Conclave sweat threat: Who will be the next pope?
Pope Francis has left the table. The first Latin‑American pontiff played every street of his twelve‑year run
That’s a rather naive view of gravity. The laws of motion we teach are, strictly speaking, false. They have been replaced by general relativity and quantum mechanics.
In school we teach stuff that is close enough to the truth to be practical.
ye and? still not "advocating". it's not like there is team gravity going around trying to proselytize against team "matter increases in space all the times and that's what looks like you got pulled by earth".
they just teach it because it's easy enough and "not wrong" enough to describe fairly well a ton of events.
same with Darwinian and post Darwinian theories of evolution.
ye and? still not "advocating". it's not like there is team gravity going around trying to proselytize against team "matter increases in space all the times and that's what looks like you got pulled by earth".
they just teach it because it's easy enough and "not wrong" enough to describe fairly well a ton of events.
same with Darwinian and post Darwinian theories of evolution.
Yes there is. It’s just not reached high enough consensus.
That’s why consensus alone is a poor measure of whether something should be taught in schools.
I am certain evolution is true, but I certainly don't advocate it. It's the thing which makes the world horrifying.
I am not certain "evolution" is true because that doesn't mean much.
I am fairly certain genetic mutations do occur, in most cases they are either damaging for the individual or with no effect, in rare cases they can be beneficial, and in those cases that slightly increases reproduction odds, which is when the mutation starts to appear in the genetic pool of that species more and more and statistically will "conquer" space in the genetic pool more if it is more useful for reproduction (to reach the age of reproduction, reproduce successfully, and have your offspring do the same).
along with that a lot of stuff might work a little (or a lot) differently than the current consensus thinks and there are still a lot of non-consensus problems (like group selection, how much if any does that matter, "punctuated equilibrium" v smooth evolution and so on and on) and doubts, so it's not like "evolution" exists as a strict set of rules describing some dynamic that narrowly happens regularly in all living species.
it's a vague and broad concept with a few fairly clear elements (mutations happen/ if they impact reproductive success down the line they have a statistical chance of growing in the gene pool) that describes what happens historically to living beings better than alternative explanations (which at this point just don't exist tbh, it's all about which variants of evolutionary theory you think are more plausible)
I am certain evolution is true, but I certainly don't advocate it. It's the thing which makes the world horrifying.
It is so defeatist, fatalistic, and self abusive eschewing your subjectivity and your agency in this way..
..Unless you are actively exploring a framework of reality that can transcend evolution, which you have shown no indication of.
I will never understand people who would rather force themselves to endure living in hell rather than entertain the idea that they don’t understand reality.
I am not certain "evolution" is true because that doesn't mean much.I am fairly certain genetic mutations do occur, in most cases they are either damaging for the individual or with no effect, in rare cases they can be beneficial, and in those cases that slightly increases reproduction odds, which is when the mutation starts to appear in the genetic pool of that species more an
If anything in the sciences has been proven, evolution is just one of those things. The evidence for evolution is just so undeniable.
Who was forcing you to go to a religious high school?
Sounds like a great class to me. Almost certainly more interesting than almost any class I ever took in high school.
I think this is a solid idea provided that you also believe that it should be illegal to force a religious child to go to a secular school that they don't consent to.
Um… my parents? I was a minor.
And it was a completely **** class that taught ridiculous concepts such as rock music being inherently “sinful”. Apparently we just use words however we want to these days! And when I argued or said I could disprove their points, I was punished for it and given detentions over and over and over. **** that class and **** them for forcing me to spend a single minute of my precious youth learning that bullshit.
I see a whole new batch of posters are discovering the joys of debating "scientism" with lagtight. He really is the gift that keeps on giving. If any of you guys fancy learning from others' mistakes (lol, like that would ever happen), feel free to check out the religion & science thread (https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/285/p...), which was originally created when my own "debate" with lagtight was excised to a new thread back in the long long ago.
I see a whole new batch of posters are discovering the joys of debating "scientism" with lagtight. He really is the gift that keeps on giving. If any of you guys fancy learning from others' mistakes (lol, like that would ever happen), feel free to check out the religion & science thread (https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/285/p...), which w
Thanks for the link!
I'm always eager for my musings to reach a new audience.
If you believe that random genetic variation happens, and you believe Natural Selection selects genes that are beneficial for survival, it's difficult to see how you don't arrive at the conclusion that evolution happens. It's almost a tautology. It's like you agree with all of the premises but you don't like the branding.
I never said evolution doesn't happen. It happens all the time.
Here are a couple brief excerpts from a little booklet that a friend of mine made up called IQ TEST:
MICRO EVOLUTION: You can breed dogs and people are getting taller. (True)
MACRO EVOLUTION: Dogs and people have bacterium ancestors. (False)
Just because you can breed dogs (micro evolution or variation) does not prove dogs have bacterium ancestors (macro evolution). People are taller than in the past...but they are still people...micro evolution (small changes) does not prove macro evolution (big changes).
NATURAL SELECTION: TRUE OR FALSE?
1. Imagine you go camping in Alaska and you take your furry dog and hairless dog. Then they run into the woods and you can't find them.
2. The dogs fall in love and make 4 puppies. Two puppies are furry, and two are hairless.
3. The cold Alaskan winter comes and the hairless dogs freeze to death. The furry dogs don't mind the cold, they live, and reproduce.
4. The surviving furry dogs are most likely going to produce furry dogs, but the hairless trait (phenotype) might remain in the population.
5. A second winter comes, and the hairless dogs freeze to death. After a while the only type of dog you will see in Alaska is furry dogs.
This is an example of Natural Selection.
Natural Selection is true!
Natural Selection is not evidence for the Theory of Evolution.
You started with dogs and ended with dogs.
I dont understand, we don't "advocate for gravity", we teach gravity existing as something we can measure the effects of in reality.
I agree.
And we use it to describe past events as well. I mean we teach how stars and planets get formed right? even if we never assisted such events in real time
We can certainly speculate about how stars and planets got formed. Hard to know about events from (allegedly) billions of years ago.
Here are a couple brief excerpts from a little booklet that a friend of mine made up called IQ TEST
...
Both you and your friend fail pretty hard at IQ.
It is so defeatist, fatalistic, and self abusive eschewing your subjectivity and your agency in this way....Unless you are actively exploring a framework of reality that can transcend evolution, which you have shown no indication of.I will never understand people who would rather force themselves to endure living in hell rather than entertain the idea that they don’t understand
It's defeatist to say I think it's horrifying that animals have evolved to torture and kill each other?
I loved my cat, but what she did to baby mice was pretty terrible.
Without even considering humans and what they do to each other (and other animals), various animals torture and kill each other constantly around the globe. The world is full of senseless pain and suffering carried out by instinct, because it propagates particular patterns of chemical compounds.
No framework in which you view the world is going to help those baby mice.
I never said evolution doesn't happen. It happens all the time. Here are a couple brief excerpts from a little booklet that a friend of mine made up called IQ TEST:
This is a laughably terrible argument.
Okay, thanks.
And it was a completely **** class that taught ridiculous concepts such as rock music being inherently “sinful”. Apparently we just use words however we want to these days! And when I argued or said I could disprove their points, I was punished for it and given detentions over and over and over. **** that class and **** them for forcing me to spend a single minute of my precious youth learning that bullshit.
I'm starting to think that maybe you didn't always enjoy attending that religious high school.
Why don't you guys quit with the pretense and just say "look, I'm too much of a moron to understand anything about science, but I really, really want the sky daddy story to be true because I'm a dumbo who likes to believe in fairy tales"? At least that would be, you know, honest.
I never said evolution doesn't happen. It happens all the time. Here are a couple brief excerpts from a little booklet that a friend of mine made up called IQ TEST:
Actually we started with wolves. Dogs can still generally interbreed with wolves, but they are considered to be different species. Soviet scientists decided to domesticate silver foxes through selective breeding and they managed to basically create dogs in just a few decades.
There has also been undirected speciation in the last 50 years, including small birds in Europe and the Galapagos.
None of this proves that all life evolved from tiny and primitive forms of life, but IMO it certainly makes that idea plausible.
Surely you don't think one has to be a mind reader to be able to determine if a person is acting in a Christ-like manner.
If there is a God who will eventually judge humans, surely he would judge on the basis of behavior, not thoughts. Someone who "believes" in Jesus but routinely tortures children shouldn't be counted as a Christian who loves his neighbor, don't you think?
Jesus also said that to follow him you should give all your possessions away to the poor and leave your family.
It's not too tough for me to determine whether or not someone has done those things.
