1
   

Darwinisum

 
 
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 07:54 pm
I was reading a article by Lloyd Pye on Charles Darwin and his theory on evolution. On conclusion I felt his augment was flawed, however, I was unable to explain to myself " why " the said article was in

http://www.lloydpye.com/2003Articles.htm

under " Star child debate " was I correct in my assumption, or was he ( Lloyd Pye ) correct.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 916 • Replies: 8
No top replies

 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 09:24 pm
If the assumption you held was contrary to Mr. Pye's hypothesis, whatever the subject, there is a statistically significant probability you were less incorrect than he. There is a vast gulf between "Science" and "Sounds like science". Mr. Pye makes a lot of noise, and does no science whatsoever. On the other hand, there are those who find that sort of thing entertaining, assuring the genre a long and successful run despite evidence, reason and logic. If you're really credulous, and convinced there is a vast conspiracy to keep the truth from the masses, a website you'll find gratifying is www.rense.com. There you will find a continually updated compendium of the preposterous, from UFO Abductions to Communism-as-a-Zionist-Conspiracy, and you will be afforded the opportunity to purchase, among many other things unavailable elsewhere, secret homeopathic remedies, arthritis-curing magnetic sleeping pads, and a neck pendant you can wear to protect yourself from the ills of cellphone radiation.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 09:27 pm
Uh, Timber . . . do you recall how much they wanted for that pendant?
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 09:28 pm
LOL, Set ... no, I don't. Personally, here in The Northwoods, I would appreciate whatever cooking effect a cellphone might have, this time of year Laughing
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 09:58 pm
Bad, bad science. No method and no evidence, it is all anecodotal.

And how could you have two bodies, dying at the same time, but one is completely skeletonised and the other has flesh remaining (the "misshapen hand").
0 Replies
 
anton bonnier
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 10:06 pm
Timber.
On reflection...... There were so many facts and so many fictions in his discourse, I think I was overwhelmed by the fictiouse facts.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 11 Feb, 2004 11:03 pm
anton, I just don't go much for the fantastic. Are you familiar with James Randi? Check out www.randi.org ... he's merciless on Junk Science and paranormal claims.
0 Replies
 
anton bonnier
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Feb, 2004 04:47 pm
Thanks you timber, have heard of J Randi but didn't know of his web site, will follow it through. thank you again.
0 Replies
 
rufio
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Feb, 2004 05:46 pm
Haha, that guy is a nutcase. Check this out:

http://www.lloydpye.com/2003Everything.htm

A quick google will find well-established answers to these things, but he makes it out as a giant conspiracy.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Darwinisum
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 11:25:17