Topic Proposal Issues

I would urge Admin to promote Hoot Mon's PNT, "What exactly are the "forces" of natural selection?" Perhaps the topic could be more narrowly framed as "Are these things natural selection?"He has cited several interlocutors' lists of examples of natural selection, going on to claim that the reasoning behind these lists would also justify listing "rainbows" as selective forces.Wikipedia's definition of natural selection is pretty good:

quote:

---

Natural selection is the process by which favorable traits that are heritable become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable traits that are heritable become less common. Natural selection acts on the phenotype, or the observable characteristics of an organism, such that individuals with favorable phenotypes are more likely to survive and reproduce than those with less favorable phenotypes. If these phenotypes have a genetic basis, then the genotype associated with the favorable phenotype will increase in frequency in the next generation. Over time, this process can result in adaptations that specialize organisms for particular ecological niches and may eventually result in the emergence of new species.

---

With this general definition as background, a debate of what is and is not an instance of natural selection could be useful.For example, my own mention of a meteor strike could be categorized as a cause of genetic drift (a subspecies population of organisms at ground zero simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time) or natural selection (immediately surviving organisms differentially equipped to survive and reproduce in the aftermath).His citations of others' lists, and his own additions, would make a nice short list within which to frame--and limit--the debate.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Admin, if there is no additional interest in Hoot Mon's natural selection PNT, I'll withdrawn my own--solitaire clay pigeon shoots are not my favorite sport.Perhaps Hoot Mon can propose a more precisely targeted objection to the standard understanding of natural selection instead--his idiosyncratic views on sexual selection have already been dead-horse flogged.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Based on Hoot Mon's recent response in the PNT forum, his main purpose is to object to terminology he justifiably finds loose.Mea culpa.I see no reason for a full thread about a terminological quibble: I agree that it makes more sense to speak of an instance or process of natural selection, for example, rather than "forces" of evolution or natural selection.I don't see what else there is to say.Edited by Omnivorous, : sp

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Yes, it is probably best that this forum restricts itself to the shallow end of the pool.”HM

Lit1776's PNT is a list of stuff that has been discussed ad nauseum. If she wants to discuss any single point in detail, that's fine, but I, and I suspect others, really have no interest in trying to stem a Gish Gallop.Point her to the Index of Creationist Claims and send her on her way.

The immediate problem is that there are 4 or 5 themes in the "Proposed New Topic" (PNT). To varying degrees they are PRATT's (points refuted a thousand times), heavily discussed in previous topics. Are we in the situation that "it's all been discussed before" - Time to shut the forum down?Anyhow, I invite you to bring your PRATT concerns to the What is an Articulate Informed Creationist topic. I'm certainly interested in what the evolution side members hope to find in creationist opponents. What would you consider to be characteristics of a "good creationist opponent"?Adminnemooseus

My intention was to point out the excessive number of topics in that one post. And this comment should give one pause: The impression is that Lit has a long list of "proofs against evolution" that she is going to just throw into the conversation. For every one long post that one write discussing one point, she is going to produce a half dozen more "problems" to be answered.But it appears that Ned is willing to work with her. Maybe she will see how things are done here and perhaps we'll get a usable OP out of it.-By the way, I realize that the mods have lives that need to be lived, but it wouldn't hurt if a moderator, when responding to an OP, would link to previous threads, not necessarily active (inactive ones can be informative), relevant to the topic or topics, especially since the moderators are the only ones who can respond to a PNT. Sometimes this is done, and sometimes it isn't. Besides giving initial information to the newcomer, it might be helpful to them to see how things are done around here.

I am the ghost of admins past.OHHHHHHH (the usual cacophony of misery)... Moderators, I am your former partner, morely or less...I am NOT a bad bit of mutton (...Groucho moustache twirl).So how about some admin with cojones promotes Jar's PNT, "How can "Creationism" be supported?" He has cut to the chase, got to the point, made a long story short, shat or go off the pot, etc.What CAN creationists do in scientific debate?The subject is a necessary proglegomena to any future blah blah blah, one we have never discussed quite so frankly. Does the EvC forum, in demanding that creationists bring scientific evidence to bear, ignore the fact that they simply cannot? Are we, then, merely creationist flypaper? Who are the creationist scientists we have failed to attract? Have they not all been exposed as bunkum?Does one punish a horse because one wishes it could fly?OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH....(chains, moans, etc.)Exit, definitely stage left.

---

Trust me.

What the Undead said.That PNT shouldn't be gathering cobwebs.

Thirded

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

I am content and lumber back to my mossy crypt.Edited by AdminOmni, : To sort out the living and the dead.

---

Trust me.

http://EvC Forum: Natural laws in the past? -->EvC Forum: Natural laws in the past?Simple was told he could start a topic on any subject, and he has done so. The faults of the topic are not so much his fault as they are typical of creationists in general and simple in specific.You cut them all kinds of slack on other areas, and I agree that they are necessary due to the usual limitations of the creationist view of reality (that it isn't.)So I say promote the topic and let the cards fall where they may. It gives him a place to blather away to no consequence.Besides, we all know where he is going with this, and that the actual topic doesn't matter to him.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : besides

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I'd really like to see him explain why the earth has a cold core. I have a ton of questions for him to consider, plus the fact that the earth's core is hot can be determined by "present state science" and that this core actually exists in the present.All his objections are based off of natural laws not applying down there (yet he has no reason) or that our assumption of heat is based off of past (and even totally unrelated events).I'm willing to do a great debate if you all don't want it opened to the whole community. I also don't think he should go unchallenged with his assumptions and "logic".Kuresu

---

"Have the Courage to Know!" --Immanuel Kant" One useless man is a disgrace. Two are called a law firm. Three or more are called a congress" --paraphrased, John AdamsWant to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

I'd be concerned about topic-drift given the mention of the big bang, but it otherwise looks like a solid topic. Perhaps Phat will reconsider and just ask for some modifications.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Wasn't there a topic a couple of years ago where somebody claimed the earth's core was a gigantic diamond? Maybe simple's topic would fit there.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place”
-- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC