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.
phaedrus said:You have the first premise right but you have ignored the latter, special creation.
I did not conclude that natural selection is a transendental philosophy I said that unless it is a natural law it is the premise of a philosophy. It can be no other kind of a philosophy except transendental since it transends all living systems.
Bushido216 said:Natural selection is the short-hand for a naturally occuring process by which those creatures best adapted to their environment will have the best chance to survive. It is an observed phenomena.
Pete Harcoff said:Could you clarify this? Are you trying to assert that the biological history of the Earth was a result of divine creation, but made to look like it evolved?
No, you said unless *I* point to natural selection as a natural law, it is transcendental philosophy. But I have pointed to empirical evidence that demonstrates the existence of natural selection as a mechanism for evolution. Are you denying it?
Fine, show me the mathmatical formula for calculating this and natural selection can be a law like the Mendal laws of inheritance.
Sigh. There is no mathematical formula. Biology doesn't work on formulas, it is much more practical than that. You're asking me to provide you with an orange peel and only providing me with an apple. Take football, American or otherwise, is there a formula for determining which team will win? The team with the better team will have the better chance of winning, but it won't be definite.phaedrus said:Fine, show me the mathmatical formula for calculating this and natural selection can be a law like the Mendal laws of inheritance.
MartinM said:No, it isn't.
'Zen and the art of creationist gibberish'?
danaman5 said:First of all, biology usually can't be calculated with mathematics. Secondly, it is a common myth that all theories in science eventually become laws. This is false, evolution will never become a law, because laws are something entirely different.
Sorry, none of what you posted above has anything to do with the post to which you are replying. If you say that evolution isn't science you don't know what you are talking about (yup, again easy to make unsupported assertions).phaedrus said:Oh Please! These people are scientists that know how it works. Morris was an accomplished scientist who commited the carnal sin of asserting that the earth was not umpteen million years old. My point is that if you say that evolution is science you dont know what you are talking about. I see no reason to think otherwise
phaedrus said:No again! Everything in philosophy is predicated on a premise and natural selection is a premise. The only 'la-la land' is the circular reasoning that asserts that natural selection is science.
a.) I just did.phaedrus said:Show me one science that does not lend itself to mathematical calculations and I'll shut up. The laws of inheritance are mathematical formulas BTW.
Bushido216 said:Sigh. There is no mathematical formula. Biology doesn't work on formulas, it is much more practical than that. You're asking me to provide you with an orange peel and only providing me with an apple. Take football, American or otherwise, is there a formula for determining which team will win? The team with the better team will have the better chance of winning, but it won't be definite.
As well, Mendel's law is still just a theory. However, it is given the status of "law" because it is very commonly accepted. If Evolution didn't go against some creationist's beliefs, then evolution would also be given "law" status.
Bushido216 said:a.) I just did.
b.) No, they're really not.
Intellectual dishonesty?..Often you like all others here rely on information that YOU HAVE NOT GATHERED..rather you have learned this from some other sources..cut the BS toff..if you ask a question expect an answer..Actually you weren't asking a question but making a statement: if you can't get info from non-creationists literature, what is left? Pro slant evolutionary resources..You've limited all points of view by saying Creationists have no credibility as scientists (that sounds like a stmt doesn't it)..besides before I and most other creationists became one, all one learned growing up was the evolutionary slant on origins..so the answer is yes..i do get info on the evolution from evolutionists...(you watch enough Discovery and Nature and read Nature and Scientific American, one gets the evolutionary spin all the time...what else are you going to accuse me of toff?toff said:I am not asking Parker, Behe, or Morris. None of them, as far as I know, post on this forum. I'm asking YOU. And by not even answering the question, you've answered it. Thanks for playing; your intellectual dishonesty is revealed.
Bushido216 said:Biology doesn't work on formulas, it is much more practical than that.
You do realize that arguing with you is like arguing with an eight year old?phaedrus said:No you didnt and yes they really are.
Indeed, formulas abound. However, anyone who wishes to make the claim that every thing in biology can is quantified in the some respect as physics is making a very bold claim.Pete Harcoff said:Actually, there are mathematical formulas with respect to biology, including evolution.
toff said:Sorry, none of what you posted above has anything to do with the post to which you are replying. If you say that evolution isn't science you don't know what you are talking about (yup, again easy to make unsupported assertions).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?