Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Creationism, Intelligent Design, and Evolution.
Bart Stewart
Regular Poster
Posts: 985
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:27 pm
Contact:

Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Bart Stewart » Wed Dec 14, 2016 12:45 am

Yeah, there may be no further hope for any part of Darwin's theory (which, after all, was only a theory.) This big conclave of esteemed scientists at the Royal Society in London has basically thrown in the towel on the whole thing.

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/david ... ism-broken

You would think this would be bigger news, more widely reported. The article also noticed the media silence, and dropped dark hints of a conspiracy to "muffle" news that is troubling to the science establishment. So far, this story only seems to be here on CNSNews.com, which is a site founded by L. Brent Bozell, a figure on the conservative end of the political spectrum. Or maybe somewhere out beyond the end of it. CNS is a division of the Media Research Center, whose mission is "to create a media culture in America where truth and liberty flourish."

From the article --

"Dr. Gerd Müller opened the meeting by discussing several of the fundamental 'explanatory deficits' of 'the modern synthesis,' that is, textbook neo-Darwinian theory. According to Müller, the as yet unsolved problems include those of explaining:

Phenotypic complexity (the origin of eyes, ears, body plans, i.e., the anatomical and structural features of living creatures);

Phenotypic novelty, i.e., the origin of new forms throughout the history of life (for example, the mammalian radiation some 66 million years ago, in which the major orders of mammals, such as cetaceans, bats, carnivores, enter the fossil record, or even more dramatically, the Cambrian explosion, with most animal body plans appearing more or less without antecedents); and finally

Non-gradual forms or modes of transition, where you see abrupt discontinuities in the fossil record between different types.

As Müller has explained in a 2003 work (“On the Origin of Organismal Form,” with Stuart Newman), although 'the neo-Darwinian paradigm still represents the central explanatory framework of evolution, as represented by recent textbooks' it 'has no theory of the generative.'


Maybe in the near future there will be no further "muffling" of denials of Darwin. After all, Trump Cabinet member Dr. Ben Carson has affirmed that Darwin's theory was "encouraged by the Adversary."

By which he meant Satan.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9729
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:39 am

I assume "sarcasm" at each and every point of this issue...with varying degrees. Don't see it all that much at the link..... but my goodness ID is NOT a theory at all and complexity is an unavoidable result of Darwinian Evolution....NOT an unanswered question.

Does the Royal Society hold an annual April Fools gathering every December?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26136
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Matthew Ellard » Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:45 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Does the Royal Society hold an annual April Fools gathering every December?


You got it. The conference was not on the conventional scientific evidence for evolution, but rather "New trends in evolutionary biology: biological, philosophical and social science perspectives"
https://royalsociety.org/science-events ... y-biology/

The theory of Evolution is not "broken".

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28986
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gord » Wed Dec 14, 2016 2:04 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Does the Royal Society hold an annual April Fools gathering every December?


You got it. The conference was not on the conventional scientific evidence for evolution, but rather "New trends in evolutionary biology: biological, philosophical and social science perspectives"
https://royalsociety.org/science-events ... y-biology/

The theory of Evolution is not "broken".

And it was in November, not December.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Bart Stewart
Regular Poster
Posts: 985
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 5:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Bart Stewart » Wed Dec 14, 2016 3:31 am

Read the Comments section at the bottom and you will see readers absolutely blasting these CNS guys over this article.

Very misleading article. As such, probably destined to be picked up and trumpeted over every Christian conservative site on the web.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 19428
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby scrmbldggs » Wed Dec 14, 2016 4:46 am

...and georgie... :roll:
Hi, Io the lurker.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9685
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:48 pm

Just a comment on the statement that "evolution is 'just' a theory."

Anyone who says this is immediately displaying their basic ignorance of science. The word 'theory' in science does NOT mean the same thing as the same word when used by laymen. For example, no one would say that "gravity is 'just' a theory."

In science, ideas pass through stages depending on how much evidence there might be to support them. The lowest level is a speculation. Next comes a hypothesis, which is characterised by the fact that it gets tested, by generating testable predictions. A theory is an idea that has been tested to the point, and supported by sufficient evidence, that it is now considered a very, very strong idea. Evolution has reached this stage by the build up of sufficient evidence to make it pretty damn unlikely that it is incorrect.

Of course, the details of the theory are different. Evolutionary biologists are constantly tweaking the details. Natural selection works via a number of different mechanisms, and those mechanisms are subject to changes in our understanding. That is far from saying that Darwinism is broken. That statement is total bulldust.

User avatar
Monster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4953
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 7:57 pm
Location: Tarrytown, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Monster » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:07 pm

From "The Vulgarian", one of the commenters of the article:

The fact that so many people voted for Donald Trump clearly indicates there is no intelligent design to the universe.
Listening twice as much as you speak is a sign of wisdom.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19197
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:10 pm

Calling modern evolutionary theory "Darwinism" is like calling current aeronautical theory "Wrightism".
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9729
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:28 am

If its not Darwinism, then how can we blame Darwin for all the world's ills???

............... makes no sense at all. Darwin is dead... he doesn't mind.... and probably would not have when alive, unless it pissed off wifey. maybe we should all start blaming Darwin's Wife? See how THAT evolved? Proof positive.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Cadmusteeth
Regular Poster
Posts: 900
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 7:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Cadmusteeth » Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:58 am

Monster wrote:From "The Vulgarian", one of the commenters of the article:

The fact that so many people voted for Donald Trump clearly indicates there is no intelligent design to the universe.
I would contend that the campaigners were using a flaw in the design to their advantage.

LogicalSceptic
New Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:20 pm

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby LogicalSceptic » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:30 pm

no one would say that "gravity is 'just' a theory."


Hasn't it gone beyond theory? So comparing apples and pears. I would say gravity is a law.
You drop something, it falls.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19197
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:55 pm

LogicalSceptic wrote:
no one would say that "gravity is 'just' a theory."


Hasn't it gone beyond theory? So comparing apples and pears. I would say gravity is a law.
You drop something, it falls.

That's empirical evidence. We don't don't have a hard law yet.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28986
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gord » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:33 pm

LogicalSceptic wrote:
no one would say that "gravity is 'just' a theory."

Hasn't it gone beyond theory? So comparing apples and pears. I would say gravity is a law.
You drop something, it falls.

It's both.

This video should explain a lot, and more!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqk3TKuGNBA
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

IrritableBadger
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2016 12:12 am

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby IrritableBadger » Wed Dec 21, 2016 2:13 am

LogicalSceptic wrote:
no one would say that "gravity is 'just' a theory."


Hasn't it gone beyond theory? So comparing apples and pears. I would say gravity is a law.
You drop something, it falls.


Laws are not a scientific categorization. Laws are keen observations, truisms, with no quantitative data to support them and are devoid of the potential to be falsified.

That last bit is crucial. Any scientifically valid hypothesis or theory innately assumes the possibility of being proven wrong.

All the laws people toss around (thermodynamics, gravity, motion, energy, &c...) have no scientific basis. I think this next part confuses a lot of people. Under the umbrella of a law you can find many different scientifically valid theories, but the scientific method does not provide for a two way flow of information*. Meaning that the progression, or regression, of validity in the face of evidence can only go one direction at a time. A theory cannot support a law and a law cannot support a theory.

Leaving the overly simplified world of science for a moment. Scientifically valid information does not automatically preclude the applied validity of an observation. "What goes up, must come down" is no less correct because it isn't scientifically valid. It simply isn't scientifically valid.

Although it's probably worth it having its own topic, the way anecdotal thinking among people of science changes is a conundrum proper and worth pondering on. The brand name scientists and philosophers invariably begin to distance themselves from a strictly scientific understanding of the world. The evidentiary atheist becomes the fatalistic agnostic and finally the contented ignoramus happy to know they didn't actually know very much at all.

* If it supports more than one direction of flow the hypothesis is too broad and needs greater precision before experimentation begins.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9685
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:23 pm

IB

A scientific law is most definitely based on solid empirical data. It is, however, subject to change.

However, that is a part of the overall scientific principle that EVERYTHING is subject to change. A speculation is very, very subject to change. A hypothesis is very subject to change. A theory is not very subject to change, and a basic change in a theory falls into low probability. A scientific law is even less likely to change.

This is where science is different to religion and to pseudoscience. The proponents of both are enormously resistant to changing their ideas, simply because they think their ideas are so great. But scientists are perfectly willing to change anything, if the evidence drives such a change.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19197
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:32 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:IB

A scientific law is most definitely based on solid empirical data. It is, however, subject to change.

However, that is a part of the overall scientific principle that EVERYTHING is subject to change. A speculation is very, very subject to change. A hypothesis is very subject to change. A theory is not very subject to change, and a basic change in a theory falls into low probability. A scientific law is even less likely to change.

This is where science is different to religion and to pseudoscience. The proponents of both are enormously resistant to changing their ideas, simply because they think their ideas are so great. But scientists are perfectly willing to change anything, if the evidence drives such a change.

And young people can get famous by upsetting a scientific theory. They get burned at the stake if they try that with religions.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4806
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Austin Harper » Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:34 pm

IrritableBadger, that is wrong in so many places.
Laws DO have quantitative data to support them. For the examples you give:
1st Law of Thermodynamics: ΔU = Q - W
2nd Law of Thermodynamics: ΔS ≥ ΔQ/t
Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation: F = Gm1m2/r2
Newton's First Law of Motion: ΣF = 0
Newton's Second Law of Motion: F = m dv/dt (or F = ma for constant acceleration)
Law of Conservation of Energy: ΣE = 0
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19197
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism is Broken

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Dec 21, 2016 7:42 pm

Austin Harper wrote:IrritableBadger, that is wrong in so many places.

He knows.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.


Return to “Origins”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest