The complexity is that Darwinism sticks deeply in the heads of shallow people. It explains everything, especially the sociology of their personal lives. Which is what really matters. So trenchant criticisms generally don’t really happen much though outbreaks of rage often do.
In short, the new find suggests that some species don’t really exist; they are just the same type of dino with different horns.
The Scientific American columnist is unimpressed by two recent books on the subject, cosmologist Sean Carroll’s Something Deeply Hidden and science writer Tom Siegfried’s The Number of the Heavens.
Famously, Epictetus had an exchange with someone on the necessity, credibility and utility of logic: DISCOURSESCHAPTER XXV How is logic necessary? When someone in [Epictetus’] audience said, Convince me that logic is necessary, he answered: Do you wish me to demonstrate this to you?—Yes.—Well, then, must I use a demonstrative argument?—And when the questioner had Read More…
Everything below is from a comment posted by UB: Ed at 34, [re: Ed on telling the truth]It is just one of the rules we have to follow if we want to be welcome in society. If I chose to live by myself in a cabin in the hills I would have no obligation to Read More…
Sounds promising. If physics depends on mathematics and chemistry depends on physics and biology depends on chemistry, why could not be laws be derived that help us understand ecology? But then Malthus betrays the authors, as he misled Darwin.
Arvay: Would not the multi-verse itself have to have parameters? Would not those also, have to fall within narrow ranges? And what principle of physics defines how many constants there are? What defines what ranges those parameters must have? What law of nature decides what the laws of nature must be? (That would be circular causation!) What governs the dice?
To judge from Darwinism’s lobbyists and followers in recent decades, who want to make a living putting rubes in their place, without embracing eugenics, Darwin has certainly paid off. But the genome map is killing all that.
Did we mention? Darwinism’s over. People who make their living off it better think of some other way to seem smart.
Axe: Then again, if you simply value scientific honesty, you ought to be moved by the fact that thousands of professional Darwinists laboring for 160 years have not explained the origin of a single complex functional feature of life with the degree of rigor expected in all serious sciences.
And if Darwinism isn’t a correct statement of origins anyway, where does that leave all these theistic evolution fudgers in the cold light of the morning? They won’t come off looking any better than the creationists or the Darwinists, however they tried to position themselves.
In neuroscientist Michael Graziano’s envisioned world, In his envisioned world, individuality is no longer a term that has any meaning.
Today, we know much more about what happens to people when they die—and what we are learning does not support materialism.
A declassified spyplane pic accidentally discovers this fact? So why be dogmatic about the far past? Wait till we have mapped the whole planet before splintering more lecterns.
Douglas Murray, for example, challenges sessile campus organisms