Good luck Roy...I think a few people have tried this myself included but the Big Slush is a trickster...
Darwinism Benefits Scientific Method?
- Thread starter IceAgeCivilizations
- Start date
- Status
Darwinism clearly has no predictive value for scientific innovations, unless you include for "airplane wing designs and traffic flow solutions," so Darwinism is just a bizarre morphing scheme, intended to make kids think that they evolved from goo, and therefore, are not worth much more than goo.
No Darwinist can predict how the "species" will supposedly morph into a new "species," so Darwinism is stricly science fiction. Creatures do naturally select within their respective syngameons, such as the syngameon which includes llamas, camels, and alpacas, but that is the extent of evolution, evolution per se, not Darwinian evolution, where swamp goo supposedly morphed into the wide variety of creature which we see.
Darwinism is science fiction folks, don't be fooled.
No Darwinist can predict how the "species" will supposedly morph into a new "species," so Darwinism is stricly science fiction. Creatures do naturally select within their respective syngameons, such as the syngameon which includes llamas, camels, and alpacas, but that is the extent of evolution, evolution per se, not Darwinian evolution, where swamp goo supposedly morphed into the wide variety of creature which we see.
Darwinism is science fiction folks, don't be fooled.
No such thing as Darwinism.
No such thing as a Darwinist.
No such thing as a Darwinist.
No such thing as Darwinian evolution.
No such thing as god.
You can't know that, you just think that.
That's your main problem with evolution, and it's a strawman. Evolutionary theory doesn't mean you are worth as much as goo. Your ego is bruised that you can no longer consider yourself a heavenly creature of light. This is ulitmately, not a scientifically valid reason to object to evolution. Your insistance that evolution works on the "syngameon" level, and not above is a complete perversion. The main breakthrough that Darwin made was that small steps of evolution add up to the big steps. Accumulated changes result in all the species we see today from a common ancestor.
Last edited:
Give up Spider, Ice isn't interested in intelligent discussion of facts and observations. He just enjoys repeating his nonesense about morphing goo, as if we didn't get his brilliant sarcasm the first time.
Evolution science will continue to grow, regardless of the few god botherers that feel the need to attack it just to make them feel better about their irrational beliefs.
Evolution science will continue to grow, regardless of the few god botherers that feel the need to attack it just to make them feel better about their irrational beliefs.
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
This is, of course, a strawman argument par excellence.
Who has said this? Certainly not I. Certainly no reputable scientist that I have heard of. So, what if this has been said. It is pure bollocks. Why? Very simple.
Scientific progress is based upon the scientific method. The scientific method takes nothing as read. All results and all 'truth's' are provisional. Scientific progress depends upon taking nothing as writ. Your unattributed, strawman statement is the very antithesis of what science as about.
I am not at all surprised that you should make such an elementary error. (You lack the intellect to make a more advanced error.) But really, what did you hope to achieve by this mindless obfuscation? Do you actually believe you are establishing some measure of superiority over Darwinst's by this drivel.
But dear Ophiolite, nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Current Biology is based on the scientific method AND evolution.
Current Biology is based on the scientific method AND evolution.
Yes, "current biology" does teach that goo morphed into you, very scientific, you know, observable, reproducable, haw!
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
You haven't read what I wrote. If you have read it you have certainly not understood it. Since you are an intelligent person this must be a failure on my part that I shall now attempt to correct.
Actually, I think I shall just ask you to read it again. Do you treat Darwinian evolution as writ? I hope not. I think better of you than that. Did Dhobzhansky, or Eldridge, or Simpson, or Gould, treat it as writ? No, they did not. They questioned aspects of it and in so doing improved and strengthened the edifice.
In science we treat nothing as writ. Nothing.
It still is what it is, goo supposedly morphed into the wide variety of creatures which we see.
That's the first time I've seen the contrition smilie face, is it a new model?
your love for jesus has blinded you. It's called embarrasment and it has been part of sciforums forever (you can read that in two ways). However, before the new updated forum software was installed it looked differently.
They're so cute, like a little sock puppet.
What is this goo you keep mentioning?
Do you mean the origins of life, abiogenisis? You claim to be interested in science, explain yourself.
- Status