Active Users:733 Time:03/04/2025 11:11:06 AM
Re: 2 things Night Walker Send a noteboard - 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
I think the issue the author has is that what he is defining NS as is not NS. What I can gather about the author's views is that he seems to think NS needs to present a clear choice for each of its “decisions” before it is made. Since we do not know everything about everything yet it is impossible to make the predictions this author seems to be requiring. It may be possible in the future to do exactly what the author wants, but just because we can’t currently does not invalidate NS as a theory nor would it if we can't make predictions the author wants in the future because it would require us to know all possible futures of the species (know when mutations happen and how they affect a species). Additionally large amount of what we know about science is gathered in this form. We see something, we make a prediction, we see if it is right, and we then refine and retest. It is through this process that we come to know something.

Ultimately the author also seems to be searching for a unifying theory of nature; something that we can put variables into and gets some sort of predictable result out of. While there may be a unifying theory for physics there is not one for biology. Life and biology are variable by nature and NS does not try to be a unifying theory; NS intent is to be a mechanism for evoltuion.
This message last edited by Night Walker on 07/08/2011 at 05:50:14 PM
Reply to message
Natural selection - 06/08/2011 03:51:26 PM 1073 Views
selection for suitability - 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM 719 Views
Thanks for your responce - 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM 836 Views
I can't speak for LadyLorraine and won't try, but here's how I see it: - 06/08/2011 06:49:49 PM 777 Views
Just a question - 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM 765 Views
Yes it can - 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM 638 Views
But how? - 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM 836 Views
Okay, I think I see what you're saying - 08/08/2011 05:30:43 PM 652 Views
Close - 08/08/2011 05:41:46 PM 852 Views
Re: Just a question - 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM 858 Views
I'm not sure I understand you - 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM 761 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies. - 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM 779 Views
Then it is still a tautology - 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM 790 Views
You can know it's beneifical to a particular individual, but it's harder to say for populations. - 06/08/2011 10:18:16 PM 892 Views
Maybe... - 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM 749 Views
As I understand it - 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM 710 Views
Better... - 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM 694 Views
Actually - 06/08/2011 10:13:51 PM 784 Views
Re: Actually - 06/08/2011 10:37:33 PM 922 Views
Re: Actually - 06/08/2011 11:38:52 PM 850 Views
Oeh - 07/08/2011 01:54:19 PM 700 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM 796 Views
Re: Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 06/08/2011 07:08:25 PM 796 Views
Re: Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 07/08/2011 12:46:23 AM 790 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify... - 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM 813 Views
The questions go deeper - 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM 811 Views
Re: The questions go deeper - 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM 798 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question. - 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM 818 Views
TalkOrigins addresses this at length. - 06/08/2011 11:14:52 PM 874 Views
Not very much, but interesting none the less - 06/08/2011 11:38:36 PM 866 Views
Re: Natural selection - 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM 794 Views
Thanks a lot - 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM 939 Views
2 things - 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM 699 Views
Re: 2 things - 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM 919 Views
Re: 2 things - 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM 731 Views
My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM 762 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM 705 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM 860 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 07:02:27 PM 707 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 09:09:57 PM 817 Views

Reply to Message