Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Re-Theory of Evolution
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 23 of 60 (456594)
02-19-2008 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by ICANT
02-18-2008 11:52 AM


Re: Re-Simple
ICANT writes:
quote:
If it is so simple why is there so much controversy over the word evolution?
There isn't.
Just because you're playing a semantic game doesn't mean there is any controversy.
It's just you playing a game.
Go to PubMed. Do a search for any article regarding evolution. Please tell us how many references to the origin of the universe you find.
Note: There are articles regarding the origin of the universe to be found on PubMed. Some of them even use the term "evolution." The task for you is to determine how many of them connect to biology.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by ICANT, posted 02-18-2008 11:52 AM ICANT has not replied

Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 24 of 60 (456597)
02-19-2008 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by ICANT
02-18-2008 9:22 PM


Re: A different tack
ICANT writes:
quote:
So why can't it be refered to as what it is? The Theory of Biological Evolution.
End of problem.
Because there is no problem. When we're talking biology, everybody understands that the term "evolution" refers to biological evolution, not stellar evolution.
Note, both chemistry and biology use the term "nucleus." But somehow, nobody ever confuses the "nucleus" of the atom with the "nucleus" of the cell. When we talk about a "nuclear" weapon, we don't worry about teratogenic weapons. We all know we're talking about the atomic nucleus, not the cellular nucleus.
Your complaint that there is some confusion about the term "evolution" is nothing more than a semantic game.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by ICANT, posted 02-18-2008 9:22 PM ICANT has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024