Scientists Confirm: Darwinism Is Broken

[Kenny'sID]

Nope, it is science. Not only scientists say that. Unbiased judges have come to that conclusion when creationism in its many forms has gone up against evolution.

That proves no more than your type of science does. Anyone can make claims.

People actually believe evolution is a fact...hardly a news flash.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you listen to the conference recordings yes they do. Essentially they are saying that neo-Darwinism and evolution as taught in university and textbooks is flawed. None of them believe in creation so of course they will expand the theory of evolution, but the first source is essentially saying that their conclusions on Darwinism and evolution is what people who believe in creation have been saying all along.

No one has ever claimed that Neo-Darwinism is perfect. There are unanswered questions in it, just as there will be unanswered questions in this new synthesis. And no, the people that believe in creationism have been making quite different claims and those claims were shown to be wrong long ago.

All that conference was about was what direction would be best to take for studying evolution in the future. There is no doubt that life evolved or that you and I are both apes.

 

[HitchSlap]

That proves no more than your type of science does. Anyone can make claims.

People actually believe evolution is a fact...hardly a news flash.

Tell you what... you do your kind of science, we'll do our kind of science, and then we'll compare notes to see who's correct.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That proves no more than your type of science does. Anyone can make claims.

Yes, but we can support our claims. You can't. I have even offered to help you to learn and I know that others would do so too if you could ask questions politely and properly.

People actually believe evolution is a fact...hardly a news flash.

Somewhat wrong. Scientists can demonstrate that evolution is a fact. hardly a news flash.

The reason that your side constantly loses court cases is that all that they have are empty claims.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Yes, but we can support our claims

You never have before....you only do just as I said you did, pretend to have support, when it's only opinion.

Somewhat wrong. Scientists can demonstrate that evolution is a fact. hardly a news flash.

No, it's exactly right, some believe evolution is fact...period.

The reason that your side constantly loses court cases is that all that they have are empty claims.

Nope, it because we are dealing with secular courts and people that have duped themselves in to believing such nonsense instead of the truth they'd prefer not to believe.

I have no doubt, many courts would conclude God does not exist, but do you really think I care, or that would sway my thoughts in the least?

As I've always said, "it all just happened" is ridiculous compared to ID.

 

[sfs]

If you listen to the conference recordings yes they do. Essentially they are saying that neo-Darwinism and evolution as taught in university and textbooks is flawed. None of them believe in creation so of course they will expand the theory of evolution, but the first source is essentially saying that their conclusions on Darwinism and evolution is what people who believe in creation have been saying all along.

As I just said in your parallel thread in the Christians-only forum, no. Just no. What ID claims and what these scientists are discussing are very different things. Neo-Darwinism covers a specific set of models for how evolution works. Those models were a great starting place, but they're well known to be inadequate in many ways, and they have been and are being extended, adapted and refined by lots of researchers. That's normal scientific research. ID, in contrast, claims that something other than evolutionary mechanisms are required.

(I note that I'm running an evolutionary theory reading group at work, and we're working our way through the proceedings volume from a similar conference, one on the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. Some good stuff in there, but also considerable hype.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

You never have before....you only do just as I said you did, pretend to have support, when it's only opinion.

Actually I have. And I have offered to do so with you. You tend to run away from such offers.

No, it's exactly right, some believe evolution is fact...period.

Wrong again, evolution can be shown to be a fact. The theory of evolution explains how evolution happened just as the theory of gravity explains how gravity works.

Nope, it because we are dealing with secular courts and people that have duped themselves in to believing such nonsense instead of the truth they'd prefer not to believe.

Wrong again. Christian judges, even conservative Christian judges have found against creationists. They understand the nature of evidence. They have a far better understanding of "truth" than you do. You should really watch the PBS portrayal of the Dover trial. It is quite illuminating. The creationist side got a conservative George Bush (Sr.) appointed judge, and they still lost miserably.

I have no doubt, many courts would conclude God does not exist, but do you really think I care, or that would sway my thoughts in the least?

Wrong again. The theory of evolution is not an "anti-God" theory. It says nothing about God. It only tells us how life got to its present state, not whether or not there is a god. One of the main witnesses for the evolution side in the Dover trial is a devout Christian.

Also if one's thoughts cannot be swayed by reason it only shows that one's thoughts are unreasonable.

As I've always said, "it all just happened" is ridiculous compared to ID.

No one claims that "it all just happened" except for creationists that have no understanding of the theory of evolution.

 

[Kenny'sID]

You tend to run away from such offers.

Where did I do that? Show me.

Wrong again, evolution can be shown to be a fact. The theory of evolution explains how evolution happened just as the theory of gravity explains how gravity works.

You didn't read my comment very carefully did you..

Wrong again. Christian judges, even conservative Christian judges have found against creationists. They understand the nature of evidence. They have a far better understanding of "truth" than you do. You should really watch the PBS portrayal of the Dover trial. It is quite illuminating. The creationist side got a conservative George Bush (Sr.) appointed judge, and they still lost miserably.

Just more talk...doesn't substantiate a thing

Wrong again. The theory of evolution is not an "anti-God" theory.

Of course it is, if it's anti bible, it's anti God. You should have been able to put that together yourself.

No one claims that "it all just happened" except for creationists that have no understanding of the theory of evolution.

That's what y'all keep saying, yet when it comes right down to it, that's all it really amounts to.

But by all means, do explain how it came to be...how did it happen without a creator?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where did I do that? Show me.

I am not going to dig through countless posts for you. I will instead give you one of the topics that you ran away from. I posted an image of Goosenecks State Park. That picture alone refutes a worldwide flood.

You didn't read my comment very carefully did you..

I did read it. You did not understand the response given to you.

Just more talk...doesn't substantiate a thing

Wrong again, but then what did I expect?

Of course it is, if it's anti bible, it's anti God. You should have been able to put that together yourself.

The same rather silly claims were made about Galileo's work. You only interpret it as being "anti God".

That's what y'all keep saying, yet when it comes right down to it, that's all it really amounts to.

But by all means, do explain how it came to be...how did it happen without a creator?

Kenny, you need so much education that we need to start with the basics first. Any simplified explanation will have you amaking your same false claim. When you learn some of the basics of science, and I will gladly help you with that, then you may be able to understand the explanation of how life evolved. The errors of yours are on a very basic level and those need to be fixed first.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I will instead give you one of the topics that you ran away from. I posted an image of Goosenecks State Park. That picture alone refutes a worldwide flood.

Rediculous accussation and one heck of a stretch to say I ran away from something you never even commented on. Might I show you a picture of the sistine chapel, right out of the blue and then say you ran a way from the argument I intended when I never stated an argument. What a stretch, dude. Since I'm not absolutely sure what came off there, or if the pic was even directed at me...show me the post so I can see if I ran from anything...otherwise I'll assume you are making a baseless charge.

I did read it. You did not understand the response given to you.

Nope, you agreed to just what I claimed in the post while saying I was wrong. Anyone can go back and read it and see that you clearly misunderstood, but if you aren't going to see it, fine. Some people just have a problem admitting they messed up...but when it's all the in black and white, that's just not a smart thing to do, but suit yourself...

Wrong again, but then what did I expect?

You need to show me "why" I'm wrong.

The same rather silly claims were made about Galileo's work. You only interpret it as being "anti God".

You got off track, but I suppose that one way to evade the fact.

Kenny, you need so much education that we need to start with the basics first. Any simplified explanation will have you amaking your same false claim. When you learn some of the basics of science, and I will gladly help you with that, then you may be able to understand the explanation of how life evolved. The errors of yours are on a very basic level and those need to be fixed first.

The age old claim around here ... "YOU don't understand science"...lol. Fact is, I I won't accept what you call science. Science is what it is, but what people choose to derive from that science, is not science, it's opinion, and often agenda driven opinion. Or an opinion drawn not because it's necessarily logical, but in order to prove, or back up a predetermined notion.

I've seen your basics, and they are not drawn purely from science.

You have nothing but an illusion you pass off as science, when it's only opinion of what scientific fact means or leads to. Illusion derived from delusion of your own making. Or, you want to believe it, you will find a way to believe it....true or not.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Rediculous accussation and one heck of a stretch to say I ran away from something you never even commented on. Might I show you a picture of the sistine chapel, right out of the blue and then say you ran a way from the argument I intendedm when I never stated and argument. What a stretch, dude.

I posted that quite a while ago. You seem to want me to go back, you can go back. If you did not understand the image that I posted you should have said so. And if you wish to discuss it I will gladly do so. It needs to be done on its own. No Gishing allowed.

Nope, you agreed to just what I claimed in the post while saying I was wrong. Anyone can go back and read it and see that you clearly misunderstood, but if you aren't going to see it, fine. Some people just have a problem admitting they messed up...but when it's all the in black and white, that's just not a smart thing to do, but suit yourself...

No, you simply misunderstood at best.

You need to show me "why" I'm wrong.

I will gladly do so. Ask your questions politely and properly and I will. Do you know what that means? Politely means no dishonest "gotcha" questions. When it comes to the sciences you are the one that needs to catch up a bit. Properly means limiting your questions. Don't run all over the place. Ask one question per post.

You got off track, but I suppose that one way to evade the fact.

Nope, you simply would not let yourself understand again. In these long posts all you get is a simple correction. If you want to go into depth on any of it you need to ask questions politely and properly.

The age old claim around here ... "YOU don't understand science"...lol. Fact is, I I won't accept what you call science. Science is what it is, but what people choose to derive from that science, is not science, it's opinion, and often agenda driven opinion. Or an opinion drawn not because it's necessarily logical, but in order to prove, or back up a predetermined notion.

No, that is a simple and obvious fact. WE can discuss what is and what is not science too. As I have pointed out your side keeps losing lawsuits. Part of the reason is that creationists do not know what science is. Your can slander science all that you want, you will still be wrong.

I've seen your basics, and they are not drawn purely from science.

Please, don't make me laugh.

You have nothing but an illusion you pass off as science, when it's only opinion of what scientific fact means or leads to. Illusion derived from delusion of your own making. Or, you want to believe it, you will find a way to believe it....true or not.

Really? You use the science that says that your beliefs are wrong every day. If one uses that which they deny that makes them rather hypocritical in my book. It is amazing how creationists will not quit using the science that they deny.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That proves no more than your type of science does. Anyone can make claims.

Yes, but I can back up my claims with evidence. Something that you can't do.

People actually believe evolution is a fact...hardly a news flash.

Wrong again, some people know that evolution is a fact. Some people still believe in creationism. Hardly a news flash. Knowledge is demonstrable. That evolution is a fact can be demonstrated. All you have is mere belief.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...It is amazing how creationists will not quit using the science that they deny.

One can't help contrast The Amish...

 

[Subduction Zone]

One can't help contrast The Amish...

At least they try to stand by their convictions. For too many creationists they simply have a comforting belief.

 

[Speedwell]

Of course it is, if it's anti bible, it's anti God. You should have been able to put that together yourself.

It's not even anti-Bible. It's only "anti" a particular interpretation of the Bible subscribed to by a small minority of Christians.

 

[freezerman2000]

That proves no more than your type of science does. Anyone can make claims.

People actually believe evolution is a fact...hardly a news flash.

Turn the tables and the reverse would be hardly be a news flash...

 

[loveofourlord]

Now that's better. This source:
New trends in evolutionary biology: biological, philosophical and social science perspectives

Does not support the claims of your first source.

it be nice if they listed what these revisions are too, I mean yes evolution should be revised, like it has been a few hundred times as new things are discovered, this i a far cry from ID.

 

[Subduction Zone]

it be nice if they listed what these revisions are too, I mean yes evolution should be revised, like it has been a few hundred times as new things are discovered, this i a far cry from ID.

Why? Science is always changing in all branches. There would n be no real point to keeping a list of revisions since thereis no one official book of science. And ID is merely people playing dress up. It is not real science at all.

 

[loveofourlord]

Why? Science is always changing in all branches. There would n be no real point to keeping a list of revisions since thereis no one official book of science. And ID is merely people playing dress up. It is not real science at all.

well I mean usually these talks list somewhere what they are discussing :> I just meant more for reference as to what they are talking about in this particular event.

 

[Kenny'sID]

It's not even anti-Bible. It's only "anti" a particular interpretation of the Bible subscribed to by a small minority of Christians.

The bible is pretty clear on that, still I'm surprised that someone is just now mentioning what you have..I expected that a while back.

Anyway, thanks for posting something at least sensible..the way things have been going here, it's at least refreshing.