+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 44
Latest: Robinquit
New This Month: 1
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 11399
Total Topics: 251
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Author Topic: Darwin  (Read 6907 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19041
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Darwin
« Reply #150 on: June 18, 2018, 12:39:02 pm »
Agelbert NOTE: I did not write any of this well referenced material. Rather than posting the entire list of responses 🔬 to the common objections of evolutionists to their theory's  false predictions, I will post one each day.
 
You can view previous objections and the responses to them by scrolling this topic thread.

After this section is completed, we will move on to the importance of exposing the failed Darwinian Evolution Theory Predictions and a detailed discussion of said failed predictions.

Since I took pre-med in college, late in life, I am well versed in the language of molecular biology. When a term comes up that the average reader might not be familiar with, I will define it to save the reader some time.

Feel free to pass this on to friends and family, always including the references. These scholarly references are important to credibie debate. Please make sure you include them and the .DarwinsPredicitions web site link. 

.DarwinsPredictions

This section examines various concerns evolutionists often have regarding their theory’s false predictions.

Responses to common objections

No one believes these predictions anymore

Yes, this is the point. It is true that evolutionists have, for the most part, dropped many predictions that were once made by evolutionists or entailed by the theory. We can learn from this failed track record as it has implications for evolution’s complexity and explanatory power.


References

Chalmers, A. F. 1982. What is This Thing Called Science?. 2d ed. Indianapolis: Hackett.

Klayman, Joshua, Young-Won Ha. 1997. “Confirmation, disconfirmation, and information in hypothesis testing,” in W. M. Goldstein, R. M. Hogarth, (eds.) Research on Judgment and Decision Making: Currents, Connections, and Controversies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakatos, Imre. 1970. “History of science and Its rational reconstructions.” Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970:91-136.

Popper, Karl. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.

Quine, W.V.O. 1951. “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” The Philosophical Review 60:40.

Stanford, P. Kyle. 2006. Exceeding Our Grasp: Science, History, and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives. New York: Oxford University Press.

van Fraassen. Bas C.  1989. Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

https://sites.google.com/site/darwinspredictions/responses-to-common-objections
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

+-Recent Topics

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
February 15, 2019, 01:54:57 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
February 15, 2019, 01:43:48 pm

Money by AGelbert
February 14, 2019, 08:22:30 pm

Defending Wildlife by AGelbert
February 14, 2019, 04:04:46 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
February 14, 2019, 03:41:37 pm

Rick Simpson's Hemp Oil by AGelbert
February 10, 2019, 01:22:30 pm

The Big Picture of Renewable Energy Growth by AGelbert
February 08, 2019, 12:04:00 pm

Photvoltaics (PV) by AGelbert
February 07, 2019, 07:09:38 pm

Corporate Profits over Patient in the Health Care Field by AGelbert
February 07, 2019, 02:21:35 pm

Sustainable Farming by AGelbert
February 07, 2019, 01:46:33 pm