Evolution Message Board - Msg: 25725218

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: LLCF who wrote (2647)	6/18/2009 3:53:57 PM
From: Greg or e	Read Replies (1) of 69300

Again it's "Round and round the mulberry bush" Obviously the title of the review reflects a play on the title of the book. I haven't read the book either but it seems pretty clear that wells is criticizing the version of Darwinian evolution that is being promoted specifically by Coyne in his book. Nothing more and nothing less. I get your point though that some other form of Evolution is possibly true and that this article does nothing to address that possibility. That would require examination of the specific claims involved. However; it seems that Darwinian evolutionary assumptions often lay at the root of many other theories of evolution as well. Therefore if ones basic assumptions are not in fact valid, then one must establish the theory based on other grounds before proceeding. "falsification" is exactly what a scientist would look for... ie. 'falsifying a theory'. With his lack of definition of what he's trying to falsify, the article is a non-starter." That seems like a bit of a red herring. Wells is directly challenging specific proofs that Coyne is using to establish his main argument. Whats wrong with that?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next