The Evolution of GroupThink

[jwoodie]

The current state of scientific inquiry reminds me of Descartes' "proof" that miracles exist: His argument was that it would be even more of a miracle if they didn't exist but so many people believed in them. In the same way, scientific theories are increasingly justified by the number or percentage of people who believe in them.

Furthermore, skeptics of these theories are more frequently subjected to ad hominem attacks than factual arguments and rebuttals. Two of the most prominent theories displaying this proclivity among their proponents are global warming and evolution. The former is so influenced by political/monetary interests that it may never be resolved.

The latter is interesting in that we may actually figure it out some day, if the reflexive orthodoxy defending its current iteration can be relaxed somewhat. While I agree that there is no room for religious beliefs or supernatural explanations in this debate, neither does that provide any evidence to support current evolutionary theory.

Why is it impermissible to ask how evolution might work? It is clear from archeological records that new species in bursts rather than gradually "over millions of years" as many resort to as a substitute for biological explanation. Why are these questions so upsetting to some?

I believe that a missing biological explanation will be found unless political correctness manages to snuff out honest inquiry into this subject, as it has done with so many others.

 

[Ravi]

" It is clear from archeological records that new species in bursts rather than gradually "over millions of years" as many resort to as a substitute for biological explanation."

Please clarify.

 

[abu afak]

...The latter is interesting in that we may actually figure it out some day, if the reflexive orthodoxy defending its current iteration can be relaxed somewhat. While I agree that there is no room for religious beliefs or supernatural explanations in this debate, neither does that provide any evidence to support current evolutionary theory.

WHAT?
There is Overwhelming evidence for evolution.
150 years of it withOUT contradiction in fact.
The Fossil Record of Transitional species (that only Evo would predict) gets filled in more Every year.
Bones are found only in the Predictable period strata.
Just One one of Millions could have disproved Evo. Of course, none has.
Every new science that's come OUT in that period has been consistent with, or Affirmed Evo outright.
Isotopic/Carbon dating, DNA, etc, etc, etc.

Why is it impermissible to ask how evolution might work? It is clear from archeological records that new species in bursts rather than gradually "over millions of years" as many resort to as a substitute for biological explanation. Why are these questions so upsetting to some?

Who said it's "impermissable"?
WTF?
It's obvious how it works as even many religious nuts acknowledge Micro-evolution.. which becomes Macro over time.
As to why there are "bursts", that's because if the earths climate changes, or a meteor hits the planet, the conditions change so evo and adaptation speed up.
It's called 'Punctuated Equilibrium' (Ethridge/Gould) and it's 100% Consistent with Evo/adaptation.
And of course "Bursts" are in Geological time, thousands of years, rather million/tens of millions, NOT Instantly as in 'creation' that You Infer even after saying we have to take non-natural explanations out.

I believe that a missing biological explanation will be found unless political correctness manages to snuff out honest inquiry into this subject, as it has done with so many others.

There is no Missing Bio explanation.
see above.

Further, we and other creatures have anatomical Remnants of our ancestors which ONLY supports Evo/trial-and-error adaptation..
and porks 'immaculate' creation/ID.

''29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
......
"The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as Wisdom Teeth).
Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted (Notes). These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death[footnotes]

Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals..."

Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult. The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system ... Our internal tail is Unnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications)...
[.......]
Please read the other 28.​

Like so many, your IGNORANCE is self-Inflicted Religio-Politicism.
There's no excuse for not knowing or investigating Evo.
Evo, Like Gravity, is a FACT as well as a theory.
`

 

[jwoodie]

...The latter is interesting in that we may actually figure it out some day, if the reflexive orthodoxy defending its current iteration can be relaxed somewhat. While I agree that there is no room for religious beliefs or supernatural explanations in this debate, neither does that provide any evidence to support current evolutionary theory.

WHAT?
There is Overwhelming evidence for evolution.
150 years of it withOUT contradiction in fact.
The Fossil Record of Transitional species (that only Evo would predict) gets filled in more Every year.
Bones are found only in the Predictable period strata.
Just One one of Millions could have disproved Evo. Of course, none has.
Every new science that's come OUT in that period has been consistent with, or Affirmed Evo outright.
Isotopic/Carbon dating, DNA, etc, etc, etc.

Why is it impermissible to ask how evolution might work? It is clear from archeological records that new species in bursts rather than gradually "over millions of years" as many resort to as a substitute for biological explanation. Why are these questions so upsetting to some?

Who said it's "impermissable"?
WTF?
It's obvious how it works as even many religious nuts acknowledge Micro-evolution.. which becomes Macro over time.
As to why there are "bursts", that's because if the earths climate changes, or a meteor hits the planet, the conditions change so evo and adaptation speed up.
It's called 'Punctuated Equilibrium' (Ethridge/Gould) and it's 100% Consistent with Evo/adaptation.
And of course "Bursts" are in Geological time, thousands of years, rather million/tens of millions, NOT Instantly as in 'creation' that You Infer even after saying we have to take non-natural explanations out.

I believe that a missing biological explanation will be found unless political correctness manages to snuff out honest inquiry into this subject, as it has done with so many others.

There is no Missing Bio explanation.
see above.

Further, we and other creatures have anatomical Remnants of our ancestors which ONLY supports Evo/trial-and-error adaptation..
and porks 'immaculate' creation/ID.

''29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 2
......
"The ancestors of Humans are known to have been herbivorous, and molar teeth are required for chewing and grinding plant material. Over 90% of all adult humans develop third molars (otherwise known as Wisdom Teeth).
Usually these teeth never erupt from the gums, and in one Third of all individuals they are Malformed and Impacted (Notes). These Useless teeth can cause significant pain, increased risk for injury, and may result in illness and even death[footnotes]

Another Vestige of our herbivorous ancestry is the vermiform appendix. While this intestinal structure may retain a function of some sort, perhaps in the development of the immune system, it is a rudimentary version of the much larger caecum that is essential for digestion of plants in other mammals..."

Yet another human Vestigial structure is the coccyx, the four fused caudal vertebrae found at the base of the spine, exactly where most mammals and many other primates have external Tails protruding from the back. Humans and other apes are some of the only vertebrates that lack an external tail as an adult. The coccyx is a developmental Remnant of the embryonic tail that forms in humans and then is degraded and eaten by our immune system ... Our internal tail is Unnecessary for sitting, walking, and elimination (all of which are functions attributed to the coccyx by many anti-evolutionists). The caudal vertebrae of the coccyx can cause extreme and unnecessary chronic pain in some unfortunate people, a condition called coccydynia. The entire coccyx can be surgically removed without any ill effects (besides surgical complications)...
[.......]
Please read the other 28.​

Like so many, your IGNORANCE is self-Inflicted Religio-Politicism.
There's no excuse for not knowing or investigating Evo.
Evo, Like Gravity, is a FACT as well as a theory.
`

This is exactly what I am talking about:

1. It is somehow up to skeptics to disprove the theory, rather than vice versa.

2. The How? question is always evaded by answering "over time."

3. Claiming your belief to be "fact."

4. A religious ad hominem argument is always the last line of defense.

This reminds me of the early debate over the Moon's role in our solar system. Those who pointed out that it didn't seem to revolve around the Sun were condemned as anti-scientific heretics...

P.S. While you're at it, why don't you explain which Light Theory you believe to be "fact?"

 

[abu afak]

This is exactly what I am talking about:
1. It is somehow up to skeptics to disprove the theory, rather than vice versa.

What?
Rather a Breathtaking LIE in light of the effort I took to show/Elaborate evidence of Evolution.
The Burden IS on you to reply factually as to WHY my evidence isn't pretty darn good.
I answered about as fully as one could in a single post.
But I took the Burden on myself.
You put up NOTHING In response you FRAUD.

2. The How? question is always evaded by answering "over time."

There is "How" every day. Bacteria get resistant, Bugs get resistant, Moths have change color to make sooty atmosphere more camouflage-worthy, for just afew.

3. Claiming your belief to be "fact."

Ahh, the "everything is just a belief" FALLACY.
NO. "believing" evolution is ACKNOWLEDGING EVIDENTIARY Facts.
Belief in ie 'god/dog' IS mere belief, aka 'Faith': Belief withOUT Evidence.
All ideas/"beliefs" are NOT equal.

4. A religious ad hominem argument is always the last line of defense.
This reminds me of the early debate over the Moon's role in our solar system. Those who pointed out that it didn't seem to revolve around the Sun were condemned as anti-scientific heretics...

"Last line of defense"?
My first Line was LOTSA FACTS. Untouched by you of course.
My later statements Do point out the reason for your skepticism: "Religio-political".
Which is the case.
Right wing HACKS like you could care less about ANY Science.
You only care about THE TWO that the Right makes a political Football because of Genesis and Dollars.
Why don't you and your ilk make an issue of geology/plate tectonics?
LOFL

P.S. While you're at it, why don't you explain which Light Theory you believe to be "fact?"

No, clearly the/your last line of defense is Off Topic DEFLECTION and Burden shifting. You had NO "first line of defense', contrary facts.
-

 

[Ravi]

" It is clear from archeological records that new species in bursts rather than gradually "over millions of years" as many resort to as a substitute for biological explanation."

Please clarify.

^OP was unable to clarify himself. Obvious a case can be made that evolution doesn't exist.

 

[jwoodie]

This is exactly what I am talking about:
1. It is somehow up to skeptics to disprove the theory, rather than vice versa.

What?
Rather a Breathtaking LIE in light of the effort I took to show/Elaborate evidence of Evolution.
The Burden IS on you to reply factually as to WHY my evidence isn't pretty darn good.
I answered about as fully as one could in a single post.
But I took the Burden on myself.
You put up NOTHING In response you FRAUD.

2. The How? question is always evaded by answering "over time."

There is "How" every day. Bacteria get resistant, Bugs get resistant, Moths have change color to make sooty atmosphere more camouflage-worthy, for just afew.

3. Claiming your belief to be "fact."

Ahh, the "everything is just a belief" FALLACY.
NO. "believing" evolution is ACKNOWLEDGING EVIDENTIARY Facts.
Belief in ie 'god/dog' IS mere belief, aka 'Faith': Belief withOUT Evidence.
All ideas/"beliefs" are NOT equal.

4. A religious ad hominem argument is always the last line of defense.
This reminds me of the early debate over the Moon's role in our solar system. Those who pointed out that it didn't seem to revolve around the Sun were condemned as anti-scientific heretics...

"Last line of defense"?
My first Line was LOTSA FACTS. Untouched by you of course.
My later statements Do point out the reason for your skepticism: "Religio-political".
Which is the case.
Right wing HACKS like you could care less about ANY Science.
You only care about THE TWO that the Right makes a political Football because of Genesis and Dollars.
Why don't you and your ilk make an issue of geology/plate tectonics?
LOFL

P.S. While you're at it, why don't you explain which Light Theory you believe to be "fact?"

No, clearly the/your last line of defense is Off Topic DEFLECTION and Burden shifting. You had NO "first line of defense', contrary facts.
-

Ah, the name calling continues...

1. A theory is a theory. A law is demonstrable and provable. Which is it?

2. How many NEW species have developed in the last 10,000 years?

3. Translation: My beliefs are better than your beliefs.

4. LOL "lotsa facts." YOU are the one who is obsessed with the "Religio-political" aspect of this theory. Unlike you, I don't have a "dog" in this fight.

My reference to the Moon's orbit was an ANALOGY, not a "deflection" as you mistakenly believe. As to my question about Light Theory, it was to demonstrate that incomplete theories can coexist:

Classical and modern theories of light

It is interesting to compare the two classical theories of light (Wave Theory and Corpuscular Theory).

Notice that neither theory can account for polarization, since for polarization to occur the waves must be transverse in nature.

Since this concept was clearly over your head, you reflexively rejoined with some inane reference to "geology/plate tectonics." What would you like to know about that subject?

I am not philosophically opposed to evolution as a theory, but it will remain just that until the following questions can be answered with specificity:

1. Exactly how can one species turn into another species? (Please don't confuse this with intraspecies adaptation.)

2. Why has interspecies differentiation apparently occurred within distinct time intervals? For example, the archeological record suggests that amphibians, reptiles and mammals all suddenly appeared about 200 million years ago. Most modern species developed about 50 millions years ago. Why didn't these events occur gradually, as your theory would suggest?

 

[abu afak]

Ah, the name calling continues...

You were Refuted on EVERY point, including your Upside Down/LYING claim that I put the Burden on You.
Round 3:
The GUTTING of Woodie

1. A theory is a theory. A law is demonstrable and provable. Which is it?

The #1 Kweationist Laugher/FALLACY and FALSE Choice.
Maybe my 10th posting of it. Probably some strings You were in.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
Scientific American
By John Rennie - Editor in Chief
June 2002
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense - Scientific American

1. Evolution is Only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do Not use the terms that way, however.

According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses."
No amount of validation changes a theory into a Law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature.
So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are NOT expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the FACT of evolution...​

2. How many NEW species have developed in the last 10,000 years?

I have no idea.
Of course, I already answered in the LAST set that "Thousands of years" is Tiny in Evolutionary time.
How many Mountain Ranges have been created in the last 10,000 Years?
Does that man they weren't created/Upthrust by Plate Tectonics? (which also moves in Geologic Time/Millions of Years?
If you have "no dog..", why are the Only Two sciences you object to the usual Right Wing Koch-and-Kweationist ones?

3. Translation: My beliefs are better than your beliefs.

I already went to great trouble Elaborating why some "beliefs" ARE better than others:
EVIDENCE.
Your post is just a Non-answer, DISHONEST, Numb-Nuts repitition, Ignoring the difference in "beliefs".

4. LOL "lotsa facts." YOU are the one who is obsessed with the "Religio-political" aspect of this theory. Unlike you, I don't have a "dog" in this fight.

If you "don't have a dog in this fight," than you are just Plain Ignorant.
But since it would near impossible to be that Ignorant AND that you Ignore Strong FACTS/EVIDENCE presented to you, clearly you DO have a dog in the fight.
How [Else] can you Ignore the Fossil Record and 150 Years of CONSISTENT Evidence from many sciences?..
and, ie, Anatomical Remnants, which ONLY 'Common Descent' explains.

Your posts are Grossly DISHONEST/Juvenile contrariness.
As you last-word away withOUT answering the biggest points made by me.
And you will have to do that again now, since you got another of your STUPID Fallacies shot down: the use of 'Theory', which is NOT the same in colloquial use as it is in Science.
Now You'll have to ignore that too and TRY more deflections and NON-responsive repetitions.
`

EDIT to Below.
Jwoodie, 100% EVISCERATED In debate, now totally WHIFFS.
Not "just a theory" either
`

 

[jwoodie]

Your vituperousness indicates a strong emotional (and lack of intellectual) investment in this subject matter.

Thank you for reinforcing my theory about GroupThink.