Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

@nknorr,

nknorr wrote:

Evolution, by definition, is the adding of information from genes of the parents to the child.

Actually it's "defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next." - Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

rosborne979 wrote:

nknorr wrote:
Evolution, by definition, is the adding of information from genes of the parents to the child.

Actually it's "defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next." - Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974

I would like to add to rosborne979's comment that usually those who attack the theory of evolution really don't attack the theory at all, they attack a strawman. They have constructed out of a bad definition either they have been misled to believe or their lack of education on the subject. So as rosborn points out having a correct definition is necessary before you can build a premise that refutes the concept.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

That's assuming that those who attack evolution theory are attacking a straw-man, have been misled or lack education.

Which is a claim by you to not be attacking a strawman, not having been misled and being well educated. Your dog in the fight. A piece of self-flattery. 3 straw-men.

They may well be considering what scientific facts tell us about what we ought to do.

What do you think we ought to do? Let the weak perish? Fight for territory and mating partners? There is an ethical dimension to many aspects of biological science.

Is promoting evolution a good adaptation for the species from an evolutionary point of view?

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

They may well be considering what scientific facts tell us about what we ought to do.

See this is a strawman. Science doesn't suggest anything that we ought do. Science isn't in the business of building morality. We do this on an individual level. In fact we sometimes impose our sense of morality onto others.

spendius wrote:

What do you think we ought to do? Let the weak perish? Fight for territory and mating partners? There is an ethical dimension to many aspects of biological science.

What I personally think is one thing, what the collective human moral acceptance thinks is another. How you personally feel about it is also another.
Do I think we should keep those humans who are not healthy or providing to the human progress? I don't know. If I don't have to be personally responsible for them then it doesn't bother me.

Should we have to struggle for mating partners. Hell yes we should. I think people are not picky enough and make horrible decisions and choices in partners. This is just my opinion though, I shouldn't be able to dictate to others who they decide to copulate with. I don't think anyone else should have that right either. But fight, sure.

spendius wrote:

Is promoting evolution a good adaptation for the species from an evolutionary point of view?

Yes. Evolution is a fact. It is reality. It is a great basis for many medical and biological businesses. Understanding it is important to understanding humanity and life in general. Weather you accept it to be reality is your own choice but why anyone would actually reject something that is true just shows their ignorance.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Krumple wrote:

I would like to add to rosborne979's comment that usually those who attack the theory of evolution really don't attack the theory at all, they attack a strawman. They have constructed out of a bad definition either they have been misled to believe or their lack of education on the subject.

In all of the history of A2K there has never been a Creationist who demonstrated even a reasonable understanding of evolution. I even started a thread on that subject hoping that we would find someone who both understood it, and rejected it. A couple of the usual Creationist players entered the fray but they only recited the usual propaganda (which has been thoroughly refuted many many many times before).

3 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Is promoting evolution a good adaptation for the species from an evolutionary point of view?

Wow, youve outdone even yourself in verbal flatulence

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Is promoting evolution a good adaptation for the species from an evolutionary point of view?
Wow, youve outdone even yourself in verbal flatulence

Did you honestly really expect anything different from spend? I mean it's like being shocked that pigs get muddy.

2 Replies

@Krumple,

yes but some pigs are muddier than others.

spendi never surprises me, I just enjoy reading his non-sequiturs and run ons

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

See this is a strawman. Science doesn't suggest anything that we ought do.

I didn't say it did. I would like you to say what we ought to do when you have taught us evolution. If we don't know what we ought to do what use are your posts?

Quote:

Should we have to struggle for mating partners. Hell yes we should. I think people are not picky enough and make horrible decisions and choices in partners. This is just my opinion though, I shouldn't be able to dictate to others who they decide to copulate with. I don't think anyone else should have that right either. But fight, sure.

Are you quite sure monogamy has not been assumed in that reply?

Quote:

Weather you accept it to be reality is your own choice but why anyone would actually reject something that is true just shows their ignorance.

People may reject something that is true because it has aversive consequences for them. Or for society. The argument would be about those consequences and not about whether the thing was true.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

I didn't say it did. I would like you to say what we ought to do when you have taught us evolution. If we don't know what we ought to do what use are your posts?

It is not WHAT you say, it is what you say that implies a hidden logic that you can't see. You seem to think that the theory of evolution implies some hidden agenda that ought suggest how human morality should be accepted or rejected. It does nothing of the sort, the only person doing that is you and people like you.

Krumple wrote:

Should we have to struggle for mating partners. Hell yes we should. I think people are not picky enough and make horrible decisions and choices in partners. This is just my opinion though, I shouldn't be able to dictate to others who they decide to copulate with. I don't think anyone else should have that right either. But fight, sure.

spendius wrote:

Are you quite sure monogamy has not been assumed in that reply?

Why should monogamy be considered as assumed? Some people want it and others don't. Why should we impose monogamy on ALL people? We shouldn't and it is not right to expect it of people who don't want it. To expect it is morally wrong.

Krumple wrote:

Weather you accept it to be reality is your own choice but why anyone would actually reject something that is true just shows their ignorance.

spendius wrote:

People may reject something that is true because it has aversive consequences for them. Or for society. The argument would be about those consequences and not about whether the thing was true.

Everything, absolutely everything has consequences, even the good things in life. Should we then reject everything? Nonsense. I think religion is more harmful than it is good to society, so why not reject all religions?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Wow, youve outdone even yourself in verbal flatulence
Quote:

You have not so much outdone yourself in insulting the intelligence of A2Kers but have merely continued foisting your tautological stupidities on them. Your remark is meaningless.

wande's guru Karl Popper wrote--

"It is impossible to derive a sentence stating a norm or a decision from a sentence stating a fact."

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

Did you honestly really expect anything different from spend? I mean it's like being shocked that pigs get muddy.

I'm surprised at you Krumpie. I thought you had more than that about you. You can't even manage an original metaphor. You didn't even try did you? The old tired cliche will do for you won't it.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

spendi never surprises me, I just enjoy reading his non-sequitur and run ons

More assertivitis. You should see a shrink and get her to explain the vacuity of assertions used as arguments. A first year student will suffice and she won't charge you much.

There's no hyphen in "non sequitur". Which ones have you in mind?

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

I'm surprised at you Krumpie. I thought you had more than that about you. You can't even manage an original metaphor. You didn't even try did you? The old tired cliche will do for you won't it.

Why try? You arn't worth any effort at all. I go with the cheap lines because even the classics nail you to the wall perfectly. Surprised you could even read or make heads or tails of the one liner.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

It is not WHAT you say, it is what you say that implies a hidden logic that you can't see.

An assertion.

Quote:

You seem to think that the theory of evolution implies some hidden agenda that ought suggest how human morality should be accepted or rejected.

Saved from being an assertion by the "seem". So an illusion of your own.

The rest of your post is unmitigated blather. I grant that is an assertion but explaining why would take too long and not be understood by somebody as bigoted as you obviously are.

You can't even understand the simple question I started this exchange with. I'm assuming that is the case because the only other alternative is that you are evading it which is deliberately cheating rather than just being unintelligent which is not your fault.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
It is not WHAT you say, it is what you say that implies a hidden logic that you can't see.

An assertion.

Quote:
You seem to think that the theory of evolution implies some hidden agenda that ought suggest how human morality should be accepted or rejected.

Saved from being an assertion by the "seem". So an illusion of your own.

The rest of your post is unmitigated blather. I grant that is an assertion but explaining why would take too long and not be understood by somebody as bigoted as you obviously are.

You can't even understand the simple question I started this exchange with. I'm assuming that is the case because the only other alternative is that you are evading it which is deliberately cheating rather than just being unintelligent which is not your fault.

No spend, the real reason you are not responding is because you know that I have you all figured out and I have made good points that you can't refute.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Quote:

No spend, the real reason you are not responding is because you know that I have you all figured out and I have made good points that you can't refute.

Dream on--it's a free country. Give yourself gold stars. I don't give a shite.

0 Replies

@rosborne979,

Quote:

In all of the history of A2K there has never been a Creationist who demonstrated even a reasonable understanding of evolution.

I can't imagine anybody over the age of 12 who has had a five minute lesson on evolution not understanding.

ros likes to mystify this simple matter because then he can think himself superior due to his understanding of a difficult concept.

In case you silly sods haven't realised it yet but the game is up on the sort of education you have allowed the bankrupt babies to permit you to indulge your fat egos in.

The very idea of passing your examination papers into any other position than the waste-paper basket is utterly ridiculous.

Anyway--it's all over now but you'll all be alright until these bankrupt babies get old enough to realise the **** you have dropped them in.

0 Replies

@Krumple,

Quote:

Why try?

Because I am not the only reader here.

And if I'm not worth the effort why are you answering me. Forget about me eh? The readers don't need your guidance on my posts.

Still handing yourself prizes I see. It must be wonderfully satisfying.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Why try?

Because I am not the only reader here.

And if I'm not worth the effort why are you answering me. Forget about me eh? The readers don't need your guidance on my posts.

Still handing yourself prizes I see. It must be wonderfully satisfying.

The funny thing is you actually think anyone else cares about what you have to say. I am the only one and quite honestly I don't even really care all that much.

1 Reply

Don't tell me there's no proof for evolution

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know