Evolution: Science or Philosophy

[TomOfSweden]

Interestingly enough, I read the article you cited, and it was pure speculation and admitted it. Although adaptation to environment and food occurs, I still do not see a distinct species.

I think it has more to do with the authors careful use of language rather than any personal convictions. Maybe your only seeing what you're looking for.

[Rhabbi]

I think it has more to do with the authors careful use of language rather than any personal convictions. Maybe your only seeing what you're looking for.

The author speculates on the possiblity od allotropic speciation, and indicates that if it happens, the lab experiments involving fruit flies would be the first step of that process.

Although, we can't be sure, these preference differences probably existed because selection for using different food sources also affected certain genes involved in reproductive behavior. This is the sort of result we'd expect, if allopatric speciation were a typical mode of speciation.

Although this is carefully couched in a scientific way, it is nonetheless speculation. IOf anyone is reading into this, it is you and all the others who are so anxious to believe in evolution that they accept even the flimsiest of evidence as proof.

[TomOfSweden]

Although this is carefully couched in a scientific way, it is nonetheless speculation. IOf anyone is reading into this, it is you and all the others who are so anxious to believe in evolution that they accept even the flimsiest of evidence as proof.

It's not a question of wanting to believe. It's what we have to chose from. I don't know how many times I've said it in this thread. ID isn't a theory. It's evolution or nothing.

And on top of that evolution is suported by massive amounts of evidence. There are no holes. The more I read about this the more asstounded I get that this is at all an issue in USA. ID doesn't exist. It's a big debate about a non-issue. It's desperate fundamentalists who not only ignore common sense, but also facts to find suport of their religious text. What this thread has taught me is that Christians are a lot more dangerous I previously thought. They need to be taken a lot more seriously, and fought every step of the way, or we'll never be rid of them.

But good luck with being a fundamentalist. It seems to make you happy. I'm out of here now.

[Rhabbi]

It's not a question of wanting to believe. It's what we have to chose from. I don't know how many times I've said it in this thread. ID isn't a theory. It's evolution or nothing.

Actually, my point is that evolution is anything but a theory. I only pointed out that ID is a possible alternative, yet you want to think that that is what I believe. The fact that there is not an alternative to evolution does not make it true.

[TomOfSweden]

Actually, my point is that evolution is anything but a theory. I only pointed out that ID is a possible alternative, yet you want to think that that is what I believe. The fact that there is not an alternative to evolution does not make it true.

The only proponents of ID are the religious. What does that tell us about the theory? Seriously now. If it would be a real theory it would hold water no matter what perspective or prior faith you have. But it doesn't because it makes no claims.

The sooner you realise that they're the Talibans of America the better. It's a dangerous road you're travelling down and a dangerous door you're keeping open.

Anything is possible. Space aliens could have placed all the fossils on earth and Diane Dodd, (and all the other scientists who've reproduced her experiment) could all have been controlled by comunist orbital mind-control lasers. This is the level ID is on. It's pure farce.

edit: And just to be perfectly clear here. I'm not anti-christian or anti-religious. It's only the magic I question. Christianity and the Bible is and can be a great ethical and moral guide for people. I'm sure it is of the simple reason that so many are christian. I'm convinced that these are the real reasons people turn to the church. I think the hokus pokus and the rituals is just the stage show to keep the 1-minute-atention-span crowd from losing their focus.

Go jesus!

[Rhabbi]

The only proponents of ID are the religious. What does that tell us about the theory? Seriously now. If it would be a real theory it would hold water no matter what perspective or prior faith you have. But it doesn't because it makes no claims.

Actually, the first propnents of ID were people who proposed that the Earth was seeded my aliens who are conducting a vast experiemnt. Idiots, to be sure, but not religious.

ID has flaws, the biggest of which is that we have to explain where the designer came from. As science it is acceptable to me only because it shuts up the creationist who want me to believe that the Earth was created in 7 days 5000 yeras ago.

edit: And just to be perfectly clear here. I'm not anti-christian or anti-religious. It's only the magic I question. Christianity and the Bible is and can be a great ethical and moral guide for people. I'm sure it is of the simple reason that so many are christian. I'm convinced that these are the real reasons people turn to the church. I think the hokus pokus and the rituals is just the stage show to keep the 1-minute-atention-span crowd from losing their focus.

Go jesus!

Actually Tom, I never really thought you were anti-christian, though I do appreciate you saying so. Most people who call themselves christaians have no more idea wht the Bible says than a 2 year old child. That is why churches need to use the hocus pokus to keep peoples attention, they do not want them to know the truth.

[TomOfSweden]

Actually, the first propnents of ID were people who proposed that the Earth was seeded my aliens who are conducting a vast experiemnt. Idiots, to be sure, but not religious.

I love Raëlians. They're doing what the Flying spaggheti monster never can.

[anonymouse]

Math is hard work and it occupies your mind -- and it doesn't hurt to learn all you can of it, no matter what rank you are; everything of any importance is founded on mathematics.

Apologies, Rhabbi, for this pasted quote from your sig. (I've just changed my own viewing settings and hadn't seen it before now)

I agree to a point with the sentiment of it however, I am also reminded of something (I think it was Voltaire) said, "Anything too stupid to be said, should be sung." It's kinda a bookend for your own quote The math/art dichotomy...

anonymouse

[Rhabbi]

Apologies, Rhabbi, for this pasted quote from your sig. (I've just changed my own viewing settings and hadn't seen it before now)

I agree to a point with the sentiment of it however, I am also reminded of something (I think it was Voltaire) said, "Anything too stupid to be said, should be sung." It's kinda a bookend for your own quote The math/art dichotomy...

anonymouse

Since I am quoting someone, I do not think I can object to you quoting me. The truth is though that my math knowledge is what convinces me that evolution is wrong. I could be misunderstanding the acual oddds because we do not know all the dynamics of the chemical proccesses involved, but the known combinations make the odds agains even simple unicelluar life so lng that I cannot accept it.