we do not yet fully understand the evolution of the flagellar motor or the blood clotting cascade.
Interpretation: We insist that natural selection can account for these things but we can't yet SHOW you how.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Yeah if your dick falls off you have evolved into a chick.
We do not yet have "a comprehensive and detailed explanation" of the reason different masses, separated by gravity, attract each other. We don't "fully understand" how gravity works. Yet, we do not attribute gravity to angels pushing things around.
The issue is not that it is impossible to show how these things could have happened, but that we know of so many different ways they could have happened and it is not possible to pick just one as the way it did happen.
You'll have to do better than the Behe quote-mines of critics that savaged his work.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
But can you prove it's not?
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
If all "ways" are labled "evolution" of course evolution can't help but be truth.
Real scientists don't claim "any movement is gravity" in the way cultist onebrow claims "any change is evolution."
The invisible force that causes a predictable and specific type of movement is labeled "gravity."
Other movement occurs through the influence/design of an outside force...
So if we see an apple fall to the ground we don't have to insist that it was a random occurence for our observation to be considered scientific. We recognice the invisible force called "gravity" as a scientifically relevant explanation for certain movement.
Back to your insistence that you couldn't possibly pick just one cultist story for how complex organs came into existence. Darwin claimed they came into existence in a specific way, "numerous successive, slight modifications," but none of your cultist stories have yet to involve this particular "way" so none of said stories can yet be called a "refutation."
"so many different" =/= "all"
Like your heroes, you quote-mine to smear. I said that in response to a comment about the fictitious notion of de-evolution. It is more precise to say that any change in the population as generations proceed is evolution.
Nonsense. The other three fundamental forces also cause the movement of mass, with neither design nor influence.
Similarly, when we see a change in a population over generations, we don't have to insist that it was a random occurrence for our observation to be considered scientific. We recognize the invisible mechanic called "selection" as a scientifically relevant explanation for certain changes.
Which modification came first, second, third, etc.? Did any appear at the same time? You can order a set of n items in n! ways (so, for 7 items, there are 5040 ways to order them). Even if you rule out 90% of the orders, that's still 50 to choose from, and we don't know which particular order is correct.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Do you subscribe to the belief of intelligent design?
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Keep posting, PearlWatson. I'm probably gonna read through this thread with my evolutionary biology prof (yes, he does have a PhD, which seems to matter so much to you).
♪alt13
Well-Known Member
You can't ask people to prove a negative especially when your claim is supernatural.
Can you prove that there is not invisible munchkins living in my beard, feeding on my soul, and producing magic elixirs to protect me from evil spirits that if given the chance would rearrange my chacras putting my genital chi on my third eye ultimately making me a bigger dickhead than I already am?
When you posted this, I did not even consider you to be asking the question seriously, but you managed to get a couple of other posters to respond as if you were. Well done?
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
I just showed my research supervisor, who has a PhD, an MSc, and runs an extremely successful research lab.
He said he completely agrees with me, and that it's a common sentiment in academia.