< 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›
 
   
 

Yale professor’s thoughts on Darwinism

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15835
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
10 August 2019 16:38
 
Jefe - 09 August 2019 05:42 PM

“What attack was made on your motiviations?”  Why did you refer to my motivations at all?  Was it a neutral reference?

Let’s be clear - you’re the one who brought up motivations.

Jefe,
This guy has played this game before. He just keeps asking questions to string people along. Troll, pure and simple. With emphasis on the simple.

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  476
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
10 August 2019 20:18
 

I found this explanation of why the original article was wrong:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3393
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
11 August 2019 15:10
 

Computer scientist David Gelernter drinks the academic Kool-Aid, buys into intelligent design
—Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/computer-scientist-david-gelertner-drinks-the-academic-kool-aid-buys-into-intelligent-design/

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7105
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
11 August 2019 16:15
 
burt - 10 August 2019 04:38 PM
Jefe - 09 August 2019 05:42 PM

“What attack was made on your motiviations?”  Why did you refer to my motivations at all?  Was it a neutral reference?

Let’s be clear - you’re the one who brought up motivations.

Jefe,
This guy has played this game before. He just keeps asking questions to string people along. Troll, pure and simple. With emphasis on the simple.

Help me Burt.  I have a weakness.

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7105
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
11 August 2019 16:16
 
Jan_CAN - 11 August 2019 03:10 PM

Computer scientist David Gelernter drinks the academic Kool-Aid, buys into intelligent design
—Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/computer-scientist-david-gelertner-drinks-the-academic-kool-aid-buys-into-intelligent-design/

Yup.  There are several rabbit holes in that thread that lead to other rebutting evidence and take-downs of the Meyers work.

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15835
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
11 August 2019 17:22
 
Jefe - 11 August 2019 04:15 PM
burt - 10 August 2019 04:38 PM
Jefe - 09 August 2019 05:42 PM

“What attack was made on your motiviations?”  Why did you refer to my motivations at all?  Was it a neutral reference?

Let’s be clear - you’re the one who brought up motivations.

 

Hell, send me $100 per week and I’ll troll you. Enabling all the way.

Jefe,
This guy has played this game before. He just keeps asking questions to string people along. Troll, pure and simple. With emphasis on the simple.

Help me Burt.  I have a weakness.

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7105
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
12 August 2019 08:33
 
burt - 11 August 2019 05:22 PM

Hell, send me $100 per week and I’ll troll you. Enabling all the way.

I can’t afford those rates.  Not just for trolling, anyway.  wink

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  342
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
12 August 2019 10:43
 
burt - 10 August 2019 04:34 PM
TwoSeven1 - 08 August 2019 11:11 PM
burt - 08 August 2019 09:42 PM
TwoSeven1 - 08 August 2019 02:42 PM

I am interested to hear the thoughts of anyone willing to read this whole article.  I was fascinated to hear his perspective, especially since he is a computer science professor at Yale -

https://www.claremont.org/crb/article/giving-up-darwin/

As soon as he started talking about stuff from the Discovery Institute and supporting ID I know he was a fruitcake. His main claim, that evolutionary processes cannot explain the origin of new species is totally false. Back in the late 60s I had a girlfriend who was doing a Ph.D. in genetics setting up computer models of speciation. There are lots of other things going on in evolution in addition to variation and selection, but this guy is bogus.

What do you think about the section where he explains some mathematical concepts?

I’m a mathematician. I have done research on construction of evolutionary models. He doesn’t know what he is talking about, or more accurately, knows just enough to twist things to his agenda, which is not science but religions.

“I’m a mathematician. I have done research on construction of evolutionary models.”  What does an argument care about credentials?

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  342
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
12 August 2019 10:44
 
lynmc - 10 August 2019 08:18 PM

I found this explanation of why the original article was wrong:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html

David Gelernter’s article isn’t about abiogenesis.

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  342
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
12 August 2019 10:44
 
Jan_CAN - 11 August 2019 03:10 PM

Computer scientist David Gelernter drinks the academic Kool-Aid, buys into intelligent design
—Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/computer-scientist-david-gelertner-drinks-the-academic-kool-aid-buys-into-intelligent-design/

An underlying point I see in many Evolutionist responses is that time allowed for all of the diversity of life.  One of Gelernter’s points is that the Cambrian example shows that we are missing evidence to support that idea.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3393
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
12 August 2019 15:01
 
TwoSeven1 - 12 August 2019 10:44 AM
Jan_CAN - 11 August 2019 03:10 PM

Computer scientist David Gelernter drinks the academic Kool-Aid, buys into intelligent design
—Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/computer-scientist-david-gelertner-drinks-the-academic-kool-aid-buys-into-intelligent-design/

An underlying point I see in many Evolutionist responses is that time allowed for all of the diversity of life.  One of Gelernter’s points is that the Cambrian example shows that we are missing evidence to support that idea.

Gelernter is a computer scientist who does not understand the biological sciences that he is criticising; Coyne points out that he also seems “ignorant of the fossil record”.  Gelernter is also a denier of anthropogenic global warming.  IMO, it takes a certain amount of self-delusion and/or arrogance to not acknowledge one’s own limitations. 

No amount of sound scientific evidence will convince a staunch creationist/ID supporter of the true nature of the world around them because they are locked into a particular view of the world because of their religious biases.  It’s rather sad that they can’t fully appreciate the truth and beauty of life’s natural evolution.

 

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  342
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
12 August 2019 16:10
 
Jan_CAN - 12 August 2019 03:01 PM
TwoSeven1 - 12 August 2019 10:44 AM
Jan_CAN - 11 August 2019 03:10 PM

Computer scientist David Gelernter drinks the academic Kool-Aid, buys into intelligent design
—Jerry Coyne, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/05/17/computer-scientist-david-gelertner-drinks-the-academic-kool-aid-buys-into-intelligent-design/

An underlying point I see in many Evolutionist responses is that time allowed for all of the diversity of life.  One of Gelernter’s points is that the Cambrian example shows that we are missing evidence to support that idea.

Gelernter is a computer scientist who does not understand the biological sciences that he is criticising; Coyne points out that he also seems “ignorant of the fossil record”.  Gelernter is also a denier of anthropogenic global warming.  IMO, it takes a certain amount of self-delusion and/or arrogance to not acknowledge one’s own limitations. 

No amount of sound scientific evidence will convince a staunch creationist/ID supporter of the true nature of the world around them because they are locked into a particular view of the world because of their religious biases.  It’s rather sad that they can’t fully appreciate the truth and beauty of life’s natural evolution.

“Coyne points out that he also seems ‘ignorant of the fossil record’.”  Does he only seem ignorant on that subject, or is he actually ignorant?

“Gelernter is also a denier of anthropogenic global warming.  IMO, it takes a certain amount of self-delusion and/or arrogance to not acknowledge one’s own limitations.”  He’s a denier if he isn’t convinced?

Now, I don’t know David Gelernter, nor do I know all of the research he’s done, his personal views, his biases, etc., but what I do know is the value of thinking independently about an argument.  I don’t believe that Evolutionists have everything firgured out in quite the way that they consistently say they do.

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7105
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
12 August 2019 16:56
 
TwoSeven1 - 12 August 2019 04:10 PM

Now, I don’t know David Gelernter, nor do I know all of the research he’s done, his personal views, his biases, etc., but what I do know is the value of thinking independently about an argument.  I don’t believe that Evolutionists have everything firgured out in quite the way that they consistently say they do.

Maybe you would if you actually studied evolution science instead of chasing ID/Creationist fallacies.

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3393
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
12 August 2019 16:58
 
TwoSeven1 - 12 August 2019 04:10 PM
Jan_CAN - 12 August 2019 03:01 PM

Gelernter is a computer scientist who does not understand the biological sciences that he is criticising; Coyne points out that he also seems “ignorant of the fossil record”.  Gelernter is also a denier of anthropogenic global warming.  IMO, it takes a certain amount of self-delusion and/or arrogance to not acknowledge one’s own limitations. 

No amount of sound scientific evidence will convince a staunch creationist/ID supporter of the true nature of the world around them because they are locked into a particular view of the world because of their religious biases.  It’s rather sad that they can’t fully appreciate the truth and beauty of life’s natural evolution.

“Coyne points out that he also seems ‘ignorant of the fossil record’.”  Does he only seem ignorant on that subject, or is he actually ignorant?

“Gelernter is also a denier of anthropogenic global warming.  IMO, it takes a certain amount of self-delusion and/or arrogance to not acknowledge one’s own limitations.”  He’s a denier if he isn’t convinced?

Now, I don’t know David Gelernter, nor do I know all of the research he’s done, his personal views, his biases, etc., but what I do know is the value of thinking independently about an argument.  I don’t believe that Evolutionists have everything firgured out in quite the way that they consistently say they do.

There is critical, independent thinking and then there is stubborn adherence to obsolete ideas.  Not the same thing at all.  Science never figures everything out – it’s a process.  When over a century of painstaking work by experts from various disciplines, including newer sciences (e.g. DNA), test and confirm the theory and basic principles, adding and expanding on each other’s work, it’s no longer a theory but a new knowledge and understanding of our world.

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3393
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
12 August 2019 17:26
 
Jefe - 12 August 2019 04:56 PM
TwoSeven1 - 12 August 2019 04:10 PM

Now, I don’t know David Gelernter, nor do I know all of the research he’s done, his personal views, his biases, etc., but what I do know is the value of thinking independently about an argument.  I don’t believe that Evolutionists have everything firgured out in quite the way that they consistently say they do.

Maybe you would if you actually studied evolution science instead of chasing ID/Creationist fallacies.

Yup, disparaging mainstream science out of hand isn’t demonstrating ‘good’ thinking.  And to seriously consider an argument, I think one needs some idea of the author’s credibility.

[ Edited: 12 August 2019 17:57 by Jan_CAN]
 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›