Skip to comments.
Evolution debate: State board should reject pseudoscience
Columbus Dispatch ^
| February 17, 2002
| Editorial
Posted on 02/18/2002 4:59:53 AM PST by cracker
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,421-1,440 next last
To: Tares
Please decide. Do you base the belief that others have free will on evidence, or is it an axiom (or, perhaps more accurately, a theorem based on the axiom that you yourself have free will)? As for my free will, I've explained that it's an axiom, essential for me to do any thinking at all. As for others, I've explained that their conduct provides me with evidence that they too have free will. Thus, such evidence is consistent with my regarding the axiom of free will as being universally applical to all humans. In other words, it's an axiom all the way around, but one which, having been assumed, is seen to be in accord with the available evidence.
Were I to deny that others had free will, and that I alone am in possession of this attribute, I could then act capriciously, even maliciously, secure in the expectation that no one could make any decisions to respond (other than pre-determined decisions, of course). One individual, uniquely endowed with free will in an otherwise determined world, would be the death of morality. Only free will gives the concept of morality any meaning.
Without exploring this in greater depth, which I'm not inclined to do, I think I'm justified in assuming that not only do I have free will, but so does everyone else. If I'm wrong in this, then I'm probably wrong in just about everything else. Could be, but I've been satisfied with the results of my life as it is. So I'm sticking with my assumptions about free will. If you want to believe otherwise, that's up to you. But I don't see where else we can go with this topic.
To: Nebullis
Recapitulation is not out. Organisms with similar bodyplans go through similar stages during development. And it's because development and bodyplans are controlled by the same genes. Just got back from shooting my HK 9mm and Ruger 357. Though that's not a hint to start a new discussion. :-)
You say "Recapitulation is not out". That's part of the reason I'm still on the fence with this issue. I've heard many say it is out, and occasionally hear someone say it isn't. Some say vestigial organs are "out" while others don't. Still on the fence!
To: scripter
That's part of the reason I'm still on the fence with this issue.I doubt it. I wonder what's keeping you from reading the literature which will explain evolution properly? Have you read anything recent by Ernst Mayr or Stephen J. Gould?
To: Nebullis
Among other things, I said "That's part of the reason I'm still on the fence with this issue."
I doubt it.
And that is precisely that attitude that keeps me on the fence. The creationist side has their own issues. But the evolutionist side has this attitude of: well, you just haven't read the right books or you would understand everything and accept evolution as fact. Or you didn't understand what you read.
I wonder what's keeping you from reading the literature which will explain evolution properly?
Yet more of that attitude. I hope you realize the insults to the creationists and this tone and attitude you hand out does nothing for your cause.
Have you read anything recent by Ernst Mayr or Stephen J. Gould?
Yes I have, damnit. Just because I don't accept evolution as fact on blind faith doesn't mean I'm not well read on the subject.
I just went downstairs to my library and wrote down some books I have on the subject. The following is a partial listing of books I own and have read on the issue:
Brief History of Time - Hawkings
Blind Watchmaker - Dawkins
Analysis of Vertebrate Structure - Hildebrand
Science and Earth History - Strahler
Bully for Brontosaurus - Gould
Wonderful Life - Gould
Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes - Gould
Time Frames - Eldredge
Evolutionary Biology - Futuyma
There's a lot less from the "other side", but here's what I own and have read:
Evolution: A theory in Crisis - Denton
Darwin's Black Box - Behe
Reason in the Balance - Johnson
Darwin on Trial - Johnson
Don't ever ask me again "what's keeping [me] from reading the literature which will explain evolution properly." I've read more than most, so cut the tude.
To: scripter
To: scripter
To: VadeRetro
Thanks. I'm looking at it.
To: VadeRetro
One caution before AndrewC jumps in with his usual correction: Mesonychus is in there.There is no need to do that. You have appropriately posted the information and should be commended for your forthrightness.
To: scripter
What I'm getting at is that I doubt that conflicting messages or attitudes account for your creationist beliefs.
Recapitulation is out in the way that Heackel formulated it. But developmental ontogeny is a trajectory through a phenotypic space and the patterns which emerge within that space are broadly reminiscent of ancestral forms. However, the wide variety seen between organisms and their development allows precise comparisons only between closely related species and then only during certain points of development. The conflicting messages come from viewing various aspects of development.
To: VadeRetro
Did he ever get the masses of the oceans versus the atmosphere correct? The last time I looked, he had a 20 mile high atmosphere and a 6 mile deep ocean and not much else. It's an amusing computation to do correctly. (But not beyond an eight grader.)
To: Nebullis
What I'm getting at is that I doubt that conflicting messages or attitudes account for your creationist beliefs. What I'm getting at is you're attempt to label me a creationist when you know so little about me. And I have no reason to believe what you say above. In fact, I think you're so surprised somebody can read everything I've read and not accept evolution as fact, that you don't know what to say other than try to minimize my issues with the creation/evolution debate to something so trivial. I'm so sick of that elitist attitude.
To: VadeRetro
We appear to have overwhelmed and run G3K off. Usually he's in fine fettle at this time of the morning.
To: Doctor Stochastic
Did he ever get the masses of the oceans versus the atmosphere correct? The last time I looked, he had a 20 mile high atmosphere and a 6 mile deep ocean and not much else. It's an amusing computation to do correctly. (But not beyond an eight grader.) I don't know. I'm 36 and I could only get a ballpark estimate after an entire morning of work.
To: Junior
We appear to have overwhelmed and run G3K off. Usually he's in fine fettle at this time of the morning. New Theory: It's a virus that activates on the FR servers every 3-4 months, then goes dormant.
To: AndrewC
There is no need to do that. You have appropriately posted the information and should be commended for your forthrightness. Most kind of you, Sir! I think you once asked if the cetacean-looking head of Mesonychus that caused all the controversy had to be explained by convergent evolution. From the figures in that Scientific American article, I don't get the impression that such an interpretation is necessary. After all, there's a better chance of you looking like your great uncle than like someone selected at random in the population.
The "For-Dummies" naming on this figure is unfortunate. (What ever happened to the old Sci-Am?) "Arlene" is non-hippo artiodactyls. "Megan" represents the mesonychids. "Celia" is the cetaceans and "Heidi" is hippos. There's a still-viable competing version--uncoupling "Heidi" from "Celia" and hooking her up to "Arlene"--but it doesn't change the position of "Megan."
Am I saying that camels descended from savage carnivores? Maybe. I hear they're still rather evil-tempered.
To: Junior; VadeRetro
We appear to have overwhelmed and run G3K off. Usually he's in fine fettle at this time of the morning. I hope not. He needs to respond to VadeRetro and support his statements/claims. As competition in the free market keeps prices fair, I think G3K keeps it interesting.
G3K mentioned something that I've never heard of - What do you guys think about the 250K offer from Dr. Hovind. I would think somebody would take him up on his offer. Or has someone tried only to be shot down with bogus arguments - I couldn't find anything on the net other than references to the offer.
To: scripter
To: VadeRetro
with a picture of the issuing institution. Great! Best part: the Application for Patriot university. States Mr. Hovind: "Had it not been for Patriot University, I would have had no way to even consider a degree." ...Don't doubt it for a second, Kenny.
To: VadeRetro
Am I saying that camels descended from savage carnivores? Maybe. I hear they're still rather evil-tempered.
Kinda like QM, hard to believe. The figure could be used to conclude that Megan and Heidi were contemporaneous
To: AndrewC
Well, I'm not saying that Megan is the ancestor of Arlene, just that if Celia and Megan have strikingly similar skulls, maybe Great Grandmother was a toothy critter too. Not everyone in my family has my Uncle Ralph's funny-looking chin, but I do.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,141-1,160, 1,161-1,180, 1,181-1,200 ... 1,421-1,440 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
