Do evolutionists really understand the complexity of things?

[OldWiseGuy]

Why even bother asking this of "dishonest" people?

That's no answer.

 

[RickG]

This was the question.

"This is part of the unfathomable complexity I'm referring to. How does science explain why humans are unable to do something as simple as clean up a lake when it is their stated desire to do so?"

Then why did you leave out this sentence that directly preceded what I was commenting about?

"There can be no 'honest' discussion because people, even (gasp) scientists, are so dishonest."

 

[RickG]

Science waves away the questions with a patented answer, usually something about 'natural selection'. I'm the kid who keeps asking 'why', until I'm dismissed as being a nuisance.

Then I suggest this:

"cite a credible science source and point out where they are wrong. Also in doing this, provide the evidence and data to back your criticism up."​

 

[durangodawood]

That's no answer.

I'm obviously pulling back from your question to ask more broadly why you even carry on with this "dishonest" bunch.

So, why?

And I'd still like to know if you are an exception to your general characterization of people, and are honest yourself.

 

[Speedwell]

Science waves away the questions with a patented answer, usually something about 'natural selection'. I'm the kid who keeps asking 'why', until I'm dismissed as being a nuisance.

So who have you asked? Amateurs in chatrooms? How much work have you put into it yourself? There is quite a bit of material available, from books specifically written to introduce the subject to laymen* all the way up to the journal articles scientists use to communicate about the ToE amongst themselves.

*One I always recommend is What Evolution Is by the late Ernst Mayr. Mayr was one of the leading evolutionary biologists of his day and wrote the book specifically to address common misunderstandings about the ToE. A bit dated now, but still a good read.

 

[Kylie]

Read my OP.

And, as I have said, your claim that scientific answers are simple is just plain WRONG.

Your OP is flawed. Fix it and we can talk.

 

[RickG]

The living world is so complex and interdependent that it is almost impossible to frame coherent questions about it. When asked science presents simple answers that can't begin to address these complexities. Perhaps the only answer is indeed that we were "fearfully and wonderfully made"...

Would you mind presenting a specific example of this complexity where science only presents simple answers rather than complex ones. Thanks.

 

[quatona]

Science waves away the questions

Which questions? You said you weren´t even able to frame a coherent question.

with a patented answer, usually something about 'natural selection'. I'm the kid who keeps asking 'why',

If, as you say, you are unable to form a coherent question, it´s kind of odd to expect an answer.

until I'm dismissed as being a nuisance.

You are free to be proud of the chip on your shoulder.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

And, as I have said, your claim that scientific answers are simple is just plain WRONG.

Your OP is flawed. Fix it and we can talk.

Sooo, you don't think this is a simple answer?
https://askabiologist.asu.edu/complete-metamorphosis

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Which questions? You said you weren´t even able to frame a coherent question.

If, as you say, you are unable to form a coherent question, it´s kind of odd to expect an answer.

You are free to be proud of the chip on your shoulder.

My questions are along the lines of which came first, the chicken or the egg. Or, how did that turtle right itself when the necessary, and very complex, movements hadn't evolved yet? And if it did somehow succeed how was that ability passed onto his progeny? And how did that 'code' develop? Such questions are always waved away. See the problem?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Would you mind presenting a specific example of this complexity where science only presents simple answers rather than complex ones. Thanks.

Metamorphosis.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm obviously pulling back from your question to ask more broadly why you even carry on with this "dishonest" bunch.

So, why?

I'm being Godlike, i.e. "here a little, there a little".

And I'd still like to know if you are an exception to your general characterization of people, and are honest yourself.

I am certainly an exceptional person by any reasonable measure (if I do say so myself).

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Then I suggest this:

"cite a credible science source and point out where they are wrong. Also in doing this, provide the evidence and data to back your criticism up."​

Why do you think that asking hard questions is 'criticizing'?

 

[durangodawood]

I'm being Godlike, i.e. "here a little, there a little".

I am certainly an exceptional person by any reasonable measure (if I do say so myself).

I see.
You: Godlike and exceptional.
The rest: dishonest.

Good to know as I ponder engaging in discussion with you.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I see.
You: Godlike and exceptional.
The rest: dishonest.

Good to know as I ponder engaging in discussion with you.

Ponder this.

I once was engaged in similar discussions on another site. My opinions attracted a group of four or five fellows who basically attacked every position I took, which puzzled me. At length I came across all of these fellow's 'stories' in other threads unrelated to the subjects we were arguing about.

What I discovered was that all of them had serious personal problems including health, finances, employment, marital, and relationship problems with their kids and others. In short they were a mess, and upon learning this lost all credibility with me.

When I said that I'm exceptional 'by any measure' I meant the usual measures that we measure our successes and failures by. Needless to say the aforementioned failures that these fellows suffered most certainly influenced their arguments and attitudes.

I suspect that I might find some of the same conditions here.

All this said I take no pleasure in the misfortune of others, or excessive pride in my own good fortune. I believe I am blessed in many areas where others are not, and I am very thankful.

 

[Kylie]

Sooo, you don't think this is a simple answer?
https://askabiologist.asu.edu/complete-metamorphosis

It's simple, yes, but not a complete one.

 

[Kylie]

Metamorphosis.

You think science only has simple explanations for this? If you go to a butterfly expert and ask what happens, they'll just give you a few sentences and say, "That's literally all we know."

REALLY?

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic...llars-transforming-butterflies-metamorphosis/
http://www.zmescience.com/ecology/animals-ecology/how-caterpillar-turn-butterfly-0534534/
https://askentomologists.com/2015/01/14/what-happens-inside-a-cocoon/

These sources just begin to scratch the surface of what we know, and they are all more detailed than what you posted.

 

[MasonP]

My brain (mind) has been tampered with.

Think back, you know it has, how could you possibly believe what you believe if it hadn't been tampered with?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...How does science explain why humans are unable to do something as simple as clean up a lake when it is their stated desire to do so?

It's hard to say without some details (evidence). The issue may not be a scientific one, but an organizational one, or a financial one.

Corruption does often play a part in these enterprises, but there's generally less opportunity for corruption during the research phase because the research budget is typically a small proportion of the whole, and allocated early at fixed rates. Corruption is more likely in the tendering and implementation phases, where there's a much larger financial incentive.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It's hard to say without some details (evidence). The issue may not be a scientific one, but an organizational one, or a financial one.

Corruption does often play a part in these enterprises, but there's generally less opportunity for corruption during the research phase because the research budget is typically a small proportion of the whole, and allocated early at fixed rates. Corruption is more likely in the tendering and implementation phases, where there's a much larger financial incentive.

True, but why? What makes some people dishonest and others not? How does evolution work in this regard?