Darwinian evolution - still a theory in crisis.

[Hans Blaster]

Yes, I understand. Part of the difference between her and Lee Smolin is that while she has the degree, she intentionally focuses on philosophical practicalities that intersect Physics and Social Life, while Smolin has focused on criticizing the institutions of Physics research. It should probably have been known that this is the case being that she titled her recent book, "Existential Physics" rather than "Problems with Physics." I can understand her existential concerns. Whether I fully agree or not with her viewpoints is another issue.

A Scientist's Guide To Life's Biggest Questions Existential Physics Existential Physics

Existential Physics -- A Scientist's Guide to Life's Biggest Questions

existentialphysics.com

That book has nothing to do with the criticism she has gotten. I have no interest in her thoughts on those subjects.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's all in reading the evidence correctly and with absolute truth, not just "I think this looks like something that fits between this and that on the evolutionary chain. What do you think, Hans?"

I think you have offered no evidence that you have the slightest clue how to evaluate evidence.

And after the to agree it gets publish in the world by the liberal media and then new laws and policies are created around "the new discovery".

This has nothing to do the politics or the "liberal media".

 

[Hvizsgyak]

I’m a practicing Catholic too but believe in theistic evolution. You DO realize we’re allowed to believe in evolution and that many priests do, too, don’t you?

Confronting Creation's Complexities

Why should it matter to Catholics whether Darwinism survives or fades away? Hasn’t the Church tolerated evolution quite happily since it was first discussed at...

www.catholic.com

Yes, I know we are allowed to believe evolution but from what I have seen about these mutated evolution links between organisms, I just don't buy it. And there is no sin in believing what I believe because I place God as the Creator of the whole thing.

But how many people over the centuries lose their faith in God because (along with other information) they are tripped up by Darwinian Evolution. The Devil is always looking for ways to drive a wedge between man and God and when you have alot of atheists using evolution to drive that wedge, more and more people lose their faith in God. Now if science would admit to God being the prime Mover and Creator of man then we wouldn't have this problem but that is not the case.

 

[FaithT]

What can I say, if the right tools aren't there to analyze the thing in question, maybe we should wait until they are. But if they must speculate on them because they just want to, place that information under "religious belief and folklore" so that the liberal media doesn't take it and create all sorts of stories from it as fact.

You DO know that Catholics aren’t required to believe as you do, correct?

 

[Hvizsgyak]

I think you have offered no evidence that you have the slightest clue how to evaluate evidence.


This has nothing to do the politics or the "liberal media".

Yes, it does.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

This has nothing to do the politics or the "liberal media".

It's still funny to me, as a Brit looking in, that the term 'liberal media' is used as such a catch-all explanation for things conservative Christians don't like. Especially when it's something like the age of the universe or the theory of evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, it does.

Please explain how.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

They would be idiots. I’m actually quite the Mesopotamian history buff. It really is a fascinating cycle; Enki is definitely my favourite god!

But it’s true though is it.

Enlil is my favorite. He wanted to destroy the humans because they were making too much noise. There are alot of loud cars, motorcycles and loud music being played that I wish there was a way too destroy those objects (without harming the humans who owns them ).

 

[AV1611VET]

What can I say, if the right tools aren't there to analyze the thing in question, maybe we should wait until they are.

Excellent point.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Excellent point.

And then you, Hvisgyak (which sounds like me when I blow my nose) et al would run the same spiel again about them not getting the right tools for the job either.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

When you look at something and see what it’s all about how is that not seeing it first hand?

There is a difference between seeing something right in front of you and seeing something millions of miles away or from millions of years in the past. The observation should not have the same weight of accuracy because of the distances involved. Many peripheral things could be altering the observation, and the observer would be clueless about them

 

[River Jordan]

Yes, I know we are allowed to believe evolution but from what I have seen about these mutated evolution links between organisms, I just don't buy it.

You've already said you won't ever buy it no matter what, so the above isn't worth much.

But how many people over the centuries lose their faith in God because (along with other information) they are tripped up by Darwinian Evolution. The Devil is always looking for ways to drive a wedge between man and God and when you have alot of atheists using evolution to drive that wedge, more and more people lose their faith in God.

The majority of people in the western/developed world who accept the reality of evolution are theists and most Christians have no problem with evolution.

Reality doesn't match your claims.

Now if science would admit to God being the prime Mover and Creator of man then we wouldn't have this problem but that is not the case.

"Science" isn't a person and doesn't speak. If you are referring to scientists, lots of us are faithful Christians including some very prominent ones such as Dr. Francis Collins.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

Please explain how.

I don't remember what I said "yes it does" to.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don't remember what I said "yes it does" to.

I'm doubtful of that but playing along, you said 'yes it does' in response to Hans Blaster saying "This has nothing to do the politics or the "liberal media"." Which is the second time you've conflated any science that you don't agree with to the 'liberal media'. Explain how it does.

 

[Larniavc]

You guys are sometime delusional?

Less than one foot is preferable and with the right pieces of equipment (some of which have not even been created yet).

Well there you go; you don’t trust reality as per your senses. It does make me wonder what source of information do you trust?

 

[River Jordan]

And then you, Hvisgyak (which sounds like me when I blow my nose) et al would run the same spiel again about them not getting the right tools for the job either.

I liken it to people coming to a professional soccer match, standing on the sidelines, and constantly yelling that the pros are playing the game all wrong and should play the way the sideline yellers prefer. But when the pros on the field invite the yellers to come on the field and show how it's done, suddenly the yellers don't have the right shoes, aren't warmed up, their moms are calling them, or just can't be bothered.

It's all just empty trash talking really. If they really think they have a better way to do science then obviously the proper response is "put up or shut up". Unfortunately they do neither.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I liken it to people coming to a professional soccer match, standing on the sidelines, and constantly yelling that the pros are playing the game all wrong and should play the way the sideline yellers prefer. But when the pros on the field invite the yellers to come on the field and show how it's done, suddenly the yellers don't have the right shoes, aren't warmed up, their moms are calling them, or just can't be bothered.

It's all just empty trash talking really. If they really think they have a better way to do science then obviously the proper response is "put up or shut up". Unfortunately they do neither.

A VERY apt analogy.

 

[Hvizsgyak]

I don't remember what I said "yes it does" to.

I found it. This is one topic where science claims something and public policies and laws tried to be enacted to reflect the "scientific data".

The Evolution of Gender Identity in Modern Society: Trends and Transformations - PSYFORU

In our rapidly changing world, conversations around gender identity have become more crucial than ever. As society evolves, so too does our understanding of

psyforu.com

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I found it. This is one topic where science claims something and public policies and laws tried to be enacted to reflect the "scientific data".

The Evolution of Gender Identity in Modern Society: Trends and Transformations - PSYFORU

In our rapidly changing world, conversations around gender identity have become more crucial than ever. As society evolves, so too does our understanding of

psyforu.com

That's not the science we're talking about. We're specifically talking about your claim that scientists, astronomers specifically, studying the stars and saying they're millions of light years away is linked to the liberal media. And we can even lump the theory of evolution into that mess too since that's what started this whole thing in the first place.

Stay on topic, please.

 

[AV1611VET]

A VERY apt analogy.

Chuck Swindoll once pointed out that there are two types of critics, re those who are running the race:

The coaches, who give advice to the runners so as to make them better.

And those who sit on the side line and take pot shots at them.