|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 18, 2010 9:40:22 GMT 1
Scientists have been at the forefront of western civilization, their profound discoveries have changed our lives forever.
Thus Albert Einstein opened up a vast new area of physics with his investigations into the photo-electric effect, Isaac Newton
laid the foundation for mechanical engineering and ballistics, Maxwell's magnificent equations laid the basis for electrical engineering, Faraday discovered the electric motor and generator, Max Planck introduced the quantum that has become so important in modern physics - one offshoot being the transistor invented by Shockley... the list could go on and on....
But what of Darwin?
Just how has this scientist revolutionised our lives?
He has produced an interesting theory, evolution, that has marginally improved our understanding of how life has developed (whilst at the same time leaving major questions unanswered)
Just why is such a fuss made about this minor scientist who has made so little real impact upon our lives?
|
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Oct 18, 2010 10:13:07 GMT 1
Well, I suppose he exploded the idea that all species were made by God and could not change, in a nutshell.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr Red on Oct 18, 2010 10:46:15 GMT 1
How did he revolutionise Science?
1) by reading his Grandfather's books.
2) by studious observation
3) by waiting till he had sufficient evidence to prove his thoeries.
4) by getting a damn sight closer to the situation.
and if he was wrong in any way can we quote Newton.
"If I have been able to see further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants"
Darwin was a giant then, he is a giant and a plinth now.
|
|
|
|
Post by carnyx on Oct 18, 2010 10:54:18 GMT 1
Progenitor A#1, I agree that Darwin did 'nature study', and was more of a meta-scientist, (e.g. involved in the creation of metaphysical ideas), than a scientist per-se. Anyway, we should be thankful that the bien-pensants, free-thinkers, atheists, Dawkins, etc., take his idea of natural selection as the driver of his Theory of Evolution, as ' gospel truth' as it were. However, I predict that Darwin will really go down in history, as the man who conclusively proved the existence of God! 1. Homo Sapiens is just another species; a part of Nature, and so will evolve via natural selection. 2. At every stage in this process of human evolution, which we call progress, we see that at every stage, a belief in gods or gods is common to all human generative groups. And in a general sense theism is a natural adaptation .... as natural to humans as antlers are to deer. 3. And as this record of progress ( aka history) is written by the winning side, the emergence of the monotheistic Christian God of the most successful generative grouping on earth to-date, indicates that God is a highly successful and naturalsurvival adaptation of Homo Sapiens to-date. Darwin would have been proud! (And I suspect both Dawkins and the Creationists, would not be best pleased by having it pointed out that Darwin's Theory of Evolution PROVES the existence of God.)
|
|
|
|
Post by olmy on Oct 18, 2010 11:11:05 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by olmy on Oct 18, 2010 11:36:06 GMT 1
However, I predict that Darwin will really go down in history, as the man who conclusively proved the existence of God! 1. Homo Sapiens is just another species; a part of Nature, and so will evolve via natural selection. 2. At every stage in this process of human evolution, which we call progress, we see that at every stage, a belief in gods or gods is common to all human generative groups. And in a general sense theism is a natural adaptation .... as natural to humans as antlers are to deer. 3. And as this record of progress ( aka history) is written by the winning side, the emergence of the monotheistic Christian God of the most successful generative grouping on earth to-date, indicates that God is a highly successful and naturalsurvival adaptation of Homo Sapiens to-date. Darwin would have been proud! (And I suspect both Dawkins and the Creationists, would not be best pleased by having it pointed out that Darwin's Theory of Evolution PROVES the existence of God.) Right, I'll add 'evolution' and 'proof' to the ever growing list of things you know nothing about... Natural selection is only 'concerned' with how well you pass your genes on to the next generation, not in the truth of things you happen to believe. The human liking for theism (and other superstitions) is open to many interpretations, for example.... The general tendency of humans to see intention, where there is none (and hence invent spirits, gods, monsters and demons) is rather like our 'ability' to see faces in clouds and fire. In short, it is much more important to survival (and hence reproduction) that one always recognises a face or a deliberate act, when one is there, than it is to eliminate false recognitions. Hence we have "hyperactive agency detection". |
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 18, 2010 11:57:31 GMT 1
However, I predict that Darwin will really go down in history, as the man who conclusively proved the existence of God! 1. Homo Sapiens is just another species; a part of Nature, and so will evolve via natural selection. 2. At every stage in this process of human evolution, which we call progress, we see that at every stage, a belief in gods or gods is common to all human generative groups. And in a general sense theism is a natural adaptation .... as natural to humans as antlers are to deer. 3. And as this record of progress ( aka history) is written by the winning side, the emergence of the monotheistic Christian God of the most successful generative grouping on earth to-date, indicates that God is a highly successful and naturalsurvival adaptation of Homo Sapiens to-date. Darwin would have been proud! (And I suspect both Dawkins and the Creationists, would not be best pleased by having it pointed out that Darwin's Theory of Evolution PROVES the existence of God.) Right, I'll add 'evolution' and 'proof' to the ever growing list of things you know nothing about... Natural selection is only 'concerned' with how well you pass your genes on to the next generation, not in the truth of things you happen to believe. The human liking for theism (and other superstitions) is open to many interpretations, for example.... The general tendency of humans to see intention, where there is none (and hence invent spirits, gods, monsters and demons) is rather like our 'ability' to see faces in clouds and fire. In short, it is much more important to survival (and hence reproduction) that one always recognises a face or a deliberate act, when one is there, than it is to eliminate false recognitions. Hence we have "hyperactive agency detection". Why are atheists on MB's so uniformly dull and uniformly dim, and why do they believe so passionately in the creed of atheism? |
|
|
|
Post by olmy on Oct 18, 2010 12:05:48 GMT 1
Why are atheists on MB's so uniformly dull and uniformly dim, and why do they believe so passionately in the creed of atheism? Te-He, nothing intelligent or interesting to say, then......?  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by carnyx on Oct 18, 2010 12:19:23 GMT 1
olmy#5 And had it not crossed your brow that a belief in a supernal being could confer an evolutionary advantage? And,that there is sufficent evidence in the record to show it?
|
|
|
|
Post by olmy on Oct 18, 2010 12:24:44 GMT 1
And had it not crossed your brow that a belief in a supernal being could confer an evolutionary advantage? Try READING MY POST. And,that there is sufficent evidence in the record to show it? Oh, evidence, GOOD! Let's see it then....
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 18, 2010 12:42:03 GMT 1
Hence we have "hyperactive agency detection". You just love high-sounding bollocks don't you Olmy. Sigh! I wish there was a scientist on this board, then we might learn summat. |
|
|
|
Post by carnyx on Oct 18, 2010 12:55:17 GMT 1
My Dear Olmy,
You say;
I say that, from the historical record, it appears that a belief in God really does help to pass genes on to the next generation.
... in comparison to those who have no such belief.
|
|
|
|
Post by olmy on Oct 18, 2010 12:55:53 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Oct 18, 2010 12:56:57 GMT 1
I think you do have a point, carnyx, since religious belief does seem to have been a universal phenomenon before science really got going. Social cohesion, perhaps? I'm particularly thinking here of the Egyptians and their belief that the the Pharaoh was represented as a kind of agent of a life after death for the average Egyptian, which was the reason they took great lengths to entomb him in such an elaborate and ritualistic way.
|
|
|
|
Post by carnyx on Oct 18, 2010 13:14:26 GMT 1
abacus9900Yes ... I was just looking at the breeding record. Atheists don't seem to be as productive, somehow. Do you suppose Atheists are not as sexy as Theists?
|
|
;D