Author Topic: Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian  (Read 6042 times)

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #45 on: August 19, 2005, 11:25:26 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrBill
I believe that a "day" (for the 7 day creation WJC reference) to God is a really, really long time and evolution is his method of creating all life on earth ...


"When I got up this morning, Sigmund Freud was still in med school" -- George Burns as God in "Oh God"

There are several "goldilocks" zones, fundamental forces which must be closely balanced to allow for life.  Epsilon was noted above, as was the orbital distance of the Earth.  Some others are The relative strength of Gravity vs the Electrical force, Omega; the relative density of the universe, Lambda; The cosmological constant, Q; the amplitude of irregularities on the Cosmic Background Radiation, and D; the number of spatial dimensions.

If any of these numbers were pretty much anything other than what they are we would not exist.

The odds are indeed astonomical, but astronomical stuff happens frequently... look up when you are outside.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #46 on: August 19, 2005, 11:39:06 PM »
Bummer.

For some... gotta be a tough nut to swallow, our existience owed to a cosmic fart.

Suits, tho. My faith in the cosmic fairness of the lottery is restored.

'Ta win it, yah gotsta be innit'.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Dead Man Flying

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6301
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #47 on: August 20, 2005, 12:06:04 AM »
How exactly does one go about falsifying a theory of intelligent design?

-- Todd/Leviathn

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #48 on: August 20, 2005, 12:11:26 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
How exactly does one go about falsifying a theory of intelligent design?

-- Todd/Leviathn


zactly.

Offline Seagoon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
      • http://www.providencepca.com
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #49 on: August 20, 2005, 12:24:14 AM »
Hi Saburo,

Quote
What makes these atheists "militant"?

I thought militants were fanatics that used violence to try to get their way.

Usually the status quo of any group tends to view out of the box thinking by others with some resistance when that thinking goes against established, common ideals.

Kind of the human nature in us.

How about using "stubborn" instead of "militant" in your description? Seems a bit more accurate.


Sorry about the use of the word "militant", I meant it in the sense of aggressively promoting, and refusing to allow for even the consideration of other possibilities. I'm more than happy to simply say "atheist" and leave it at that.

- SEAGOON
SEAGOON aka Pastor Andy Webb
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #50 on: August 20, 2005, 12:25:50 AM »
You wouldn't blame us for wanting you to speak on the discussion you've spawned since, would you?

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #51 on: August 20, 2005, 12:26:22 AM »
How exactly does one go about falsifying a theory of intelligent design?

-- Todd/Leviathn


Unintelligently?

>end of joke>

Intellegent Design requires the belief in an intellegent designer, ie God. That requires that a leap of faith be taken. A leap of faith is by definition illogical.  

The scientific method is based on logic.  Intellegent design strays from science and into the realm of faith.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2005, 12:32:53 AM by Holden McGroin »
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #52 on: August 20, 2005, 12:32:27 AM »
And that's the difference.

School is for learning. Learning how to learn. Methods of facing and dealing with questions.

Not being told how things work and suck it up 'cuz that's how it is.

If that was what school was, I'd just quit.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2005, 12:34:39 AM by Nash »

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #53 on: August 20, 2005, 12:34:54 AM »
in my limited intelect I can only say this.  These brain trust guys sit around and think till it hurts.  Alot of the stuff they come up with are scientific theory based on said method.  It cannot be actually physically proven so a leap of faith in science  (IE 1+1 does in fact equal 2 why because math tells us so)  I know it's not so simple as that but that's the best I got.

Electricity for example,  The flow of electrons cannot be physically proven......except by mathmatics.  We know twinkle twinkle little star E= I times R.  There for electricity can be proven.

sometimes when you crunch the numbers it doesnt add up.  We are finding this out through scientific method about Darwinism wich leads us to explore other areas of thought.  To simply dismiss ID or creationism as religious bable is like columbus beleiving that thinking the world is round is hericy (SP?)

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #54 on: August 20, 2005, 12:40:20 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslinger
To simply dismiss ID or creationism as religious bable is....


That's the problem, Gunslinger.

Nobody is dismissing anything were it not unjustifyable.

In science, you work with what you know, and move outwards.

You don't take on preposition the outwards, and try to move inwards.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2005, 12:43:47 AM by Nash »

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #55 on: August 20, 2005, 12:43:48 AM »
The theory of electricity is valid because its effects can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.  

The standard model of particle physics brought forth by quantum theory can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.  

General relativity can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.

The existance of God can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.

(Oops... went one too far there)
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Gunslinger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10084
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #56 on: August 20, 2005, 12:52:43 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
The theory of electricity is valid because its effects can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.  

The standard model of particle physics brought forth by quantum theory can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.  

General relativity can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.

The existance of God can be experimentally measured and mathematically predicted.

(Oops... went one too far there)


yes but what if the evolution of life could not be experimentally measured and was mathmatically un-predictable?  Like I said the numbers don't crunch....next step....why don't they crunch.

OTOH I'd really like to hear about the missing links to darwins evolution.  I know one was posted earlier pertaining to protiens and DNA/RNA but I havn't seen much else posted here.

Offline Seagoon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
      • http://www.providencepca.com
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #57 on: August 20, 2005, 12:54:04 AM »
Hi Nash,

Quote
Originally posted by Nash
Intelligent Design aint nothing like that. It's a fully formed idea. It has nothing to do with problem solving. Through it, you wouldn't be teaching kids how to observe, research, and learn... you would simply be telling them: "This is how it is."

Ladies and gentlemen - that aint a school. That's a church.
...
But by mandating Intelligent Design, it's as if you'd want to render mankind incapable of that.


[As you read the following, please try to keep in mind that I'm an ex-evolutionist myself]

Actually, Intelligent Design is anything but a fully-formed idea. At present it is a developing paradigm, a theory being tweaked and worked on that some scientists believe might explain the existing data better than the theory of Darwinian Evolution. The problem they are having, is that with the exception of a few publishers and journals, no one wants to be seen dead discussing this subject, especially in the academic institutions - to do so is instantly to be ostracized and assume pariah status in the scientific community. Nothing short of a pilgrimmage to the grave of Clarence Darrow and 30 or so apologetic papers praising Darwin to the skies will gain you readmittance.

As a result, most scientists who want to pursue development of the theory end up in a Catch-22 situation where the only instutions that will let them do so are either religious or very light-weight and inclined more to philosophy than "hard science."

Although ID is being tarred with the "religious" label its development is being fueled by ordinary non-religious scientists like xrightyx who are simply coming to the conclusion  that the Darwinian theory doesn't explain the data. The discipline most responsible for this being DNA research and Biochemistry which is showing to the chagrin of Darwinians that there is no natural mechanism for ADDING information to the DNA sequence that would allow for instance, for a change of species. What this means is that while we can tinker with DNA in a lab, "nature" simply doesn't have a mechanism for changing DNA in the way that would allow for Flatworms to become Field Mice. It simply can't be done, and it doesn't matter how much time or mutation one posits. Then there are other problems like the aforementioned problem of "creation" of DNA, again simple CHANCE+TIME has no biomechanical means of doing it. There is, in short, a complexity to organisms that nothing in the natural order can create or generate no matter how much time is presupposed.

This has left many scientists who are not at all religious, saying in essence, "Look I don't believe in God, or the Bible, or Church, or any of that other stuff, I just observe and report, that's all I do, and yet what I'm observing leaves me with no other option but to assume that this stuff was designed. I don't know how or by who, but I'm going to keep looking into it."

Many more who are aware of the gaps, the problems, the breakdowns, and the impossibilities are simply saying, "look I know that "evolution" can no more explain the existence of this structure any more than I could explain the existence of a pocket-watch by saying "time and chance" assembled it naturally. But if I say that in public, my career will be over forever, so I'm just going to shut-up and nod my head and keep my grants."

Now if you want more complexity of explanation in the Biochemistry area on why DNA is proving to be the death-knell to Darwinian theory, either someone competent like XrightyX is going to have to do it, or I'm going to have to start quoting brighter men than I.

- SEAGOON
SEAGOON aka Pastor Andy Webb
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #58 on: August 20, 2005, 12:59:16 AM »
When two scientists disagree, they do not normally invoke the secular arm; they search for further evidence to decide the issue, because, as men of science, they are well aware that neither is infallible and that more data will eventually prove the postulated theory.. or disprove it.

But when two religions disagree, since there is no criteria to which either's theologians can appeal, there is nothing for it but mutual hatred and an open or covert appeal to force.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Neo-Darwinian Fundamentalism at the Smithsonian
« Reply #59 on: August 20, 2005, 01:06:48 AM »
Hi Seagoon.

Thanks sincerely for the response.

It's heavilly filled with stuff that leaves me scratchin' my head. That don't mean that yer confusing - just means I'm kinda slow.

I'm gonna duck out, and see what Holden, Hang and DMF have to say on it. Because.... well, lets face it - that'd be more interesting..

If they don't show up, I'll pop back in.