5 ms·

I don't think that being either helpful or charitable were motivations behind your comment.

by barking 10y ago

danieltillett 10y ago
Yes they were. I though of writing a snarky response, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt that your post was the result of not knowing anything about evolution and not trolling. If you really are interested in knowing the answers to your questions then you need to study evolutionary biology - it really is a very interesting topic :) Edit. If you want to know more then any of Richard Dawkins biology books are really good. The Blind Watchmaker would be my suggestion of where to start.
- eru 10y ago
  Even Wikipedia would be a good introduction here.
  - danieltillett 10y ago
    Yes, but it can be really hard trying to make sense out of all the information without having the assumed knowledge. I would really recommend starting with a good book that assumes very little.
DonHopkins 10y ago
Since you're questioning somebody else's motives yourself now, what do you think is wrong about questioning the motives of someone who parrots tired old discredited creationist propaganda, describing it as seemingly sensible? Shouldn't you be as open to criticism as the scientific theories you're criticizing?
- barking 10y ago
  Well I wouldn't have 'parroted' it, had known that it as 'tired old discredited creationist propaganda'. Does that answer your question?
  - DonHopkins 10y ago
    Oh, so it is ok to question motives! I'm so relieved. Google and wikipedia will quickly and easily disabuse you of the idea that it's "a big flaw in the theory of evolution". What were your motives for thinking and parroting that there is a "big flaw" in evolution without bothering to look it up, when it's so easy to discover how tired and discredited the "absence of intermediate forms" argument is? Here's the first google hit with the phrase "absence of intermediate forms" you parroted, a site specifically dedicated to spreading misinformation about evolution -- Gary Bates' Creation Ministries International: http://creation.com/that-quote-about-the-missing-transitional-fossils http://creation.com/that-quote-about-the-missing-transitiona... >Gary has been speaking on the creation/evolution issue since 1990. With a background in management and marketing, in 2002, he was invited to join the ministry full-time in Brisbane and eventually became its Head of Ministry. Much in demand for his popular lay talks on creation, Gary and his family relocated to America to serve as CEO of CMI-US. He was also elected to the position of CEO of CMI-Worldwide, CMI’s international Federation of ministries. http://creationwiki.org/Gary_Bates http://creationwiki.org/Gary_Bates >Bates has a keen interest in the UFO phenomenon and wrote the Amazon.com top 50 bestseller Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection. In July 2009 he was the keynote speaker at the first Christian symposium on the UFO phenomenon held in Roswell, New Mexico. And here's a more reputable source that debunks the claim you parroted -- National Center for Science Education: http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/transitional-fossils-are-not-rare http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/transitional-fossils-ar... >Fossils with transitional morphology are not rare. Fossils illustrating the gradual origin of humans, horses, rhinos, whales, seacows, mammals, birds, tetrapods, and various major Cambrian "phyla" have been discovered and are well-known to scientists. Explore Evolution's claims to the contrary are just a rehash of older creationist arguments on this point, relying on out-of-context quotes, confusion over terminology and classification, and ignoring inconvenient evidence.
    - barking 10y ago
      What do you think that my motives were?
      - 10y ago

I don't think that being either helpful or charitable were motivations behind your comment.

by barking 10y ago

I don't think that being either helpful or charitable were motivations behind your comment.

Yes they were. I though of writing a snarky response, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt that your post was the result of not knowing anything about evolution and not trolling. If you really are interested in knowing the answers to your questions then you need to study evolutionary biology - it really is a very interesting topic :) Edit. If you want to know more then any of Richard Dawkins biology books are really good. The Blind Watchmaker would be my suggestion of where to start.

eru 10y ago
Even Wikipedia would be a good introduction here.
- danieltillett 10y ago
  Yes, but it can be really hard trying to make sense out of all the information without having the assumed knowledge. I would really recommend starting with a good book that assumes very little.

DonHopkins 10y ago

Since you're questioning somebody else's motives yourself now, what do you think is wrong about questioning the motives of someone who parrots tired old discredited creationist propaganda, describing it as seemingly sensible? Shouldn't you be as open to criticism as the scientific theories you're criticizing?

barking 10y ago
Well I wouldn't have 'parroted' it, had known that it as 'tired old discredited creationist propaganda'. Does that answer your question?
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  Oh, so it is ok to question motives! I'm so relieved. Google and wikipedia will quickly and easily disabuse you of the idea that it's "a big flaw in the theory of evolution". What were your motives for thinking and parroting that there is a "big flaw" in evolution without bothering to look it up, when it's so easy to discover how tired and discredited the "absence of intermediate forms" argument is? Here's the first google hit with the phrase "absence of intermediate forms" you parroted, a site specifically dedicated to spreading misinformation about evolution -- Gary Bates' Creation Ministries International: http://creation.com/that-quote-about-the-missing-transitional-fossils http://creation.com/that-quote-about-the-missing-transitiona... >Gary has been speaking on the creation/evolution issue since 1990. With a background in management and marketing, in 2002, he was invited to join the ministry full-time in Brisbane and eventually became its Head of Ministry. Much in demand for his popular lay talks on creation, Gary and his family relocated to America to serve as CEO of CMI-US. He was also elected to the position of CEO of CMI-Worldwide, CMI’s international Federation of ministries. http://creationwiki.org/Gary_Bates http://creationwiki.org/Gary_Bates >Bates has a keen interest in the UFO phenomenon and wrote the Amazon.com top 50 bestseller Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection. In July 2009 he was the keynote speaker at the first Christian symposium on the UFO phenomenon held in Roswell, New Mexico. And here's a more reputable source that debunks the claim you parroted -- National Center for Science Education: http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/transitional-fossils-are-not-rare http://ncse.com/creationism/analysis/transitional-fossils-ar... >Fossils with transitional morphology are not rare. Fossils illustrating the gradual origin of humans, horses, rhinos, whales, seacows, mammals, birds, tetrapods, and various major Cambrian "phyla" have been discovered and are well-known to scientists. Explore Evolution's claims to the contrary are just a rehash of older creationist arguments on this point, relying on out-of-context quotes, confusion over terminology and classification, and ignoring inconvenient evidence.
  - barking 10y ago
    What do you think that my motives were?
    - 10y ago