Don’t Call it “Darwinism” [religiously defended as "science" by Godless Darwinists]

springerlink ^ | 16 January 2009 | Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch

[Coyoteman]

We will see and hear the term “Darwinism” a lot during 2009, a year during which scientists, teachers, and others who delight in the accomplishments of modern biology will commemorate the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species. But what does “Darwinism” mean? And how is it used? At best, the phrase is ambiguous and misleading about science. At worst, its use echoes a creationist strategy to demonize evolution.

snip...

In summary, then, “Darwinism” is an ambiguous term that impairs communication even about Darwin’s own ideas. It fails to convey the full panoply of modern evolutionary biology accurately, and it fosters the inaccurate perception that the field stagnated for 150 years after Darwin’s day. Moreover, creationists use “Darwinism” to frame evolutionary biology as an ism or ideology, and the public understanding of evolution and science suffers as a result. True, in science, we do not shape our research because of what creationists claim about our subject matter. But when we are in the classroom or otherwise dealing with the public understanding of science, it is entirely appropriate to consider whether what we say may be misunderstood. We cannot expect to change preconceptions if we are not willing to avoid exacerbating them. A first step is eschewing the careless use of “Darwinism.”

[LeGrande]

"reinforcement of the darkness you're already in."

Seriously, when I believed, I was in darkness. Now that I have made the break, I can hardly believe the weight that has been lifted and how clear everything is. If anything I get angry with myself for being deluded for so many years.

You have my sincere sympathy for your cognitive dissonance.

[RegulatorCountry]

Woo-hoo ... much Beavistry and Buttheadedness over in DC Comic-land. Over 1k replies.

Does somebody get a little gold star or something?

[Fichori]

“How's this:

<include std_disclaimer.h>” [excerpt]

If we are using C, you'll get an error: syntax error before '<' token unless you do:

#include <std_disclaimer.h>

(Assuming of course that you have the path to std_disclaimer.h set with the -I switch)

Otherwise you can just do:

#include "/dev/urandom"

Eventually you will get some sort of disclaimer, but it will take a while.

A long while.

[metmom]

The lg random word generator does not have a lie filter.

[metmom]

You can get some good deals at garage sales. If I ever wanted to sell my Saxon Physics book, I'd try at a garage sale first.

Now, I can think of a few Evolutionaries who are a bit sensitive about their education.

No kidding. I have copied the indignant reaction of a college professor about a student who stated that he questioned his prof about something. How dare he?!?! The gall of kids these days....

[metmom]

I think you are grossly overestimating your own intellect.

An understatement if I ever heard one.

[LeGrande]

Woo-hoo ... much Beavistry and Buttheadedness over in DC Comic-land. Over 1k replies.

Does somebody get a little gold star or something?

What are you talking about? Do you frequent DC? I would, but it is much more fun playing with you Deists : )

[metmom]

Scientists disagree with you that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. You argument is moot.

Astronomers Detect First Split-Second of the Universe (WMAP & CMB)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1597858/posts

NASA Satellite Glimpses Universe’s First Trillionth of a Second
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1597911/posts

[metmom]

*snicker*

[LeGrande]

Scientists disagree with you that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. You argument is moot.

Sorry but the Inflationary theory does not falsify the Theory of Relativity. Better luck next time : )

[grey_whiskers]

Yah, it's been about fifteen years since I looked at C.

I *knew* it didn't look quite right.

Thanks for the correction.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

*And* he is a hypocrite and troll of the first order.

Notice in post 968 where he dismisses me because of an (unsubstantiated) accusation that I had confused him with Coyoteman; and then in 982 he admits to actually confusing Fichori with Mrjesse; but merely transfers his ad hominem to a new target.

Lazy, dishonest, incompetent, rude, childish.

...who still has not answered repeated questions about his level of education (Post 974).

Despite falsely mocking the education of others (Post 969).

And claiming "he has a pretty good grasp of field equations" (Post 976), and inaccurately posting about Relativity (Post 971 "The gist of the argument was that nothing is faster than the speed of light, therefore an omnipotent God doesn't exist because the speed of light is a limit.") while being too uniformed to realize that his major premise is false.

Troll.

Or, as they used to say before the world wide web, *PLONK*.

Cheers! Cheers!

[Fichori]

“Funny, I looked into the bottom of my coffee cup and didn't see your god there? Why not, if he is omnipresent?” [excerpt]

Its because you're blind, LeGrande.

Completely blind.

You think you can see, but its just an illusion.

Nothing but a figment of your imagination.

And your brain won't conjure what you don't want to behold.

[grey_whiskers]

The problem I was touching on there, is that often the specialists in a field use a word from their discipline to a lay audience, and are wildly misunderstood or mischaracterized as a result.

The lay people don't know any better -- they think they're doing well to have heard *of* the concept.

It is interesting in this regard that both the celebrated Christian apologist C.S. Lewis, and Nobel-laureate in physics Dick Feynman, independently came up with the idea that "if you can't express your concept in words an elementary student can follow, you don't really understand it yourself."

Those two--and Einstein--were in my judgment the clearest writers I have ever read.

See also the article from the book in post 926 this thread.

Cheers!

[metmom]

I wouldn’t expect you to think so.

[LeGrande]

And your brain won't conjure what you don't want to behold.

I actually agree with you for once : )

[metmom]

From someone who can’t distinguish between *omnipresent* and *omnipotent*, that’s no surprise.

But he’s yet to be right about anything. The entertainment possibilities are endless.

[Fichori]

“Notice in post 968 where he dismisses me because of an (unsubstantiated) accusation that I had confused him with Coyoteman; and then in 982 he admits to actually confusing Fichori with Mrjesse; but merely transfers his ad hominem to a new target.” [excerpt]

I'm really not surprised that he got me and mrjesse confused.

When (intellectually speaking) you're in a sack and there are two fellas with bigs sticks wangin away, its hard to remember which one is which...

The LeGrandeic System of Astrophysics (fourth edition)

[mrjesse]

Said LeGrande:Are you insulting Fichori Metmom? He is kind of sensitive about his education. Did you know that he bought a physics book at a yard sale? He very proudly pointed that out to me : )

Hey! I like my physics textbook. Speaking of those who are sensitive about their education - I too noticed that you haven't been much^H^H^H^H at all open about yours!

By the way, I'm still waiting for an answer from you about the apparent displacement of a basically stationary heavenly body that were 12 light hours away. Do you really believe that it would show up in the east while it was really in the west, at any instant in time for an observer on the earth? This would seem to be the case based on your claim that the sun is lagged about 2.1 degrees from it's apparent position at any point in time for an observer on the earth due to the fact that the earth rotates about 2.1 degrees in the 8.3 minutes it takes the sun's light to reach the earth.

Now, if the sun orbited around the earth every 24 hours - then sure I can see why you'd claim the 2.1 degrees of displacement. But last I checked the earth mostly orbits the sun.

So do you really believe that if the earth were 12 light hours away from the sun that the sun's gravitational pull would be towards the eastern horizon when the sun appeared on the western horizon? Unbelievable. That's almost as bad as believing that the earth is flat..! What school taught you physics? Unbelievable..

Still waiting for an answer....

-Jesse

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Lazy, dishonest, incompetent, rude, childish. ...who still has not answered repeated questions about his level of education

Legrande thinks that the "real" position of the sun in the sky leads its "apparent" position by 2.1 degrees. That is to say, the sun revolves around the earth. He defended this view for hundreds of posts. Fichori can provide the links to these most interesting conversations. Oh, yes, Legrand also thinks he is made of "waves of nothing."