Opinion Polls: Delphi's Polling Place

Hosted by Showtalk

Opinion polls on all subjects. Opinions? Heck yes, we have opinions - but we're *always* nice about it, even when ours are diametrically opposed to yours. Register your vote today!

  • 4923
    MEMBERS
  • 124192
    MESSAGES
  • 18
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Darwinism vs Creationism   The Curious You: Beliefs and Ideas

Started Mar-11 by WALTER784; 253 views.
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Mar-11

By Design: Behe, Lennox, and Meyer on the Evidence for a Creator

FWIW

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Mar-11

That’s a long one. I’m going to have to use a charger to run a video that long. Never mind, I found the transcript

https://www.hoover.org/research/design-behe-lennox-and-meyer-evidence-creator

  • Edited March 11, 2023 11:34 am  by  Showtalk

I love how these three are labeled as “leading voices”, no one knows who these people are. These people are as informed on the subject as any street preacher is, there is literally no proof, that’s why it’s called faith.

Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Mar-13

You don’t know who they are but the faith community does.  There is proof everywhere if you are open to looking at it. Read the transcript. Science was founded in religion. So technically any time so when someone  speaks of science, the basis of fact behind it IS religion.

In reply toRe: msg 1
EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze

Mar-20

Related discussion:  Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions 
Excerpt:  "Darwinism" is NOT Evolution!

Why "Darwinism" is not the same thing as Evolution
[outdated link]

I really don't know why people use the term "Darwinism," as if it were somehow synonymous with Evolution, when in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. More often than not, the use of this term is an attempt by pro-theists, creationists, and ID'ers, to reframe, and misrepresent Evolution out of context. As long as they can keep the focus on Darwin, they can poke more holes in Evolution, the reason? Charles Darwin did not originate the Theory of Evolution, in fact, the concept had existed long before he came along.

What Charles Darwin is famous for is providing direct empirical evidence to support the concept that the evolutionary process occurred by means of natural selection.

The theory as presented in Darwin's The Origin of Species, I should say, was not new to the world and it cannot be attributed to Darwin. The theory, contrary to popular belief has been around since Aristotle and Lucretius. Darwin's contribution is that he gathered indisputable evidence, and he set forth a theory on how evolution works, the theory of natural selection.

http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Biographies/Science/Darwin.htm

We have learned much since Darwin's time and it is no longer appropriate to claim that evolutionary biologists believe that Darwin's theory of Natural Selection is the best theory of the mechanism of evolution. I can understand why this point may not be appreciated by the average non-scientist because natural selection is easy to understand at a superficial level. It has been widely promoted in the popular press and the image of "survival of the fittest" is too powerful and too convenient.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/modern-synthesis.html

Darwin never knew about the work being done by Gregor Mendel, an Austrian monk, who would became the father of modern genetics. Through his experiments with pea plants, Mendel was able to demonstrate the concept of heredity, which would lead to the discovery of genetic drift. The study of genetics alone would take the Theory of Evolution in directions Darwin could never have imagined possible.

This description would be incomprehensible to Darwin since he was unaware of genes and genetic drift. The modern theory of the mechanism of evolution differs from Darwinism in three important respects:

  1. It recognizes several mechanisms of evolution in addition to natural selection. One of these, random genetic drift, may be as important as natural selection.
  2. It recognizes that characteristics are inherited as discrete entities called genes. Variation within a population is due to the presence of multiple alleles of a gene.
  3. It postulates that speciation is (usually) due to the gradual accumulation of small genetic changes. This is equivalent to saying that macroevolution is simply a lot of microevolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/modern-synthesis.html

Science itself continues to improve upon what we know by constantly reviewing, analyzing, testing, and scrutinizing, itself. Science builds upon the works of others as a means of extending our knowledge and understanding of the physical universe all around us. That Charles Darwin made an important contribution to Modern Evolutionary concepts should never be disputed, but the assumption that his concepts and Modern Evolution are the same is just plain wrong.

Further Reading

Biography of Charles Darwin

The Complete Works of Charles Darwin

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory

Understanding Evolution

Evolution II: Modern Evolution

The evolution of Evolution

Map of the Evolution of Modern Evolution

  • Edited March 20, 2023 2:22 pm  by  EdGlaze
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Mar-21

EdGlaze said...

I really don't know why people use the term "Darwinism," as if it were somehow synonymous with Evolution, when in fact, nothing could be further from the truth.

Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Also called Darwinian theory, it originally included the broad concepts of transmutation of species or of evolution which gained general scientific acceptance after Darwin published On the Origin of Species
...[Message truncated]
View Full Message
EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze

Mar-21

I didn't watch the video but from the description it seems to take a religious, rather than scientific perspective.

Thus, the second and third sentences of what I posted may apply best:

More often than not, the use of this term [Darwinism] is an attempt by pro-theists, creationists, and ID'ers, to reframe, and misrepresent Evolution out of context. As long as they can keep the focus on Darwin, they can poke more holes in Evolution, the reason? 

 

 

_____________

Excerpt from:  Creationism experts?

An Introduction to the Evolution versus Creation Debate

The evolution / creation debate hinges largely on a disagreement regarding the nature of science and scientific theories.

Creationism versus Scientific Evolution Theory:
Debating - How to Debate a Creationist

Hardcore creationists may be ignorant of the science itself, but they are usually very knowledgeable about the tactics of arguing about it. A debate against a well-prepared creationist is like walking into a courtroom against a highly skilled trial lawyer; don't expect to win just because you're right.

The goal of this website is to help provide people with tools to aid them in recognizing the kinds of tactics creationists are likely to use in their attacks on evolution theory, and also to help open peoples' eyes about the kind of fanaticism that exists out there among people who most likely seem otherwise quite normal.

How Not to Argue with Creationists
Certain tactics should be avoided in public debates with creationists, as this continuation of an exchange between James Lippard and Ian Plimer illustrates.

www.talkorigins.org/faqs/how-not-to-argue.html

  • Edited March 21, 2023 7:26 am  by  EdGlaze
WALTER784
Staff

From: WALTER784

Mar-21

It's on Wikipedia... not a video... and it mentions evolution as I colored in red twice. Not a video... just a Wikipedia explanation.

If you don't like it, you're welcome to go to Wikipedia and edit those references of evolution out, but I won't guarantee whether they will or will not be reverted. 

But you're free to continue believing whatever you like!

FWIW

  • Edited March 21, 2023 9:17 am  by  WALTER784
EdGlaze

From: EdGlaze

Mar-21

It's on Wikipedia... not a video...

I was referring to the video in post 1.

But you're free to continue believing whatever you like!

That's what this forum is all about — opinions; however, in the evolution/creationism debate there are also many facts, especially scientific, to consider.

  • Edited March 21, 2023 11:11 am  by  EdGlaze
Showtalk
Host

From: Showtalk

Mar-21

Since the basis of early science was religion, taking the discussion back to religion isn’t so far fetched.  I decided a long time ago not to try and figure this one out because it was too complicated.  I once asked about it in church and was never given answer. It made the adults in the room nervous and no one knew what to say. So that was that.

TOP