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

Skip to comments.

The Dini-gration of Darwinism
AgapePress ^ | April 29, 2003 | Mike S. Adams

Posted on 04/29/2003 10:43:39 AM PDT by Remedy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 901-920921-940941-960 ... 1,961-1,975 next last
To: Last Visible Dog
Evolution is the theory that postulates that biological organisms give rise to different biological organisms by a process of mutation followed by natural selection through survival and reproduction of the fittest.
921 posted on 05/16/2003 12:06:37 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 918 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
You are arguing with a man who's education is probably 8-10 years beyond your own.

Are you sure that you want to go there?

Don't say that I did not warn you.
922 posted on 05/16/2003 12:07:02 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 918 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
HINT: the word and concept of evolution existed before Darwinism

But it meant something different, then, now didn't it? Or maybe you aren't aware of this.

The word "evolution" comes from a latin word, "evolvere," meaning "unrolling," as in "the unrolling of a scroll." In line with this etymology "evolution" carried a sense of the unfolding or unfurling of what already existed in fact or in programmatic potential.

Prior to Darwin the common scientific and biological usage of the term was with respect to the growth and development of organisms, for instance in embryology. Indeed this is the way Darwin himself most commonly used the term.

Others came to use "evolution" (or "development") to refer to the "transmutation" of species and to common descent, but Darwin long resisted this precisely because the sense of "unrolling" was contrary to his own view of evolution as a process resulting from variation and selection operating among the vicissitudes of reproductive competition.

Admittely the term "evolution" had been used, before Darwin, by Lammark to describe his own theory, but this was more appropriate. Lammark's theory was very different from Darwin's in certain respects, and Lammark did indeed envision that evolution followed a programmatic development, being channeled necessarily along the course of a universal "scale of being".

The point I'm getting at here is that the sense of the term "evolution" is different when referring to cosmic versus biological evolution. With respect to the former, evolution retains much of the orginal sense of "unrolling," since we dealing with the realm of universal, physical laws, whose effects are typically mathematically predictable. In the case of biological evolution we are dealing, to a much greater extent, with processes (such as natural selection) that are not predictable as to their specific results.

Your implication that the term evolution carries the same sense in both cases (the evolution of the universe according to physical law, and the origin of species according to random variation and environmentally driven selection) commits the fallacy of equivocation.

923 posted on 05/16/2003 12:08:26 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 848 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
--BWAAAAAAAHAHAHA! It's like modern art and rap "music" - we can all recognize crap when we see/smell/feel it.--

Exactly!
924 posted on 05/16/2003 12:09:46 PM PDT by Not Insane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 910 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
Your implication that the term evolution carries the same sense in both cases (the evolution of the universe according to physical law, and the origin of species according to random variation and environmentally driven selection) commits the fallacy of equivocation.

Nicely put.

925 posted on 05/16/2003 12:10:51 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 923 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Evolution is that biological organisms give rise to different biological organisms ...

wow amazing ---

now I know!
926 posted on 05/16/2003 12:11:41 PM PDT by f.Christian (( the VERY sick mind - won't recognize facts -- REALITY -- probability anymore ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Cosmology - The science of the world or universe; or a treatise relating to the structure and parts of the system of creation, the elements of bodies, the modifications of material things, the laws of motion, and the order and course of nature. (Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary)

Now unless you can prove biological evolution has nothing to do with "the order and course of nature" (which is absurd) - biological evolution does have something to do with cosmology.

Oh boy, the pick-your-definition game! I just love that one. Ok, here's *my* dictionary's definition:

Cosmology: a branch of astronomy that deals with the origin, structure, and space-time relationships of the universe; also : a theory dealing with these matters (Merriam-Webster)
Now unless you can prove biological evolution has something to do with "space-time relationships of the universe" (which is absurd) - biological evolution *doesn't* have something to do with cosmology.

So much for the definition game... Most amateur philosophers outgrow that one pretty fast, I see that you haven't yet.

You're right - that was amusing.

Just not in quite the way you intended.

Proving a know-it-all is wrong is fun.

You've got a lot to learn about the nature of "proof", son. And it's a more rigorous thing than just picking the broadest definition you can get your hands on in order to stretch a word beyond any useful meaning (i.e., by your definition and argument, *car repair* is related to cosmology). When a word is expanded that far, any "connection" you've claimed to have demonstrated is a Pyrrhic victory, at most.

Is this a relative of yours?

"There's glory for you!"

"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "

"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument,' " Alice objected.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

"The question is, " said Alice, "whether you *can* make words mean so many different things."

-- From Through The Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll


927 posted on 05/16/2003 12:12:32 PM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 810 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Aristotle also worked out that the Earth was spherical. A hundred years later, Aristarchus worked out the relative sizes and distances between the Earth, the Moon, and the Sun and clearly understood that the Earth/Moon system circled the Sun.

The ancient Chinese attempted to measure the circumference of the Earth by walking around it (glub, glub) and the Indians reportedly tried to measure the circumference of the giant turtle that the Earth rode on but, as they tended to fall off the edge, they had to abandon the project.

928 posted on 05/16/2003 12:13:48 PM PDT by balrog666 (When in doubt, tell the truth. - Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 909 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
now I know

Happy to help.

929 posted on 05/16/2003 12:14:06 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 926 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
You are not too quick on the uptake. I was sick of Aric2000 sniping from the sidelines and disrupting debates so I decided to give him a dose of his own medicine.

Ah, riiiiigghhhtt... The old "no, I wasn't being stupid, I was being, um, *ironic*, yeah, *that's* it..." excuse.

Sure, I buy that. You betcha.

BTW: your “biological evolution has no connection to cosmology” is a snipe. It is a factually incorrect statement meant to disrupt the debate.

No, actually, it's your grossly inaccurate twisting of what I *actually* wrote.

Why are you anti-evolutionist zealots always so fond of making up false "quotes"?

930 posted on 05/16/2003 12:14:15 PM PDT by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 811 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
I always thought equivocation meant lying.
931 posted on 05/16/2003 12:14:26 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 923 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
The BIG guns are out today.

LVD does not have a snowballs chance in hell now.

I love watching this....
932 posted on 05/16/2003 12:14:56 PM PDT by Aric2000 (Are you on Grampa Dave's team? I am!! $5 a month is all it takes, come join!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 927 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Will-come-back-for-a-look-later placemarker.
933 posted on 05/16/2003 12:18:24 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 932 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Aristotle also worked out that the Earth was spherical.

I don't recall the source of my information, but I believe that Aristotle's reasoning was based on the earth's shadow on the moon during an eclipse (timely topic). The shadow was *always* circular. Aristotle reasoned that the earth must be a sphere because a sphere is the only geometric solid that *always* casts a circular shadow.

934 posted on 05/16/2003 12:18:56 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 928 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
WTF is "Theory of Cosmological Evolution" supposed to mean?

Good question, seeing as how there is no such thing as the (or a) "Theory of Cosmological Evolution". There are various theories within the field of cosmology that attempt to explain the evolution of the universe, or of galaxies, or of stars, etc, but these theories all have names (few of which include the word evolution, and NONE of which include the word "darwinism," "orthodox" or otherwise).

935 posted on 05/16/2003 12:22:01 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 901 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
The BIG guns are out today

Evolution is that biological organisms give rise to different biological organisms ...

the big guns are loaded with poppycock !

Main Entry: pop·py·cock
Pronunciation: 'pä-pE-"käk
Function: noun
Etymology: D dialect pappekak, literally, soft dung, from Dutch pap pap + kak dung
Date: 1865
: empty talk or writing : NONSENSE

936 posted on 05/16/2003 12:24:54 PM PDT by f.Christian (( the VERY sick mind - won't recognize facts -- REALITY -- probability anymore ! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 932 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
The two single biggest problems for the T-of-E are macroevolution and abiogenesis.

Apparently I've been reading the same literature as you, because I see the same problems with T-of-E

"In all the thousands of fly-breeding experiments carried out all over the world for more than fifty years, a distinct new species has never been seen to emerge ... or even a new enzyme."

(Gordon Taylor, The Great Evolution Mystery (New York: Harper and Row, 1983, pp 34, 38)

937 posted on 05/16/2003 12:26:44 PM PDT by Galatians513
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon
Cosmology: a branch of astronomy that deals with the origin, structure, and space-time relationships of the universe; also : a theory dealing with these matters (Merriam-Webster)

I think that means the word has more than one meaning - therefore your comment that evolution has nothing to do with cosmology is false (all that was needed is one definition - not all of them)

938 posted on 05/16/2003 12:27:06 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 927 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
mmmmmm... Poppycock

Main Entry: pop·py·cock
Pronunciation: 'pä-pE-"käk
Function: noun
Yummy caramel coated popcorn with premium nuts.
939 posted on 05/16/2003 12:27:28 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 936 | View Replies]

To: Stultis
There are various theories within the field of cosmology that attempt to explain the evolution of the universe, or of galaxies, or of stars, etc, but these theories all have names (few of which include the word evolution, and NONE of which include the word "darwinism," "orthodox" or otherwise).

BINGO!

There for the statement "evolutiuon has nothing to do with cosmology" is false.

940 posted on 05/16/2003 12:29:09 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 935 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 901-920921-940941-960 ... 1,961-1,975 next last

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