Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hello Evolution, Nice to Meet You (nature displays genius, Evos forced to personify)
Discovery Institute ^ | June 2, 2009 | Logan Gage

Posted on 06/02/2009 3:07:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Hello Evolution, Nice to Meet You

I believe it was Philip Johnson who once said that if you replaced the word "evolution" in biology textbooks with the word "design," almost nothing of substance would change. I think he was right.

We wonder at nature, not because we are so ignorant, as some people think, but rather because it is so amazing. As Benjamin Wiker and Jonathan Witt explained in A Meaningful World, nature displays true genius. And it is this plain fact that drives design-deniers to deify, or at least personify, Evolution.

Take as just one example this extremely fascinating article, "To Be a Baby," (a play on Thomas Nagel's question of what it is like to "be a bat") from Seed Magazine. The article is an interview with Berkeley psychologist Alison Gopnik, author of The Philosophical Baby: What Children's Minds Tell Us About Truth, Love, and the Meaning of Life.

Gopnik notes that the helplessness of young children seems to be an evolutionary disadvantage and thus would never have developed via the Darwinian mechanism (recall that in humans this period of helplessness is longer than in many other species). Yet her fascinating research led her to see that babies have such a richer mental life (especially rich in imagination) than we typically give them credit for. And this period where they are helpless actually affords them a lengthy period to develop thoughts about the world.

Thus Gopnik concludes:

The way that evolution seems to have solved this problem is by giving us this period of childhood where we don’t have to do anything, where we are completely useless. We’re free to explore the physical world, as well as possible worlds through imaginative play. And when we’re adults, we can use that information to actually change the world.

Rather than see the amazing design of the world, the Darwinian is forced to the absurd position of personifying "Evolution." Evolution intended this and that. And yet this rings hollow when you read of the genius of child development Gopnik ably describes.

Yet she would have lost nothing except the superfluous personification had she just opened her eyes to design.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: creation; evolution; goodgodimnutz; intelligentdesign; science

1 posted on 06/02/2009 3:07:16 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 06/02/2009 3:07:42 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

In related news from an equally reliable source:

ALIENS HELPED INDIANS BEAT CUSTER - http://weeklyworldnews.com/alien-alert/8654/aliens-helped-indians-beat-custer/

WINGED CAT! — http://weeklyworldnews.com/mutants/8484/winged-cat/


3 posted on 06/02/2009 3:12:47 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I thought Bat Boy was at Little Big Horn.

(Little Bat Horn?)


4 posted on 06/02/2009 3:14:51 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Presumably evolution doesn’t always break in favor of the continuation of the species. I think that’s what explains humanity’s greatest threat to its existence: liberals.


5 posted on 06/02/2009 3:16:57 PM PDT by PressurePoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pogo101

>>I thought Bat Boy was at Little Big Horn.

(Little Bat Horn?)<<

That explains a lot! :)


6 posted on 06/02/2009 3:17:06 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Please allow me to introduce myself
Im a man of wealth and taste
Ive been around for a long, long year
Stole many a mans soul and faith
And I was round when Jesus Christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game.....


7 posted on 06/02/2009 3:20:39 PM PDT by TexasRepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Of course, just because a psychologist invokes evolution doesn’t make it so. Likewise I could invoke evolution to explain my missing socks...


8 posted on 06/02/2009 3:58:20 PM PDT by blowfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blowfish

Or missing links.


9 posted on 06/02/2009 3:59:24 PM PDT by AZ .44 MAG (A society that doesn't protect its children doesn't deserve to survive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts; allmendream

Your article claims that prolonged childhood is a selective disadvantage and therefore proof against evolution? To prove this he chooses to use a child psychologist?? That’s silly to the absurd. Had he chosen to provide a compare/contrast dissertation about the advantages of rapid development vs. slow maturity in a natural setting it may have been at least compelling. I’m sorry, GGG. This one wasn’t worth your time to post. I’d like to see more of the literature research study article that you sometimes post. They are much more informative.

Thanks for posting this anyway.


10 posted on 06/02/2009 4:01:05 PM PDT by FormerRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
In related news from an equally reliable source:

Strange that you should finally see through the just-so stories of Darwinists.

Since the book by Gopnik is not yet released we must use the quotes from the "Seed" article. That said, the statement made by Gopnik excluding the final sentence, "The way that evolution seems to have solved this problem is by giving us this period of childhood where we don’t have to do anything, where we are completely useless. We’re free to explore the physical world, as well as possible worlds through imaginative play." seems to apply completely to Darwinists in the adult stage.

Gopnik seems not to have gone through the baby(toddler) stage, since it surprises her that babies can be smart. She also must not be a parent since she seems to be surprised that they can learn to do things. Finally, my grandson reminds me that toddlers have innate curiousity about the world. He quickly gravitates towards making any device with buttons and knobs perform actions undreamt of by their makers.

Just to comment further, babies are not useless.

11 posted on 06/02/2009 4:04:58 PM PDT by AndrewC (Metanoia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC

As I said, my source is as reliable as the OP.

Thanks for agreeing.

As far as childhood somehow undermining TToE — only when you don’t understand science. This is the most specious “analysis” I have ever seen — even from one of these sister-to-WWN sites.


12 posted on 06/02/2009 4:18:47 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FormerRep

You think we should mention that all advanced animals go through a “childhood” period? Or do we want to just let them continue to think Humans are the only ones?


13 posted on 06/02/2009 4:20:11 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FormerRep

It is a popular-level article—not a science paper—that focuses on how the Evos often personify evolution in order to make sense of biological features that don’t make sense via the Darwinian mechanism of slow, incremental change.


14 posted on 06/02/2009 4:47:54 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC; freedumb2003

==seems to apply completely to Darwinists in the adult stage.

LOLOLOL :o)


15 posted on 06/02/2009 4:51:18 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

LOL...published by Evos no doubt:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178219865054585.html


16 posted on 06/02/2009 5:00:40 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

That article has nothing to do with anything.

Just like this one.


17 posted on 06/02/2009 5:09:16 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Sure it does. It demonstrates that the Evo-atheists are statistically the most likely publisher stories about Indian-loving aliens and winged cats.


18 posted on 06/02/2009 5:15:37 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

You’re right. It’s tends to the masses. I guess it’s just my preference. Thanks.


19 posted on 06/02/2009 5:19:17 PM PDT by FormerRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>>Sure it does. It demonstrates that the Evo-atheists are statistically the most likely publisher stories about Indian-loving aliens and winged cats.<<

You can’t read very well, can you?

*slaps self* Who am I talking to?

I withdraw the question.


20 posted on 06/02/2009 5:19:30 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Best to just let this one go. It was never really meant to prove anything just convey the author’s opinion.


21 posted on 06/02/2009 5:20:37 PM PDT by FormerRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FormerRep

>>Best to just let this one go. It was never really meant to prove anything just convey the author’s opinion.<<

Good advice.

Abandoning thread.

‘Night.


22 posted on 06/02/2009 5:23:34 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

See ya!


23 posted on 06/02/2009 5:34:13 PM PDT by AZ .44 MAG (A society that doesn't protect its children doesn't deserve to survive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: FormerRep; GodGunsGuts; metmom
Best to just let this one go. It was never really meant to prove anything just convey the author’s opinion.

Uhhhh, no that would be the results liberals expect to find with evolution, thus the sham of peer review.

Is there a single thread where evo-liberals don't project-alot?

24 posted on 06/02/2009 5:38:39 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for g!ood men to do nothing---Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
Sure it does. It demonstrates that the Evo-atheists are statistically the most likely publisher stories about Indian-loving aliens and winged cats.

Liberals project. In fact I challenge anyone to find a thread where liberal-evos haven't projected. Or used strawmen.

25 posted on 06/02/2009 5:45:55 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for g!ood men to do nothing---Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tpanther

Yes, they do...especially when they try to tell YOU that you are made of goo.


26 posted on 06/02/2009 5:50:02 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
As I said, my source is as reliable as the OP.

...

As far as childhood somehow undermining TToE — only when you don’t understand science.

No, this is what you "said": "In related news from an equally reliable source:"

The original source was the "Seed" article which contains the fairytale.

You continually assert that because someone disagrees with your viewpoint that they don't understand science. Well, something has to be able to undermine TToE or it is not science, by definition. On top of that, it was a comment that was made by the researcher/author during the interview which seems to undermine TToE(but a just-so story comes to the "rescue" in a comment following it), not a comment made by the article's author. The undermining comment being "It’s related to one of the basic things that came out of our research: Why do children exist at all? It doesn’t make tremendous evolutionary sense to have these creatures that can’t even keep themselves alive and require an enormous investment of time on the part of adults. That period of dependence is longer for us than it is for any other species, and historically that period has become longer and longer.

And specious is the act of making up just-so stories to justify a conclusion. Especially when that conclusion involves defining childhood(children) as useless. Do you think children are useless?

27 posted on 06/02/2009 6:22:29 PM PDT by AndrewC (Metanoia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Thanks for the ping!


28 posted on 06/02/2009 8:44:42 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC

>>No, this is what you “said”: “In related news from an equally reliable source:”<<

Yes, as opposed to people who purposely misread my post.

>>You continually assert that because someone disagrees with your viewpoint that they don’t understand science. Well, something has to be able to undermine TToE or it is not science, by definition. <<

That makes no sense whatsoever. Are you talking about falsifiability?

>>On top of that, it was a comment that was made by the researcher/author during the interview which seems to undermine TToE(but a just-so story comes to the “rescue” in a comment following it), not a comment made by the article’s author. <<

Yes, a child psychologist can undermine a 200 year old bedrock of physical science.

>>The undermining comment being “It’s related to one of the basic things that came out of our research: Why do children exist at all? It doesn’t make tremendous evolutionary sense to have these creatures that can’t even keep themselves alive and require an enormous investment of time on the part of adults. That period of dependence is longer for us than it is for any other species, and historically that period has become longer and longer. <<

How silly is that comment. The progression of lengthening childhood is a sociological phenomenon, not a physical one. The fact we have seen it in a few hundred years — faster than a blink of an eye in terms of evolution — means that it has nothing to do with evolution at all. As I said, anyone with the tiniest passing knowledge of science should be able to come to this conclusion. I guess someone had to help connect the dots.


29 posted on 06/03/2009 8:43:24 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: tpanther

>>Liberals project. In fact I challenge anyone to find a thread where liberal-evos haven’t projected. Or used strawmen.<<

I think I shall dub thee iron-y man.


30 posted on 06/03/2009 8:44:13 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
Yes, as opposed to people who purposely misread my post.

You mean the sterling post citing Batboy. Get a life.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Are you talking about falsifiability?

Well, howdy. You said it made no sense. You just fell into the hole?

Yes, a child psychologist can undermine a 200 year old bedrock of physical science.

Do you know the difference between physical science and biological science?

How silly is that comment.

Well, now you seem to be getting the drift of the thread. That silly comment was made by Gopnik who later made this statement. "The evolutionary answer seems to be that there is a tradeoff between the ability to learn and imagine — which is our great evolutionary advantage as a species — and our ability to apply what we’ve learned and put it to use."

So you evidently agree with the Logan Gage, "Rather than see the amazing design of the world, the Darwinian is forced to the absurd position of personifying "Evolution." Evolution intended this and that. And yet this rings hollow when you read of the genius of child development Gopnik ably describes.".

31 posted on 06/03/2009 9:31:44 AM PDT by AndrewC (Metanoia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC

>>Rather than see the amazing design of the world, the Darwinian is forced to the absurd position of personifying “Evolution.” Evolution intended this and that. And yet this rings hollow when you read of the genius of child development Gopnik ably describes.<<

That is, as I said, specious. It is incorrect on so many levels that it is almost impossible to address them all.

Suffice it to say that seeing the wonder of a child is indeed, possible for those who understand science. The statement just shows the inability of the person to see beyond simple talking points.


32 posted on 06/03/2009 9:45:06 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
That is, as I said, specious. It is incorrect on so many levels that it is almost impossible to address them all.

No, what is specious are the statements made by the Darwinists. Your argument is specious, because you admit that the Darwinist's statement was silly in your post 29. The simple statement you assert is specious assails the statements made by Gopnik which is exactly what you have done.

And your statement implying that one must understand science to see the wonder of children is completely laughable.

33 posted on 06/03/2009 10:11:28 AM PDT by AndrewC (Metanoia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC

You crack me up. I leave your words for the world to see.

Adios.


34 posted on 06/03/2009 10:17:45 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks. Sic semper tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; GodGunsGuts
You crack me up. I leave your words for the world to see.

Coming from the person who cites Batboy.....

35 posted on 06/03/2009 10:30:21 AM PDT by AndrewC (Metanoia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; AndrewC

==I leave your words for the world to see.

I guess he’s really impressed with your work AC!


36 posted on 06/03/2009 10:40:15 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Projection on top of layers of projection...predictable coming from a zerrhoid.


37 posted on 06/03/2009 12:27:29 PM PDT by tpanther (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for g!ood men to do nothing---Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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