Message boards :
Politics :
Intelligent Design Thoery
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 21 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
skildude Send message Joined: 4 Oct 00 Posts: 9541 Credit: 50,759,529 RAC: 60 |
I never liked the term Survival of the fittest. Perhaps a better term is "survival of the most easily adaptable" In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. Diogenes Of Sinope |
BarryAZ Send message Joined: 1 Apr 01 Posts: 2580 Credit: 16,982,517 RAC: 0 |
There you go -- sounding like a Bain Capital sort of guy <giggle> I never liked the term Survival of the fittest. |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Perhaps some here think I don't believe in Darwin? This is not true. I do believe. I believe in his work, his book. I don't believe in what was done to his work after his death. Neo-Darwinism, isn't correct. |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Possibly picking up the Fibonacci series in nature is evidence of nature using I think so. Please continue... ...so far so good. On the right track. :-) |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30593 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
I don't believe in what was done to his work after his death. Neo-Darwinism, isn't correct. So you don't believe in DNA. Okay. |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
I don't believe in what was done to his work after his death. Neo-Darwinism, isn't correct. Oh, I believe in DNA. Last year I seen with my own eyes a sparrows [English import kind] eating off the fronts of cars in parking lots. Cars haven't been around but about 100 years and only about 50 of them years at speeds to smash bugs on the fronts of them. Id say thats rather fast for the evolutionary process. Neo-Darwinism postulates that natural selection acts on---heritable (genetic) variations "on individuals" in populations and that mutations (especally random copying errors in DNA) give us the main source of these genetic variations. Because positive mutations "appear" to be rare, Neo-Darwinism tells us that evolution will be a slow, gradual process. Neo-Darwinism is also called the Modern Synthesis. Odd that Neo-Darwinism blends Darwin with DNA and yet objects to my blending of science and Faith. Darwin had no real proof that he was on the correct track, no more proof then I. So, then it was taken on fiath that Darwin was correct right up till we found DNA? Ah, but I do have that Faith Gene as my hold out card for trump, might not be the last trump care either... |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30593 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
I don't believe in what was done to his work after his death. Neo-Darwinism, isn't correct. I think you don't understand evolution. What you describe is a learned behavior. It isn't that the beak of the bird has changed shape to better pick bugs off a windshield, which would be evolution. Neo-Darwinism postulates that natural selection acts on---heritable (genetic) variations "on individuals" in populations and that mutations (especally random copying errors in DNA) give us the main source of these genetic variations. Because positive mutations "appear" to be rare, Neo-Darwinism tells us that evolution will be a slow, gradual process. Neo-Darwinism is also called the Modern Synthesis. Odd that Neo-Darwinism blends Darwin with DNA and yet objects to my blending of science and Faith. Darwin had no real proof that he was on the correct track, no more proof then I. So, then it was taken on fiath that Darwin was correct right up till we found DNA? Ah, but I do have that Faith Gene as my hold out card for trump, might not be the last trump care either... Where do you get this will be slow? Look up Mendelian genetics. It didn't take centuries for those sweet peas to have different color blooms. I think your assumptions are showing. |
Ex: "Socialist" Send message Joined: 12 Mar 12 Posts: 3433 Credit: 2,616,158 RAC: 2 |
Look what has happened to the wolf since we intervened. Or more specifically just look at the dog breeds that we shaped in just 200 years. All genetics. #resist |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Look what has happened to the wolf since we intervened. Or more specifically just look at the dog breeds that we shaped in just 200 years. Nice of you to bring that up. We use the Design we was given in nature. We started when we became farmers. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30593 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Look what has happened to the wolf since we intervened. Or more specifically just look at the dog breeds that we shaped in just 200 years. Ah, ignore inconvenient facts, a requirement of belief. |
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
Yes, have a good night Intelligent Design, Matt...have a good day... If that is true it is either incompetent or malevolent. That is as clear as the glasses on your face. Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
Matt Giwer Send message Joined: 21 May 00 Posts: 841 Credit: 990,879 RAC: 0 |
There is evidence that the Fibonacci series does appear across various parts of nature, and in scientific areas. The unanswerable question of course is whether it was by deliberate design by a third party or parties unkown, or simply by evolution where the most fittest survive. If one wishes to make an issue of this series then one must also explain all the series not found in nature at the same time. A hits out of millions is not unexpected. And in making claims for Fibonacci series one has to address the correct use of the word ALMOST describing its fit before going further. Almost means it is not a mathematically exact fit but rather one good enough for government work. If you sat down with a sheet of blank paper to design a planet, you might to decide to base that design upon a set theme. Sounds a bit like the Norwegian Fiords in HHGTTG but you know what I mean. If one were to design a planet it is best to start off with Ringworld and then change the laws of nature so that it is stable. As in Time Bandits it would be better to start with with computers on day one along with several other good ideas. It is at best malevolent to design in disease, suffering and death. That is just sadistic. Maybe the designer is a sadist. It never said it was a nice god. Its sales staff said that. Unvarnished Haaretz Jerusalem Post The origin of the Yahweh Cult |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
I'll wait on Nick. ....I have faith in him. :-) Then I'll address the other issues. |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
If one were to design a planet it is best to start off with Ringworld and then change the laws of nature so that it is stable. As in Time Bandits it would be better to start with with computers on day one along with several other good ideas. I think you mean Terry Pratchett. Personally I prefer D.N. Adams' works. I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Ï€ Fibonacci sequence golden spiral nonlinear dynamics chaos theory And, a belief that diverse systems give a tangible or visible form to highly 'nonlinear dynamics' and have in common a 'unifying pattern' that are very much similar to results in 'chaos theory', which gives us the machinery for putting meaning to certain phenomena of 'nonlinear systems', which might be thought of as patterns, denoting Intelligence in the Design; God to most of us. 95% of us. Open systems are they not? :-) |
Intelligent Design Send message Joined: 9 Apr 12 Posts: 3626 Credit: 37,520 RAC: 0 |
Ï€ Oh, I should add Im not the first to think along these lines. ...just sayin! Good night folks! |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
Not entirely sure what the arguments or the opinions expressed here are actually saying. A fractal can be a thing of immense beauty and complexity; yet, it follows a simple equation. Intelligent design ? Hardly, just Nature in the form of mathematics. Try this for you Golden ratio fans. Take any two three digit numbers, add them together, Then add this sum to the second number. Next add this new sum to the previous sum and so on. When you get to the tenth sum divide it by the 9th sum and presto you will get 1.61 and possibly be able to round to 1.618. This is the golden ratio to a good approximation. Again structure and beauty hidden in our world and revealed by Mathematics. No design here just numbers--the way things have to be to be real in our world. The spirals in cone flowers, pineapples, broccoli etc are what has to occur when new cells are produced and pushed out into the existing center of the flower. Same is true for the Hexagonal, close-pack of a bee hive. Not design just the way things are and must be. All of the ills that befall the human body are not intelligent design but rather the imperfect result of selective evolution. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
denoting Intelligence in the Design; God to most of us. 95% of us. Yes, there is a severe lack of understanding of science in the majority of the population, but I think your estimate is quite skewed to favor your view. It is clear that some people prefer to draw their own conclusions instead of letting the data lead them to the right one. All the more reason why we need better science curriculum taught in schools, and not that presumptuous crap taught by Intelligent Design. Just sayin. |
SciManStev Send message Joined: 20 Jun 99 Posts: 6651 Credit: 121,090,076 RAC: 0 |
A more correct datapoint is that in Europe, 25% say they are athiests, while in the US, only 15% say they are athiests. Steve Warning, addicted to SETI crunching! Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group. GPUUG Website |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
[Off-topic] Things start to look really interesting when you look at the non-believer category, which includes Atheists and Agnostics (which I still argue that many Agnostics are Atheists whom are asking themselves the wrong question). I've seen some statistics that put the number as high as 30% of the population. ...and I wonder how much higher that number would be if Atheism weren't such a political career-killer or didn't carry the social stigma that it does. Just sayin. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.