Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
So who is going to call David Berlinski? So who is going to call David Berlinski?

10-29-2009 , 12:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
What did I assume that you did not?
Just state what you're arguing for please, I'm not in the mood for random back and forths.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
You cannot substitute that as that is the subject at hand. And if you do not know what is meant be "darwinian mechansim" at this point I am not quite sure what to say.
You realize you are talking to someone who has read more on the subject of evolution then you will read in 10 life times. If Luckyme doesn't precisely understand what that phrase entails then it is overwhelmingly likely that there's a problem with your vague phrase, not him.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin A
I Googled "Darwinian mechanism" and three out of the first four hits were creationist sites. The fifth is a history paper, and the sixth is a paper on cultural change.

You can draw your own conclusions about that term.
Shocking.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILOVEPOKER929
You realize you are talking to someone who has read more on the subject of evolution then you will read in 10 life times. If Luckyme doesn't precisely understand what that phrase entails then it is overwhelmingly likely that there's a problem with your vague phrase, not him.
this is not about reading or knowing books on evolution. This is about recognizing a term that has been used and explained hundreds of times on this forum, if anything else.

If this was his first day here and he asked I would have simply respond "by X I mean Y".

It is like asking what does "WTF" refer to?
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tame_deuces
What mechanism? Sexual reproduction? Asexual reproduction? Chromosomes? DNA? Mutation? Molecules? Atoms? Quantum levels? Some underlying unknown fabric of reality that might/might not exist?

Obviously there is a dead end to knowledge by means of reduction. That hardly means the moon's gravitational pull does not cause tides.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
this is not about reading or knowing books on evolution. This is about recognizing a term that has been used and explained hundreds of times on this forum, if anything else.

If this was his first day here and he asked I would have simply respond "by X I mean Y".

It is like asking what does "WTF" refer to?
Please answer Tame Deuces' question.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILOVEPOKER929
Please answer Tame Deuces' question.
Isn't that obvious at this point? What the **** have I been talking about for the last 20 posts? The mechanism in question is random mutation/natural selection.

If this is really hard for you to grasp I will try and break it down. Evolution is the "what", as in we went from point A to point B. The mechanism is the "how", as in we drove.

I can say that I agree that we went from point A to point B without agreeing that we drove. There can be two different sets of evidence as well.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 03:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Isn't that obvious at this point? What the **** have I been talking about for the last 20 posts? The mechanism in question is random mutation/natural selection.
So when you say this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
So you are claiming that the darwinian mechanism is responsible for the all of the biodiversity and was the engine of evolution that took bacterium to baboon, so to speak.
Are you asking us to deny this:

"The other major mechanism driving evolution is genetic drift, an independent process that produces random changes in the frequency of traits in a population."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
If this is really hard for you to grasp I will try and break it down. Evolution is the "what", as in we went from point A to point B. The mechanism is the "how", as in we drove.

I can say that I agree that we went from point A to point B without agreeing that we drove. There can be two different sets of evidence as well.
If your point is that evolutionary biologists haven't figured everything out then wow what can I say. You scored a major point there. This guy would be proud of you:



If you actually disagree with what evolutionary biologists have figured out so far, in the face of mountains of evidence from a plethora of disciplines, then I don't know what to say. At this point, only dumb people, brainwashed people, and charlatans deny that random mutations and the phenomenon of natural selection play an important role in driving evolution. It has been observed. It's as close to "2+2 = 4 land" that we can get.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 03:15 PM
Quote:
"The other major mechanism driving evolution is genetic drift, an independent process that produces random changes in the frequency of traits in a population."
no.

Quote:
If your point is that evolutionary biologists haven't figured everything out then wow what can I say. You scored a major point there. This guy would be proud of you:
Wow, I mean did you have some sort of teaching that allowed you to be so good at twisting words?
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 03:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
no.



Wow, I mean did you have some sort of teaching that allowed you to be so good at twisting words?
So are you here simply to learn science? Or do you have a point you driving at with regards to Religion, God, Theology, etc.?

Because I can understand:
Step A: Get people to state their views
Step B: Get people to commit to specific definitions
Step C: X

Where X can be a debate, or a counter-point, or a discussion of some kind. I can also understand if you are just curious about A and B, with no C in mind at all... But that will be a little bit of a let down!
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 03:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AirshipOhio
So are you here simply to learn science? Or do you have a point you driving at with regards to Religion, God, Theology, etc.?

Because I can understand:
Step A: Get people to state their views
Step B: Get people to commit to specific definitions
Step C: X

Where X can be a debate, or a counter-point, or a discussion of some kind. I can also understand if you are just curious about A and B, with no C in mind at all... But that will be a little bit of a let down!
In regards to your first sentence, there is a reason why I moved this discussion to SMP.

In many cases Step C for me is just gathering data so I have a better understanding of that person, I am sorry if that is not fun for you. I am sure you have learned by now that all you have to do is wait and I am sure to through out plenty of controversial arguments.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 04:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
I am sure you have learned by now that all you have to do is wait and I am sure to through out plenty of controversial arguments.
You do two things that bug me. First, the word is "throw" - throw out - your throw out trash, ideas and sometimes your back. Through isn't even pronounced the same way. So stop that.

The other thing you do, and all ID/creationist Christians do, is limit God. It's just damned presumptuous and arrogant to think you or any person can decide what God must have done in the creation of Creation.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 06:49 PM
Quote:
You do two things that bug me. First, the word is "throw" - throw out - your throw out trash, ideas and sometimes your back. Through isn't even pronounced the same way. So stop that.
meh

Quote:
The other thing you do, and all ID/creationist Christians do, is limit God. It's just damned presumptuous and arrogant to think you or any person can decide what God must have done in the creation of Creation.
Please point out where I did this. I will be waiting.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Please point out where I did this. I will be waiting.
You can stop that, too.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxising
You can stop that, too.
Why, you made an accusation (one that I find to be quite unfounded) and I expect that you back it up.

ILOVEPOKER, do you agree with her statement?
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Why, you made an accusation (one that I find to be quite unfounded) and I expect that you back it up.
I expect to win a bracelet at the WSOP next year. Which one of us d'ya think is going to have their expectations met, first?

I expect more from you. I expect you to know that prevaricate means "lie." I expect you to be straightforward in your dealings, not necessarily pleasant, but not a sneak, either.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxising
I expect to win a bracelet at the WSOP next year. Which one of us d'ya think is going to have their expectations met, first?

I expect more from you. I expect you to know that prevaricate means "lie." I expect you to be straightforward in your dealings, not necessarily pleasant, but not a sneak, either.
I don't understand what is going on here, when was I not straightforward? Your the one making the negative accusations, not me. You claimed that I was limiting God by saying what mode of creation he was allowed to use. I have never made such a statement, not once.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Wow, I mean did you have some sort of teaching that allowed you to be so good at twisting words?
The truth is, I'm really not sure what you're getting at anymore.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 07:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Why, you made an accusation (one that I find to be quite unfounded) and I expect that you back it up.

ILOVEPOKER, do you agree with her statement?
I don't agree or disagree with her statement. I only read a select few threads nowadays and I can't remember everything written.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxising
You do two things that bug me. First, the word is "throw" - throw out - your throw out trash, ideas and sometimes your back. Through isn't even pronounced the same way. So stop that.

The other thing you do, and all ID/creationist Christians do, is limit God. It's just damned presumptuous and arrogant to think you or any person can decide what God must have done in the creation of Creation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Please point out where I did this. I will be waiting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxising
You can stop that, too.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 08:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
I have never made such a statement, not once.
I see. So, for the record, just to be clear:

You believe it's possible that human beings as a species evolved from a single-celled organism over a long period of time by Darwinian mechanisms including random mutation and selective processes. Is that correct?
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxising
I see. So, for the record, just to be clear:

You believe it's possible that human beings as a species evolved from a single-celled organism over a long period of time by Darwinian mechanisms including random mutation and selective processes. Is that correct?
There is nothing in my theology to prohibit this. It that is what happened, that is what happened.

I believe that we have worth because we are God's creation. How he went about that creation is negligible imo.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 08:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILOVEPOKER929
The truth is, I'm really not sure what you're getting at anymore.
Don't go soft on me.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jibninjas
Don't go soft on me.
That's what she said?
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote
10-29-2009 , 10:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ILOVEPOKER929
Shocking.
Try the same phrase in the search function on Talk Origin.

Edit: Here, I'll give you one.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/modern-synthesis.html

In 1859 Charles Darwin supplied a mechanism, namely natural selection, that could explain how evolution occurs.

This is like trying to pretend macroevolution is a term used only by creationists.

Edit edit:

Here are 2 from the great man himself(Dawkins) in TBW:

there are those who have no reason to deny that evolution has happened but who, often for political or ideological reasons, find Darwin's theory of its mechanism distasteful

if the Darwinian theory of mechanism had been around at the time, he would have

Last edited by NotReady; 10-29-2009 at 11:01 PM.
So who is going to call David Berlinski? Quote

      
m