How to sharpen the teeth of Evolution scientists

Aphex_Twin

Evergreen
Joined
Sep 7, 2002
Messages
7,474
They say "Never argue with an idiot - he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience." It seems to be the case with the current evo-creationism debates. Has Creationism sucked the life blood and critical "killer instinct" of Evolution scientists?


A very interesting article, apparently debunking Evolution, but from a non-Creationist skeptic. Link

I think he is indeed honest in not being a Creationist and this should be a good excercise for proponents of Evolution. It should also serve as a guide as to what not to attribute to Evolution. It should also point out that the "we don't know" is a valid answer, especially on weak claims (not that Evolution is a weak claim, but that certain things within the field are indeed weak).

Note that, especially towards the end there are a few fallacious statements, namely:
"that Evolution concerns itself with the beginning of life"
"that we have to observe a species changing into another to prove Evolution"
"that statements on how species A might have developed as it did are instrumental in the scientific validity of Evolution"

In short, as far as science is concerned today, Evolution is the best theory, it is plausible, it establishes a certain number of general principles, but in no way has it been theoretically funded to the depth and precision of sciences like Physics. So it appears it is somwehere in between "valid, undisputable science" and "unproven theory".

Have fun ;)
 
I think its time we had a subforum for 'god v science' threads. :p
Well its not leakproof, i know that, but lets say its like one of those little paper boats you made at school. It floats pretty well, but there will always be some git that tries to sink it. Now lets look at other theories, most notibly creationism (which i include ID). In the same example, they would be a lead brick. It doesnt need help in sinking, it does it by itself.
 
It should also point out that the "we don't know" is a valid answer

The problem here is that religion is a product of fear of the unknown, which is why it is invoked as an explanation for any natural phenomena people do not understand - from lightning or weather, as a primitive example, to the modern "God of Gaps".
 
The main argument is that Evolution scientists have been so hone on debunking Creationists that they let some standards down.

Note again that you don't necessarily be a Creationist or proponent of ID (aka Stealth Creationism) to test the scientific validity of Evolution.

This is NOT an evo-creationism thread.
 
Aphex_Twin said:
The main argument is that Evolution scientists have been so hone on debunking Creationists that they let some standards down.
The creationism debate has very little to do with science. If you want to learn about evolutionary biology rather than applied sociology, there's no reason to go near it.
 
Aphex_Twin said:
They say "Never argue with an idiot - he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience." It seems to be the case with the current evo-creationism debates. Has Creationism sucked the life blood and critical "killer instinct" of Evolution scientists?

I find this part of your post offensive, for several reasons, and I demand an immediate apology. First, because you seem to be delegating Creationists to "idiot" status. The comparison is clear, and insulting, as I am a Creationist and despite what you may think actually quite bright. Second, I find the idea of evolutionary scientists with "killer instinct" disturbing, we don't want serial killers running around out here. Third, and most importantly, "they" is not a valid identification, I want names for whoever is spewing this garbage.

Ok, so two of the three were primarily me just making fun, but really, the first one was serious. :rolleyes: It does seem like you are calling Creationists idiots (I wonder why it sounds like that :rolleyes: ) and I don't think that's an appropriate thing to do.

EDIT: The article was interesting. I wonder if we're seeing the formation of a third side in this - the "Screw all you guys, I'm leaving" side. :lol:
 
I believe what we have is a failure to communicate.

metaphor: a figure of speech in which an expression is used to refer to something that it does not literally denote in order to suggest a similarity
 
Top Bottom