Artificial Life Experiments Show How Complex Functions Can Evolve

NSF ^ | May 8, 2003 | Staff

[f.Christian]

"FR anarcho-loons"

[Aric2000]

Now wouldn't that be cool.

But that would be fair, so, can't have that, they'd NEVER agree to an actual fair debate.

What I would like to see is the creationists give a list of reasons of why Evolution is not true, then, the evolutionist gets as much time as necessary to refute each point.

That would never be a go either, because if in a true and real debate, the creationists would have some HUGE problems.

Can't have that.

[donh]

Then why are you supporting evolution?

Oh, probably some of the same reasons the Pope and Catholic Church do. Because it's painfully obvious from the available evidence. As most resonably well-educated adults are aware.

Do you not believe in the Bible?

A broad question. Does the Pope believe in the Bible? How do you account for the Pope believing in both the bible and the Theory of Evolution?

[Right Wing Professor]

Yes, but polls are *statistics* applied on top of the raw data. And unless you're expecting that everyone who is lying, it's the "statistics" that are wrong. Just in the same way that they try to use statistics to "prove" evolution. It's all pseudoscience.

If you go to the web page of the National Academy of Sciences, the world's premier scientific organization, and look under 'Mathematics', you'll find eight individuals who call themselves statisticians. They're all pseudoscientists, are they?

[f.Christian]

only fools believe in evolution !

[js1138]

I'm not an athiest, and I belong here at least as much as someone who thinks statistics is a discredited science.

Me too. What's with the sudden identification of conservatism with the flat earth society?

[Carlucci]

As a Catholic, I'm "permitted" to believe in Evolution provided I acknowledge the following:

1. God did it!
2. He did it freely!
3. He did if from Nothing (Ex Nihilo)
4. At some time during the process, He intervened in order to infuse man with an immortal soul.

While I may have had a rather "radical" priest as an instructor, I was led to believe that certain parts of the Bible (like Genesis and Noah's Ark) can be thought of as "Aetological Myths", which may or may not be strictly factual, but contain deeper, indisputable truths.

Anyway, I believe in God but still want to learn as much about Evolution as possible, just to bolster my own arguments for Intelligent Design.

[js1138]

Am I the only one here who actually cares what the bible has to say???

You're not alone. You have fC to keep you company.

[Aric2000]

I am not an atheist either, but then again, I don't believe in your bible either, so I guess that would make me an atheist in your eyes anyway.

And so what if Genesis is not supposed to be taken literally, why does that discredit anything in the bible.

I am still trying to figure that out, if the bible is not taken literally, but is taken with the understanding that you will be taught a moral lesson from that story, it is somehow discredited? Why is that?

You guys are hard to figure out sometimes.

[RonF]

Yeah, kind of my point. There are conservatives, both religious and otherwise, that have a position on evolution, but there is no "conservative" position on evolution. So I'm wondering why this stuff is posted and debated here.

[donh]

Yes, but polls are *statistics* applied on top of the raw data.

So if they are wrong, that means the data is wrong, as I just pointed out.

And unless you're expecting that everyone who is lying, it's the "statistics" that are wrong.

If I said Dave is 6 and Tom is 2 and asked you what their difference in age was, and you said 4, but it turned out that you were wrong because Tom is really 5--does that mean algebra is a false science?

Just in the same way that they try to use statistics to "prove" evolution.

Before I bother to respond to this, in In what particular manner do think "they" use statistics to prove evolution?

It's all pseudoscience.

You mean like other sciences that rely heavily on statistics, such as physical astronomy and geology?

[elbucko]

That's not what the bible says.

Oh! And you have taken it upon yourself to be the arbiter of what the Bible says?

[f.Christian]

what is being taught in public schools ? ?

The fr pat henry ... self appointed mind and lives guardian // czar (( anarcho-loon ))--- of other people's children ---

via govt money -- schools --- very strange -- weird !

ph ...

So why should biologists worry about creationists? It's precisesly for the reason you say -- to prevent irrationality and bogus "science" from being rammed into (and thus ruining) the still-forming minds of innocent children.

271 posted on 05/01/2003 8:03 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)

fC ...

Atheist cram school --- America ?

[f.Christian]

only fools believe in evolution !

[Aric2000]

Now he's cutting and pasting your posts.

I don't know if this is a good thing or bad.

FC is starting to scare me, hopefully he lives on the other side of the country.

[AmericanAge]

"Does the Pope believe in the Bible?"

Laf, do you really want to get into the Catholics here???

[f.Christian]

Anarcho-loon alert !

[AmericanAge]

Oh, so people who take the word of the Bible over the word of evolutionists are "flat-earthers"? What sort of defamation is that??

[PatrickHenry]

So I'm wondering why this stuff is posted and debated here.

For the same reason there are endless threads on the Civil War, on religion, on the Hobbit Hole, and lots of other non-election topics. People enjoy them, and Jim Robinson runs a great website.

[Dimensio]

Next this person is going to start using statistics, a "science" long since disproven. Just ignore them.

Interesting that you say that considering that I've seen quite a few YEC arguments that use "statistics" to "prove" that the formation of the universe, the formation of the solar system and biological evolution are all impossible.