A Civil Discussion: Evolution, Science, Theology, Atheism, Climate

[sear]

#220 PS

Collecting all the viable breeding pairs is a small portion of the feat.
Our beloved Noah would also have had to assemble a floating barn big enough to store enough food for all the animals aboard the ark.
Some of them were ruminants.
Some were predators.
Each would have needed a food supply for a few months.

It's a charming story.
But it's not likely to be a factual historical account.
Anyone that disagrees need only do as Noah allegedly did.

No one will ever succeed at it.

 

[cancel2 2022]

You don't impress me at all, Tom.
Go talk to a snail.

Yeh stick to being the JPP racism hall monitor, Damo will be issuing a peaked cap, whistle and a shiny badge shortly.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk

 

[Phantasmal]

Evolution is a undeniable fact. We have observed changes in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. That is direct scientific evidence.

The theory of evolution explains how evolution via natural selection has created diversity.

I did not watch the video after reading about Berlinski who seems to to have acquainted himself with fossil evidence before attacking it, and also seems not to have an understanding of natural selection. I didn’t waste 40’mnutes of my time.

 

[Timshel]

What you describe is known as adaptation. Not evolution. Besides, don't evolutionists claim that evolution happens too slowly to observe it happening? Adaptation is the expression of genetic traits that already exist in DNA. Also, adaptations can be reversed. Evolution cannot. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that we evolved from apes. Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups.

Nope.

changes in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.

Is THE definition of evolution. Adaptation is typically used to describe changes within a single organism and, of course, not over successive generations.

http://www.nas.edu/evolution/Definitions.html

Evolution is a fact and the TOE and common descent is well supported by science.

OTOH, your religion is a fairy tale for children and halfwits.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Okay; I want to revisit this theory of evolution.

If man evolved from monkeys as the theory goes, why didn't the OTHER monkeys and apes evolve?

Well for one evolutionary theory doesn’t state that man evolved from ape. It’s the single biggest misconception of the theory and poof positive of science illiteracy. Evolutionary theory predicts that apes and human descended from common ancestors.

As for other monkeys and apes...well if you think about what you just said, the very variety of primates you just mentioned is evidence that they have and still are evolving.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Reject away but the vast majority if scientists are ATHEISTS.

it does not bode well for science if the vast majority of scientists are irrational......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

They evolved to their ideal point. Rightys seem to have avoided it too.

they also have reached the ideal point.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

#220 PS

Collecting all the viable breeding pairs is a small portion of the feat.
Our beloved Noah would also have had to assemble a floating barn big enough to store enough food for all the animals aboard the ark.
Some of them were ruminants.
Some were predators.
Each would have needed a food supply for a few months.

It's a charming story.
But it's not likely to be a factual historical account.
Anyone that disagrees need only do as Noah allegedly did.

No one will ever succeed at it.

your mistake is thinking Noah did it instead of God......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Well for one evolutionary theory doesn’t state that man evolved from ape. It’s the single biggest misconception of the theory and poof positive of science illiteracy. Evolutionary theory predicts that apes and human descended from common ancestors.

As for other monkeys and apes...well if you think about what you just said Derp, Derp, the very variety of primates you just mentioned is evidence that they have and still are evolving.

Mott evolved from a sheep.....

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I disagree w/ the basic premise, that the scientific community has opined that if their theories are true, religion must be false (if I'm reading that correctly).

Many scientists ARE religious; some have spoken about their pursuits as ultimately searching for god and an explanation for the universe. I always reject the premise that belief in evolution & abiogenesis are inconsistent w/ a belief in god & religion.

To be fair I don’t believe the OP opined that.

Personally I believe as Stephen Jay Gould did that science and religion are non over lapping magesteria. They both attempt to explain different kinds of mysteries of our universe. Neither is a mutually incompatible belief as they have their separate spheres.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

As Berlinski pointed out...there's big gubment money to be made with those studies.

Congratulations you’ve found an effective means to dismiss all scientific evidence in which an ugly fact contradicts your personal beliefs.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

It's impossible, and probably written wrong. How do the animals get to Noah anyway? Even if somehow they could cross oceans, they'd die before crossing. I've stated that the ark would need to be about the size of the Jin Mao Tower, or bigger. My guess is if anything was of it, it was just a flood in a certain area. People didn't know what size the world was, and only knew what was around them. The animals were probably just from around the area. If it rained that much the ark would need to be built a certain way, as a ship taking on that much rain would sink. So it would have to have the rain roll of it like a house.

This is the Jin Mao Tower, by the way.

And keep in mind that many cultures, on different continents, have their own great flood stories.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I did not watch the video after reading about Berlinski who seems to to have acquainted himself with fossil evidence before attacking it, and also seems not to have an understanding of natural selection. I didn’t waste 40’mnutes of my time.

So you're saying that although he has an accomplished scientific pedigree, he's one of those who the fundies have latched on to in a desperate attempt to "prove" Intelligent Design by using a scientist to bamboozle the doubters?

 

[Mott the Hoople]

There is nothing civil or intellectual in a discussion about evoulution from a religious nut job.
You premise is based on savage first century magical thinking that requires a level of insanity to buy into.
You are hopelessly out of touch with reality.

Well Leon those are pretty serious charges and if you make those you had better be able to back that up with a factual knowledge of the scientific principle in question and not just a “faith” in science.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

How does the THEORY of evolution square with religious beliefs?

It doesn’t have too. That’s a false choice. Evolutionary theory has nothing to say on God, the existence of God or the ultimate origin of life itself.

Evolutionary theory is simply a very robust explanation that biologist use to model speciation. Whether you like it or not, or believe in it or not, for whatever reason, the fact remains that it is a very powerful tool in understanding how living systems adapt to their environment and, over time, form new and different species.

It’s so useful, in fact, that most forms of applied biology are founded on the principle of evolutionary theory.

 

[Darth Omar]

So you're saying that although he has an accomplished scientific pedigree, he's one of those who the fundies have latched on to in a desperate attempt to "prove" Intelligent Design by using a scientist to bamboozle the doubters?

Why is doubting a bad thing all of a sudden?

When did skepticism fall out of favor?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Why is doubting a bad thing all of a sudden?
When did skepticism fall out of favor?

It hasn't fallen out of favor; in fact, I believe that it is mandatory. I was making an observation that it's possible that the scientist in the OP is being used by fundie religionists to silence the religious doubters.

If you are concerned about skepticism being out of favor, you need look only to your closest fundamentalist church. Mainstream Christian churches seem far less concerned with pushing the ID schtick, and are more comfortable with science and religion co-existing.

 

[Darth Omar]

It doesn’t have too. That’s a false choice. Evolutionary theory has nothing to say on God, the existence of God or the ultimate origin of life itself.

Evolutionary theory is simply a very robust explanation that biologist use to model speciation. Whether you like it or not, or believe in it or not, for whatever reason, the fact remains that it is a very powerful tool in understanding how living systems adapt to their environment and, over time, form new and different species.

It’s so useful, in fact, that most forms of applied biology are founded on the principle of evolutionary theory.

The Origin of the Species lol.

I’m good with speciation but I struggle with some aspects of common descent [particularly the ape-like to man jump] and I have my doubts about the creative power of natural selection.

There is plenty of room for God in it unless one takes a strict literalist view on the early chapters of Genesis.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

You must have missed the "THEORY" part of "Theory" of Evolution.

You’re using “theory” in the common sense of a guess or idea. That’s not what a scientific theory is. A scientific theory is an overarching explanation that describes some natural or related natural phenomena and a scientific theory must meet specific criteria to be considered a scientific theory.

Among those are that it must be based on fact. Gravitational theory, for example, is based on the fact of the law of gravity. That is that every particle of matter attracts all other particles of matter with a force that is directly proportional to their mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centers.

The theory of evolution by natural selection is based on three laws of nature that are easily observed. The law of inheritance. All off spring are similar to their parents, the law of variation, all off spring have differences from their parents. The law of superfecundincy, that all species produce more off spring than will survive to reproductive maturity.

 

[Darth Omar]

It hasn't fallen out of favor; in fact, I believe that it is mandatory. I was making an observation that it's possible that the scientist in the OP is being used by fundie religionists to silence the religious doubters.

If you are concerned about skepticism being out of favor, you need look only to your closest fundamentalist church. Mainstream Christian churches seem far less concerned with pushing the ID schtick, and are more comfortable with science and religion co-existing.

It seems skepticism is ok unless it’s applied to certain theories.

I find that to be pretty ironic.