• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Recent content by sfs

  1. sfs

    The Falsifiability Criterion

    It's true that what you wrote to me -- "stop referring to it as if it were true" -- was closer to a command than advice, but I was being polite. Do you not read what you yourself write? This would be more persuasive if you showed any interest in looking at the data -- some of which I'd be happy...
  2. sfs

    The Falsifiability Criterion

    How would you know? Without learning about the subject, you've got no basis to decide. And no, I'm not going to stop referring to common descent as true. It's so well supported by such a vast range of data that I'd have to be insane not to accept it as a very good description of reality. I...
  3. sfs

    The Falsifiability Criterion

    If the others want to learn about macroevolution, there are abundant resources available from people with extensive knowledge of the subject, which group very much does not include @Hvizsgyak. Many of them are written to explain evolution and the evidence supporting it to ordinary folks without...
  4. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    Make up your mind already? Do you want to be spoon fed the children's version or learn how scientists actually view evolution? I'll happily provide any number of technical papers if you want to see how scientists actually study evolution.
  5. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    A statement that nearly all biologists would agree with, and one that does absolutely nothing to support your rejection of macroevolution. Just to be clear: you obviously know next to nothing about macroevolution, the evidence for it, and why the vast majority of scientists accept it. But...
  6. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    Not all of the Steves are biologists -- I wasn't when I signed it (although I am now, more or less).
  7. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    Whereas I find it's still the tiny fringe it's always been. I base my conclusion on working with thousands of scientists from dozens of countries over the last 40 years while you base yours on reading something on a site dedicated to attacking evolution, right? Have you tried applying any...
  8. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    Among those with genuine PhDs in relevant fields, the number who reject common descent is really, really tiny. Vanishingly small. Go for it. I've been looking at creationist arguments for several decades and have yet to see a good one, but anything is possible.
  9. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    The problem here is that you have contradictory goals. You want to understand the science well enough to judge whether it's sound or not, and you also want it explained in really simple terms. You can't have both -- not at the same time, that is. It's great to explain things in simple terms, and...
  10. sfs

    Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

    I wouldn't call that a uniform usage in science. A theory is generally a model that explains a broad range of evidence, but it's quite acceptable to have two competing models that explain the same evidence and for which there is not yet evidence to distinguish them. Or for a theory to explain...
  11. sfs

    Abiogenesis Harder than Once Thought

    What an odd paper. The core of the paper makes little sense to me. The author divides the information needed for the universal ancestral cell into three components: 1) genetic information; 2) structural information, e.g. protein folds and domains; 3) dynamic information embodied in biochemical...
  12. sfs

    Icons of Evolution

    There's nothing pre-scientific about it. Scientific understanding (and practice) requires that physical phenomena follow consistent patterns, at least the great majority of the time. It doesn't require any commitment as to the reason for the patterns. We see that things are regular and can be...
  13. sfs

    Icons of Evolution

    I think it does more than that: it subverts some prevailing religious ideas of the surrounding dominant culture, including sustantially demythologizing creation, and it replaces the king or priest as the representative of divinity with humans more generally. (I'm referring to the first creation...
  14. sfs

    Icons of Evolution

    I think your difficulty in grokking lies in thinking of God as one actor among many in the universe. In most traditional theistic understanding, all natural processes, including natural selection, are simply patterns in the way God chooses to make things. Science always describes only the...
  15. sfs

    Icons of Evolution

    He specifically says that he's thinking of God creating through evolution. I think you're conflating two orthogonal kinds of explanation. If a novelist writes a scene involving a poker game and gives the characters plausible poker hands, are those hands the results of the shuffle in the scene...
See more
Top Bottom