Notices
Results 1 to 10 of 10
Like Tree8Likes
  • 3 Post By tk421
  • 2 Post By adelady
  • 1 Post By tk421
  • 2 Post By KALSTER

Thread: Dissecting Darwinism

  1. #1 Dissecting Darwinism 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    122
    I recently found a paper called Dissecting Darwinism. Dissecting Darwinism

    Now I am not sure if it was written by an intelligent designer, (it might of been) considering there is a chapter questioning transitional species but either way it did look like an interesting paper and I decided to read it. I am not an intelligent design proponent but I do think we need more scientists questioning some of the tenets of neo-Darwinism which have certainly never been proven. Any comments on the paper would be appreciated.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,960
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    I recently found a paper called Dissecting Darwinism. Dissecting Darwinism

    Now I am not sure if it was written by an intelligent designer, (it might of been) considering there is a chapter questioning transitional species but either way it did look like an interesting paper and I decided to read it. I am not an intelligent design proponent but I do think we need more scientists questioning some of the tenets of neo-Darwinism which have certainly never been proven. Any comments on the paper would be appreciated.
    How much longer are we going to have to put up with your (laziness; disingenuousness)? A quick google search turns up a gazillion refutations. Here's one: A Response to Joseph Kuhn’s Dissecting Darwinism « Afarensis: Anthropology, Evolution, and Science

    It's painfully obvious that you are using this mechanism (say, guys, I just came across this random paper; whaddya thing about it?) to push your own beliefs, but without actually engaging in a discussion. You are, effectively, using this forum to proselytize.


    pyoko, Strange and Neverfly like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    I recently found a paper called Dissecting Darwinism. Dissecting Darwinism

    Now I am not sure if it was written by an intelligent designer, (it might of been) considering there is a chapter questioning transitional species but either way it did look like an interesting paper and I decided to read it. I am not an intelligent design proponent but I do think we need more scientists questioning some of the tenets of neo-Darwinism which have certainly never been proven. Any comments on the paper would be appreciated.
    How much longer are we going to have to put up with your (laziness; disingenuousness)? A quick google search turns up a gazillion refutations. Here's one: A Response to Joseph Kuhn’s Dissecting Darwinism « Afarensis: Anthropology, Evolution, and Science

    It's painfully obvious that you are using this mechanism (say, guys, I just came across this random paper; whaddya thing about it?) to push your own beliefs, but without actually engaging in a discussion. You are, effectively, using this forum to proselytize.
    A wordpress is not a reliable scientific source.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    city of wine and roses
    Posts
    6,222
    You're absolutely right that it's mostly ID or anything-but-evolution. Just look at the list of references at the bottom of the paper. You might have noticed that there's a not very supportive (to be polite) rebuttal in the very same issue of the very same journal. Comments on Darwinism

    You might also notice that neither of the writers is a biologist nor an anthropologist. They're both doctors, not scientists. Nothing wrong with being a doctor, but even a doctor as a doctor will refer you to an endocrinologist if you have a problem that their surgical or rheumatology or oncology skills are inadequate for so they refer you to someone who's specialised in the relevant area.
    pyoko and Flick Montana like this.
    "Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen." Winston Churchill
    "nature is like a game of Jenga; you never know which brick you pull out will cause the whole stack to collapse" Lucy Cooke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,960
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    A wordpress is not a reliable scientific source.
    The refutations are solid and point out where Kuhn is woefully ignorant. You'll see that the rebuttal that Adelady refers to is consonant with the Wordpress exchange.

    Btw, are you a shill for the Discovery Institute, by any chance? Your approach to knowledge (i.e., ignoring anything that doesn't conform to your pre-existing beliefs) has a lot in common with theirs.
    pyoko likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Apocalyptic Paradise
    Posts
    6,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tk421 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    A wordpress is not a reliable scientific source.
    The refutations are solid and point out where Kuhn is woefully ignorant. You'll see that the rebuttal that Adelady refers to is consonant with the Wordpress exchange.

    Btw, are you a shill for the Discovery Institute, by any chance? Your approach to knowledge (i.e., ignoring anything that doesn't conform to your pre-existing beliefs) has a lot in common with theirs.
    You're absolutely right. What was posted was sound, but that's just the way it happens to be, this time. NBSM is quite within his rights to be skeptical of a non-peer reviewed paper.

    Since peer reviewed articles do not often refute claims, the proper course is to post peer reviewed articles that demonstrate the validity of Darwin style evolution.

    Likewise, the onus is on NBSM to post peer reviewed articles supporting his conclusions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    As noted, your own paper uses a list of dubious sources from ID proponents and not from a reliable scientific source, yet you complain about a critique on Wordpress? Did you not notice that? That "paper" of yours is nothing more than a propaganda piece rife with fallacies. Please respond.
    pyoko and Neverfly like this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by adelady View Post
    Just look at the list of references at the bottom of the paper.
    I know it spoils the journey to read the end first, but I always check the references first. Definitely lets you know what you're reading: comedy, sci-fi, etc.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    As noted, your own paper uses a list of dubious sources from ID proponents and not from a reliable scientific source, yet you complain about a critique on Wordpress? Did you not notice that? That "paper" of yours is nothing more than a propaganda piece rife with fallacies. Please respond.
    I did not check out the bibliography, I now see it is ID books. As I said skepticism of neo-Darwinism is good but not resorting to Intelligent Design. The paper turned out to be ID but I will search for other scientific ones.
    Last edited by nsbm ranger; January 22nd, 2013 at 03:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,245
    Quote Originally Posted by nsbm ranger View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KALSTER View Post
    As noted, your own paper uses a list of dubious sources from ID proponents and not from a reliable scientific source, yet you complain about a critique on Wordpress? Did you not notice that? That "paper" of yours is nothing more than a propaganda piece rife with fallacies. Please respond.
    I did not check out the bibliography, I now see it is ID books. As I said skepticism of neo-Darwinism is but not resorting to Intelligent Design. The paper turned out to be ID but I will search for other scientific ones.
    How about rather familiarising yourself properly with the current "modern synthesis" before you go and search for ways to refute it? That way you are much less likely to fall for pieces of poop like this "paper" and wasting your and everybody else's time.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Darwinism is not perfect.
    By faxRfax in forum Introductions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: April 9th, 2012, 07:43 AM
  2. Thoughts on Darwinism.
    By esbo in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: April 4th, 2012, 01:15 PM
  3. Over 100 alternatives to neo-Darwinism
    By forests in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: February 24th, 2012, 12:47 PM
  4. Dissecting this Relay Circuit
    By Frenchi in forum Electrical and Electronics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: July 28th, 2008, 12:35 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •