Posted on 07/23/2006 9:36:42 AM PDT by tomzz
I probably should have noted that the powerpoint presentation which the link involving the Haldane Dilemma points to was for a little presentation I gave at the McLean Bible Church in Virginia on the topic about a couple of months ago.
Ping for later.
I've found this to be a fascination subject. Chuck Missler did a study on it that I still have on tape and bring out every now and then. It's still over my head, but it's fascinating.
I'm bookmarking - this could get interesting. I'll sit on the sidelines and watch.
Expect a lot of flammage.....
I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it's been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books in the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has. -- Malcolm Muggeridge, The End of Christendom
Read later
It takes all of two minutes to google up how the Haldane Dilemma is invalid .
“Haldane's "cost of natural selection" stemmed from an invalid simplifying assumption in his calculations. He divided by a fitness constant in a way that invalidated his assumption of constant population size, and his cost of selection is an artifact of the changed population size. He also assumed that two mutations would take twice as long to reach fixation as one, but because of sexual recombination, the two can be selected simultaneously and both reach fixation sooner. With corrected calculations, the cost disappears (Wallace 1991; Williams n.d.).More in-depth analysis of the Haldane Dilemma here .Haldane's paper was published in 1957, and Haldane himself said, "I am quite aware that my conclusions will probably need drastic revision" (Haldane 1957, 523). It is irresponsible not to consider the revision that has occurred in the forty years since his paper was published.
I think a reasonable person can be a believer in creation or ID, and I have absolutely nothing against them. But there’s something seriously wrong with someone who goes out of their way to misrepresent evolution.
Ignorance is bliss placemarker.
How have you been Ted?
I dunno. You come here to get news about the Israel/Lebanon war, and all you find is newbies posting crevo threads, eh?
And as vanities, to boot.
LOL. That was funny!!!
Yeah, but it's sort of an inside joke. Over the head sort of thing, I expect.
Haldane Dilemma: Not actually a dilemma placemarker
One can be a believer and not deny evolution.
One who is an atheist or agnostic must by necessity believe in evolution. If intelligent design or some other matter suggesting God action is proved then ipso facto they are wrong.
A agree with Coulter what people miss in this discussion is not the religion of the intelligent design believers but the religion of the Darwinists. The reason even a tepid, incomplete discussion of intelligent design cannot occur in the public schools--is the Darwinist religion cannot permit what to them is a heresy. Claiming no faith in God does not make one more objective or "scientific." Such claims themselves are leaps to faith just like any ohter religion.
No kidding. Did you talk about the electric sun and remote viewing too? Betcha that would've been a hit.
What would you expect form the clown prince of astrophysics?
How about the Felt Gravity Effect? And ascii bats?
I am supposing you are right. After all, we are still talking about the "dinosaur meat", and that leads me to think it is not over the head, so much as through the head and out the other side.
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.