What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-03-2013, 01:37 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 12:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 12:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Chas, would you agree evolution is a process that an intellect can use to create, manufacture, or discover?
No.

Well you are wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17506635
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2013, 01:41 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 12:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  No.

Well you are wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17506635
Using 'evolutionary strategies' is not using evolution.

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
12-03-2013, 01:44 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:41 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Well you are wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17506635
Using 'evolutionary strategies' is not using evolution.
Evolution is descent with modification.....see the defining evolution thread.
Also google "memetic" evolution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2013, 01:47 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:44 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:41 AM)Chas Wrote:  Using 'evolutionary strategies' is not using evolution.
Evolution is descent with modification.....see the defining evolution thread.
Also google "memetic" evolution.

Evolution is descent with modification with differential survival.

Memetics is an interesting and useful concept; it is not a science.

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
12-03-2013, 01:47 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 12:54 AM)Chas Wrote:  No.

Well you are wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17506635


The paper appears to be how humans (the intelligent agent) are using strategies we have gleaned from evolution (a natural process) to help us in studying chemicals at the molecular level. This is so out of context and beside that point, it is quite baffling.


To quote the abstract of the paper, 'Chemical evolution as a tool for molecular discovery'.
"In modern academic and industrial laboratories, evolutionary strategies are used routinely to identify biopolymers with novel activities."


We are the intelligent agents, you ignoramus... Dodgy

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
12-03-2013, 02:13 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:47 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:37 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Well you are wrong.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17506635


The paper appears to be how humans (the intelligent agent) are using strategies we have gleaned from evolution (a natural process) to help us in studying chemicals at the molecular level. This is so out of context and beside that point, it is quite baffling.


To quote the abstract of the paper, 'Chemical evolution as a tool for molecular discovery'.
"In modern academic and industrial laboratories, evolutionary strategies are used routinely to identify biopolymers with novel activities."


We are the intelligent agents, you ignoramus... Dodgy

I forgive you for calling me an ignoramus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2013, 02:25 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 01:47 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:44 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Evolution is descent with modification.....see the defining evolution thread.
Also google "memetic" evolution.

Evolution is descent with modification with differential survival.

Memetics is an interesting and useful concept; it is not a science.
Even using your definition...that you cherry picked to make your point(thats what many claimed I was going to do), you can still find plenty of example of humans using this process to create, discovery and manufacture.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2013, 02:58 AM (This post was last modified: 12-03-2013 03:02 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 02:13 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:47 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  The paper appears to be how humans (the intelligent agent) are using strategies we have gleaned from evolution (a natural process) to help us in studying chemicals at the molecular level. This is so out of context and beside that point, it is quite baffling.


To quote the abstract of the paper, 'Chemical evolution as a tool for molecular discovery'.
"In modern academic and industrial laboratories, evolutionary strategies are used routinely to identify biopolymers with novel activities."


We are the intelligent agents, you ignoramus... Dodgy

I forgive you for calling me an ignoramus.

Wow. Retort after retort, rebuttal after rebuttal, post after post. You can never be bothered to actually respond to the substance, but feign 'forgiveness' when you're personally insulted. This is a veiled and shallow attempt at false modesty in an rather poor attempt to maintain your perceived moral high ground, but everyone else here can see the bullshit you're shoveling for what it really is. So go have intercourse with yourself, and then forgive yourself for being such an ass backwards, retarded, obtuse, pretentious, witless, turgid sack of shite ... Dodgy

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
12-03-2013, 03:05 AM (This post was last modified: 12-03-2013 03:13 AM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 02:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 02:13 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I forgive you for calling me an ignoramus.

Wow. Retort after retort, rebuttal after rebuttal, post after post. You can never be bothered to actually respond to the substance, but feign 'forgiveness' when you're personally insulted. This is a veiled and shallow attempt at false modesty in an rather poor attempt to maintain your perceived moral high ground, but everyone else here can see the bullshit you're shoveling for what it really is. So go have intercourse with yourself, and then forgive yourself for being such an ass backwards, retarded, obtuse, pretentious, witless, turgid sack of shite ... Dodgy
I forgive you for the litany of insults you direct at me.
There are people on this forum I always make it point to try to respond to them. I don't always respond to them but I do try. You're not on that list. I thought you had potential but for now I have given up on you. I'm going to put you on my ignore list so that I don't have to keep forgiving you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2013, 03:12 AM
RE: What do Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Design movement have in common?
(12-03-2013 02:25 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(12-03-2013 01:47 AM)Chas Wrote:  Evolution is descent with modification with differential survival.

Memetics is an interesting and useful concept; it is not a science.
Even using your definition...that you cherry picked to make your point(thats what many claimed I was going to do), you can still find plenty of example of humans using this process to create, discovery and manufacture.


Cherry-picked what?

Evolution is a natural process - humans aren't 'using' it.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: