‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 > 
 
   
 

Yale professor’s thoughts on Darwinism

 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6784
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
14 August 2019 17:32
 

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21694
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
15 August 2019 09:48
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 August 2019 11:11
 
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

 

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7135
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
15 August 2019 12:11
 
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

The bible cannot touch modern science or all the discoveries and advances we have made in the past 1800 or so years (since their final authorship).
The authors are grounded firmly in their time, and their writings are obviously and necessarily ignorant of anything that came afterwards.

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  347
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
15 August 2019 14:13
 
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
15 August 2019 14:25
 
TwoSeven1 - 15 August 2019 02:13 PM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

Yup – sea lioning.

 

 
 
proximacentauri
 
Avatar
 
 
proximacentauri
Total Posts:  335
Joined  07-02-2017
 
 
 
15 August 2019 14:43
 
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 02:25 PM
TwoSeven1 - 15 August 2019 02:13 PM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

Yup – sea lioning.

Yup, fundamentalist biblical literalist sea lioning.

 

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  347
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
16 August 2019 06:53
 
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 02:25 PM
TwoSeven1 - 15 August 2019 02:13 PM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

Yup – sea lioning.

If you hadn’t made broad statements then I wouldn’t have reasons to question you.

It’s ironic for you to ignore the conclusions found in a reference that someone of your own perspective provided.  It’s fair to ask what your takeaway is from that reference, especially since you always attack the credibility/understanding of my references.

 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
16 August 2019 07:59
 
TwoSeven1 - 16 August 2019 06:53 AM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 02:25 PM
TwoSeven1 - 15 August 2019 02:13 PM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

Yup – sea lioning.

If you hadn’t made broad statements then I wouldn’t have reasons to question you.

It’s ironic for you to ignore the conclusions found in a reference that someone of your own perspective provided.  It’s fair to ask what your takeaway is from that reference, especially since you always attack the credibility/understanding of my references.

The point I made was simple and clear, yet you ask for clarification without addressing what was said, i.e. sea lioning.  And you failed to address the relevant points of criticism in the link showing the flaws in the OP article.  It is you who need to take the time to clarify your position and be upfront enough to acknowledge that it is religion that shapes your views, using discredited ‘science’ as justification.

Some people here have taken the time to respond though it is often thought that such posts should be ignored; you’ve been given an opportunity to justify an untenable position but have failed to do so.  The ball’s in your court.

 

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  347
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
16 August 2019 09:00
 
Jan_CAN - 16 August 2019 07:59 AM
TwoSeven1 - 16 August 2019 06:53 AM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 02:25 PM
TwoSeven1 - 15 August 2019 02:13 PM
Jan_CAN - 15 August 2019 11:11 AM
EN - 15 August 2019 09:48 AM
Antisocialdarwinist - 14 August 2019 05:32 PM

Until a better theory comes along, I’m sticking with Darwin. I.D. is bullshit, and claiming it’s not religious is even bullshittier. Who was the designer?

It’s also unnecessary for a Christian to reject Darwin.  It’s taking a position against science that is not called for.

Even though the Roman Catholic Church is not known as one of the most progressive or liberal churches, Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/pope-would-you-accept-evolution-and-big-bang-180953166/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/4588289/The-Vatican-claims-Darwins-theory-of-evolution-is-compatible-with-Christianity.html

The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.  This is their Achilles’ heel – in basing their beliefs on the literal truth of their bible, all crumbles in the light of day.

“... Pope Francis (and the Vatican) does not deny the Big Bang or Darwinian evolution and does not support intelligent design-leaning views.”  Of what relevance is this?

“The fundamentalist-types appear to be the last holdouts with their inability to accept what cannot reasonably be denied.”  Evolution cannot reasonably be denied?  Did you read Jefe’s last reference?  If so, what is your takeaway?

Yup – sea lioning.

If you hadn’t made broad statements then I wouldn’t have reasons to question you.

It’s ironic for you to ignore the conclusions found in a reference that someone of your own perspective provided.  It’s fair to ask what your takeaway is from that reference, especially since you always attack the credibility/understanding of my references.

The point I made was simple and clear, yet you ask for clarification without addressing what was said, i.e. sea lioning.  And you failed to address the relevant points of criticism in the link showing the flaws in the OP article.  It is you who need to take the time to clarify your position and be upfront enough to acknowledge that it is religion that shapes your views, using discredited ‘science’ as justification.

Some people here have taken the time to respond though it is often thought that such posts should be ignored; you’ve been given an opportunity to justify an untenable position but have failed to do so.  The ball’s in your court.

“The point I made was simple and clear, yet you ask for clarification without addressing what was said, i.e. sea lioning.”  It’s not the clarity or simplicity of your statement that I’m questioning.  I’m questioning your logical justification in making the statement.

“And you failed to address the relevant points of criticism in the link showing the flaws in the OP article.”  I did not say that Gelernter is correct.  I started this thread by saying I was fascinated to hear his perspective.  I also said earlier in this thread that I’m not offering a defense of Meyer’s book.

In my opinion, Jefe’s reference is the most relevant response to Gelernter’s article that anyone has provided in this discussion because it speaks directly to Douglas Axe’s expiriment.  In light of this, I would like to know what your justification is for implicitly stating that Evolution is undeniable.  If Jefe’s reference is correct, and the probability of Evolution to create new proteins is unknown, then I don’t understand why Evolution is undeniable.  Of course, I understand that Jefe provided the reference, not you.  That’s why I would like to know your takeaway.

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  17722
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
16 August 2019 09:12
 

I can’t believe you guys have filled up 5 pages on this bullshit.

Life is to complex to just happen, therefore there must be a designer.

That is a complete bullshit self-negating statement, this was over before it even started.

 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  3468
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
16 August 2019 09:25
 
GAD - 16 August 2019 09:12 AM

I can’t believe you guys have filled up 5 pages on this bullshit.

Life is to complex to just happen, therefore there must be a designer.

That is a complete bullshit self-negating statement, this was over before it even started.

Yeah, I regret it now ... should have left it at posting the Coyne article.

 

 
 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  347
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
16 August 2019 09:39
 
GAD - 16 August 2019 09:12 AM

I can’t believe you guys have filled up 5 pages on this bullshit.

Life is to complex to just happen, therefore there must be a designer.

That is a complete bullshit self-negating statement, this was over before it even started.

“Life is to complex to just happen, therefore there must be a designer.”  This isn’t an accurate summary of Gelernter’s point.

If you think the things I bring up for discussion are trivial then what does it matter that others engage me or not?  I would expect that if others feel the same way then they would simply stop responding.  I half-expect that to happen at this point in the thread anyway.

 
proximacentauri
 
Avatar
 
 
proximacentauri
Total Posts:  335
Joined  07-02-2017
 
 
 
17 August 2019 07:31
 

“Science is a philosophy of discovery; intelligent design is a philosophy of ignorance.”  - Neil deGrasse Tyson

 
TwoSeven1
 
Avatar
 
 
TwoSeven1
Total Posts:  347
Joined  18-12-2018
 
 
 
17 August 2019 10:58
 
proximacentauri - 17 August 2019 07:31 AM

“Science is a philosophy of discovery; intelligent design is a philosophy of ignorance.”  - Neil deGrasse Tyson

Neil deGrasse Tyson - “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”

How much credence should we give a man who thinks that science is always true?

 
‹ First  < 3 4 5 6 >