Originally posted by jaywill
I don't think anyone should resort to lying.

I don't think people should make the charge of someone lying lightly. Lying is deliberate misrepresentation, knowingly stating a falsehood, not just being mistaken on some facts.

I get annoyed for example when people say "Michael Behe LIED". He said something to the effect that he knew of no articles in m ...[text shortened]... k this was character assasination to discredit a fine book - [b]Darwin's Black Box.[/b]

I don't know much about what Mike Behe has said. I do know that the group that was taken to court for trying to introduce ID into schools in the US were shown to be a bunch of liars.

I am sure however that Mike Behe is educated enough to know that some of the claims he has made in the past are simply not supported by science. In my book that is "knowingly stating a falsehood".

Originally posted by snowinscotland
...or is neither. Perhaps the concept is still beyond your grasp?

Since it's such an evident truth, perhaps you can be the first one on a thread with over 200 posts who can rightly label what NS is, not what it supposedly does.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Since it's such an evident truth, perhaps you can be the first one on a thread with over 200 posts who can rightly label what NS [b]is, not what it supposedly does.[/b]

Perhaps you could actually start reading peoples responses instead of trying to tell everybody else what Natural Selection is.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Perhaps you could actually start reading peoples responses instead of trying to tell everybody else what Natural Selection is.

Again, you challenge bereft of weight. I have read each and every post within the thread. The best that has been offered--- and even that without agreement--- is what NS does, not what it is. Give it a shot, though, since you think yourself up to the task. What is NS?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Again, you challenge bereft of weight. I have read each and every post within the thread. The best that has been offered--- and even that without agreement--- is what NS does, not what it is. Give it a shot, though, since you think yourself up to the task. What is NS?

What it is? What it does?
There is no difference ... your rantings notwithstanding.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Since it's such an evident truth, perhaps you can be the first one on a thread with over 200 posts who can rightly label what NS [b]is, not what it supposedly does.[/b]

If you understand the concept, you can label it how you want....


...a rose by any other name would smell as sweet...

What irks you about a name?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Either NS happens to the species or it is an action of the species.

Use my example. Is it an action of the species or is it something that happens to the species?

Because whichever your (wrong) answer, I described what is often labeled 'Natural Selection.'

Nemesio

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Since it's such an evident truth, perhaps you can be the first one on a thread with over 200 posts who can rightly label what NS [b]is, not what it supposedly does.[/b]

I'll answer again. Natural Selection is a description of how the expression of certain genetic dispositions
and their subsequent impact on reproduction influences the traits seen within the species as a
whole. I tried to answer this by example to show you how your question is foolish.

It is neither an act of the species (a species cannot 'act,' only individuals can act) nor an act
upon the species (an individual's actions is not necessarily an act upon the species, just like
when you decide to have children isn't an act upon the species).

Stop asking your fraudulent question.

Nemesio

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Since it's such an evident truth, perhaps you can be the first one on a thread with over 200 posts who can rightly label what NS [b]is, not what it supposedly does.[/b]

Are you being deliberately stupid? It has been answered before. You can get definition in any dictionary. Can't you understand the concept or are you just trying to make some devil worshiper evolutionist fall into a contradiction?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Again, you challenge bereft of weight. I have read each and every post within the thread. The best that has been offered--- and even that without agreement--- is what NS does, not what it is. Give it a shot, though, since you think yourself up to the task. What is NS?

Curious. What do you mean here 'bereft of weight'? Is it a strength to be dogmatic?

And thank you for kindly nominating yourself as the judge of what is best; it is always good to know us mortals are being watched over and guided...

Originally posted by serigado
Are you being deliberately stupid? It has been answered before. You can get definition in any dictionary. Can't you understand the concept or are you just trying to make some devil worshiper evolutionist fall into a contradiction?

You can get definition in any dictionary.
You mean, like this one:
a natural process that results in the survival and reproductive success of individuals or groups best adjusted to their environment and that leads to the perpetuation of genetic qualities best suited to that particular environment

or this one:

the process by which...

No matter where you look, you will find the same answer, i.e., it is a process. That leaves the same question still sitting there, doesn't it?

Originally posted by Nemesio
I'll answer again. Natural Selection is a description of how the expression of certain genetic dispositions
and their subsequent impact on reproduction influences the traits seen within the species as a
whole. I tried to answer this by example to show you how your question is foolish.

It is neither an act of the species (a species cannot 'act,' only i ...[text shortened]... hildren isn't an act upon the species).

Stop asking your fraudulent question.

Nemesio

It is only fraudulent to those who refuse to ask the obvious question. And, despite your protestations otherwise, all you have done (again) is describe what it does, not what it is. Perhaps that's just NS at work, eh?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
You can get definition in any dictionary.
You mean, like this one:
a natural process that results in the survival and reproductive success of individuals or groups best adjusted to their environment and that leads to the perpetuation of genetic qualities best suited to that particular environment

or this one:

the process by which answer, i.e., it is a process. That leaves the same question still sitting there, doesn't it?

What question? Your question of what is natural selection?

Originally posted by snowinscotland
What question? Your question of what is natural selection?

Hint: read the title of the thread.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
It is only fraudulent to those who refuse to ask the obvious question. And, despite your protestations otherwise, all you have done (again) is describe what it does, not what it is. Perhaps that's just NS at work, eh?

You keep describing NS as if it 'does' something. This is your problem. NS doesn't 'do' anything.
It is not an act. NS is a description of the results on species of particular behaviors that individuals
in the species engage in. There is no 'act.' So, when you continue to ask your question, you
keep phrasing the question in a way that literally makes no sense.

If I am wrong and it is an act, then use my bunny example above to show me how it is an act.
If it's sooooo painfully obvious to you, then it should be a nearly trivial effort to demonstrate it
with my quintessential example above.

Nemesio