Originally posted by @sonhouseRight, but the fact that it's called "punctuated equilibrium" indicates when it (the idea) became an established part of ET... and this happened during my lifetime.
Which scientists were touting PE before 75 years ago? Are you talking about Pierre Tremaux?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Tr%C3%A9maux
He published a paper in 1865 that seems to suggest PE.
Originally posted by @kazetnagorraIf you wish to learn more about reading comprehension, try this website:
If you wish to learn about the theory of evolution and its core tenets, try this website:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/readandunderstandlikeaboss/
Originally posted by @lemon-limeEven the full version of PE wasn't till 1972. Are you more than 45 years old?
Right, but the fact that it's [b]called "punctuated equilibrium" indicates when it (the idea) became an established part of ET... and this happened during my lifetime.[/b]
Originally posted by @lemon-limeI suggest looking at your malfunctioning response interpretation device instead.
Your default response generator seems to be stuck.
1 edit
Originally posted by @lemon-limeCan you articulate what the disagreement is?
I was poking fun at the idea that you or I (or anyone else) are unable to discern signs of intelligent design.
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.
Originally posted by @sonhouse• Yes, the paper coining the term 'punctuated equilibria' was published in 1972. I posted a link (and a quote from that link) on page 10.
Even the full version of PE wasn't till 1972. Are you more than 45 years old?
• Yes, I am more than 45 years old.
Originally posted by @wildgrassI said disagreements, not "the disagreement".
Can you articulate what the disagreement is?
Originally posted by @lemon-limeOk. Cool.
I said disagreements, not "the disagreement".
Which of these two premises has stronger supportive evidence?
1) Organisms were intelligently designed.
2) Aliens built the pyramids.
Originally posted by @wildgrassDefine "aliens."
Ok. Cool.
Which of these two premises has stronger supportive evidence?
1) Organisms were intelligently designed.
2) Aliens built the pyramids.
Originally posted by @wildgrassIt depends on who you ask. And it's not terribly difficult to guess who would answer 1) and who would answer 2).
Ok. Cool.
Which of these two premises has stronger supportive evidence?
1) Organisms were intelligently designed.
2) Aliens built the pyramids.
I'm guessing you would answer 2). What do you think my answer might be?
1 edit
Originally posted by @lemon-limeWhat do you think I think your answer might be?
It depends on who you ask. And it's not terribly difficult to guess who would answer 1) and who would answer 2).
I'm guessing you would answer 2). What do you think my answer might be?
edit: or just answer the darn question. I asked because I don't know.
1 edit
Originally posted by @wildgrassI don't 'know' what your answer would be either.
What do you think I think your answer might be?
edit: or just answer the darn question. I asked because I don't know.
If I knew nothing about you I have a 50% chance of picking the correct answer. But I've seen enough of your postings to know that I now have a 98.6% chance of picking the correct answer. Your answer would be number 2).
bearing in mind it was you who framed the question
Originally posted by @wildgrassWhat do you think I think your answer might be?
What do you think I think your answer might be?
edit: or just answer the darn question. I asked because I don't know.
I think you think my answer might be number 1).
Originally posted by @lemon-limeIs that your answer?
[b]What do you think I think your answer might be?
I think you think my answer might be number 1).[/b]