Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: Quix
They have been tested mathematically. And ID won.

Would you care to elaborate on this statement. As I've stated above, the difference between scientific theory and mythological fantasy is that the former requires some level of empirical support. At best, it would appear that a mathematics model may challenge some trivial aspect of evolution; I fail to see how it would establish intelligent design as any sort of alternative.

Here, let me provide an analogy:

Histrionic personality disorder is a theory of psychological behavior. It is conceivable that one could devise a mathematics model which challenges the qualitative or quantitative consistency of traits generally thought to comprise histrionic personality disorder. If challenged comprehensively enough, this could cast into doubt the entire existence of histrionic personality disorder as a distinctive psychological profile.

This would not however establish possession by demonic spirits as the alternative 'theory' (though one may fantasize that as one's explanation..)

260 posted on 06/22/2003 8:36:44 PM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies ]


To: AntiGuv
They have been tested mathematically. And ID won.-Quix-

Would you care to elaborate on this statement.

Certainly. Neo-Darwinism (Darwinism itself has been laughed out by science) postulates that the changes which create new species are due to mutations. DNA has shown that it is almost impossible to change even one gene favorably in a stochastic manner. There are some 30,000 genes in humans and less than a thousand in bacteria so the descent of man alone from bacteria would have taken a minimum of 29,000 miracles (and that is not considering that there are over a million species in existence today each with at least a few genes which are different from all the other species).

300 posted on 06/22/2003 8:53:12 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
Am not really energized nor up for such a protracted exchange.

Perhaps others can carry that torch if they care to.

I think the mathematical models effectively demonstrated that the basic underpinings of the theory of evolution don't wash. Not enough time by a long shot in even the oldest GUESStimates of the age of the universe.

The ordered complexity is just to extensive by several orders of magnitude.

My posts were mostly designed as quick responses off the top of my head against some of the more . . . uhhh silly postulations in the article.
341 posted on 06/22/2003 9:18:38 PM PDT by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies ]

To: AntiGuv
empirical support?

Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment: empirical laws

or

Relying on or derived from observation or experiment: empirical results that supported the hypothesis
617 posted on 06/23/2003 2:22:22 PM PDT by CyberCowboy777 (They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson