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?...

[GodGunsGuts]

==Come on, the guy talks about this stuff for a living and had just written a book dealing with the subject. It’s not a particularly shocking question—the subject comes up on these threads all the time. You think he’d never heard it before?

I know this is difficult for you, but Dawkins simply could not answer the question. Even an anti-creationist like Glenn Morton admits Dawkins couldn’t answer the question:

“I will state categorically that the audio tape of the interview 100% supports Gillian Brown’s contention that Dawkins couldn’t answer the question.”

http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199807/0117.html

The question you should be asking yourself is: WHY COULDN’T DAWKINS ANSWER THE QUESTION????

[Fichori]

“Because you seem to think that the Bible is a scientific textbook. That is the whole premise behind creationism, you think that it should be taught next to real science.” [excerpt]

I haven't been referencing the Bible, as a scientific textbook or otherwise.

I have been posting demonstrable math.

Why are you bringing up Creationism?

Remember, we are talking about your claim that the Earths rotation alone causes a 2.1° discrepancy between the Suns optical position and its actual position.

You're the one who keeps bringing up religion, the Bible and Creationism!

“I happen to think that it should be taught next to Greek Mythology.” [excerpt]

And now your bringing up Greek Mythology!

“Your cognitive dissonance must be working overtime. What in the world gave you the idea that I might want to be a Christian? Especially a Christian as you would define it.” [excerpt]

Well, the fact that you keep bringing up Religion and Creationism while we are debating your supposedly scientific claim that there is 2.1° discrepancy between the Suns optical position and its actual position.

Why do you keep bringing up religion?

Is there something relgious about your 2.1°?

[Elsie]

You do not seem to have shown any credible scientific evidence to the contrary.

And the PROtary are mere claims with NO proof of Evolution® at all.

[Elsie]

The Amish don't educate beyond about 8-10th grade.

And an 8-10th grade 'eductaion' received 100 years ago is BETTER than a college degree today.

[Elsie]

Once you understand that even random processes can have non-random effects, you will be on the road to understanding evolution.

You mean BELIEVE; don't you?

---

Think, perhaps, of Boyle's law -- you can look it up on wikipedia or any of hundreds of other sites. Random movements of molecules can have a unified effect.

I guess that's why Brownian movement has a certain direction to it.

[js1138]

I guess that's why Brownian movement has a certain direction to it.

Actually it does. If you track the movement of an individual dust mote, for example (the iconic example of Brownian motion) and plot the distance from its point of origin over time, the distance will increase.

Variation and selection present a special case, in which some changes are favored. If you study a system in which small random motions occur, and a ratchet mechanism blocks retrograde motion, you get effective motion away from the point of origin.

[allmendream]

Science deals in evidence not proof. Once again if you had any knowledge of the subject your opinion might carry more weight.

[allmendream]

The Amish are woefully unprepared by their 8th grade education for the modern world or for beginning course work at the University level.

And my University degree in Cell and Molecular Biology covers knowledge not in existence one hundred years ago. Hard for their education in the subject to be “better” when they didn't even know about it.

Unless you consider keeping people ignorant of reality to be “better”. The Amish do. They call it ‘keeping apart from the world’.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Creeping up on a 2000 post thread.

Congratulations!

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

Oo, Glenn Morton says so! Must be true!

I still don't buy it. I have a pretty good plausibility detector. You're asking me to believe that someone who speaks publicly and on TV about evolution all the time was stumped by a question that, like I said, a half-dozen people on these threads have answered over and over. And that this same experienced public speaker, rather than launching into an evasive answer right away, stared into space for 11 seconds before saying anything. That's...implausible.

But, of course, you will believe what you want.

[LeGrande]

I have been posting demonstrable math.

But you are using the wrong coordinate system : )

Why are you bringing up Creationism?

Did you read the title and the article behind this thread? "Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?" I think the answer should be obvious : )

And now your bringing up Greek Mythology!

Don't you think that your faith should be taught next to Greek Mythology? Where would you put it, in the Sex Ed classes?

Is there something relgious about your 2.1°?

You agreed that if the Sun orbited the Earth (your Religious view unless you think the Bible is wrong) then you would see a 2.1 degree lag. I fail to see why you are so upset : ) I am simply agreeing that it doesn't matter whether the sun is orbiting the Earth or the Earth is merely spinning. It is essentially the same thing. I think you should stick to your religious principles and keep the Earth as the center : )

[Elsie]

Science deals in evidence not proof.

Therefore...

Then quit claiming that Evolution® is a PROVEN thing.

A biased veiw will claim the 'evidence' supports their veiwpoint - which, of course, is the correct one.

[Elsie]

If you track the movement of an individual dust mote, for example (the iconic example of Brownian motion) and plot the distance from its point of origin over time, the distance will increase.

Maxwell; methinks thou art demon posessed!

[js1138]

I notice you have no data with which to contradict me. You could do a google search and look at actual tracks of objects moved about by Brownian motion.

[Fichori]

“But you are using the wrong coordinate system : )” [excerpt]

Below we have a two body system.

Both bodies are stationary.

The small green and blue body is rotating.

The large fiery body is not rotating.


It does not use the wrong coordinate system.

“Did you read the title and the article behind this thread? "Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?" I think the answer should be obvious : )” [excerpt]

Oh, I understand Evolutions proponents claims.

I'm just not dumb enough to believe their claims.

“Don't you think that your faith should be taught next to Greek Mythology? Where would you put it, in the Sex Ed classes?” [excerpt]

I see your bringing up faith again.

Empirical science is not about faith.

“You agreed that if the Sun orbited the Earth (your Religious view unless you think the Bible is wrong) then you would see a 2.1 degree lag.” [excerpt]

I agreed that if the Sun orbited the Earth, there would be a 2.1° lag.

Scientifically speaking, the Sun does not orbit the Earth.

Why do you bring up your eisegetical understanding of the Bible again?

“I fail to see why you are so upset : ) I am simply agreeing that it doesn't matter whether the sun is orbiting the Earth or the Earth is merely spinning. It is essentially the same thing.” [excerpt]

Your assertion that there is no difference between the Sun orbiting the Earth and the Earth spinning is scientifically false.

They are not essentially the same thing.

A laser ring-gyro can tell the difference.

That proves the fallacy of your 'essentially the same' argument.

“I think you should stick to your religious principles and keep the Earth as the center : )” [excerpt]

'Religious principles' (says the atheist)

I have no 'religious principles' that tell me the Sun orbits the Earth.

However, I'm starting to think that you do.


Your religious principles aside, your claimed scientific assertion that there is a 2.1° lag of the Suns apparent position do to the Earths rotation is scientifically false.

You have not empirically demonstrated your claim.

Until then, your claim is a claim of Faith.

[scarface367]

And an 8-10th grade 'eductaion' received 100 years ago is BETTER than a college degree today.

Somehow I don't think you know what you are talking about.

[allmendream]

The theory of evolution through natural selection is well supported by evidence.

That living systems are INCAPABLE of staying exactly the same, and thus undergo change/evolution is a fact.

Evolution is the change in genetic variation of a population. That there IS a change in genetic variation of a population is a fact that is explained by the theory.

Are you starting to comprehend? Should I try over again and go slower?

[allmendream]

You would be correct.

[GodGunsGuts]

==But, of course, you will believe what you want.

Actually, now that I have demonstrated that partisans on both sides of the debate have acknowledged that Dawkins was stumped by the question, I think it would be more appropriate to say that YOU will ignore the obvious and believe what you want.

[LeGrande]

It does not use the wrong coordinate system.

I asked you to show the Sun orbiting the Earth. You said that you agreed with the 2.1 degree lag if the Sun orbited the earth. Why are you trying to show it with a rotating Earth, you said that you couldn't do that way and I have to agree.

Oh, I understand Evolutions proponents claims.
I'm just not dumb enough to believe their claims.

Then falsify their claims, win a Nobel :) Will you pardon me if I don't hold my breath while I am waiting?

“Don't you think that your faith should be taught next to Greek Mythology? Where would you put it, in the Sex Ed classes?”

I see your bringing up faith again.
Empirical science is not about faith.

Creationism isn't science.

Your assertion that there is no difference between the Sun orbiting the Earth and the Earth spinning is scientifically false.

Not in a two body model : )

A laser ring-gyro can tell the difference.

What does a laser ring gyro prove in a two body model? That either the Earth or the Gyro is rotating? It is the same difference as the Earth/Sun model. Really you should do yourself a favor and visit the Library at least once in your life : )

I have no 'religious principles' that tell me the Sun orbits the Earth.

You don't believe Joshua 10:13? "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day."

Obviously the Bible claims that the Sun was moving around the Earth. You do believe the Bible don't you? It is your ultimate authority isn't it? LOL If you don't believe what the Bible says, then you have my apology.

You have not empirically demonstrated your claim.
Until then, your claim is a claim of Faith.

All you have to do is go outside with a transit and an accurate chronometer and take some careful measurements, no faith required. That is the difference between you and me, I believe in reality and you believe in fiction.