Atheist Nexus Logo

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

Information

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4173
Latest Activity: yesterday

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Bud Light Withdraws Offensive Slogan

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 30. 16 Replies

Dinosaur Highway

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 29. 8 Replies

Evolution is a FACT, not a theory.

Started by Idaho Spud. Last reply by Joseph P Apr 25. 15 Replies

L'homme "blanc" n'existe en Europe que depuis 6500 BC

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 16. 1 Reply

ORIGIN OF ATHEIST PRIDE

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Gerald Payne Apr 15. 196 Replies

Chimps Seen Making and Using Spears

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 14. 3 Replies

Why sex? The evolution of sex

Started by Rick Springfield Apr 12. 0 Replies

Scientists Say not all Traits are Directly from DNA

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Apr 5. 6 Replies

Coffee Lowers Risk of Liver Cancer

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Apr 4. 20 Replies

Ice Age Floods - Columbia River Basalt Group

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Mar 27. 5 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Joseph P on February 10, 2015 at 12:29pm

And it's published in which scientific journal, after several qualified biologists have examined the proposal for flaws?

Comment by Shaun Johnston on February 10, 2015 at 10:11am

I believe I have found a critical flaw in Ronald Fisher's Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, on which the modern synthesis based.See article.

Comment by Joseph P on January 28, 2015 at 3:16pm

Why should your "theory" not also be subject to criticism?

And hell, for that matter, tell us what your hypothesis is.  What mechanism have you discovered, which you think is absent from the current synthesis of the theory of natural selection?  I've never seen you express an inkling of an alternative model, which you're attempting to support as a replacement to natural selection.

And no, I'm not going to wade through your incoherent blog to try to find where you've mentioned it, if you've talked about it in there.  If you can't express it here, in simple, concise language, then you're right, I'm not interested in hearing what you have to say.  All I've ever seen from you is the sort of inane attacks that I would expect from a creationist conspiracy-nut (natural selection requires the supernatural; natural selection leads to eugenics), with no alternative even hinted at.

Comment by Christopher Lowe on January 28, 2015 at 12:10pm

@ Shaun Johnston Of course Darwinian theory of evolution should be criticized. Bring it on! But be specific. A vast army of biologists have amassed and reviewed data on the subject for a century and a half. You need a level of expertise to even have a debate with these scientists. 

What if you are wrong? Even misguided? I see you pissing and moaning on your blog how you've been attacked?

Why should your "theory" not also be subject to criticism? Show some comprehension of the subject and show some maturity.

Comment by Joseph P on January 28, 2015 at 11:32am

Or come up with something to say that is worth listening to.  I just took a glance at your latest blog post, and it's borderline incoherent.  I can't even figure out what you're getting at with your mountain metaphor, and I'd love to know why you have a bug up your ass about eugenics.

Comment by Shaun Johnston on January 28, 2015 at 11:27am

OK, I get it, piss off. OK.

Comment by Idaho Spud on January 28, 2015 at 11:17am

I'm not wasting my time reading anything you have written until you get Dawkins, and/or other respected evolutionary scientists to agree with you.

Comment by Joseph P on January 28, 2015 at 11:09am

I'm waiting for someone with an actual lab, running actual experiments, to turn up something, rather than you making absurd claims.  When you keep coming at us with deliberately provocative claims about natural selection being supernatural, we're just going to think you're an asshole.

This is science, not theology.  Where's your data?  Where are the peer-reviewed studies that support your wild assertions?  After your last ridiculous post, I can't even be bothered to check the latest stuff you've written, unless you're pointing us to something written by someone more credible than you.

The model of natural selection is criticized and modified all the time, when real scientists discover some detail turned up in their experiments.  When you have something similar to contribute, rather than wild speculation, I might care about what you have to say.

Comment by Shaun Johnston on January 28, 2015 at 10:48am

No, about natural selection not having the physical properties it would need to work, and the primary support for it being flawed. Do you agree that is possible, or is natural selection beyond criticism?

Comment by Joseph P on January 27, 2015 at 5:36pm

More stuff about Natural Selection being a supernatural proposal?

 

Members (4173)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service