|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
Do you know that Darwin never used the term evolution? I've seen it claimed. I wouldn't repeat the claim, knowing what I know of history. Another evomyth... This religion is just too full of antihistory.See Descent of Man, chapter 21It seemed worth while to try how far the principle of evolution would throw light on some of the more complex problems in the natural history of man. I shan't plague you all with overkill. There are more occasions, as anyone would expect. Now the chapter is good for laughs. Circular reasoning is pretty thick, and one can't help but chuckle at this gem: By considering the embryological structure of man,- the homologies which he presents with the lower animals,- the rudiments which he retains,- and the reversions to which he is liable, we can partly recall in imagination the former condition of our early progenitors; and can approximately place them in their proper place in the zoological series. We thus learn that man is descended from a hairy, tailed quadruped, probably arboreal in its habits, and an inhabitant of the Old World. Quite a lot to learn from an embryo; what a nifty shortcut! Not science, but... what does one expect from Darwin? He was quite fond of the shuck and jive. And we mustn't forget his knack for soft-sell understatements like this Many of the views which have been advanced are highly speculative, and some no doubt will prove erroneous; but I have in every case given the reasons which have led me to one view rather than to another. That kicks off the chapter, but later the gullible victim is assured time and again that the conclusions are sound and reliable. A true classic, if this sort of thing is what one fancies.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 449
Advanced Master Member
|
Thanks CTD Another evomyth... This religion is just too full of antihistory. I stand corrected. I went back and checked my source, and it said that the term was not used in Origin of Species, but was adapted after that. mea culpa. Now perhaps you would like to follow up by showing what is missing in the concept of evolution as the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation, that is included in the descent with modification theory as expressed by Darwin in Origin of Species, as YOU have claimed. Or we can still discuss what evolution really means regardless of who used which terminology when. Enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
Thanks CTD Another evomyth... This religion is just too full of antihistory. I stand corrected. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Don't shock me like that! I went back and checked my source, and it said that the term was not used in Origin of Species, but was adapted after that. Might want to check this source. Last sentence on the page reads There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. 'Tis the first edition, and the same sentence remains in the sixth also.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 449
Advanced Master Member
|
Thanks again, CTD 'Tis the first edition, and the same sentence remains in the sixth also. My understanding was that the term was used by embryologists (Haeckel among others), first to describe the unfolding of embryos into the individual organisms, and then they applied this to biological change of organisms over time, and that Darwin never liked the term. Certainly I find it too easy to misunderstand the particular meaning used in biology. Don't shock me like that! Why? You showed my statement was not correct by the evidence. That is all I ask of any argument where you claim I am wrong -- show me. Show me that something is missing from modern statements of evolution and the theory of evolution. Show me that modern versions are watered down, diluted. Show me that various ways to express the basic meaning of evolution are substantially different. Show me that the foraminifera do not demonstrate evolution with both change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation AND with speciation by division of populations from a parent population to two or more daughter populations that don't interbreed (and yes, they reproduce sexually). Show me that the structure of my argument from observation to conclusion on Evolution Theory Explains Diversity is erroneous. Show me there is more to your argument than assertion. Enjoy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 30,867
Master Elite Member
|
asdfShow me that the structure of my argument from observation to conclusion on Evolution Theory Explains Diversity is erroneous. Actually, creativity explains diversity.  "I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject a theory that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it."—H. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, 31 (1980), p. 138.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 449
Advanced Master Member
|
Thanks for another non-reply, Russ: Actually, creativity explains diversity. Which does not in any way show that my argument does not explain diversity. Nor do you provide any evidence to substantiate your point. Evolution also explains the failures - the organisms that fail to reproduce either due to death or due to reproduction malfunction (including lethal mutations). Does "creativity" explain failures too? If it doesn't explain failures then it doesn't really explain diversity. Enjoy. ps - the failure to explain failures is also the fault with SoSick's magic hidden coding - why should magic hidden coding result in (often prenatal) death?
Last edited by RAZD; 07/10/08 08:38 PM. Reason: added ps
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
Master Elite Member
|
Earlier in the thread, we saw that stasis is indeed a concern for evolutionism, even according to a professional evolutionist. Well, they have a little more to be concerned about. ![[Linked Image]](http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2010/02/spider4f.jpg) Wired Science reports the discovery of an "165 million year old" spider fossil, which even at the microscopic level is virtually identical to spiders living right now. E. gertschi shows all the features of the modern members of the family, found in North America, suggesting it has evolved very little since the Jurassic period, Selden said. “The scimitar-shaped structure you notice out of the male is so distinctive,” he said. “Looking at modern ones, you think, well, it’s just a dead ringer.” Credit to Brian Thomas, M.S. at ICR for keeping on top of things. http://www.icr.org/article/5284/
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
|
