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

To: spqrzilla9
I'm an engineer by trade, so nearly 100% of what I do is based on some extension of the scientific method.

You completely misunderstood my point. I would not expect Darwin to have the ability to predict specific changes in an ecosystem (that IS nonsense), but if his theory that the complexity of species increases over time is correct, then he would have to conclude that zebras, for example, would be more "complex" (perhaps in some unspecified manner that Darwin could not foresee) in 2002 than they were in 1830.

152 posted on 06/07/2002 3:00:58 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child
I'm an engineer by trade, so nearly 100% of what I do is based on some extension of the scientific method.

Actually, engineering isn't science and isn't the scientific method. Science is about developing and testing new hypotheses. Engineering is the application of science, a very different discipline. So this comment is nonsensical.

You completely misunderstood my point. I would not expect Darwin to have the ability to predict specific changes in an ecosystem (that IS nonsense), but if his theory that the complexity of species increases over time is correct, then he would have to conclude that zebras, for example, would be more "complex" (perhaps in some unspecified manner that Darwin could not foresee) in 2002 than they were in 1830.

This comment by you only reinforces that you are grossly misrepresenting the scientific method and evolution.

The reality is that Intelligent Design is not science. At best, its a criticism of a scientific theory but it is not a scientific theory itself.

156 posted on 06/07/2002 3:10:09 PM PDT by spqrzilla9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
You really don't read the science well, thoroughly and closely at all, do you? There is nothing in Darwin to indicate that a species becomes more complex. What a weird misinterpretation.
207 posted on 06/07/2002 6:41:08 PM PDT by equus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
...then he would have to conclude that zebras, for example, would be more "complex" (perhaps in some unspecified manner that Darwin could not foresee) in 2002 than they were in 1830.

This is a rather blatant misstatement of evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory makes no predictions about the evolution of any species. Likewise your time scale is far too short. Such short times are not predicted by evolutionary theory.

254 posted on 06/07/2002 8:47:20 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

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