Evolution is mathematically impossible

[OldWiseGuy]

The problem is that you do believe in voodoo. But you are right on one thing, your personal ignorance of science is not apt to harm you. But if you push for the ignorance of science you will harm others.

Everyone is ultimately personally responsible for what they believe. But at the hands of today's educators we don't know what to believe.

American History professor to incoming class:

"Forget everything you learned in high school. You are about to learn the truth."

 

[Queller]

Isn't good for who? Is mankind poorer because I don't believe the ToE? I'm the richer as I enjoy all the benefits of science without the voodoo.

Thye only voodoo involved is what's in your imagination. There's no voodoo in science.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Thye only voodoo involved is what's in your imagination. There's no voodoo in science.

I'm speaking of evolution, not science in general.

 

[bhsmte]

I'm speaking of evolution, not science in general.

Evolution is one of the most well evidenced theories in science. Therefore, you are speaking of science.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Evolution is one of the most well evidenced theories in science. Therefore, you are speaking of science.

I'll grant that it is the most well theorized theory in science.

 

[pitabread]

I'll grant that it is the most well theorized theory in science.

It is also extremely well evidenced. Now if you wanted to learn how and why that is the case you could. It's up to you.

 

[Astrophile]

American History professor to incoming class:

"Forget everything you learned in high school. You are about to learn the truth."

That probably happens in other subjects besides history, for example mathematics.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

That probably happens in other subjects besides history, for example mathematics.

Possibly true, based on the 'fuzzy' math that defines higher education.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It is also extremely well evidenced. Now if you wanted to learn how and why that is the case you could. It's up to you.

Evolutionists see only evidence that supports their theory. Worse yet they have banished any concept of design in nature as anathema to the theory. That alone should leave one scratching their head.

 

[pitabread]

Evolutionists see only evidence that supports their theory. Worse yet they have banished any concept of design in nature as anathema to the theory. That alone should leave one scratching their head.

Incorrect.

Perhaps instead of making groundless projections, you should try learning about the ToE and how and why it is supported.

Then you'll also be in a better position to understand why things like 'Intelligent Design' have been rejected as pseudoscience with no evidentiary support.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Incorrect.

Perhaps instead of making groundless projections, you should try learning about the ToE and how and why it is supported.

Then you'll also be in a better position to understand why things like 'Intelligent Design' have been rejected as pseudoscience with no evidentiary support.

Evolution rejects design, period, whether intelligent or not.

 

[pitabread]

Evolution rejects design, period, whether intelligent or not.

I feel like we might be getting into equivocation territory here, so perhaps you should define what you mean by evolution and design in this context.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I feel like we might be getting into equivocation territory here, so perhaps you should define what you mean by evolution and design in this context.

Take an organ, such as the human hand with all it's connections. I see elegant design from the start, not the end product of a million fortuitous changes over millions of years (details which are impossible to verify). Studying anatomy reveals such design from the smallest detail to the whole organism.

 

[pitabread]

Take an organ, such as the human hand with all it's connections. I see elegant design from the start, not the end product of a million fortuitous changes over millions of years (details which are impossible to verify). Studying anatomy reveals such design from the smallest detail to the whole organism.

I asked for a definition of design and evolution. What are your definitions of such?Simply claiming you "see design" isn't a definition in the human hand isn't a definition of such.

On top of that, we've already established your claims of design in living things is based on emotional arguments and circular logic. So if you're going down that route again, you can surely appreciate why such arguments are not persuasive and certainly not scientific.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I asked for a definition of design and evolution. What are your definitions of such?Simply claiming you "see design" isn't a definition in the human hand isn't a definition of such.

On top of that, we've already established your claims of design in living things is based on emotional arguments and circular logic. So if you're going down that route again, you can surely appreciate why such arguments are not persuasive and certainly not scientific.

Design is a plan from which something is created or fabricated. Just reverse engineer the human hand and you'll see the plan (many such diagrams are available). I'm only trying to persuade you and others that I believe that we were designed, and not the result of happenstance. I would think that by now you and others would concede the fact that OldWiseGuy believes in special creation. Of course it is challenging to you and others as I keep imposing this belief into these evolution threads.

 

[Speedwell]

Evolutionists see only evidence that supports their theory. Worse yet they have banished any concept of design in nature as anathema to the theory. That alone should leave one scratching their head.

Not anathema, irrelevant.

 

[Speedwell]

Evolution rejects design, period, whether intelligent or not.

Falsehood alert: Evolution does not reject design. Design is an unfalsifiable proposition which science cannot disprove.

 

[Speedwell]

Design is a plan from which something is created or fabricated. Just reverse engineer the human hand and you'll see the plan (many such diagrams are available). I'm only trying to persuade you and others that I believe that we were designed, and not the result of happenstance. I would think that by now you and others would concede the fact that OldWiseGuy believes in special creation. Of course it is challenging to you and others as I keep imposing this belief into these evolution threads.

False dichotomy alert: the alternatives to "design" can be more than just "happenstance". The interacting stochastic process which make up the biosphere have enough information processing capacity to account for the biological complexity which we observe.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Falsehood alert: Evolution does not reject design. Design is an unfalsifiable proposition which science cannot disprove.

That's encouraging.

 

[tas8831]

Evolutionists see only evidence that supports their theory.

Then perhaps you can condescend to show us some ACTUAL evidence that counters it? Or better yet - evidence FOR your deity magic stories?

By the way - you not understanding things is not evidence that the evidence of revolution is only what we want to see.

Worse yet they have banished any concept of design in nature as anathema to the theory.

Heavens, no!!! I also heard tell that the 'turtles all the way down' story of creation has been banned in science!

That alone should leave one scratching their head.

Why?

Analogies and bible verses are not sufficient to warrant the consideration.