Creationism justified

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

1 - natural selection has been opposed to creationism, so proponents of evolution had to defend it very strongly against bible-thumpers, but this has reduced the amount of objective criticism of the theory. 2 - people accept evolution because they can see the overall process - fish grows legs crawls out of water legs get bigger grows hair is a zebra - and so it makes sense, but they don't consider the details. I think the mechanism of natural selection - totally random mutations that effect chance of producing offspring - is faulty. I should say I read a book on this once that i thought was persuasive enough to raise doubts. Think about how powerful and intelligent nature is, like all the different reactions the body has for healing itself and fighting infections, so on and so on. I just think there's more going on.

― Sheridan, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think the mechanism of natural selection - totally random mutations that effect chance of producing offspring - is faulty. I should say I read a book on this once that i thought was persuasive enough to raise doubts.

The mechanism of speciation is not so clear but "totally random mutations that effect chance of producing offspring" = the fundamental basis for experimental genetics. It's a completely observable phenomenon in all lifeforms/viruses/mycoplasma/whatever. Think of bacteria acquiring antibiotic resistance. What was this book you read? Why do you think this is faulty?

― Kris, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"nature is intelligent": what's the (non- faulty) mechanism of this intelligence?

it may be true that "people" aren't up on the details, and respond only to the generality; biologists like darwin (obv) and stephen jay gould (to name two i can spell) work on nothing but the details

"all the different reactions the body has for healing itself and fighting infections" = excellent argument for unplanned series of darwinian evolutionary developments, good argument AGAINST "powerful & intelligent nature" (which wd have devised a one-size- fits-all SINGLE resistance-system)

― mark s, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The father of a friend of mine once completely tripped me out with his theory that mathematics proves that God exists.

― Dan Perry, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I should say I read a book on this once that i thought was persuasive enough to raise doubts.

Reading the Bible once doesn't make you much of a theological scholar.

― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, lets see what our friend Lawson has to say about this Here is a god section on how economics taints the sciences. and dont forget Alfred lawson's lovely views on space, assuming he means the one between his ears.

― Mr Noodles, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Lawson... or Eugen Duhring?!?!

― Sterling Clover, Thursday, 14 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.