+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 41

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Evolution Controversy

    The proceedings of that conference, Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), reports various challenges to evolution presented by respected mathematicians and similar scholars at the conference. For example, the conference chair Sir Peter Medawar stated at the outset:


    "[T]he immediate cause of this conference is a pretty widespread sense of dissatisfaction about what has come to be thought as the accepted evolutionary theory in the English-speaking world, the so-called neo-Darwinian Theory. ... There are objections made by fellow scientists who feel that, in the current theory, something is missing ... These objections to current neo-Darwinian theory are very widely held among biologists generally; and we must on no account, I think, make light of them. The very fact that we are having this conference is evidence that we are not making light of them."


    "[I]t seems to require many thousands, perhaps millions, of successive mutations to produce even the easiest complexity we see in life now. It appears, naively at least, that no matter how large the probability of a single mutation is, should it be even as great as one-half, you would get this probability raised to a millionth power, which is so very close to zero that the chances of such a chain seem to be practically non-existent."


    (Stanislaw M. Ulam, "How to Formulate Mathematically Problems of Rate of Evolution," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 21)




    "We do not know any general principle which would explain how to match blueprints viewed as typographic objects and the things they are supposed to control. The only example we have of such a situation (apart from the evolution of life itself) is the attempt to build self-adapting programs by workers in the field of artificial intelligence. Their experience is quite conclusive to most of the observers: without some built-in matching, nothing interesting can occur. Thus, to conclude, we believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe this gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged within the current conception of biology."


    (Marcel Schutzenberger, "Algorithms and Neo-Darwinian Theory," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 75)

    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,784

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    "[i]t seems to require many thousands, perhaps millions, of successive mutations to produce even the easiest complexity we see in life now. It appears, naively at least, that no matter how large the probability of a single mutation is, should it be even as great as one-half, you would get this probability raised to a millionth power, which is so very close to zero that the chances of such a chain seem to be practically non-existent."

    British discovered that just by feeding migrant birds they provoked unintentional evolution. 10% of migrant birds that decided to stay in Britain over the winter and feed of humans developed different shape of beak than those that continued migrate to the south.

    "We do not know any general principle which would explain how to match blueprints viewed as typographic objects and the things they are supposed to control. The only example we have of such a situation (apart from the evolution of life itself) is the attempt to build self-adapting programs by workers in the field of artificial intelligence. Their experience is quite conclusive to most of the observers: without some built-in matching, nothing interesting can occur. Thus, to conclude, we believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe this gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged within the current conception of biology."

    And computers in 1966 were so advanced that they could simulate AIs. NOT!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero
    Wistar Institute Press, 1966
    Do you by chance have anything a bit more current?

    This is from a time period before the first moon landing (1969).

    It's almost like posting a article from 1536 that states the world is flat. And that if you sail far enough to the west (from Europe) you will fall off the edge. Therefore denying that Columbus discovered the 'New World' in 1492*.

    * I would like to mention here that the L'Anse aux Meadows (UNESCO) site is dated at around 1050 AD. Yep, the Vikings attempted to start a settlement in Canada 4-500 years before Columbus 'discovered' America.

    virtual-tours-newfoundland.ca/LanseauxMeadows/Meadows.html.
    Last edited by nomaxim; 01-29-2010 at 03:24 PM.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Do you by chance have anything a bit more current?

    This is from a time period before the first moon landing (1969).

    It's almost like posting a article from 1536 that states the world is flat. And that if you sail far enough to the west (from Europe) you will fall off the edge. Therefore denying that Columbus discovered the 'New World' in 1492*.

    * I would like to mention here that the L'Anse aux Meadows (UNESCO) site is dated at around 1050 AD. Yep, the Vikings attempted to start a settlement in Canada 4-500 years before Columbus 'discovered' America.

    virtual-tours-newfoundland.ca/LanseauxMeadows/Meadows.html.
    Also, (while we're on the topic of being historically accurate), people in Columbus's time knew that the world was a globe. Erastothenes measured the size of the globe in about 300BC. That people were worried about falling off the edge of the world is a modern myth, supposed to make Columbus's voyage seem even greater.

  5. #5
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by BarackZero View Post
    The proceedings of that conference, Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), reports various challenges to evolution presented by respected mathematicians and similar scholars at the conference. For example, the conference chair Sir Peter Medawar stated at the outset:


    "[T]he immediate cause of this conference is a pretty widespread sense of dissatisfaction about what has come to be thought as the accepted evolutionary theory in the English-speaking world, the so-called neo-Darwinian Theory. ... There are objections made by fellow scientists who feel that, in the current theory, something is missing ... These objections to current neo-Darwinian theory are very widely held among biologists generally; and we must on no account, I think, make light of them. The very fact that we are having this conference is evidence that we are not making light of them."


    "[I]t seems to require many thousands, perhaps millions, of successive mutations to produce even the easiest complexity we see in life now. It appears, naively at least, that no matter how large the probability of a single mutation is, should it be even as great as one-half, you would get this probability raised to a millionth power, which is so very close to zero that the chances of such a chain seem to be practically non-existent."


    (Stanislaw M. Ulam, "How to Formulate Mathematically Problems of Rate of Evolution," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 21)




    "We do not know any general principle which would explain how to match blueprints viewed as typographic objects and the things they are supposed to control. The only example we have of such a situation (apart from the evolution of life itself) is the attempt to build self-adapting programs by workers in the field of artificial intelligence. Their experience is quite conclusive to most of the observers: without some built-in matching, nothing interesting can occur. Thus, to conclude, we believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe this gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged within the current conception of biology."


    (Marcel Schutzenberger, "Algorithms and Neo-Darwinian Theory," in Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (Wistar Institute Press, 1966, No. 5), pg. 75)
    mmmmmmmm...do your really think that posting snippets from, and using as proof, opinions from 1966 is a good idea?

    I think if you did a little honest "googling" you might find science has advances a bit since then. But the, you think the earth is 6000 years old and that there were dinos on the ark.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    mmmmmmmm...do your really think that posting snippets from, and using as proof, opinions from 1966 is a good idea?

    I think if you did a little honest "googling" you might find science has advances a bit since then. But the, you think the earth is 6000 years old and that there were dinos on the ark.
    lol I would think he would find google an advancement since this article.

  7. #7
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Hey Zero, explain the existence of human chromosome 2 and why it's important?
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,557

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Yes, you have to laugh - 1966?
    :yelcutelaughA:

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Planet Gong
    Posts
    1,032

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Age alone does not invalidate the argument.
    Of course, I could be biased: the doctor is himself of similar vintage.

    For me, 1966 was "Beanie and Cecil" "Kukla, Fran and Ollie", and the Animated Beatles cartoons on Saturday Morning, moving to a new home in the DC suburbs - with better sledding, and the mysteries of long division.

    As to the argument at hand: I'd like to know what source BZ is quoting from.
    And does anyone here have library privileges at a fair sized university? "Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution" is not in Google Book, Google Scholar or Project Gutenberg, and the one copy I found on ABE costs a nominal egg.
    Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather straps. - Emo Phillips

  10. #10
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings. User Rank
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Age alone does not invalidate the argument.
    Of course, I could be biased: the doctor is himself of similar vintage.
    Of course not but, when more relevant and accurate information is available, why post outdated information to support your position...unless the current information does the contrary....Oh......

    By, the way, same vintage here.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by dr poormouth View Post
    And does anyone here have library privileges at a fair sized university? "Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution" is not in Google Book, Google Scholar or Project Gutenberg, and the one copy I found on ABE costs a nominal egg.
    Found two copies in Ohiolink.
    One at Cleveland State and the other at Wright State.
    Descript'n xi, 140 p. : ill. ; 25 cm
    Note Reprint. Originally published: Philadelphia : Wistar Institute Press, 1967
    "A symposium held at the Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology, April 25 and 26, 1966
    Includes bibliographies and index
    Subjects Evolution -- Mathematical models -- Congresses
    Alt Name Moorhead, Paul S
    Kaplan, Martin M
    Brown, Pamela
    Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
    LC NO QH371 .M29 1985
    Dewey No 575.01/62 19
    OCLC # 13759533
    ISBN 0845142038 (pbk.)
    LCCN 8519836
    Afraid we don't have it here a Kent State. A request through Ohiolink would take about a week.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,424

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Found two copies in Ohiolink.
    One at Cleveland State and the other at Wright State.
    Afraid we don't have it here a Kent State. A request through Ohiolink would take about a week.
    Or you could just google where Zero Got his info.

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/07...evolution.html

    The entire thread word for word. Check out July 11, 2006


    This would could be barrack himself.
    http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2266686.aspx
    Tone sounds familiar. "leftest"

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/07/

    I wonder if I can find any more of barracks arguments word for word stated by the discovery institute.
    Last edited by Spector567; 02-01-2010 at 06:21 PM.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    There's a copy at my institute, however, I won't be getting back from Nepal until the end of February. If anyone is still interested in this topic at that time (doubtful), I can pick it up.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Do you by chance have anything a bit more current?

    //
    A request for something "more current" from an "archaeologist," whose studies date back millenia???

    Amusing, no?

    The insuperable statistics of protein and enzyme synthesis have not changed in the intervening decades.

    But to the extent you think they have, please explain yourself.

    What is the space of cytochrome C?

    Of human hemoglobin?

    Let me make it very simple for you.

    What is the space of alanine?

    Explain.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    724

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by dr poormouth View Post
    Age alone does not invalidate the argument.
    Of course, I could be biased: the doctor is himself of similar vintage.
    1. Our own heliocentric solar system was first proposed by Nikolai Copernicus (1473 - 1543). Using the *logic* of the *professor*, NoMaxim, we must abandon such primitive notions and revert to what, NoMaxim, the earth at the center of our solar system?

    2. Darwin's famous book was written in 1859, considerably before 1966.
    One might conclude that science had taken some substantial strides since Charlie rode in the Beagle. But no, NoMaxim worships at the Darwinian Altar of 1859 and laughs at science 107 years more recent.

    3. When leftists can't attack the message, because they have absolutely no basis whatsoever to do so, they attack the messenger, or even the date the messengers gave their message.

    How anti-science and anti-intellectual can you get!

    What next, will NoMaxim and Company reject calculus because it was developed so LONG AGO by Isaac Newton (1643 - 1727).





    As to the argument at hand: I'd like to know what source BZ is quoting from.
    I provided my source. Do pay attention.


    [/quote] And does anyone here have library privileges at a fair sized university? "Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution" is not in Google Book, Google Scholar or Project Gutenberg, and the one copy I found on ABE costs a nominal egg.[/quote]

    How telling that the entire lot of leftists here can't pool their intellectual wonderfulness and monies and obtain such a document.

    I didn't find it hard to get at all.

    *Murray Eden showed that it would be impossible for even a single ordered pair of genes to be produced by DNA mutations in the bacteria, E. coli,—with 5 billion years in which to produce it! His estimate was based on 5 trillion tons of the bacteria covering the planet to a depth of nearly an inch during that 5 billion years. He then explained that the genes of E. coli contain over a trillion (10^12) bits of data. That is the number 10 followed by 12 zeros. *Eden then showed the mathematical impossibility of protein forming by chance. He also reported on his extensive investigations into genetic data on hemoglobin (red blood cells).


    Hemoglobin has two chains, called alpha and beta. A minimum of 120 mutations would be required to convert alpha to beta. At least 34 of those changes require changeovers in 2 or 3 nucleotides. Yet, *Eden pointed out that, if a single nucleotide change occurs through mutation, the result ruins the blood and kills the organism!


    *George Wald stood up and explained that he had done extensive research on hemoglobin also,—and discovered that if just ONE mutational change of any kind was made in it, the hemoglobin would not function properly. For example, the change of one amino acid out of 287 in hemoglobin causes sickle-cell anemia. A glutamic acid unit has been changed to a valine unit—and, as a result, 25% of those suffering with this anemia die.


    "An increasing number of scientists, most particularly a growing number of evolutionists . . argue that Darwinian evolutionary theory is no genuine scientific theory at all . . Many of the critics have the highest intellectual credentials."—*Michael Ruse, "Darwin's Theory: An Exercise in Science," in New Scientist, June 25, 1981, p. 828.



    Commenting on the crisis that had come to the evolutionary camp, *Niles Eldredge, head of the Department of Paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History, later wrote this:
    "The doubt that has infiltrated the previously smug confident certitude of evolutionary biology's last twenty years has inflamed passions . . There has been a total lack of agreement even within the warring camps . . Things are really in an uproar these days . . Sometimes it seems as though there are as many variations on each [evolutionary] theme as there are individual biologists."—*Niles Eldredge, "Evolutionary Housecleaning," in Natural History, February 1982, pp. 78, 81.
    Last edited by BarackZero; 02-02-2010 at 08:41 AM.
    "As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, but that America gave him the White House based on the same credentials." - Newt Gingrich

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: Evolution Controversy

    Quote Originally Posted by Spector567 View Post
    Or you could just google where Zero Got his info.

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/07...evolution.html

    The entire thread word for word. Check out July 11, 2006

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/07/

    I wonder if I can find any more of barracks arguments word for word stated by the discovery institute.
    The article was written by Casey Luskin, Discovery Institute- Casey Luskin and caseyluskin.com/facts. And no where has BZ given Casey Luskin credit for writing that article.

    This would could be barrack himself.
    http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2266686.aspx
    Tone sounds familiar. "leftest"
    'CaliforniaDreamin' and 'Spider MBA' are two of BZ's other usernames.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

Similar Threads

  1. Pacquiao Marquez 3 Controversy
    By Administrator in forum Sports Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-02-2011, 10:06 PM
  2. John Mather controversy
    By aguest in forum Science Scams
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-28-2010, 08:01 AM
  3. A Controversy in a different persepective
    By amorac in forum General Chat
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 01-14-2009, 10:26 PM
  4. The Google Controversy
    By g-report in forum Mail Order Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-03-2007, 04:10 PM
  5. Coffee Mug Fuels Controversy
    By BVR USA Liaison in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-01-2007, 09:18 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •