DoctorAlien:


Are you seriously asking what the contributions of Ernst Mayr and E. O. Wilson are to mainstream science? Since when did your Google stop working?

vaxx:
It is just stop now. What are their main contribution to science?

DoctorAlien:


Are you seriously asking what the contributions of Ernst Mayr and E. O. Wilson are to mainstream science?

DoctorAlien:


Borrow Google from your neighbor. Just type Ernst Mayr. After reading about him, type E. O. Wilson.

budaatum:


What is Evolution and how does it work? Evolution 101 provides the nuts-and-bolts on the patterns and mechanisms of evolution.

budaatum:

Neither of those two were creationists! I've posted about them above!

budaatum:

Neither of those two were creationists! I've posted about them above!

OLAADEGBU:


https://youtu.be/U0u3-2CGOMQi

Watch the movie God vs Evolution and be prepared to have your faith shaken. Over 3 million views already.

EmperorHarry:
I'm still not sure why people tend to treat evolution like it's not a work in progress. There are missing links yet to be discovered and theories yet to be made logical and rational.This doesn't mean evolution has not been observed,tested and agreed upon as a phenomenon by the scientific community just like gravity and revolution of the earth around the sun.It becomes a problem when certain evolutionists create based on extrapolation and assumptions an explanation of the origin of life due to evolution thereby creating an illusion of refuting other theories that are for the same purpose.

vaxx:


And about them, they are not even an authority on the subject, they have NOT produce well noted experiment to validate their claim and their claim have not receive a single award from any recognised authority.

budaatum:

Very good. Now, can you provide anything similar and worthy as that for any creationist on your list of scientists?

DoctorAlien:


It means nothing bro. If anything, these awards only signify acceptance within the ruling paradigm. Is anybody going to give you awards if you keep challenging their evolutionary teachings? We both know the answer.

I posted those pictures though to show vaxx that the people who recognized the distinction between historical science and operational science were/are high-profile evolutionists.

vaxx:
Evolution theory was recently tested in chemistry lab thru lab tube late last year and the winner won 1 million dollar.......


https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06753-y

EmperorHarry:

Evolution is closely related to,if not adaptation which is a observable and verified phenomenon in nature. So in no way should an open minded knowledge seeker dismiss evolution due to anthropocentric or supercilious mentality such an overwhelmingly evident phenomenon as a hoax. It's very much a possibility and does no harm but it's still a work in progress and largely based on human inputs which is susceptible to errors.
Humans are related to apes and monkeys through a common ancestor. Okay!
Whales share a common ancestor which was a land animal but somehow evolved into aquatic animal with a blowhole.Okay? Probably needs more work since Darwin assumed the land animal was a "bear".
Giraffes for a while didn't have a transitional fossil until recently(which may or may not be evidence of how the giraffes neck became long).
So you see,work in progress and that's what it should be seen as.Certain evolutionists tend to give this "we have all the evidence" vibe that shows the same arrogance and close mindedness that certain creationists have.

vaxx:
All scienctifc theory are work in progress. Science is not an enterprises that stand still like immovable stream. Exploration, investigation , identification are non stop in science.

I am not in the mood to write much today, i will explore some of your input later ...

EmperorHarry:
We're on the same page here.I hope you don't see my comments as a disapproval of the evolution theory cos on the contrary I'm approving of it to an extent which I've clearly explained.


I just wanted to make it clear that evolution is still a work in progress to whom it may concern.

DoctorAlien:


It means nothing bro. If anything, these awards only signify acceptance within the ruling paradigm. Is anybody going to give you awards if you keep challenging their evolutionary teachings? We both know the answer.

DoctorAlien:
The prominent evolutionist Professor Richard Lewontin said (emphases in original):

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

Lewontin, R., Billions and billions of demons, The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31. (Source)

budaatum:
This is abject rubbish!

Our "prior commitment" is to creationism, which we adhered to but which we are now abandoning in light of superior information and an improvement in our ability to reason and understand.

DoctorAlien:
The atheist paleontologist, Stephen Jay Gould, made the following candid observation:

“Our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. The stereotype of a fully rational and objective ‘scientific method’, with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots is self-serving mythology.”

Gould, S.J., Natural History 103(2):14, 1994. (Source)

Cc: Budaatum

DoctorAlien:
You mean what Prof. Richard Lewontin wrote?

You are talking about yourself right? Because Prof. Richard Lewontin spoke about himself and other scientists.

budaatum:
That "candid observation" applies to crappy scientists! Stephen Jay Gould himself would never claim that's what he does!

If you learn your science in a proper school you would have had your subjective "preconceptions and biases" properly educated out of you and would have learnt to use your senses properly.

vaxx:
why are you appealing to authority. You are commiting a fallacy. It is not needed in this kind of discussion unless we want scrutinised their model of enquiry which is not needed.

DoctorAlien:


Easy, easy, easy. Now calm down, and slowly read that quote by Stephen Jay Gould again. Note the word "our".

DoctorAlien:
You mean what Prof. Richard Lewontin wrote?

You are talking about yourself right? Because Prof. Richard Lewontin spoke about himself and other scientists.

DoctorAlien:
What is the whole Enterprise of preaching evolution if it is not the business of appeal to authority? What are you guys doing when you say things like "how many 'scientists' hold that opinion?"