Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-10-2015, 03:01 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
Well, guys, you should have warned me that EvolutionKills is not quite, er, mentally adequite. Unfair play.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-10-2015, 03:21 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(11-10-2015 03:01 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  Well, guys, you should have warned me that EvolutionKills is not quite, er, mentally adequite. Unfair play.

We demand evidence, you have provided none; mere assertions are not evidence.

You are the one being inadequate here dipshit. Drinking Beverage


But hey, thanks for reminding me of one of my favorite movies.

[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=138282&d=1407315836]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
11-10-2015, 03:42 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
Is Neo Flight a flight????

Perhaps the F15 just runs around on the ground really fast?

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
11-10-2015, 03:45 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(11-10-2015 03:01 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  Well, guys, you should have warned me that EvolutionKills is not quite, er, mentally adequite. Unfair play.

I mean this with total, and I am sincere about this, total sincerity, you are a retard.

Bless you my son, for thou art stupid. AMEN.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
11-10-2015, 06:39 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(11-10-2015 03:01 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  Well, guys, you should have warned me that EvolutionKills is not quite, er, mentally adequite. Unfair play.

Laugh out load

Replies the person who's grasp of English has become demonstrably worse over time.

Who's comments have devolved into meaningless, incoherent drivel.

Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
11-10-2015, 07:31 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(11-10-2015 02:39 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  The allopatric speciation is a nice idea, clear and simple. The funny thing is
that this device isn't related to the so much prized idea of natural selection.

How is it not? Consider

Isolated populations will differ in selection pressures and in genetic drift.

Quote:NS or no NS, the allopatry appears just as Deus ex machine...

The independence
of the allopatry of natural selection was quite clear to keen sir Karl: “If you
isolate a small number of individuals from the main population and prevent them
from interbreeding with the main population, then ... the distribution of genes
in the gene pool of the new population will differ somewhat from that of the
original population. This will happen even if selection pressure is completely
absent.” (Karl Popper. Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind. Evolutionary
Epistemology, Rationality, and the Sociology of Knowledge. Open Court Publishing,
1993, p. 144). "Modern synthesis" is as coherent as the Old Testament.
Though the allopatric speciation really works, its evolutionary significance
is negligible.

Prove it. The mathematical models demonstrate that speciation is inevitable under those circumstances, and those circumstances arise naturally quite often.

Quote:The territories are far from being so intensely segregated that
to support the allopatric origin of innumerable species. You wouldn't believe:
prudent theorists never made estimates of the number of barriers in question.
Why, they merely make irresponsible statements...

Many examples of natural barriers have been given - you simply haven't the wit to understand them.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
11-10-2015, 07:32 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(11-10-2015 03:01 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  Well, guys, you should have warned me that EvolutionKills is not quite, er, mentally adequite. Unfair play.

Provide actual evidence or fuck off.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
12-10-2015, 02:42 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
With your kind consent, guys, I'll continue (in fact, my rede is close to the
finality). Fais ce que dois, advienne, que pourra, verstein?
As you see, the nice idea of allopatric speciation is virtually barren. Then
what is left?
Well, sympatric speciation requires no spatial barriers, by definition. The
trouble is that, until recently, neo-darwinists repudiated the very idea. Say,
classic Ernst Mayr (1904-2005) outright negated sympatric speciation. He did
till the end of his days...
In the world of sex, the evolution begins with speciation, and speciation adds
up, in substance, to sympatry. Theorists felt badly bewildered: how come that
reproductive isolation takes place ohne geographic barriers, with unrestricted
gene flow? Only recently they began to shyly guess that reproductive isolation
is feasible in the absence of spatial barriers, that there are dozens modes of
isolation independent of geographic segregation.
They began, yet practically all they can tell us about sympatric speciation is
sheer blah-blah. It is so pointless that I feel lazy to review the subject. All
the same, guys, this is beyond your comprehension. Since you can't perceive even
the difference between asexual mode of reproduction and this sexual...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 03:00 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
(12-10-2015 02:42 AM)Vladimir Wrote:  With your kind consent, guys, I'll continue (in fact, my rede is close to the finality).

Oh, wonderful. Perhaps you'll finally deliver a point in all of this rambling pseudo-English.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-10-2015, 03:09 AM
RE: Is neo-darwinism a scientific theory?
Is it here a ladys literary coterie?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: