2 edits
Originally posted by @lemon-limeso is mine. Your refusal to answer tells me you know you are wrong and you are just trolling.
[b]t's a simple question...
/b]
Originally posted by @lemon-limeIt seems you are a bit confused. Punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain/describe consequences of evolution (evolutionary history). The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
When I said "history" of PE I was referring to [b]when it was first introduced and what it attempted to explain. It's purpose was to explain a conspicuous lack of fossil evidence of intermediary species. These were called "gaps" in the fossil record.
I don't know how old you are, but PE became a supporting theory to evolution during my life ...[text shortened]... and called it punctuated equilibria."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium[/b]
Originally posted by @lemon-limeUhhh... yes?
Is there any evidence the pyramids were actually built by [b]anyone? They look like pointy little hills[/b]
(Maybe comes as no surprise. We're obviously not getting anywhere if we're debating whether or not the pyramids were built. Kinda like when humy suggested free will doesn't exist 🙂)
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraThe core tenets of...
It seems you are a bit confused. Punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain/describe consequences of evolution (evolutionary history). The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
Who are the priests of this religion?
3 edits
Originally posted by @wildgrassactually, that isn't quite what I said.
...Kinda like when humy suggested free will doesn't exist 🙂)
I was saying that the way many, but not all, people define free will is such that it is self-contradictory and I hope everyone agrees a self-contradiction cannot exist in reality but rather only in imperfect minds. I also said that compatibilism definition of free will is NOT self-contradictory but said I was unsure if even that could be a 'valid' definition because of my concern that it may differ too much from what most people actually mean by 'free will'.
However, since then I have revised that latter position and made a judgment that the compatibilism definition of free will doesn't differ TOO much from what most people actually mean by 'free will' thus IS valid. Thus I now define free will as compatibilism free will and assert all other definitions of 'free will' that I know of are invalid.
In other words, I accept this;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism
-and assert compatibilism free will exists, but not any other kind of 'free will'.
Originally posted by @freakykbhIf you wish to learn about the theory of evolution and its core tenets, try this website:
[b]The core tenets of...
Who are the priests of this religion?[/b]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraThe core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
It seems you are a bit confused. Punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain/describe consequences of evolution (evolutionary history). The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
PE was introduced to (and subsequently became a part of) evolution theory during my lifetime.
Where do you see anything about core tenets in that?
Originally posted by @lemon-limeIt seems you are a bit confused. Punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain/describe consequences of evolution (evolutionary history). The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
[b]The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
PE was introduced to (and subsequently became a part of) evolution theory during my lifetime.
Where do you see anything about core tenets in that?[/b]
Originally posted by @wildgrassI was having some fun, and taking a poke at criticism I've seen of intelligent design. Most folks who argue against it seem to think it's a ploy to subvert the minds of young evolution devotees...
Uhhh... yes?
(Maybe comes as no surprise. We're obviously not getting anywhere if we're debating whether or not the pyramids were built. Kinda like when humy suggested free will doesn't exist 🙂)
it's a conspiracy!
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraYour default response generator seems to be stuck.
It seems you are a bit confused. Punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain/describe consequences of evolution (evolutionary history). The core tenets of evolution were never under (academic) debate during your lifetime.
2 edits
Originally posted by @lemon-limeyou must be old.
PE was introduced to (and subsequently became a part of) evolution theory during my lifetime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Mayr
I would calculate well over 75 years old if you remember anything of it when it was first publicly proposed since the first publication of it was 75 years ago. This is all well before my time.
Originally posted by @lemon-limeIf I'm following: Criticism of intelligent design theory is like criticism of aliens-built-the-pyramids theory? If so, then I agree.
I was having some fun, and taking a poke at criticism I've seen of intelligent design. Most folks who argue against it seem to think it's a ploy to subvert the minds of young evolution devotees...
it's a conspiracy!
Or are you just playing a perpetual game of devil's advocate?
Originally posted by @humyNice try. A few other people had the same idea before PE was introduced to (and subsequently became a part of) evolution theory.
you must be old.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Mayr
I would calculate well over 75 years old if you remember anything of it when it was first publicly proposed since the first publication of it was 75 years ago. This is all well before my time.
Ever hear of scientists building on the work of others who came before them?
2 edits
Originally posted by @lemon-limeWhich scientists were touting PE before 75 years ago? Are you talking about Pierre Tremaux?
Nice try. A few other people had the same idea before PE was introduced to (and subsequently became a part of) evolution theory.
Ever hear of scientists building on the work of others who came before them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Tr%C3%A9maux
He published a paper in 1865 that seems to suggest PE.
I found an english translation here:
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=https://archive.org/details/b28083970&prev=search
Good luck reading it though. I don't see in that text any precurser to PE (Punctuated Equilibria)
Originally posted by @wildgrassI was poking fun at the idea that you or I (or anyone else) are unable to discern signs of intelligent design.
If I'm following: Criticism of intelligent design theory is like criticism of aliens-built-the-pyramids theory? If so, then I agree.
Or are you just playing a perpetual game of devil's advocate?
I suspect most of what you've seen and read about ID comes from the same sources humy and KN get their information, but that's okay... I don't mind disagreements just so long as they are civil disagreements.