Why Did Darwinism Emerge?

[gentlegreen]

That is what I mean by a "post-Darwinist" era.

For most people however, Darwin remains a shibboleth. Hence the baffled fury that the mildest criticism of Darwin evokes from the likes of Bioboy and Truxta.

 

[bi0boy]

By "Darwinism" we of course don't mean the literal works of Charles Darwin. How about wiki's defintion:

Darwinism is a set of movements and concepts related to ideas of transmutation of species or of evolution, including some ideas with no connection to the work of Charles Darwin.The meaning of "Darwinism" has changed over time, and varies depending on who is using the term.In the United States, the term "Darwinism" is often used by creationists as a pejorative term in reference to beliefs such as atheistic naturalism, but in the United Kingdom the term has no negative connotations, being freely used as a short hand for the body of theory dealing with evolution, and in particular, evolution by natural selection.

 

[ViolentPanda]

That is what I mean by a "post-Darwinist" era.

For most people however, Darwin remains a shibboleth. Hence the baffled fury that the mildest criticism of Darwin evokes from the likes of Bioboy and Truxta.

I don't believe that it's either possible or necessary to be "post-Darwinist".
However, if secondary school science could somehow integrate post-Darwin contributions to evolutionary theory (and generally get over the whole "big man" schtick when it comes to science), then that'd be helpful. Darwin is essential to understanding evolution, but so are many other contributors.

 

[bi0boy]

Apparently some asteroids hitting earth render all this evolutionary theory obsolete

 

[phildwyer]

I'm not aware of many scientists who do deny that the theory of natural selection is a theory. I've certainly never met a biologist who believes that the theory is actually a "law".

Panda, meet Bioboy.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Apparently some asteroids hitting earth render all this evolutionary theory obsolete

There was i, fairly sure that what they actually did was provide fuel for the theory.

 

[phildwyer]

Apparently some asteroids hitting earth render all this evolutionary theory obsolete

Once again you equate "evolutionary theory" with "Darwinism."

That's been your basic error throughout this thread. Do you really want to stick with it now?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Panda, meet Bioboy.

Misrepresentation, phil.

 

[phildwyer]

I don't believe that it's either possible or necessary to be "post-Darwinist".
However, if secondary school science could somehow integrate post-Darwin contributions to evolutionary theory (and generally get over the whole "big man" schtick when it comes to science), then that'd be helpful. Darwin is essential to understanding evolution, but so are many other contributors.

The problem is, however, that as soon as the holes in Darwin's theory are pointed out, many if not most soi disant "biologists" are plunged into incoherent, raging denial. This thread provides some of the best examples imaginable.

 

[TruXta]

Truxta and basic grammar, however, mixes perfectly.

I could care less if my grammar isn´t perfect, at least I´m not a fucking nutjob like yourself.

 

[bi0boy]

The problem is, however, that as soon as the holes in Darwin's theory are pointed out, many if not most soi disant "biologists" are plunged into incoherent, raging denial. This thread provides some of the best examples imaginable.

Can you show me where on this thread you have pointed out holes in Darwin's theory?

 

[phildwyer]

How about wiki's defintion

If you don't mind my saying so, that's been pretty much the level of your knowledge throughout.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The problem is, however, that as soon as the holes in Darwin's theory are pointed out, many if not most soi disant "biologists" are plunged into incoherent, raging denial. This thread provides some of the best examples imaginable.

If you're talking about bioBoy, he hasn't done so. The worst he's been guilty of is being impatient with your "arguments".

By the way, I haven't seen any examples of "incoherent, raging denial" here. The format is such that incoherence would be difficult to achieve.

 

[phildwyer]

Can you show me where on this thread you have pointed out holes in Darwin's theory?

Can't be bothered to read back, but I'll happily point them out again now. Monocausality, gradualism, unidirectionalism, disregard of empirical evidence, lack of knowledge of the history of the cosmos. Just off the top of my head.

 

[TruXta]

That is what I mean by a "post-Darwinist" era.

For most people however, Darwin remains a shibboleth. Hence the baffled fury that the mildest criticism of Darwin evokes from the likes of Bioboy and Truxta.

LOL wut? Where have I expressed fury at criticism of Darwin? It remains a fact that evolution through natural selection is the key pillar in the science of biology. Nothing makes sense without it. The fact that Darwin didn´t get all the details right and didn´t know about DNA means diddly squat.

 

[bi0boy]

If you don't mind my saying so, that's been pretty much the level of your knowledge throughout.

So how are you defining Darwinism, if not in the way I quoted?

 

[phildwyer]

I could care less if my grammar isn´t perfect, at least I´m not a fucking nutjob like yourself.

Go away Truxta, you've caused yourself enough mortification here. You've never read a book of biology in you life have you?

Actually, don't bother answering, the answer is obvious. Just go away.

 

[gentlegreen]

Phil's too nice to be the new Ernie - but he's a lot weirder in his "reasoning" ...

This is less biology and more linguistic absurdism

 

[phildwyer]

LOL wut? Where have I expressed fury at criticism of Darwin? It remains a fact that evolution through natural selection is the key pillar in the science of biology. Nothing makes sense without it. The fact that Darwin didn´t get all the details right and didn´t know about DNA means diddly squat.

Truxta: the only illiterate expert in the history of science. That's quite an achievement, albeit in the somewhat esoteric field of Applied Buffoonery.

 

[phildwyer]

Phil's too nice to be the new Ernie

Grrrr... you caught me on a good day.

 

[TruXta]

Go away Truxta, you've caused yourself enough mortification here. You've never read a book of biology in you life have you?

Actually, don't bother answering, the answer is obvious. Just go away.

Truxta: the only illiterate expert in the history of science. That's quite an achievement, albeit in the somewhat esoteric field of Applied Buffoonery.

Kids, FYI these kinds of posts are where dwyer starts to realise he´s made a tit out of himself again. He always tells people to go away at the point it becomes painfully clear to all involved that dwyer must fuck off.

 

[phildwyer]

If you're talking about bioBoy, he hasn't done so. The worst he's been guilty of is being impatient with your "arguments".

Hang on a second, you just came along and agreed with my arguments. What's with the scare quotes all of a sudden?

 

[phildwyer]

He always tells people to go away

Not "people," Truxta. Just you. I've told no-one else to go away, because everyone else has made enough sense to demonstrate at least a basic knowledge of the field under discussion. You have demonstrated the opposite. That's why you should go away--for your own good.

If you choose to stay around for our entertainment, you are of course more than welcome to do so.

 

[TruXta]

Not "people," Truxta. Just you. I've told no-one else to go away, because everyone else has made enough sense to demonstrate at least a basic knowledge of the field under discussion. You have demonstrated the opposite. That's why you should go away--for your own good.

If you choose to stay around for our entertainment, you are of course more than welcome to do so.

I was talking generally. This is what you do. Make a tit of yourself and then tell people to go away when they point out that very fact. You sad sad wanker.

 

[phildwyer]

I was talking generally. This is what you do. Make a tit of yourself and then tell people to go away when they point out that very fact. You sad sad wanker.

And now you finally lose your temper, and with it the pitiful shreds remaining to your tattered dignity.

 

[phildwyer]

I could care less if my grammar isn´t perfect

Actually it is perfect. Perfectly suited to the content expressed therein. Perfectly attuned to the personality it reveals. Perfectly in accordance with your general demeanor.

Perfect crap, in other words.

 

[TruXta]

And now you finally lose your temper, and with it the pitiful shreds remaining to your tattered dignity.

Au contraire. I´m actually chuckling away to myself. You make me laugh, at you, not with you, needless to say. Anyway, carry on displaying your superior understanding of science and history. I´ll have to remember that one about the K-T event disproving Darwinistic evolution tho. Good one, even for a knuckle-head like yourself.

 

[phildwyer]

I´ll have to remember that one about the K-T event disproving Darwinistic evolution

This from the twerp who was denying the very existence of Darwinism just two pages ago.

Truxta, you've surpassed yourself.

 

[TruXta]

This from the twerp who was denying the very existence of Darwinism just two pages ago.

Truxta, you've surpassed yourself.

I looked, and I didn´t. In fact I didn´t even post on page 4 at all.

 

[phildwyer]

I looked, and I didn´t. In fact I didn´t even post on page 4 at all.

Incidentally, I just noticed on another thread that you come from a family of Jehovah's Witnesses. No disrespect (seriously*) but I think this may have colored your approach to questions of the relationship between reason and religion. You seem to conceive the two as diametrically opposed, and you get seriously annoyed and abusive when this conception is challenged.

For me, however, true religion and reason are one and the same.

* and I'll edit this post if you like