Re: Prof Waagen says evolution is not by chance as Darwin supposed

On Sep 25, 3:06 pm, backspace <sawireless2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 25, 5:59 pm, stevedh...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Evolution/natural selection is a blind force, much like gravity is.
It effects things. There is no goal.

But Paul who says so? We can't all invent our own pragmatics and
semantics surrounding *evolution* and *natural selection*. Let me
quote you a passage that you might have missed that will help you
understand my question:

"We are told dogmatically that Evolution is an established fact; but
we are never told who has established it, and by what means. We are
told, often enough, that the doctrine is founded upon evidence, and
that indeed this evidence 'is henceforward above all verification, as
well as being immune from any subsequent contradiction by experience;'
but we are left entirely in the dark on the crucial question wherein,
precisely, this evidence consists." Smith, Wolfgang (1988) Teilhardism
and the New Religion: A Thorough Analysis of The Teachings of Pierre
Teilhard de Chardin, Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books & Publishers Inc.,
p.2

I had missed this quotation, as I am not familiar with Wolfgang
Smith. Perhaps the fact that he wrote this book you quote from when I
was in pre-school may have had something to do with that.

In response to the quotation, all scientific thought can be challenged
and contradicted by new evidence or ideas. Anyone who does not accept
this has earned the mockery that they will incure.

Note that this applies to both people arguing for and against
evolution (or gravity, or quantum theory, or whatever). Anyone has
the right to challenge a theory, but the supporters of that theory
have equal right to defend the theory and challenge alternate theory
that is presented.

In response to your argument, which seems to be a variation of your
normal method of questioning the source of an argument rather than the
meaning behind it, I again submit the links I posted yesterday:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

and

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html

Both contain a decent overview of the theory of evolution, and both
include citations.

Thank you for restricting your argument to real words,

steve

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New Ethiopian Find - Oldest Biped At 3.8-4 mya
    ... > the science and the implications on human evolution and instead try to ... >> it take evidence to move you to this point. ... > you've used it as a vehicle to attack me. ... > insults your way in response to the repeated, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Another of Richards Strawman "Lists"
    ... famous for doing this - listing off dozens of reference with nothing ... pointless and unhelpful as quote mining. ... that deals with the evolution of novel systems that require at least ... And I have posted evidence that this is the case. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Credibility of ICR
    ... about evolution, but in many cases they flat out lie. ... What exactly do they mean by "true" transitional fossil? ... going through paragraph 12 quote "NO FOSSIL EVIDENCE" as the heading ... the best evidence for evolution was the fossil record, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Clash of worldviews. The evo-fundies are eroding human worth.
    ... another Darwinist in dire need to discredit creationists in ... > evolution in general. ... >beliefs are challenged by empirical evidence again and again. ... Needless to say, no response. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Virginia: Chesterfield School Board takes up debate on different theories of life.
    ... If you believe in God, and God is in charge of everything, ... working through naturalistic evolution (which after all, ... There is no evidence of the ... The official T.O. stock response to this claim is that many, ...
    (talk.origins)