Paradigm Shift: Holistic Darwinism VS the Selfish Gene

[VirOptimus]

Perhaps that is because Dawkins brand of evolution is a mixed up confused lie. It is a counterfeit and a forgery. People do not want to put any effort into learning how evolution really works.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Perhaps that is because Dawkins brand of evolution is a mixed up confused lie. It is a counterfeit and a forgery. People do not want to put any effort into learning how evolution really works.

And with that, my irony meter just exploded.

 

[bhsmte]

And with that, my irony meter just exploded.

He is keeping the irony meter industry flourishing.

 

[joshua 1 9]

And with that, my irony meter just exploded.

The irony in case you missed it is that you can not got two evolutionists with a Phd to agree about anything. So if you want to promote a theory it would help if you could find more than token agreement about just what that theory is.

In this thread we are talking about Dawkins and his "selfish gene" and the evolutionist that do not agree with this selfish gene approach. For example Corning and his Hypothesis on Synergism.

Of course Darwin never claimed to understand the mechanism of evolution. Students can ask what is the driving force behind evolution: social science or life science? (biology or physics) Corning will be quick to answer that the true driving force is politics.

Still biology and physics often contradict themselves when it comes to evolutionary theory. Biology will make claims that violate the laws of physics. Some people talk about the contradictions or paradoxes inherent within human nature which we try to account for in logical and consistent ways.

Goethe tells us that the truth has long been known. If people seek to know the truth they will find the truth. Only to many people do not want to know the truth and the freedom they would have if they were to walk in the truth.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The irony in case you missed it is that you can not got two evolutionists with a Phd to agree about anything. So if you want to promote a theory it would help if you could find more than token agreement about just what that theory is.

In this thread we are talking about Dawkins and his "selfish gene" and the evolutionist that do not agree with this selfish gene approach. For example Corning and his Hypothesis on Synergism.

Of course Darwin never claimed to understand the mechanism of evolution. Students can ask what is the driving force behind evolution: social science or life science? (biology or physics) Corning will be quick to answer that the true driving force is politics.

Still biology and physics often contradict themselves when it comes to evolutionary theory. Biology will make claims that violate the laws of physics. Some people talk about the contradictions or paradoxes inherent within human nature which we try to account for in logical and consistent ways.

Goethe tells us that the truth has long been known. If people seek to know the truth they will find the truth. Only to many people do not want to know the truth and the freedom they would have if they were to walk in the truth.

No, what's ironic is a man (yourself) who knows very little, if next to nothing, about evolution claims that the 'brand' of evolution is a 'mixed up and confused lie'.

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, what's ironic is a man (yourself) who knows very little, if next to nothing, about evolution

There is very little that makes me laugh but this is one of them. If I know nothing about evolution then what does that say about 99% of the people that knows less about it then me? I have read at last a dozen books that deals with the subject to some degree where the average person has read ZERO (0) books about evolution or even science in general. So by your admission no one knows anything at all. Other than a few professors that teach it for a living and get paid to learn it. Do you even realize how much you condemn yourself when you judge others?

Matthew 12:37 "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

claims that the 'brand' of evolution is a 'mixed up and confused lie'.

A conversation or debate without rhetoric is like a canoe without a paddle. You can go down steam but if you want to go upstream you need a paddle to get you there.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

There is very little that makes me laugh but this is one of them. If I know nothing about evolution then what does that say about 99% of the people that knows less about it then me? I have read at last a dozen books that deals with the subject to some degree where the average person has read ZERO (0) books about evolution or even science in general. So by your admission no one knows anything at all. Other than a few professors that teach it for a living and get paid to learn it. Do you even realize how much you condemn yourself when you judge others?

Matthew 12:37 "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."

A conversation or debate without rhetoric is like a canoe without a paddle. You can go down steam but if you want to go upstream you need a paddle to get you there.

You keep saying that you know more about evolution that 99% of people (I have absolutely no idea how you reached that figure), and you keep touting the claim that you have read 'at least a dozen books' about evolution, yet every time you start a topic about evolution, you consistently make simple and glaringly wrong claims about evolution, and yet when you are corrected on them, you NEVER take those corrections to heart and then you keep repeating the same errors again and again.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So by your admission no one knows anything at all. Other than a few professors that teach it for a living and get paid to learn it. Do you even realize how much you condemn yourself when you judge others?

Also: how in the ever loving asterisk-ampersand-exclamation-mark did you get THAT from what I said?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Also: how in the ever loving asterisk-ampersand-exclamation-mark did you get THAT from what I said?

What good is it to repeat this all over again if you were not able to follow the logic the first time around? IF I know nothing about evolution then no one knows anything because I know more about evolution then the vast majority of the people.

There are many areas that I have studied extensively that you do not seem to be aware of. Things that are of interest to me like the discovery of fire and cooking food and the impact that had on evolution. Or even the amount of study I have done on the botany and the evolution of wild species that became domesticated species. Most of this information is in scientific journals as not that many books are written on the ancient plant species that we find in the Middle east and in the Bible.

I am not claiming to be any sort of an expert. I am only claiming to know more about the subject then the vast majority of people. Perhaps that is what is confusing you.

 

[joshua 1 9]

you consistently make simple and glaringly wrong claims about evolution, and yet when you are corrected on them, you NEVER take those corrections to heart and then you keep repeating the same errors again and again.

I think that you are telling me about yourself. Perhaps YOU are the one that is guilty of what you are trying to accuse me of. I mean if you want to help me to clean up my back yard great, wonderful. But you maybe a bit busy cleaning up your own mess in your own backyard.

 

[pitabread]

I have read at last a dozen books that deals with the subject to some degree

Which books?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Which books?

You have GOT to be kidding me. Ok, I will name a few to give you an idea of what I have studied and read. "The language of life (how cells communicate in Health and Disease)" Debra Neihoff. "The Language of life" Francis Collins, "The Double Helix" James Watson. "The Food Crisis in Prehistory" Mark Nathan Cohen (Overpopulation and the Origins of Agriculture) "Catching the Fire" How cooking made us human. Richard Wrangham "Signature in the Cell" Stephen meyers "Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Eve Devo" Sean B Carroll. To name a few in addition to the study and research I have done with Biology books and the internet like Wiki and references like that. Also I have studied and read Gerold Schroeder and some of his books. I have a lot of books here that I have not read but I have looked through them to get an idea of the content like Stephen Jay Gould "Wonderful life The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History"

There are people like Edwin H Colbert that I have studied to see what they contributed: "His fieldwork in Antarctica in 1969 helped solidify the acceptance of continental drift, by finding a 220-million-year-old fossil of a Lystrosaurus. His popularity and his text books on dinosaurs, paleontology, and stratigraphy(with Marshall Kay) introduced a new generation of scientists and amateur enthusiasts to the subject. He was the recipient of numerous prizes and awards commemorating his many achievements in the field of science." wiki

I have studies the Botany of Ancient middle age plants and how they evolved into domesticated plants. I have studied how farming spread from the Middle East to Europe. I can go on and on about different things I have looked into, researched and studies like "The seven daughters of Eve" sykes and all of the DNA research that is associated with the out of africa theory and the various Haplogroups that we find when we study DNA. I have looked into Darwin and his educational experience along with the pressure put on him by his dad. How he was friends with Charles Lyess and how the geology gradualism had an effect on Darwin and his attempt at Biology.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What good is it to repeat this all over again if you were not able to follow the logic the first time around? IF I know nothing about evolution then no one knows anything because I know more about evolution then the vast majority of the people.

There are many areas that I have studied extensively that you do not seem to be aware of. Things that are of interest to me like the discovery of fire and cooking food and the impact that had on evolution. Or even the amount of study I have done on the botany and the evolution of wild species that became domesticated species. Most of this information is in scientific journals as not that many books are written on the ancient plant species that we find in the Middle east and in the Bible.

I am not claiming to be any sort of an expert. I am only claiming to know more about the subject then the vast majority of people. Perhaps that is what is confusing you.

Oh lord, this is just insane.
Joshua, if I am saying that you yourself do not know anything about evolution, then I am not saying that anyone else knows anything about evolution. That's not how the English language works!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think that you are telling me about yourself. Perhaps YOU are the one that is guilty of what you are trying to accuse me of. I mean if you want to help me to clean up my back yard great, wonderful. But you maybe a bit busy cleaning up your own mess in your own backyard.

No, I am not talking about myself. I am only talking about YOU. I'm not the one who makes thread after thread about evolution and get simple things wrong time and time again. That's you. Stop with this pathetic attempt at reverse psychology to try and make yourself look smart. It's not working.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I am only talking about YOU.

You are not allowed to talk about me, that is against the rules.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Joshua, if I am saying that you yourself do not know anything about evolution

You are wrong, I know a lot about evolution. Actually I do not even have any problem with evolution. I have a problem with the anti theist version of evolution like Dawkins selfish gene does not fit my concept and my belief of what evolution is.

Anti theists have hijacked the theory and replaced it with with a counterfeit forgery theory that does not reflect the truth. People like Dawkins like to try to promote the false theory and they argue against the truth and the true theistic theory of evolution.

Counterfeit and true evolutionists have the exact same evidence to work with. It is just the people that promote the false theory have to take the evidence and twist - warp it to serve their agenda. Francis Collins talks about this on his biologos web site. He explains all of this there. He explains this a lot better than I do and his books are widely accepted by christians and non christians. As a director he is a leading expert on the subject. He is very well respected in the scientific community. In January 2015 President Obama announced the NIH-led Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) in his State of the Union address.[41] Collins not only had favor with the Obama administration he was also well funded. Even he received an additional $680 million in the proposed fiscal year 2017 budget. He is well funded because he knows how to get results. Even though he was appointed by Obama - President Donald Trump is keeping Francis Collins as director of the National Institutes of Health.

 

[VirOptimus]

You are wrong, I know a lot about evolution. Actually I do not even have any problem with evolution. I have a problem with the anti theist version of evolution like Dawkins selfish gene does not fit my concept and my belief of what evolution is.

Anti theists have hijacked the theory and replaced it with with a counterfeit forgery theory that does not reflect the truth. People like Dawkins like to try to promote the false theory and they argue against the truth and the true theistic theory of evolution.

Counterfeit and true evolutionists have the exact same evidence to work with. It is just the people that promote the false theory have to take the evidence and twist - warp it to serve their agenda. Francis Collins talks about this on his biologos web site. He explains all of this there. He explains this a lot better than I do and his books are widely accepted by christians and non christians. As a director he is a leading expert on the subject. He is very well respected in the scientific community. In January 2015 President Obama announced the NIH-led Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) in his State of the Union address.[41] Collins not only had favor with the Obama administration he was also well funded. Even he received an additional $680 million in the proposed fiscal year 2017 budget. He is well funded because he knows how to get results. Even though he was appointed by Obama - President Donald Trump is keeping Francis Collins as director of the National Institutes of Health.

No matter what you state, its selfevident from your posts that you understand very little, if anything, about basic science and basic theology.

Reading and understanding is two very different things.

 

[bhsmte]

You are not allowed to talk about me, that is against the rules.

The content of your posts are open to criticism. You did write them, didn't you?

 

[joshua 1 9]

The content of your posts are open to criticism. You did write them, didn't you?

Really you do not know the difference between a criticism of what someone says and a flame or a personal attack? I have a book I would like to suggest for you to read.

I want people to find the weakness in what I say so I can strengthen my beliefs and purge out any errors. That does not mean I want them to attack me personally.

 

[bhsmte]

Really you do not know the difference between a criticism of what someone says and a flame or a personal attack? I have a book I would like to suggest for you to read.

I want people to find the weakness in what I say so I can strengthen my beliefs and purge out any errors. That does not mean I want them to attack me personally.

LOL. You and your books.

People have constantly pointed out the flaws in the logic of your posts. When this happens, you either completely ignore what they state and or the contradictory train starts rolling.

It is really, quite amusing.