Креационизам наспроти еволуционизам

[Lurtz]

Во врска со темава и прашања кои човек понекогаш си ги поставува, некои личности имале интересни размислувања

"We feel that even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, the problems of life remain completely untouched."
—Ludwig Wittgenstein

"Why is nature so ingeniously, one might even say suspiciously, friendly to life? What do the laws of physics care about life and consciousness that they should conspire to make a hospitable universe? It's almost as if a Grand Designer had it all figured out."
—Paul Davies

"Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper."
-Albert Einstein

"Consider the most obvious question of all about the initial state of the universe and life: Why is there an initial state at all?"
-Lawrence Sklar

 

[DBack]

Во врска со темава и прашања кои човек понекогаш си ги поставува, некои личности имале интересни размислувања:

“If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.” - Judith Hayes

“You ever noticed how people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved? You ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet. "I believe God created me in one day" Yeah, looks like He rushed it.” - Bill Hicks

“Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence to religious principles” - James D. Watson

"We are the product of 4.5 billion years of fortuitous, slow biological evolution. There is no reason to think that the evolutionary process has stopped. Man is a transitional animal. He is not the climax of creation." - Carl Sagan

"The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity" - Richard Dawkins

 

[Чорбаџија]

“Идеологијата и филозофијата на нео-Дарвинизмот кој се продава од страна на неговите експерти како научна теоретска основа на биологијата, сериозно го попречува развојот на науката и го крие од студентите вистинкото поле со проблеми”
(Владимит Л. Болеиков – професор по биохемија на московскиот државен универзитет, член на руската академија на природни науки)

 

[Дмт]

“Дарвинизмот е мртов.” - анонимус
Е сега може да се препуштите на уживање

 

[Ipsissimus]

“Идеологијата и филозофијата на нео-Дарвинизмот кој се продава од страна на неговите експерти како научна теоретска основа на биологијата, сериозно го попречува развојот на науката и го крие од студентите вистинкото поле со проблеми”
(Владимит Л. Болеиков – професор по биохемија на московскиот државен универзитет, член на руската академија на природни науки)

Линк?

 

[Чорбаџија]

Линк?

http://www.theportugalnews.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?id=819-9

 

[DBack]

“Идеологијата и филозофијата на нео-Дарвинизмот кој се продава од страна на неговите експерти како научна теоретска основа на биологијата, сериозно го попречува развојот на науката и го крие од студентите вистинкото поле со проблеми”
(Владимит Л. Болеиков – професор по биохемија на московскиот државен универзитет, член на руската академија на природни науки)

Шарам - барам, ама интернетов као да незнае за овој голем мислител...

Ај ќе барам уште...

Него, што ти е ова НЕО- у дарвинизмот?!?

 

[Дмт]

http://www.theportugalnews.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?id=819-9

Since May of this year, 29 scientists, including eight biologists, have signed the Discovery Institute’s “Scientific Dissent From Darwinism” charter. The most recent signatories are Lev V. Beloussov and Vladimir L. Voeikov, two prominent Russian biologists from Moscow State University. Dr. Voeikov is a professor of embryology and a member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.

“The ideology and philosophy of neo-Darwinism, which is sold by its adepts as a scientific theoretical foundation of biology, seriously hampers the development of science and hides from students the field’s real problems”, Professor Voeikov said in an interview with the US Northern Light newspaper.
Јеп дарвинизмот е мртов, сега главното прашање кое се поставува е следното.
Кој или кои не лажеа ?
И зошто ?

 

[Ipsissimus]

Еве што велат непристрасните научници за нивните колеги кој се посочени тука:

David Berlinski

He uses uncertainty to challenge the scientific consensus; he points to the evidence that isn't there and seeks out the things that can't be proved. In its extreme and ideological form, this contrarian approach to science can turn into a form of paranoia—a state of permanent suspicion and outrage.Daniel Engber

Mark Perakh, a critic of the intelligent design movement, contends that Berlinski's writings are not scientific, but popular, and that Berlinski "has no known record of his own contribution to the development of mathematics or of any other science."

. . . The content of David Berlinski's article does not differ from more traditional creation-science material, though his tone is more genteel and his writing a lot more literate. . . . But true to the creation-science genre, his approach consists of constructing strawmen, then knocking them down with misinterpreted, faulty, or nonexistent data as well as carefully selected quotations from evolutionary scientists. . . . Eugenie Scott

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Berlinski#Views_on_evolution

Stanley Salthe

The Scientific Dissent From Darwinism document has been widely criticized on several different grounds. First, similar to previous lists produced by other creationists, the professional expertise of those listed is not always apparent and is alleged to be deficient.[39] Also, the professional affiliations and credentials that are claimed for some of the signatories has been questioned. Finally, there appear to be a few who appear on the list who are not firmly committed to the agenda advanced by the Discovery Institute, and who have been misled into signing or who have changed their minds. Russell D. Renka, a political scientist, said that the Discovery Institute presented the list in an appeal to authority to support its anti-evolution viewpoint

Critics have also noted that the wording and advertising of the original statement was, and remains, misleading,[12] and that a review of the signatories suggested many doubt evolution due to religious, rather than scientific beliefs.[13] The claims made for the importance of the list have also been called intellectually dishonest because it represents only a small fraction of the scientific community,[5] and includes an even smaller number of relevant experts.[43] The Discovery Institute has responded to some of these criticisms

Many of those who have signed the list are not currently active scientists, and some have never worked as scientists.
Also, if a signatory was previously the head of a department or the president of an institute, their past and most prestigious position will be listed, not their current position. For example, Ferenc Jeszenszky is a physicist in Budapest who handles the "Hungarian Creation Research" videos, but appears instead on the list as "Former Head of the Center of Research Groups, Hungarian Academy of Sciences".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Scientific_Dissent_From_Darwinism#Responses

 

[Toecutter]

Во врска со темава и прашања кои човек понекогаш си ги поставува, некои личности имале интересни размислувања:

“If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.” - Judith Hayes

“You ever noticed how people who believe in Creationism look really unevolved? You ever noticed that? Eyes real close together, eyebrow ridges, big furry hands and feet. "I believe God created me in one day" Yeah, looks like He rushed it.” - Bill Hicks

“Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence to religious principles” - James D. Watson

"We are the product of 4.5 billion years of fortuitous, slow biological evolution. There is no reason to think that the evolutionary process has stopped. Man is a transitional animal. He is not the climax of creation." - Carl Sagan

"The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity" - Richard Dawkins

Carl Sagan you say?

Во својата книга “Змејовите од Рајот“, Саган објаснува дека примарните еволутивни карактеристики и шеми на организација кај хомо-сапиенсот биле не од приматите наследни туку од...

If the preceding view is correct, we should expect the R-complex in the human brain to be in some sense performing dinosaur functions still; and the limbic cortex to be thinking the thoughts of pumas and ground sloths. Without a doubt, each new step in brain evolution is accompanied by changes in the physiology of the preexisting components of the brain. The evolution of the R-complex must have seen changes in the midbrain, and so on. What is more, we know that the control of many functions is shared in different components of the brain. But at the same time it would be astonishing if the brain components beneath the neocortex were not to a significant extent still performing as they did in our remote ancestors.

MacLean has shown that the R-complex plays an important role in aggressive behavior, territoriality, ritual and the establishment of social hierarchies. Despite occasional welcome exceptions, this seems to me to characterize a great deal of modern human bureaucratic and political behavior. I do not mean that the neocortex is not functioning at all in an American political convention or a meeting of the Supreme Soviet; after all, a great deal of the communication at such rituals is verbal and therefore neocortical. But it is striking how much of our actual behavior -as distinguished from what we say and think about it- can be described in reptilian terms. We speak commonly of a “cold-blooded” killer. Machiavelli’s advice to his Prince was “knowingly to adopt the beast.”

 

[DBack]

Јеп дарвинизмот е мртов, сега главното прашање кое се поставува е следното.
Кој или кои не лажеа ?
И зошто ?

--- надополнето ---

Carl Sagan you say?

Во својата книга “Змејовите од Рајот“, Саган објаснува дека примарните еволутивни карактеристики и шеми на организација кај хомо-сапиенсот биле не од приматите наследни туку од...

Meaning?

 

[Toecutter]

“If we are going to teach creation science as an alternative to evolution, then we should also teach the stork theory as an alternative to biological reproduction.” - Judith Hayes

“Today, the theory of evolution is an accepted fact for everyone but a fundamentalist minority, whose objections are based not on reasoning but on doctrinaire adherence to religious principles” - James D. Watson

"The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity" - Richard Dawkins

Догма страјкс аген.
Уште во стара добро “советска“ традиција да ги прогласат сите кои имаат и некој алтернативен поглед за “ментално болни“ и да им шибнат Торазин и ајт во лудница...

 

[*phoenix*]

Догма страјкс аген.
Уште во стара добро “советска“ традиција да ги прогласат сите кои имаат и некој алтернативен поглед за “ментално болни“ и да им шибнат Торазин и ајт во лудница...

Good old days.

 

[Дмт]

Хахахахха остана без зборови па со слики и мимики ке објаснуваме.
Тогаш ај, еве го мојот одговор.
.i.
И да....конечно дарвинизмот е МРТОВ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Toecutter]

--- надополнето ---

[/COLOR]

Meaning?

Саган ги лоцира примарните патерни на однесување на Хомо сапиенсот и примарните социјални структури кои ги ствара истиот... во делот од мозокот наречен Триунски мозок , R-complex или како што Саган вика...рептилското мозоче...
Понатаму една друга теорија која се надоврзува на Саган а која нема да ја споменуваме поради големата количина на форумски тролови кажува дека кај бирократите и политичарите тој дел од мозокот е многу поразвиен отколку кај просечен човек...со што се објаснува

1.Мотивот кај одреден, процентуално безначаен дел од човечката популација да има политички амбиции (дел се опортунисти, мал дел идеалисти) и уште позначајно активно да ги остварува низ животот.

2.Целосното или делумно отсуство на било каква можност за емпатија или мутуалистички социјален механизам (ако се земе дека совеста ете...е социјален конструкт) што им овозможуваат со еден потпис или стискање копче да пратат во смрт милиони луѓе а после тоа да си седнат на кафенце, Хенеси коњаче и кубанска пура...

3.Да не го парафразирам Џон Конор ама си кажа убаво во филмот...:tv: