- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,999
- 52,622
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Roe v Wade
Is that obscure enough?
Here's another one:
Italian seismologists cleared of manslaughter
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Roe v WadeYou probably have some obscure case in which that may have happened so let's hear about it.
1.F.M. Wuketits, an evolution theorist, writes [W5, p. 11]: “We pre-suppose the essential correctness of biological evolution, yes, we assume that evolution is universally valid.”please identify these "assumptions" you speak of.
You shouldn't have said that. Now we'll get to hear about the Hindenburg (scientists claimed that hydrogen was safe and uninflammable) and Thalidomide (scientists claimed it was safe and had no side effects).You probably have some obscure case in which that may have happened so let's hear about it.
Those are all interesting opinions, but what makes you think that they are widely held or normative?[
1.F.M. Wuketits, an evolution theorist, writes [W5, p. 11]: “We pre-suppose the essential correctness of biological evolution, yes, we assume that evolution is universally valid.”
: Evolution is a universal principle: “The principle of development not only holds for life on earth; it extends much further. It is quite clearly the most widely valid principle imaginable, because it encompasses the entire universe. . . . All of reality around us is characterized by a history of self-development. Biological evolution is only part of this universal process” (Hoimar von Ditfurth; [D3, p. 22]).
One should not drag in a creator (or synonyms such as designer, planning spirit, or “demiurge”). Ernest Kahane, a French molecular biologist, formulates it as follows [S5, p. 16]: “It is absurd and absolutely preposterous to believe that a living cell could come into existence by itself; but, notwithstanding, I do believe it, because I cannot imagine anything else.”
Another Assumption follows as a consequence :
This world, including all living organisms, is based exclusively on matter and materialistic principles.
Another assumption:Evolution relies on processes that allow increases in organization from the simple to the more complex, from non-life to life, from lower to higher life-forms.
How many more do you want?
Those are legal decisions not scientific ones.Roe v Wade
Is that obscure enough?
Here's another one:
Italian seismologists cleared of manslaughter
Yes, you can. Metaphysical materialism is not a requirement for doing science.It's obvious. You can't get the whole muck to us model without those assumptions.
I can make a pretty good guess. But you aren't likely to find a bone even 50 years old just laying out somewhere. They degrade pretty fast. That's why fossils aren't generally bones that just laid there and got covered by leaves or whatever, those are long gone.
Roe v Wade
Is that obscure enough?
Here's another one:
Italian seismologists cleared of manslaughter
I never said scientists said that hydrogen was safe and uninflammable.You shouldn't have said that. Now we'll get to hear about the Hindenburg (scientists claimed that hydrogen was safe and uninflammable) and Thalidomide (scientists claimed it was safe and had no side effects).
Wouldn't it be nice if science had some organization it was accountable to for?Those are legal decisions not scientific ones.
Just "child in the womb" relabeled to "fetus," and L'Aquila labeled "safe."So no case of scientists playing footsie with labels.
Wouldn't it be nice if science had some organization it was accountable to for?
[
1.F.M. Wuketits, an evolution theorist, writes [W5, p. 11]: “We pre-suppose the essential correctness of biological evolution, yes, we assume that evolution is universally valid.”
: Evolution is a universal principle: “The principle of development not only holds for life on earth; it extends much further. It is quite clearly the most widely valid principle imaginable, because it encompasses the entire universe. . . . All of reality around us is characterized by a history of self-development. Biological evolution is only part of this universal process” (Hoimar von Ditfurth; [D3, p. 22]).
One should not drag in a creator (or synonyms such as designer, planning spirit, or “demiurge”). Ernest Kahane, a French molecular biologist, formulates it as follows [S5, p. 16]: “It is absurd and absolutely preposterous to believe that a living cell could come into existence by itself; but, notwithstanding, I do believe it, because I cannot imagine anything else.”
Another Assumption follows as a consequence :
This world, including all living organisms, is based exclusively on matter and materialistic principles.
Another assumption:Evolution relies on processes that allow increases in organization from the simple to the more complex, from non-life to life, from lower to higher life-forms.
How many more do you want?
Lol, knowing one's career can and will be ruined by not accepting Darwinism, no doubt fuels many to modify their findings.It is a 100 percent violation of the most
basic concept in science, which is to
make every feasible effort to be objective.
Knowing about confirmation bias, knowing
the easiest person to fool is one's self.
Knowing that only bad science can come from
a failure of objectivity, knowing one's career can be
ruined by such failure.
No, thats not how science works. Isnt there some kind of rule about lying in your religion?Lol, knowing one's career can and will be ruined by not accepting Darwinism, no doubt fuels many to modify their findings.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?