| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Unbeliever Forum Master


Joined: 11 Apr 2005 Posts: 2557 Local time: 10:31 PM Location: The exact center of my observable universe
|
Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EA215 wrote: | | Atheists think just because science hasn't acknowledge God means that there's no God. |
No, the fact that science hasn't acknowledged God is merely because science has no need of that hypothesis. Atheists (or at least this atheist) disbelieve in God because of Ockam's razor and the fact that the attributes of the theistic God are mutually exclusive and self contradictory. _________________ "True wisdom is less presuming than folly. The wise man doubteth often, and changeth his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubteth not; he knoweth all things but his own ignorance."
Akhenaton?( c. B.P. 1575)
Science is a lighthouse,
Faith is the rocks below.
God Not Found - resources for atheist/agnostics
"the universe is under no obligation to be easy for us to comprehend."
moloth |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Quasarsphere Visitor


Joined: 24 Mar 2008 Posts: 5 Local time: 6:31 PM Location: Wellington, New Zealand

|
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| God, I knew this would be a video from that useless little cunt VenomFangX before I even clicked on it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andreusz Royal Citizen

Joined: 11 Jul 2008 Posts: 332 Local time: 12:31 AM Location: Johannesburg

|
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:17 am Post subject: Re: Goooodbyyyyyye to Evolutiooooon |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: |
Evolution would turn out to be wrong if bones of dinosaurs were to be found in the Precambrian eon. So yeah, evolution can be falsified. |
Yes, that's evolution as such, and I've often read this ... but what about Darwin's theory that the mechanism of evolution is natural selection? I've thought about this often, and I can't see any way it can be falsified. (No, I haven't gone religious as a consequence!) Would be interested to hear if anyone has any ideas on this.
The problem as I see it is: if an organism/species survives and flourishes, then clearly it is 'fit'; if not, it isn't. I really can't see how this can be falsified.
Or is Darwin's theory simply an application of Ockham's razor -- the simplest possible explanation that covers all the facts? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Eyedunno The Great JuJu at the Bottom of the Sea

Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Posts: 3799 Local time: 3:31 PM Location: Cin City, OH!

|
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:25 am Post subject: Re: Goooodbyyyyyye to Evolutiooooon |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: |
Evolution would turn out to be wrong if bones of dinosaurs were to be found in the Precambrian eon. So yeah, evolution can be falsified. |
Heck, ANY bones in the Precambrian or in the Cambrian. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stickhorse Antichrist

Joined: 26 Jan 2006 Posts: 859 Local time: 1:31 AM Location: Tennessee
|
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:28 am Post subject: Re: Goooodbyyyyyye to Evolutiooooon |
|
|
| Andreusz wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: |
Evolution would turn out to be wrong if bones of dinosaurs were to be found in the Precambrian eon. So yeah, evolution can be falsified. |
Yes, that's evolution as such, and I've often read this ... but what about Darwin's theory that the mechanism of evolution is natural selection? I've thought about this often, and I can't see any way it can be falsified. (No, I haven't gone religious as a consequence!) Would be interested to hear if anyone has any ideas on this.
The problem as I see it is: if an organism/species survives and flourishes, then clearly it is 'fit'; if not, it isn't. I really can't see how this can be falsified.
Or is Darwin's theory simply an application of Ockham's razor -- the simplest possible explanation that covers all the facts? |
your problem is that you're oversimplifying natural selection to mean simply, "survival of the fittest".
| wikki wrote: | | Natural selection is the process by which favorable heritable traits become more common in successive generations of a population of reproducing organisms, and unfavorable heritable traits become less common, due to differential reproduction of genotypes. |
this could be easily falsified don't you agree? _________________
http://myspace.com/stickhorse
you'll never believe what i got baddogma to do for a klondike bar! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
josephpalazzo Illusion Master

Joined: 30 Aug 2006 Posts: 8036 Local time: 12:31 AM Location: D-brane
|
Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:40 am Post subject: Re: Goooodbyyyyyye to Evolutiooooon |
|
|
| Andreusz wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: |
Evolution would turn out to be wrong if bones of dinosaurs were to be found in the Precambrian eon. So yeah, evolution can be falsified. |
Yes, that's evolution as such, and I've often read this ... but what about Darwin's theory that the mechanism of evolution is natural selection? I've thought about this often, and I can't see any way it can be falsified. (No, I haven't gone religious as a consequence!) Would be interested to hear if anyone has any ideas on this.
The problem as I see it is: if an organism/species survives and flourishes, then clearly it is 'fit'; if not, it isn't. I really can't see how this can be falsified.
Or is Darwin's theory simply an application of Ockham's razor -- the simplest possible explanation that covers all the facts? |
Good point. However, you must keep in mind that natural selection is just one leg of the theory of evolution, along with mutations, gene drift and speciation. So I don't know that every part of a theory must hold to Popper's test of falsification. Wouldn't we be taking that test to extreme? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rortykiller Forum Leader

Joined: 15 Jul 2008 Posts: 722 Local time: 12:31 AM
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Evolution is comprised strictly of two selective pressures (not one). Natural selection (survival of the fittest) and Sexual selection (often female mate selection). These pressures operate on the biological imperative of genetic drift (evident in all life forms). Thats the entire thing.
I wouldn't go as far as to call it Occam's razor though, the theory really requires knowledge of biology.
It does however cover all the facts, and though in a hypothetical way something could disprove evolution Occam's razor makes us realize how unlikely this hypothetical can be. _________________ "rights" are the modern recontextualizing of "holy"; a romanticized state of being beyond reproach. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Disko Pickle Intern


Joined: 11 Nov 2008 Posts: 48 Local time: 11:31 PM

|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quasarsphere wrote: | | God, I knew this would be a video from that useless little cunt VenomFangX before I even clicked on it. |
You're just being narrow minded.
I, for one, have been completely convinced by that video and I now acknowledge the existence of the one true God and his only begotten son, Jesus Christ. In fact, I just came back from becoming a member of a church: the Church of Satan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jutter Quixotic Cloggy

Joined: 26 Jul 2003 Posts: 6663 Local time: 6:31 AM Location: Den Helder, the Netherlands

|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sea of red wrote: | | Just like all the other theists trolls,this will probably be his one and only post. |
To this top-preformer's credit, the postcount was ultimately cranked up to a whopping three ignorant posts. _________________ ~ Let us be reasonable ~
Congratulations: you are paracorrect about the supernatural.
*"If there were nobody listening to gods anymore, there would be nothing left for us to do,...
... then to finally start listening to each other."
*As any gamer will tell you: God-mode is a cheat-code. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
kmisho Stochastic

Joined: 05 Dec 2005 Posts: 4658 Local time: 3:31 PM Location: Richmond, Virginia USA
|
Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: Re: Goooodbyyyyyye to Evolutiooooon |
|
|
| Andreusz wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: |
Evolution would turn out to be wrong if bones of dinosaurs were to be found in the Precambrian eon. So yeah, evolution can be falsified. |
Yes, that's evolution as such, and I've often read this ... but what about Darwin's theory that the mechanism of evolution is natural selection? I've thought about this often, and I can't see any way it can be falsified. (No, I haven't gone religious as a consequence!) Would be interested to hear if anyone has any ideas on this.
The problem as I see it is: if an organism/species survives and flourishes, then clearly it is 'fit'; if not, it isn't. I really can't see how this can be falsified.
Or is Darwin's theory simply an application of Ockham's razor -- the simplest possible explanation that covers all the facts? |
This is the old tautology argument. A species is deemed fit because it survives, yet survives because it's fit. The problem is that fitness is not defined by survival nor is survival defined by fitness.
A simple example I got from SJ Gould: A bunch of species of fish live in a lake, some more fit to survive in that lake than others. A drought comes and the lake dries up. You would expect all to die regardless of how well or poorly adapted each is to the lake environment. Now, one species does survive, a poor swimmer, a scanger living off scraps that hides in the shadows that is so unfit it has developed the ability to survive for some short period out of the water just to lay its eggs in safety. Suddenly, with the unpredictable change in environment to severe drought, the least fit becomes the most fit. Fitness to a particular niche is no guarantee or predictor of survival. _________________ K Michau
Now this religion happens to prevail/Until by that one it is overthrown/Because men dare not live with men alone/But always with another fairy tale.
al-Ma'arri, Syrian Poet, died 1057
You deny the existence of 999 alleged Gods. I merely deny one more - yours.
John MacKinnon Robertson, "Godism" 1896
"Never is a long time." Robert Fripp, 1998
Poetry, Art, Music |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|