17
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − There are a number of '''theories of evolution'''. In 2000, scientist Simon Conway Morris wrote in the peer reviewed [[science]] journal ''Cell'': "When discussing organic [[evolution]] the only point of agreement seems to be: 'It happened.' Thereafter, there is little consensus, which at first sight must seem rather odd."<ref>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WSN-4195FC1-1&_user=681891&_coverDate=01%2F07%2F2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000037419&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=681891&md5=1806889a6d57f9282db2e4c04d32e8f7</ref> + − + − + − ==Recent clamour to revise the modern evolutionary synthesis==+ − + − ''See also:'' [[Recent clamor to revise the modern evolutionary synthesis]] and [[Theory of evolution and little consensus]]+ − + − One of the more popular evolutionary paradigms among evolutionary scientists is the [[modern evolutionary synthesis]]. The '''[[modern evolutionary synthesis]]''' is a school of evolutionary thought which incorporates the concepts of natural selection, mutations, and studies in population genetics.<ref>http://creation.com/ariel-a-roth-biology-in-six-days</ref>+ − + − In 2005, Massimo Pigliucci, in a book review for the prestigious science journal ''Nature'', wrote: "The clamour to revise [[Neo-Darwinism|neo-darwinism]] is becoming so loud that hopefully most practising evolutionary biologists will begin to pay attention. It has been said that science often makes progress not because people change their minds, but because the old ones die off and the new generation is more open to novel ideas."<ref>http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/literature/2008/07/25/how_much_of_evolutionary_theory_needs_fi</ref> In July of 2008, Elizabeth Pennisi+ − wrote in the prestigous science journal ''Science'': "Seventy years ago, evolutionary biologists hammered out the modern synthesis to bring Darwin's ideas in line with current insights into how organisms change through time. Some say it's time for Modern Synthesis 2.0."<ref>http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/literature/2008/07/25/how_much_of_evolutionary_theory_needs_fi</ref>+ − + − ==Theories of evolution employing methodological naturalism ==+ − Some of the more notable [[naturalism|naturalistic]] theories of the evolution which employ or have employed the concept of [[methodological naturalism]] are the following:+ − + − ===Current naturalistic theories of evolution===+ − + − *[[Modern evolutionary synthesis]] which incorporates the concept of [[phyletic gradualism]]+ − + − *[[Punctuated equilibrium]] (Originally incorporated [[saltationism]] but later was declared merely complementary to [[phyletic gradualism]])<ref>Ernst Mayr, 1982a. Speciation and macroevolution. Evolution 36, page 1128</ref><ref>http://creation.com/punctuated-equilibrium-come-of-age</ref> + − + − *[[Symbiogenesis]]<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf</ref>+ − + − *Neutral theory of molecular evolution+ − + − *Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution+ − [[File:goldschmidt.jpg|right|thumb|170px|[[Richard Goldschmidt]]]]+ − + − === Past naturalistic theories of evolution ===+ − + − *[[Quantum evolution]]<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf</ref>+ − + − *[[Goldschmidt's hopeful monster theory]]+ − + − *[[Lamarckianism]]+ − + − *[[Zoogenesis]]+ − + − *[[Emication]]+ − + − *[[Orthogenesis]]<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf</ref>+ − + − *[[Pangenesis]]<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf</ref>+ − + − *[[Charles Darwin]]'s theory of evolution (The amount of credit Darwin actually deserves for the theory is disputed). <ref>Russell Grigg, [http://creation.com/charles-darwins-illegitimate-brainchild Darwin’s Illegitimate Brainchild: If You Thought Darwin’s Origin Was Original, Think Again!]</ref><ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j16_3/j16_3_58-63.pdf</ref>+ − + − ==Non-naturalistic theories of evolution==+ − Below are some non-[[naturalism|naturalistic]] theories of evolution which do not strictly apply the ideology of [[methodological naturalism]]:+ − + − + − + − *Creative evolution<ref>http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf</ref>+ − + − ==Creation science commentary on the various naturalistic theories of evolution==+ − The prominent [[creation science|creation scientist]] Creation scientist Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] wrote concerning the various theories of evolution:+ − {{cquote|...supporters of ‘jerky’ evolution [[saltationism]] and its relative, [[Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium|punctuated equilibria]]) point out that the fossil record does not show gradualism, and that the hypothetical transitional forms would be disadvantageous. But supporters of [[phyletic gradualism|gradual evolution]] point out that large, information-increasing changes are so improbable that one would need to invoke a secular miracle. Creationists agree with ''both'': punctuational evolution can’t happen, and gradual evolution can’t happen—in fact, particles-to-people evolution can’t happen at all!<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/news/scientific_american.asp</ref>}}+ − + − [[Image:Image014.jpg|thumb|150px|right|[[Karl Popper]]]]+ − + − ==Evolutionary Paradigm - Karl Popper Commentary ==+ − + − + − + − [[Karl Popper]], a leading philosopher of science and originator of the falsifiability as a criterion of demarcation of science from nonscience,<ref>+ − * http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/+ − * http://www.discovery.org/a/3524</ref> stated that Darwinism is "not a testable scientific theory, but a [[Metaphysics|metaphysical]] research programme."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref> Leading Darwinist and philosopher of science, Michael Ruse stated the following regarding Popper's statement and [[Falsifiability of evolution|the actions he took after making that statement]]: "Since making this claim, Popper himself has modified his position somewhat; but, disclaimers aside, I suspect that even now he does not really believe that Darwinism in its modern form is genuinely falsifiable."<ref>http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/PoE/pe05scnc.html</ref>+ − + − + − by the king of Sweden for his scientific achievements, noted that "there has never been a theory of evolution".<ref>[http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0807/S00053.htm Altenberg 16: An Exposé Of The Evolution Industry, July 6, 2008, by Suzan Mazur]</ref><ref>http://post-darwinist.blogspot.com/2009/05/more-tales-from-altenberg-suzan-mazurs.html</ref>+ − + − ==Inflated claims of evolutionists growing in frequency and intensity ==+ − In recent times, evolutionists have tried to convince the public of the supposed validity of the evolutionary position by increasingly and frequently using the term "overwhelming evidence" or similar terms in relation to the alleged existence of evidence that supports their position.<ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2006/0612school-year.asp</ref>+ − For example, prominent [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist [[Richard Dawkins]] claimed in an interview with journalist [[Bill Moyers]] that there is "massive evidence" for the theory of evolution.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript349_full.html</ref> Yet, there is [[evolution|not any real evidence for the evolutionary paradigm]].+ − + − ==See also==+ − *[[Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation]]+ − *[[Theory of Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]]+ − *[[Atheism and deception]]+ − + − ==External Links== − *[http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j17_2/j17_2_19-25.pdf The Century-and-a-half failure in the quest of new genetic information] by [[Jerry Bergman]] − − ==References== − {{reflist|2}} − − [[Category:Evolution]]
no edit summary
OOOOOOOOooouuuuuuuAAAAAAAooooooEEEEEEEEAAAAAaaaaAAAA
WeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaoooooooooeeeeaAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
My loony bun is fine Benny Lava!
Minor bun engine made Benny Lava!
Anybody need this sign? Benny Lava!
You need a bun to bite Benny Lava!
Have you been high today?
I see the nuns are gay!
My brother yelled to me...
I love you inside Ed!
My loony bun is fine Benny Lava!
Minor bun engine made Benny Lava!
I told a high school girl...
I love you inside me!
I'd love to see you pee on us tonight!
I'd love to see you pee on us tonight!
OOOOOOOooooOOOOOoooo
OOOOOOOooooOOOOOoooo
You feel me up with doom.
Quit looking up at me!
You got a minute girl?
The puppy had a fee!
Don't think I do love her
We're looking in a pill!
We're looking in a pill!
All of them like the bun!
Now poop on them Oliver!
OOOO DADDY!
JUST SAY IT!
You know the hole to put it!
Just sing it!
You love me!
Your pundit got armor!
You send me... Offended... You know the hole to put it!
Just sing it!
You love me!
Your pundit got armor!
ho put the goat in there?
The yellow goat I ate!
My loony bun is fine Benny Lava!
Minor bun engine made Benny Lava!
(I like to swim in it)
(I like to swim in it)
(I like to swim in his)
(beeeeejaaaaayyy!)
(I like to swim in it)
(I like to swim in it)
(I like to swim in his)
(beeeeejaaaaayyy!)
*[[Theistic evolution]]
OOOOOOOOooooooOOOOOoooo
A nerd to punk a nerd.
I'm bleeding F*cking A!
That stuff is pink colored!
Some day I sell DNA!
This boar ain't very cool.
You need a Hindi yew!
Got into Seattle.
I'll lay a friend of yours!
I fought a barber man!
We know what's in butter rum!
A jet pack... operation...
''For more information please see:'' [[Falsifiability of evolution]]
Send him the crazy Hindu!
Whatever! My Sadist!
All baked and cooked alive!
I lick you... Belinda...
The ninja made a movement.
Tell Donna... No collar...
The [[Sweden|Swedish]] cytogeneticist, Antonio Lima-De-Faria, who has been knighted
I'll do what body loves!
I put papaya there.
You love me inside there!
My loony bun is fine Benny Lava!
Minor bun engine made Benny Lava!
Anybody need this sign? Benny Lava!
You need a bun to bite Benny Lava!
Have you been high today?
I love you inside me!
OOOOOoooooOOOOOoooo
OOOOOOoooOOOOOOoooo
OOOOOOOoooOOOOOooo