Religions > Atheism > Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"jabriol" |
| Date: |
11 Aug 2003 08:56:22 PM |
| Object: |
Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bh7pis$jd1$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f366b8c$0$1299$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
I
When a special centennial edition of Darwin's Origin of Species was to
be
published, W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute
of
Biological Control, in Ottawa, Canada, was invited to write its
introduction. In it he said: "As we know, there is a great divergence of
opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but
even
about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is
unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is
therefore
right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to
the
disagreements about evolution"
THOSE who support the theory of evolution feel that it is now an
established
fact. They believe that evolution is an "actual occurrence," a
"reality," a
"truth," as one dictionary defines the word "fact." But is it?
Yes.
To illustrate: It was once believed that the earth was flat.
That's fundies for you.
Now it has
been established for a certainty that it is spherical in shape.
That's science for you.
That is a
fact. It was once believed that the earth was the center of the universe
and
that the heavens revolved around the earth.
That's fundies for you.
Now we know for sure that the
earth revolves in an orbit around the sun.
That's science for you.
This, too, is a fact. Many things
that were once only debated theories have been established by the
evidence
as solid fact, reality, truth.
Yes.
Would an investigation of the evidence for evolution leave one on the
same
solid ground?
Yes.
Interestingly, ever since Charles Darwin's book The Origin of
Species was published in 1859, various aspects of the theory have been a
matter of considerable disagreement even among top evolutionary
scientists.
Today, that dispute is more intense than ever. And it is enlightening to
consider what advocates of evolution themselves are saying about the
matter.
But none of them claim that evolution doesn't happen.
It was once believes that life on earth was created in 6 days, 6000 years
ago
in a puff of smoke. Now we know for sure that evolution created the
species.
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for certain if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5 different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not make
certainty.
.
|
|
| User: "Wayne Bagguley" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
14 Aug 2003 06:09:50 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3f384b65$0$35993$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bh7pis$jd1$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f366b8c$0$1299$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
I
When a special centennial edition of Darwin's Origin of Species was to
be
published, W. R. Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute
of
Biological Control, in Ottawa, Canada, was invited to write its
introduction. In it he said: "As we know, there is a great divergence of
opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but
even
about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is
unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is
therefore
right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to
the
disagreements about evolution"
THOSE who support the theory of evolution feel that it is now an
established
fact. They believe that evolution is an "actual occurrence," a
"reality," a
"truth," as one dictionary defines the word "fact." But is it?
Yes.
To illustrate: It was once believed that the earth was flat.
That's fundies for you.
Now it has
been established for a certainty that it is spherical in shape.
That's science for you.
That is a
fact. It was once believed that the earth was the center of the universe
and
that the heavens revolved around the earth.
That's fundies for you.
Now we know for sure that the
earth revolves in an orbit around the sun.
That's science for you.
This, too, is a fact. Many things
that were once only debated theories have been established by the
evidence
as solid fact, reality, truth.
Yes.
Would an investigation of the evidence for evolution leave one on the
same
solid ground?
Yes.
Interestingly, ever since Charles Darwin's book The Origin of
Species was published in 1859, various aspects of the theory have been a
matter of considerable disagreement even among top evolutionary
scientists.
Today, that dispute is more intense than ever. And it is enlightening to
consider what advocates of evolution themselves are saying about the
matter.
But none of them claim that evolution doesn't happen.
It was once believes that life on earth was created in 6 days, 6000 years
ago
in a puff of smoke. Now we know for sure that evolution created the
species.
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for certain if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5 different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not make
certainty.
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one. The only
thing which some scientists disagree upon is the relative importance of a few
of the minor details of evolution.
-
Wayne
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
14 Aug 2003 05:21:02 PM |
|
|
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhfqm6$9k5$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for certain
if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5
different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not make
certainty.
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one.
My goof, I was referring to speciations, as for the theory of evolution
there are two.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wayne Bagguley" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
15 Aug 2003 09:52:05 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3f3c0b78$0$44793$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhfqm6$9k5$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for certain
if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5
different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not make
certainty.
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one.
My goof, I was referring to speciations, as for the theory of evolution
there are two.
And what, pray tell, are those?
-
Wayne
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
15 Aug 2003 06:19:13 PM |
|
|
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhis6a$ukp$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f3c0b78$0$44793$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhfqm6$9k5$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for
certain
if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5
different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not
make
certainty.
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one.
My goof, I was referring to speciations, as for the theory of evolution
there are two.
And what, pray tell, are those?
-
Wayne
Darwinisn and natural selection
Random genetic drift
Punctuated equlibria
You also have those who belived that God role the dice and directed it, as
well as those who do not belive In God, and belive once abiogenesis
occurred, evolution is the only way.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
16 Aug 2003 03:32:10 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote
Darwinisn
If you're going to call evolution "Darwinism" you might as
well start sewing 'Kick Me' signs on your back.
.
|
|
|
| User: "jabriol" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
16 Aug 2003 07:44:25 AM |
|
|
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:mpqdnbsECs1OcqCiXTWJjw@comcast.com...
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote
Darwinisn
If you're going to call evolution "Darwinism" you might as
well start sewing 'Kick Me' signs on your back.
A question was asked.. I answered.. what is your point?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wayne Bagguley" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
16 Aug 2003 09:14:19 AM |
|
|
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3f3d6a82$0$425$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhis6a$ukp$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
"jabriol" <jabriol@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f3c0b78$0$44793$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
"Wayne Bagguley" <snowbirdGetRidOfThis@ThisToo.snowbird.freeserve.co.uk>
wrote in message news:bhfqm6$9k5$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk...
I don't believe in the 6 day quikie, and science do not know for
certain
if
evolution created the species, as it stand, there are more than 5
different
definitions ans some contradict each other, contradiction does not
make
certainty.
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one.
My goof, I was referring to speciations, as for the theory of evolution
there are two.
And what, pray tell, are those?
-
Wayne
Darwinisn and natural selection
Random genetic drift
Punctuated equlibria
They are ALL parts of the same theory of evolution.
Just like a goal, players and a referee are all parts of a soccer game.
You also have those who belived that God role the dice and directed it, as
well as those who do not belive In God, and belive once abiogenesis
occurred, evolution is the only way.
Those are people, not scientific theories.
-
Wayne
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: If evolution was such a fact, why do scientist disagree? comments by W.R.Thompson |
14 Aug 2003 08:05:54 AM |
|
|
In alt.talk.creationism I read this message from "info"
<info@as-if.com>:
There are not more than 5 definition of evolution. There is only one. The only
thing which some scientists disagree upon is the relative importance of a few
of the minor details of evolution.
---- It's just a theory, and a bad one at that! :-D.
ftp://info-02:info-02@65.127.169.45/=CD-R=creation-vs-evolution/index.html
How about a scientific reference on this?
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|