|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: How can Biologists believe in the ToE? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
AnswersInGenitals Member (Idle past 468 days) Posts: 673 Joined: |
I think you accidentally replied to the wrong post, Yes. Quite correct. I, of course, meant to reply to IAmJoseph. Is there anyway to change the post you're responding to? Sorry, RAZD, I never consider any of your insightful posts to be nonsensical. Edited by AnswersInGenitals, : No reason given. Edited by AnswersInGenitals, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1723 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
LOL I didn't notice that. You can always edit the post to say
"This was really in reply to [msg=-xxx] by IamJoseph"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2487 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So, are you saying that thousands of scientists are just really bad at doing science?
Like, incompetent? Also, why are predictions based upon the Theory of Evolution ever successful, if it is so incredibly wrong? Edited by nator, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3986 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Its not about detail of the ToE process but its principle and conclusion. One can select a preferred, contrived path to prove that pigs can fly too - leaving the pivotal factors in the 'millions of years' bin for further proof. I have responded to PO's question. There is fear, as well as an ascending trend against religion - thanks to Europe and Arabia, and it reached a point, ANY DREAM WILL DO. You say all what you saw in the wild of nature alligns with Darwin: so would a 1000 other explanations. Darwin took some factors such as growth points in different places, and alligned them with his ToE's factors; claimed speciation an elevation instead of anihilation; incorrectly categorised species; has no answers for what lay behind the actions he describes; failed to explain the relationship between reproduction against evolution; and failed to show any transit imprints of his thesis over millions of years of evolution. I concur we have no answers, because referring the matter to religion or the Creator is escapism from science; but Darwin does not explain any gaps or unknowns here - they remain unknowns mixed with grotesque premises. Eg: Let's say you discover that a growth in one life form group resembles or alligns with a growth point in another life form group, and let's say you can draw a graph which says millions of years ago these two points were connected, and one emrged as the other. Let's say you find the same in other areas, and nominate that this is the mode of operation for life the last 500 million years. But also, lets say the growth points were not directed at speciation but only to adapt to the same kind of life form, eg within the feline category. How would you tell the difference, that your conclusion was wrong? Whatever you site, such as an immediate time factor or another continuation factor, can apply elsewhere as well. How would you explain that the last life form, humans, acquired speech but crocs did not adapt, despite being a far older life? Here we see, that skelatal and dna imprints do not explain the difs between prime species - because these items are common to all life. Darwin does not even acknowledge speech as the factor separating humans from all others - as if its not relevent! Shall we wait the next million years - maybe crocs will clue on - speech is a more powerful tool for survival than strong jaws? But why get lost in such details - anyone can justify anything - when hard proof is not the criteria. Its called slight of hand, casino science. More impacting is the principle, than the factors which seek to justify that premise. If you say speciation occured millions of years ago, and that it is a continueing process which never ceased - then show me evidence it occured yesterday - because the millions of years have no impact on this demand - anyone with reasonable maths would acknowledge this fact. Try it with tomatoes, which are subject to decay as an ongoing process: can you say that the effects are not measurable with tomatoes everywhere and at all times? Try to match ToE with other hard facts on the ground - eg population growths every 50K years. Fact is, all the impacting fulcrum questions are sidelined with bogus answers: all transit life forms in the process of change have either become extinct, the changes were too slow to capture, or it happened long, long ago: how convenient. But even accepting those excuses - a biologist must ask the impacting questions: show us a single life form in the midst of a change - and no, not academically in dna form - but one which can be put in a museum for a child to see. There is no such thing as evolution in reality. All life form transmissions occur via the interaction of the parent host and the offspring. ToE is proven only when the latter is absent.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2487 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So, are you saying that thousands of scientists are just really bad at doing science?
Like, incompetent? Also, why are predictions based upon the Theory of Evolution ever successful, if it is so incredibly wrong?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3986 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Its a worldly view - but its not successful from the POV it has not progressed from theory to fact. But you seem to describe it as if it was. A bird becomes a bird, and a zebra becomes a zebra - not because of the external, environmental factors or the dna inherited millions of years ago - but by what it is formed by in its mother's womb. What is being said here is, the host parent is only a sub-plot, and all the right stuff comes from elsewhere. Does it mean, an egg becomes a chicken because of a retrovirus inherited millions of years ago: try that without the yoke inside.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2487 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
So, are you saying that thousands of scientists are just really bad at doing science?
Like, incompetent?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vacate Member (Idle past 4918 days) Posts: 565 Joined: |
A bird becomes a bird, and a zebra becomes a zebra - not because of the external, environmental factors or the dna inherited millions of years ago - but by what it is formed by in its mother's womb This isnt quite what you said earlier. What happened to the Air Borne [Fowl] kind? Chickens giving birth to penguins, hummingbirds, and crows... If you want to elaborate I am curious about your groupings. I posted on RAZDs thread about your categories of kind, if you are willing I believe that they need some clarity.
Problems of a different "Kind"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CTD Member (Idle past 6187 days) Posts: 253 Joined: |
How can Biologists believe in the ToE? Simple: The same way non-Norse European navigators could believe one would could drop off the western edge of the Atlantic. It's what they were taught. The only ones whose behavior is unethical in this respect are those who discover the truth and act to suppress it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3961 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined: |
How can Biologists believe in the ToE? Simple... ...It's what they were taught. The only ones whose behavior is unethical in this respect are those who discover the truth and act to suppress it. You really believe that scientists just blindly swallow what they are taught??? ![]() ![]() Just how stupid do you think scientists are? Would you care to suggest just how stupid I am, as a cosmologist, who has obviously just been gullible enough to swallow all the lies that have been taught me. And I, in my ignorance, have then passed on these lies to all of my students!!! Or perhaps I am one of the unethical ones, who knows the truth but prefers to conceal it, having deliberately fed lies to my students??? Or does this scientific stupidity/dishonesty only apply to biologists? The complete arrogance and utter ignorance demonstrated in your accusation is simply astounding. Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Simple: The same way non-Norse European navigators could believe one would could drop off the western edge of the Atlantic. It's what they were taught. Of course, you made this rubbish up in your head, which is why you can't produce one shred of evidence for your delusions. And what's the point of you reciting this rubbish? Let me remind you once more. Yes, every creationist argument is rubbish, but that doesn't mean that everything that's rubbish is a creationist argument. Some rubbish is just rubbish. It's not even creationist rubbish, it's just rubbish. You are reciting ignorant trash and it doesn't even help prop up your fairytale about the talking snake. It's just ignorant trash. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2795 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
CTD writes: Simple: The same way non-Norse European navigators could believe one would could drop off the western edge of the Atlantic. It's what they were taught. That would be a perfect answer to questions like:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
iceage ![]() Suspended Member (Idle past 6232 days) Posts: 1024 From: Pacific Northwest Joined: |
CTD writes: It's what they were taught. The only ones whose behavior is unethical in this respect are those who discover the truth and act to suppress it. You must never have been exposed to a scientific/academic environment. Yes there are big egos involved and maybe even peer pressure. However in the end what really matters is correspondence to the data. Accolades and honors are bestowed to those who innovate or go counter to established paradigm and advance new theories, equations or models that better match the data. Secondly on a personal level integrity and honesty are paramount. Any evidence of dishonesty, unethical manipulations or even ineptitude in the reporting of results or data can be career ending. Your comment...
CTD writes: The only ones whose behavior is unethical in this respect are those who discover the truth and act to suppress it. is really unsupported and baseless. It is really naive to think that there are a cadre of scientist who "discover the truth and act to suppress it" in order to maintain some godless status quo. This is especially true when you sit around and enjoy all the fruits of scientific progress. If the scientific world is inhabited by people of such dubious integrity why has science been so successful in explaining the nature of world and elevating the general living standards of all? On the contrary within the religious communities fraud, deception, half-truths, false prophecies are tolerated and overlooked. For example, if you ever read the rubbish produced by renown "scholar" Josh McDowell or more recently his son and cannot detect a smorgabord of logical fallacies and implied assertions you are not paying attention. Further I have had exposure to pentecostal style churches before in which they churn out prophecies by the dozen: most fail miserably and those that don't are paraded around as confirmation and repeated and embellished on and on (ie confirmation bias). Recently in my own home town some pentecostal knuckleheads started "receiving Gemstones from Heaven". Go to YouTube and type in "Gemstones from Heaven" and watch a few of these videos produced by Patricia King of Extreme Prophetic. I investigated this whole affair and wrote up my experiences here...
Gemstones from Heaven in Idaho The point is that within these groups there is very little skepticism and skepticism is not tolerated or encouraged, which leads to these kinds of abuses. Skeptics or out-the-box thinkers in the religious communities are burned at the stake, excommunicated or if they are lucky start their own cult. Edited by iceage, : No reason given. Edited by iceage, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CTD Member (Idle past 6187 days) Posts: 253 Joined: |
cavediver
You really believe that scientists just blindly swallow what they are taught??? Some do. Some don't. This is true in any area of study.
Just how stupid do you think scientists are? Would you care to suggest just how stupid I am, as a cosmologist, who has obviously just been gullible enough to swallow all the lies that have been taught me. And I, in my ignorance, have then passed on these lies to all of my students!!! Or perhaps I am one of the unethical ones, who knows the truth but prefers to conceal it, having deliberately fed lies to my students??? I cannot say just how stupid you are. An observant teacher would observe that some students tend to question things critically while others do not. When the pace is such that students find themselves "cramming" before tests, they don't really have time to question everything even if they otherwise would be inclined to do so. Some students struggle enough just to get by, and don't have a lot of spare intellectual energy. If you are a teacher you should be able to make a better list than I.
The complete arrogance and utter ignorance demonstrated in your accusation is simply astounding. Your disproportionate response could be interpreted as incriminating. Would you maintain that any student of science has ever been able to critically assess and verify everything he's been taught? Even one?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CTD Member (Idle past 6187 days) Posts: 253 Joined: |
You must never have been exposed to a scientific/academic environment. You must believe this statement to have propaganda value. It does. Congratulations. In fact, the same can be said for the rest of your post. But I'm unsure about the title. Is it a label? If so, it is accurate. As a response, it is insufficient. I'm not sure which of my sentences you disagree with. I expect it's the second. From your perspective the unethical ones would be those who blab. But your post never got around to what's unethical about blabbing.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025