|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
Christopher D. Beling
Member
Member # 723
|
posted 05. July 2008 08:06
Hi John,
quote:
I ask how does HIS front-loaded hypothesis differ from MY Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis?
I like your nomenclature "Prescribed Evolution Hypothesis" (PEH). It doesn't specify when and how the prescription was instantiated so is less demanding. I have learn't a great deal from your Prescribed Evolutionary Manifesto - and still think you should publish.
"Front-loaded hypothesis" sounds a bit as if there was a SINGLE download where the evidence (as Fred Hoyle realized in his book "The Mathematics of Evolution")is for AT LEAST TWO - [one at the origin of life and the other for animals]. The other problem is that this nomenclature looks as if we are positioned outside our universe and looking in (something we cannot do as scientists). I also like the terminology "Information reception hypothesis", although I guess you would not like to talk in terms of "information". To use the word "reception" is good because it correctly positions us as observers within the universe.
Chris
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 05. July 2008 10:58
Thanks Chris for interrupting my tedious monologue.
No one knows a darn thing about the origin or origins of life, or the number of times, once created, life may have been reprogrammed. What I know for certain is that life could never have arisen through chance.
At present, Leo Berg's summaries of the situation remain in complete accord with what we know for certain -
With respect to ontogeny and phylogeny -
"Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance."
Nomogenesis, page 134.
"Organisms have developed from tens of thousands of primary forms, i.e, polyphyletically...The struggle for existence and natural selection are not progressive agencies, but being, on the contrary, conservative, maintain the standard...Evolution is in a great measure an unfolding of pre-existing rudiments."
Nomogenesis, page 406.
I would only qualify by substituting "was" for "is" in his last comment as I see absolutely no evidence for progressive evolutionary change at present. Neither did Robert Broom, Pierre Grasse or Julian Huxley.
I have published on all these matters so I am not quite certain what you are driving at.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 07. July 2008 16:11
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aiwYTGVQAURk&refer=home
This is an important article which recognizes how climate change can impair our infrastructure. I especially recommend it for David (I love being right) Springer, David L.(big oil) Hagen, Anthony (sunspots) Watts and all the others who refuse to recognize the devastation man has wrought on his environment.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five."
Groucho Marx
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
IP: Logged
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 07. July 2008 17:18
John,
I independently arrived at a front loading hypothesis without reading you or any of your favorite sources - Berg, Schindewolf, et al.
I will however unhesitatingly concede that you have precedence.
There, I hope you feel better now.
IP: Logged
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 07. July 2008 17:20
Darn that "climate change". If man hadn't come along the climate would have remained constant and unchanging. Is that your position, John, that climate didn't change before man came along?
In regard to the Mauna Loa records - correlation is not causation. Didn't you learn that somewhere on the way to attaining a degree in science?
[ 07. July 2008, 17:35: Message edited by: DaveScot ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 08. July 2008 05:30
David Springer
I see that you are one of the chosen few that can still speak here.
Wrong again Springer. Correlation is the heart of the search for the truth and always has been. Apparently, bizarre as it must seem. you do not regard CO2 as a greenhouse gas. I imagine you must feel the same way about the other product of oxidation - water vapor.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
The world has always undergone profound changes in climate, but never before have changes taken place at the current rate, a rate Tim Flannery estimates to be thirty times faster than in the past. Actually the rate of increase of atmospheric CO2 is probably more than thirty times the rate in the past. It is the "rate of change" that distinguishes the present from the past, a reality that seems to be beyond your comprehension. Not only is CO2 increasing each year, the increment by which it increases is also increasing each year. The Chinese have several more coal burning generators planned for the immediate future. Does anyone imagine that they will not proceed? I stand by my position that it is much too late to avert disaster.
I find it fascinating that you continue to deny that we face a crisis. Your problem is your inability to admit that you are capable of being wrong about anything. It is evident in what has become your credo - "I love being right." Do you have any idea the effect that idiotic declaration has on any rational observer of the natural world? Apparently not.
The simple truth is that your "reign of terror" at Uncommon Descent depends entirely on the power you have been granted, presumably by Dembski, to remove anyone who might disagree with your pompous pronouncements. Any blog or forum that must engage in such tactics should be treated with contempt. That I am happy to do. Uncommon Descent uses exacty the same tactics as those employed by Pharyngula, Panda's Thumb, After The Bar Closes, ARN, EvC and RichardDawkins.net. Actually, Uncommon Descent uses them much more freely as one can easily see by reading UD's proceedings.
The major difference between Uncommon Descent and Pharyngula is the enormous following that Myers has been able to muster. He has not had to ban anywhere near the number that you have. Neither has Panda's Thumb or any of the other Darwinian strongholds.
In any event, your record speaks for itself. You are an intellectual tyrant, incapable of rational exchange with others, even those like myself who have no truck with Darwinian mysticism. It remains Springer's way or the highway. You are a pathetic demonstration of your "prescribed" fate to be an intellectual bully.
"It is abhorrent to me when a fine mind is paired with an unsavory character."
Albert Einstein
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned.... A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 08. July 2008, 10:56: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 10. July 2008 00:14
Dear John,
It's a fact that shoe size correlates with salary. How big are your feet?
Figure that one out, dummy, and get back to me.
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. July 2008 05:54
Thanks. I especially relish the "dummy." It is vintage Springer.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/off-topic/climate-change-delusion-makes-the-dsm-iv/#comments
Here is another example of Springer's intractability. It seems that in Australia climate change is considered by some to be a "delusion." Australia is also the home of Tim Flannery who was recently voted "Australian Man Of The Year" for his work on global warming and climate change.
I also note that your thread has produced only two comments, further evidence that you are incapable of tolerating dissent. I doubt very much if everyone posting at Uncommon Descent agrees with the tenor of your thread.
I will let others judge who is to be taken seriously, a real scientist like Tim Flannery or a prematurely retired computer technician like DaveScot/David Springer, self proclaimed world expert on just about everything from water (a completely oxidized molecule) as a potential fuel, to the cure for cancer to species extinction (its practically non-existent) to climate change (its a delusion) to God only knows what next.
"I love being right."
David Springer
Of course you do David. Keep trying. One of these days you might succeed. Whatever you do, be sure never to change your mind.
In the meantime -
"Plagiarize, plagiarize, don't let anything evade your eyes."
Tom Lehrer.
"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
Winston Churchill
"Mankind fiddled while earth burned."
John A. Davison
[ 10. July 2008, 09:31: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. July 2008 22:04
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/07/fight_back_against_bill_donohu.php#comments
This is wonderful news. Finally others are complaining about P.Z. Myers and his hate mongering tactics at Pharyngula. I hope they have better luck than I had. His Provost, E. Thomas Sullivan, ignored my letter exposing this degenerate creep and when I complained about Myers' disgusting behavior to the University Board of Regents, all I got back was a letter from the Chancellor of little old University of Minnesota at Morris in the Minnesota wilderness. She made it very clear that she had no interest in what Myers was doing on Pharyngula. The full text of our email exchange can be found here -
http://john.a.davison.free.fr/?p=18
comments 123 and 124
Finally others are beginning to expose this rabid insurrectionist for what he really is, a disaster as a scientist and a danger to the American Public University system. He is homozygous at the atheist Darwinian locus, a confessed hyperliberal desecrator of every decent institution on the face of the earth and hundreds of citizens. Furthermore, He has never contributed a scintilla to the Darwinian fairy tale he so desperately defends.
Like his alter ego, Richard Dawkins, he has only one goal which is to convert the entire world to Universal Atheism. He reeks hate with as many as 10 threads per day dedicated to the denigration of hundreds of decent citizens and our most sacred institutions. He epitomizes what Robert Bork has called "Slouching Toward Gomorrah." In short he is, for want of a better word, evil.
Supremely confident of his immunity, he arrogantly offered the address of the President of the University of Minnesota. I hope others will join with me in exposing this hateful creature to the scrutiny of his academic superiors and the intellectual community in general. I am confident that if a sufficient number voiced their legitimate concerns he might be silenced. However, judging from the contemporary moral, ethical and intellectual climate in this country, that may prove to be quite impossible.
I don't believe one can reach the President of the University of Minnesota via email but you can contact the Board of Regents here -
http://www1.umn.edu/regents/contact.html
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 11. July 2008, 04:53: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
