ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags evolution , charles darwin

Reply
Old 8th September 2018, 12:33 PM   #81
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,036
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Have the original posters in the thread died already?

CFLarsen and stenkh haven't died, but CFL stopped posting here several years ago.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th September 2018, 04:23 PM   #82
Venom
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 1,746
Originally Posted by Diablo View Post
They failed to evolve and got wiped out.
That means we are the fittest generation of posters.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2018, 09:06 AM   #83
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 12,774
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
That means we are the fittest generation of posters.
Well, yes, but always keep in mind that "fitness" is defined in terms of the environment.

So that may not be so much of an improvement as it sounds
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2018, 09:13 AM   #84
ahhell
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,749
Originally Posted by Matabiri View Post
This is very similar to the creation of the Period Table of the Elements. Mendeleev didn't know about the electronic structure of different elements; but he arranged them into a pragmatic classification scheme. He could also make predictions about the properties of elements which had not been isolated yet.

However, the fact that Mendeleev could not explicitly justify his arrangement in terms of fundamental physics does not invalidate the periodic table.
This, and it doesn't matter, we've found proof since then. So, who cares what Darwin said about the matter?
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th September 2018, 09:38 AM   #85
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,838
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
This, and it doesn't matter, we've found proof since then. So, who cares what Darwin said about the matter?
It's important to note that the proof was in place even before then. The fact that evolution was happening was proven well before Darwin. Darwin explained how it happened.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th September 2018, 01:34 AM   #86
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,227
The thing about Darwin is: he didn't invent the idea of evolution. That was already widely accepted, long before he got into it. Hell, it was already accepted when Lamarck came with his idea of how it happened, more than half a century before Darwin published his book.

Hell, the idea of imperfect inheritance is at least as old as Hippocrates and Aristotle. In fact, it appears multiple times in Aristotle, and is even central to such stuff as why it's ok to enslave other greeks. Obviously they didn't inherit their parents' greatness if they got taken prisoner.

What Darwin did come up with was the WAY it really happens.

So basically, who cares? It's like asking why Musk believes in rocketry. He's not the one who came up with it, he's just refining it. So who cares?

Edit: I see RecoveringYuppy beat me to it. I should really read the whole thread before answering,
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th September 2018 at 01:43 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th September 2018, 01:42 AM   #87
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 19,643
Pragmatism is an excellent place to pull back to in the face of people playing metaphysical malarkey. Evolution is the best narrative in terms of explanatory power that we have, leaving creationism/global flood/young earth narratives non starters.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th September 2018, 01:45 AM   #88
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 19,643
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
The thing about Darwin is: he didn't invent the idea of evolution. That was already widely accepted, long before he got into it. Hell, it was already accepted when Lamarck came with his idea of how it happened, more than half a century before Darwin published his book.

Hell, the idea of imperfect inheritance is at least as old as Hippocrates and Aristotle. In fact, it appears multiple times in Aristotle, and is even central to such stuff as why it's ok to enslave other greeks. Obviously they didn't inherit their parents' greatness if they got taken prisoner.

What Darwin did come up with was the WAY it really happens.

So basically, who cares? It's like asking why Musk believes in rocketry. He's not the one who came up with it, he's just refining it.

Edit: I see RecoveringYuppy beat me to it. I should really read the whole thread before answering,
And he did so in the face of problematic contemporary ideas about hereditary, namely blending. Evolution by natural selection predicted Mendelian gene inheritance. This was a major falsification test of the idea.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

Last edited by Sideroxylon; 14th September 2018 at 01:46 AM.
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th September 2018, 04:37 AM   #89
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 14,227
Well, I didn't mean to minimize his contribution.

Just saying that the efforts of the faithful to attack Darwinism by attacking Darwin and what he believed or didn't believe are misguided. Even taking Darwin out of the picture completely, evolution itself was an established fact already. We just had Lamarck's "complexifying force" to explain the drive to more and more sophisticated life forms, instead of the proper explanation, but evolution itself was still there. They're still left with an empty bag.

And the basic observation of evolution is over 2000 years older than even Lamarck. Hippocrates already had a basic idea of pangenesis, for example. Hell, in fact, you could deduce natural selection from Aristotle, if you felt so inclined. The basic notions of (A) imperfect inheritance, and (B) that some of those imperfect copies fare worse than others, are actually quite explicit in there. Now Aristotle never actually took it to that conclusion (although arguably he lays the foundation of social darwinism), but you could.

So basically if someone wants to attack evolution by ye olde "but its author didn't REALLY believe in it" crackpottery (no, really, it's in the crackpot index) they have to do better than pick on Darwin. They have to basically explain why 2500 years or so worth of smart people have ALL been wrong. Did EVERY ONE of those not believe what they were writing, or what? (Never mind that even then it wouldn't mean that then by exclusion some schizophrenic goat-humper in the Middle East was right.)

Is all I'm saying.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 14th September 2018 at 04:39 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 02:30 PM   #90
shees1993
New Blood
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by shees1993 View Post
I can answer Question 1.

Darwin did say that in his letter on 14 March [1861], but to Cuthbert Collingwood, not to Thomas Thompton. Darwin wrote:

… But I believe in Nat. Selection, not because, I can prove in any single case that it has changed one species into another, but because it groups & explains well (as it seems to me) a host of facts in classification, embryology, morphology, rudimentary organs, geological succession & Distribution …

Source
Charles Darwin, The Correspondence of Charles Darwin: Volume 9 • 1861, ed. Frederick Burkhardt et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 54; Darwin Correspondence Project [online], “Letter no. 3088”; British Library, Add. MS 37725, ff. 6–9b.

[NB: I could not include URLs because I'm new here. But if someone wants URLs then contact me at shees1993@rediff.com.]
… but it is important to note that Darwin himself did not claim to be able to show this. In a letter to F. W. Hutton on 20 April 1861 he said, ‘I am actually weary of telling people that I do not pretend to adduce evidence of one species changing into another, but I believe that this view is in the main correct, because so many phenomena can thus be grouped and explained. … I generally throw in their teeth the universally admitted truth of the undulations of light … admitted because the view explains so much.’
Source
Gavin de Beer, Charles Darwin: Evolution by Natural Selection (New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1963; repr. 1967), 158; Charles Darwin, More Letters of Charles Darwin: A Record of His Work in a Series of Hitherto Unpublished Letters, ed. Francis Darwin and A. C. Seward, 2 vols (London: John Murray, 1903), 1:184 (letter #124); Charles Darwin, The Correspondence of Charles Darwin: Volume 9 • 1861, ed. Frederick Burkhardt et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 96; Darwin Correspondence Project [online], “Letter no. 3122”.
shees1993 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 04:48 PM   #91
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,931
Seems very clear to me, Darwin didn't believe in evolution by natural selection because he had observed a new species evolving but because of the weight of all the other evidence.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th September 2018, 11:48 PM   #92
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,376
Originally Posted by shees1993 View Post
[indent]… but it is important to note........

......... “Letter no. 3122”.
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Welcome shees1993. Could you please post in normal font, normal colours, no bold, and so on. Thanks.
You been asked. Kindly post in a manner which doesn't disrupt the forum. There are rules on this (see Rule 6........disruptive formatting).
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2018, 01:02 AM   #93
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 59,135
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Seems very clear to me, Darwin didn't believe in evolution by natural selection because he had observed a new species evolving but because of the weight of all the other evidence.
Indeed. I also read it in that way.
__________________
Wake up, you cardboard.
- Pixie of Key
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:19 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.