11 Jul 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuI don't know whether Dawkins was stumped or not.
When famed evolutionist Richard Dawkins was asked in a television interview, if there is any mutation observed in any species, that is know to have added usefull information to the genome (the set of chromosomes and genes in living cells, by which hereditary information is transmitted), Dawkins was Stumped for an anwser.
Charles Darwin did not know a t ...[text shortened]... in no useful information, but from such mutations comes freaks of nature, like the 2 headed cow.
I don't know whether a mutation has been observed or not.
But you entirely miss the point.
We haven't observed a proton being formed from the combination of 3 quarks but scientists are more than happy with atomic theory that posits quarks as the building blocks of protons (and neutrons).
Evolution is an explanation for something - that's what a scientific theory is.
Everything in the explanation need not be observed - it simply needs to be able to logically explain what it is trying to explain.
Evolution explains speciation.
If you have an alternative theory then by all means, put it out there and lets have a scientific debate.
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by LemonJelloTo LemonJello
I think, in light of the link I posted, your opening post is disingenuous.
Now, you are changing your attention toward another subject. The idea that localized instances of scientific misconduct within some field warrant your wholesale impugnment of that field, is pretty ridiculous. Back a decade or so ago, a committee of his peers demonstrated qui ...[text shortened]... on the topic, what exact manner of understanding do you hope to bring to us all on the topic?
Scientists who prop up the therory of evolution, are a deceitful bunch, and i guess they have put themselves into a corner, of their own making, by supporting it for so long without any scientific evidence, and now they can only continue to flog a dead horse.
Here is a list of attempted frauds and misunderstandings.
Neanderthal Man
Piltdown Man
Nebraska Man
Java Man
Peking Man
Lucy (the ape women)
Laetoli Footprints
Kenya Skull
Archaeopterxy.
Also cells cannot group together in intelligent usefull ways, without being directed by intelligence.
vishva
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuClearly you are a giant of science.
To LemonJello
Scientists who prop up the therory of evolution, are a deceitful bunch, and i guess they have put themselves into a corner, of their own making, by supporting it for so long without any scientific evidence, and now they can only continue to flog a dead horse.
Here is a list of attempted frauds and misunderstandings.
Neanderthal Man ...[text shortened]... ot group together in intelligent usefull ways, without being directed by intelligence.
vishva
I guess we must bow to your obvious intellectual talent.
I renounce all science in favour of witless myth and blind faith.
I submit myself to you oh great Vishvahetu.
Not.
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by amannionTo amannion
I don't know whether Dawkins was stumped or not.
I don't know whether a mutation has been observed or not.
But you entirely miss the point.
We haven't observed a proton being formed from the combination of 3 quarks but scientists are more than happy with atomic theory that posits quarks as the building blocks of protons (and neutrons).
Evolution is an ...[text shortened]... an alternative theory then by all means, put it out there and lets have a scientific debate.
If you check out my previous postings, your question should be answered in a general way, but if you have a specific question, then please ask.
vishva
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuNo, no question at all.
To amannion
If you check out my previous postings, your question should be answered in a general way, but if you have a specific question, then please ask.
vishva
It's obvious that you reject science and scientific theories for myth and superstition.
11 Jul 10
6 edits
Originally posted by vishvahetuooh it's the *figure out wtf is vishva's problem with all these examples* game. Since I'm brimming to the teeth with excitement I'll have to defer my answers for a later date once I've calmed down. In the meantime lemme post a fun variant about disbelief in evolution or non-atheists :]
To LemonJello
Scientists who prop up the therory of evolution, are a deceitful bunch, and i guess they have put themselves into a corner, of their own making, by supporting it for so long without any scientific evidence, and now they can only continue to flog a dead horse.
Here is a list of attempted frauds and misunderstandings.
Neanderthal Man ...[text shortened]... ot group together in intelligent usefull ways, without being directed by intelligence.
vishva
Here is a list of problematic topics or people
L. Ron Hubbard
Henry VIII
finite resources
Garry Glitter
G.W. Bush
Hubble Telescope
Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh
VenomfangX
wisdom teeth
Jesus
mental retardation
Saint Pedro Arbries
3
Can you get em all?...any red herrings? 😵
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by LemonJelloMuch more importantly though is the fact that no single scientists results are taken that seriously on their own. There is almost invariably independent corroboration by other scientists. Further, anything that gets to Theory status tends to have corroboration from a lot of independent scientists, often including some who are initially opposed to the ideas.
There is no doubt that such instances of scientific misconduct are serious matters. It is a credit to scientific communities that many of the instances are unearthed and dealt with seriously.
The Theory of Evolution has had many critics over the years and many people whose interest was to discredit it, yet nobody has been able to successfully find fault with the Theory.
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by vishvahetuSo why did you bring it up in the first place?
Yes it was that interveiw, but i wish not to exspand on that, as i am just a lay person.
If you have good reason for disputing the Theory of Evolution then why not present it? Why go for examples that you cannot back up and don't understand? Why the clutching at straws when you claim to have something far more solid?
We all know roughly what your beliefs are on the matter, so simply repeating them over and over does you no good. If you want to convince others, you will need something more solid than repeated claims.
11 Jul 10
2 edits
Originally posted by vishvahetuAnd I understand all about the trinity until the smallest detail and I say it's all humbug...
to amannion
there you go, speculating like scientists do,....i am not religious.
And i do understand evolution.
vishva
give me a break!
Now, tell me what's fraudous about the Neandertahls!
11 Jul 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasTo FabianFnas
What is the fraud about the Neanderthals?
Do you believe that there has never been a Neanderthal population?
Please explain further.
I like the way you singled out the word fraud, but disreguarded the word misunderstanding, and scientists are good at selective evidence collaboration, anyway>
When the prehistoric man was first discovered, only part of an arm was recovered. Yet, the scientific community fabricated an entire ancient society around an arm bone.
Scientists have since found quite a few Neanderthals and after careful study have concluded that these ancestors were regular humans with bone disease, probaby rickets.
vishva