Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

So You Think You Are a Darwinian?
Royal Institute of Philosophy ^ | 1994 | D. C. Stove

Posted on 02/08/2003 7:54:52 AM PST by Ethan Clive Osgoode

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-225 next last
To: All

From the King of Slime
121 posted on 02/10/2003 7:02:07 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: js1138
The more complex circuits were replicated on an array of 1000 Pentium II 350s -- a poor man's supercomputer.

You still need to explain how intelligent human design of a process proves random, stochastic, evolution. What your statements show is the desperation of evolutionists in the face of intelligent design. Now they are trying to argue that mindless chance is a better designer than human beings. When you have to do that, you have already lost.

122 posted on 02/10/2003 7:03:34 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Numerous people have tried to explain the the calculated probabilities are bogus

This is the usual nonsense from evolutionists - they cannot tell what the refutation is but like Gould's moronic punk-eek it always happened at some other time, at some other place which of course they cannot mention nor can they mention what the refutation is.

All that the evolutionists have been doing on these threads is engaging in ad hominems and giving excuses why they cannot debate honestly the issues presented to them.

... because we don't know enough to calculate them.

We certainly do know the enough, although evolutionists keep putting down science we know very well the chances of making a single normal sized gene. There are some 300 amino acids in a medium sized gene. At each position there are 22 posible values. However, some values may be substituted by others with similar characteristics but not at all positions and not by just any value. So being extremely generous the chances are one in 10^300th power. That's just for one of the some 30,000 genes in a human being - with millions of different genes in the over a million species in existence today. In addition, as science has shown, the genes have to fit in with the entire organism and be completely connected to it to work properly so making a gene is not the end of the hurdles necessary for evolution to be true.

So yes, evolution is impossible.

123 posted on 02/10/2003 7:14:34 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: js1138
To say that evolution has no goal or destination is not entirely true.

Matter does not think. Random chance does not have a goal. You need goal to arrange things in an orderly manner instead of wandering blindly and hitting upon a solution by dumb luck. Evolution does not cut it. The complexity of living organisms shows it to be impossible. In fact, the attempt by evolutionists to claim that evolution is 'intelligent' shows how far their theory has lost respectability that it is forced to try to hijack the arguments of its opponents.

124 posted on 02/10/2003 7:19:02 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: js1138
The success of this programming method proves that useful and previously unknown things can arise through mutation and selection.

Repeating the same ridiculous statement will not make it true. You are arguing that intelligent design of a program proves random chance. Can't you see the absurdity of what you are saying??????????

125 posted on 02/10/2003 7:21:26 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
As I recall, there is a theory put forth in "The Descent of Man" about differences in evolutionary level for the various races of man.

There are many throughout his writings, here's one:

In man the frontal bone consists of a single piece, but in the embryo, and in children, and in almost all the lower mammals, it consists of two pieces separated by a distinct suture. This suture occasionally persists more or less distinctly in man after maturity; and more frequently in ancient than in recent crania, especially, as Canestrini has observed, in those exhumed from the Drift, and belonging to the brachycephalic type. Here again he comes to the same nclusion as in the analogous case of the malar bones. In this, and other instances presently to be given, the cause of ancient races approaching the lower animals in certain characters more frequently than do the modern races, appears to be, that the latter stand at a somewhat greater distance in the long line of descent from their early semi-human progenitors.
Darwin, Descent of Man, Chapter 2.

126 posted on 02/10/2003 7:25:48 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: and the horse you rode in on
It is when supernatural intervention is invoked

Hmmm, so I guess you have seen this 'natural selection' you evolutionists speak of all the time? Is it male or female? How large is its brain?

127 posted on 02/10/2003 7:28:18 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Darwin concluded that all races were the same species.

Semantics garbage, the same nonsense you do in trying to 'prove' Hitler a Catholic and the Pope not Catholic - in the very same thread. That Darwin was a racist there can be no doubt (as that racism is an integral part of evolutionary theory):

"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world."
Darwin to Graham, July 3, 1881.

128 posted on 02/10/2003 7:32:52 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: and the horse you rode in on
Why are the major Oil & Gas discoveries all made by evolutionists?

What a moronic and totally disingenous statement. Guess you have taken a poll of everyone that has discovered oil and asked them if they were evolutionists or not? Seems to me that GWB, a good Christian, dug for oil. There goes your blatant nonsense.

129 posted on 02/10/2003 7:35:45 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: I got the rope
Why is it when Lib lurkers get called out they start calling people names

I am not a liberal. And evolution is at the center of politics in our society, so this is a political discussion. People do not get so exited over science. It is you who is trying to shut down discussion and you got put down as you deserved. And no you are not a scientist. Scientists have open minds and welcome discussion. Also if evolution was true and you were a scientist you would be eager to show that evolution is true instead of close down the discussion.

130 posted on 02/10/2003 7:41:30 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
What a moronic and totally disingenous statement. Guess you have taken a poll of everyone that has discovered oil and asked them if they were evolutionists or not? Seems to me that GWB, a good Christian, dug for oil. There goes your blatant nonsense.

I lived in Houston, met them in business, had them over to the house, saw them at the country clubs. I knew all the serious players of the last 50 years, the ones who actually found oil, unlike GWB who was just a promoter.
And by the way, W didn't stop believing in evolution till it became politically expedient, like GHWB and abortion, and yeah, they were over at the house too.

131 posted on 02/10/2003 7:42:41 PM PST by and the horse you rode in on (Republican's for Sharpton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
"Darwinism" is a pejorative created by Creationists to bash anyone who does not believe in their version of reality.

Another evolutionist which is ashamed of the founder of the theory! Wow, you guys are really losing.

132 posted on 02/10/2003 7:43:05 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: and the horse you rode in on
I lived in Houston, met them in business,

Sell your nonsense to someone else, the same nonsense as your taking a poll of all those who dig for oil being evolutionists. Reminds me of the Clintonites who claimed that everything good in the world was due to Clinton. Keep it, I was vaccinated by 8 years of that liar from your kind of nonsense.

133 posted on 02/10/2003 7:45:45 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Wow, you guys are really losing

And.... you think you are winning?

134 posted on 02/10/2003 7:56:19 PM PST by LisaAnne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
Sell your nonsense to someone else, the same nonsense as your taking a poll of all those who dig for oil being evolutionists

Want to put some money on it?
Really serious money?
Money to make it worth my while to meet you in Houston this weekend?

135 posted on 02/10/2003 8:00:08 PM PST by and the horse you rode in on (Republican's for Sharpton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
Since when are all scientists Popperian irrationalists?

LOL - you really are a Stove fan, aren't you? Go ahead, post his critique of Popper - blowing holes in that one ought to be fun, too ;)

136 posted on 02/10/2003 8:36:51 PM PST by general_re (ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: and the horse you rode in on
weak
very weak

try educating yourself

get out some maybe
137 posted on 02/10/2003 8:45:07 PM PST by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: LisaAnne
Wow, you guys are really losing -me- And.... you think you are winning?

Yup, when your opponents can only respond to your statements with insults and when they are being forced to by the huge amount of scientific evidence to abandon random change, I can certainly say that the evolutionists are losing big.

138 posted on 02/10/2003 8:51:34 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: and the horse you rode in on
Money to make it worth my while to meet you in Houston this weekend?

Do you have an invitation to see GWB in Houston this weekend??????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

139 posted on 02/10/2003 8:53:32 PM PST by gore3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: gore3000
you have an invitation to see GWB in Houston this weekend??????? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

No Sonny, but then he never found any significant oil. for the rest of the family I don't need an invitation. I sure don't need an invitation to see the Senior Geologists and corp executive officers who have found most of the worlds petro.

If you got the jack, I 'll be there.
Put up or crawl back into your own little fantasy reality boy.
Some of us have led real lives and have real accomplishments and the friends that go with them.

140 posted on 02/10/2003 10:21:07 PM PST by and the horse you rode in on (Republican's for Sharpton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 221-225 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

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