Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?

CreationEvolutionHeadlines ^ | September 10, 2008

[GodGunsGuts]

Sept 10, 2008 — Astrobiologist David Deamer believes that life can spontaneously emerge without design, but he thinks lay people are too uneducated to understand how this is possible, so he gives them the watered-down version of Darwin’s natural selection instead, which he knows is inadequate to explain the complexity of life. That’s what he seemed to be telling reporter Susan Mazur in an interview for the Scoop (New Zealand). Is the lay public really too dense for the deeper knowledge of how evolution works?...

[tacticalogic]

You’ll have to excuse the typos in that last post. I’m sharing the keyboard with a cat at the moment.

[tpanther]

Me: I’m of the opinion that there’s room for everything and the science itself will survive a healthy debate.

CW: According to the Bible, the earth is flat. Let’s debate. Your turn.

______________________________________________________

You’re too helpless. You project, then distort and then whine about others distorting your views.

In short, you’re a complete waste of time.

[tpanther]

I’m not “so many Darwininsts”, and it’s not a better question. You keep arguing about question. You keep arguing about “Darwinists”. It looks like when you sit down at that keyboard to argue crationism vs. evolut8ion you assume your “opponent” collectively and monolithically. As far as you’re concerned the person sitting at the other keyboard might as well be Richard Dawkins, and will get treated accordingly.

>>>>>>>> The only thing I can tell you is projecting doesn’t constitute debate!

Show me where I said I don’t go to cretionist websites.

>>>>>>>

I’ve read creationist websites. I’m not reading another one right now.

If they’re scientists, and we’re leaving science to the scientists their “dissent” is between them and the other scientists.

#1220

Perhaps my better response would have been...

“let me know when you’re ready”?

Well, let me know when you’re ready!

Again, when I refer you to scientists, and you say you’re not going to read it...

I really don’t know how else to help you!

[ColdWater]

I just don't see that the assertion that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection" requires belief that God is dead. It makes no sense.

Once again, one has to go to the experts in ID. It is not up to the laymen to 'see' what ID is but it is up to the experts to define it for us. The ID experts have defined ID and according to them, the ID probably is dead.

[ColdWater]

Ha! This is a thread about whether all people who question evolutions is dumb. That’s the blasted headline. I mean, if the headline is ‘all non-scientists are dumb’ you would have a point.

I see you are back here learning life experiences.

[ColdWater]

If these angry at God liberals would spend 1/100th the energy on ensuring science was uncorrupted by the likes of the algoreacle cult and the like, as they do on their incessant God-hate, science would be SOOOO much better off!

Cut and paste alert.

[ColdWater]

Not:

From their Evolution 101:

“The definition
Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the history of life.

[ColdWater]

Did you never hear of WWII? The Cold War?

[ColdWater]

From your link. Their is not “mechansim” for the beginning of life stated.

Mechanisms: the processes of evolution

Evolution is the process by which modern organisms have descended from ancient ancestors. Evolution is responsible for both the remarkable similarities we see across all life and the amazing diversity of that life — but exactly how does it work?

Fundamental to the process is genetic variation upon which selective forces can act in order for evolution to occur. This section examines the mechanisms of evolution focusing on:

[ColdWater]

but I respect ‘dummies’ who claim that the 'random theory' requires faith.

Then you respect dummies that are twisting science. You are repeating the lies of the anti-evolutionists without doing your own research on evolution. Perhaps you should get your priorities right. Anyone that believes children are less important than bickering on an evolution thread here has lost it.

[ColdWater]

I don't need to be a master mathematician or scientist to quote that Behe laid out in mathematical terms the miracle of several simultaneous mutations which just happen to form into a ‘mouse trap’.

First, you have the description of what Behe laid out all wrong.

Second, since you have such great respect for Behe, do you also believe like him that God is dead and that should be taught to science students.

[ColdWater]

So, you are not really about debating all ideas. Thank you.

[ColdWater]

I've done my homework a long time ago. Goodgrief! Go read my posts!

I have read your posts. That is why I suggested that you do some homework so we could discuss the issues.

[tacticalogic]

The only thing I can tell you is projecting doesn’t constitute debate!

I've noticed that. It's tiresome.

[Fichori]

“No, you are the one that said that you didn't know how to model the two stationary bodies with one rotating. However you did say that if the Sun were orbiting the Earth then it would have a 2.1 degree lag. Show that.

You will find there is no difference in the two models : ) ”

Weeeeell, I've got news for you son.....

I modeled the two stationary bodies with one rotating.

I even drew up a nice pretty picture for the primitive goat herders among us!

Here's the new and improved animated version:


While the animation may not be to scale, the math is.

So, once again, your assertion that I claimed I “didn't know how to model the two stationary bodies with one rotating” is technically a lie.

Which seems to be standard operating procedure.

Unless you can scientifically demonstrate your 2.1°, I think its time you admitted you were wrong about your 2.1°.

The only reason I can see that you wouldn't admit your 2.1° is false, is if its a religiously held belief.

[Old Professer]

Fascinating animation; the rotating image of the earth looks like a hampster wheel with a donkey doing the driving, trying to get away from the miniature poodle who has hold of the donkey’s tail while a beaver is desperately trying to overcome the force holding him in place so that he can bite the donkey in the middle of the back.

[Fichori]

“I have read your posts. That is why I suggested that you do some homework so we could discuss the issues.”

Aawwww quit yer whining.

I have someone who is very smart that I bounce ideas off and discuss issues with.

Trust me, it ain't you. ;)

[Fichori]

“Fascinating animation; the rotating image of the earth looks like a hampster wheel with a donkey doing the driving, trying to get away from the miniature poodle who has hold of the donkey’s tail while a beaver is desperately trying to overcome the force holding him in place so that he can bite the donkey in the middle of the back.”

Uh, you over analyzed that a bit...

The textures are just from Gimp.

I'm glad you found it fascinating.

[DoctorMichael]

Creationist Ignorance PlaceMarker Bump.

****See my Tagline****

[Fichori]

Hello troll.