General Discussion

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)

36. Maybe it can. Thanks for commenting on the work.

Reply to aikoaiko (Reply #27)

Fri May 11, 2012, 11:05 PM

May 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Evolution Paradigm Shift [View all] HiPointDem May 2012 OP

You used the word Paradigm Confusious May 2012 #1

I didn't write the articles. I didn't notice shapiro saying anything like what you attribute to him HiPointDem May 2012 #2

you didn't read the article then Confusious May 2012 #3

why don't you paste the passage you're referring to when you say i didn't read the article. HiPointDem May 2012 #4

Right here Confusious May 2012 #5

"someone who says they have the truth and that others aren't listening" doesn't equal HiPointDem May 2012 #22

Nah, I've read enough of these Confusious May 2012 #32

"Active information" tama May 2012 #6

More quantum diarrhea skepticscott May 2012 #9

Sounds like postmodernist Horsesh*t Confusious May 2012 #10

I'm not talking to you tama May 2012 #11

I guess I hit a nerve Confusious May 2012 #13

Mentality? tama May 2012 #15

When the shoe fits Confusious May 2012 #30

You realize that you linked a joke, right? The page generates random pomo-sounding fake essays. HiPointDem May 2012 #26

I used it as an example Confusious May 2012 #29

You're talking about a book by a credentialed scientist who, among other accomplishments, HiPointDem May 2012 #33

yea, well, to repeat myself from below Confusious May 2012 #38

Pseudoscience. UnrepentantLiberal May 2012 #7

Lemarck was wrong then, and Lemarck is wrong now. harmonicon May 2012 #8

LAmarck. HiPointDem May 2012 #21

d'oh!! (nt) harmonicon May 2012 #28

If I were as snarky as some of the folks on this thread I would have been all over that, you HiPointDem May 2012 #35

Oh, yes, and I appreciate it. harmonicon May 2012 #40

Well yeah, but organisms do alter their genome 4th law of robotics May 2012 #56

The old axiom, "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs" still holds. byeya May 2012 #12

RTFB tama May 2012 #16

Woo-Woo. Odin2005 May 2012 #14

Boo-Boo :) tama May 2012 #17

From the interview: tama May 2012 #20

Mostly hogwash. Intelligent Design with a new hat. LTX May 2012 #18

Thanks for the link tama May 2012 #19

interesting. the majority of the posters dismiss with a single word/line = "woo". HiPointDem May 2012 #23

Bashing Neo-Darwinism + supporting Lamarckianism = Woo. Odin2005 May 2012 #24

it doesn't? are you sure? HiPointDem May 2012 #25

Well it's "deniable", for sure :D tama May 2012 #42

See post 41 by MV, Shapiro doesn't know what he's talking about. Odin2005 May 2012 #43

Shapiro's response tama May 2012 #44

Maybe we should have a discussion Confusious May 2012 #49

Yes, it would have been more accurate for him to state... Humanist_Activist May 2012 #59

Should I explain why I don't believe Confusious May 2012 #31

Shapiro is a spoon-bender? Does he do that when he's not doing bacterial genetics? HiPointDem May 2012 #34

Yea, well sometimes people Confusious May 2012 #37

no, it doesn't mean he's "right". i don't think his book is about being "right" so much as you seem HiPointDem May 2012 #39

Well, first off Confusious May 2012 #48

I'm not sure the complexity he observes cannot be incorporated into mainstream evolution. aikoaiko May 2012 #27

Maybe it can. Thanks for commenting on the work. HiPointDem May 2012 #36

A critique of Shapiro by a colleague muriel_volestrangler May 2012 #41

The establisment is wrong!!! ;) tama May 2012 #45

I agree tama. Edim May 2012 #46

This tama May 2012 #50

Answer to 1): Yes muriel_volestrangler May 2012 #52

I will gladly admit my agnosticism tama May 2012 #55

That shifting is due to the "DNA trees" you're talking about. jeff47 May 2012 #62

Established theory doesn't require the questioning you claim. jeff47 May 2012 #58

Newton knew his theory was incomplete at best, and possibly wrong from the get go... Humanist_Activist May 2012 #60

Not quite jeff47 May 2012 #61

There ProSense May 2012 #47

"Innovation, not selection, is the critical issue in evolutionary change." tama May 2012 #51

It's only math jargon if you're talking about math, otherwise it's just nonsense mathematic May 2012 #53

Yup tama May 2012 #54

Shapiro's excerpt would need major correction... bhikkhu May 2012 #57