Active Users:341 Time:26/04/2025 01:08:29 PM
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 1081 Views
selection for suitability - 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM 728 Views
Thanks for your responce - 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM 844 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 788 Views
Just a question - 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM 771 Views
Yes it can - 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM 648 Views
But how? - 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM 844 Views
Okay, I think I see what you're saying - 08/08/2011 05:30:43 PM 661 Views
Close - 08/08/2011 05:41:46 PM 860 Views
Re: Just a question - 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM 865 Views
I'm not sure I understand you - 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM 769 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies. - 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM 790 Views
Then it is still a tautology - 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM 799 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 902 Views
Maybe... - 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM 754 Views
As I understand it - 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM 720 Views
Better... - 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM 701 Views
Actually - 06/08/2011 10:13:51 PM 792 Views
Re: Actually - 06/08/2011 10:37:33 PM 929 Views
Re: Actually - 06/08/2011 11:38:52 PM 857 Views
Oeh - 07/08/2011 01:54:19 PM 706 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM 800 Views
Re: Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 06/08/2011 07:08:25 PM 803 Views
Re: Hmmm... there's some truth to that - 07/08/2011 12:46:23 AM 797 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify... - 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM 825 Views
The questions go deeper - 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM 816 Views
Re: The questions go deeper - 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM 806 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question. - 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM 826 Views
TalkOrigins addresses this at length. - 06/08/2011 11:14:52 PM 881 Views
Not very much, but interesting none the less - 06/08/2011 11:38:36 PM 874 Views
Re: Natural selection - 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM 800 Views
Thanks a lot - 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM 946 Views
2 things - 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM 705 Views
Re: 2 things - 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM 923 Views
Re: 2 things - 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM 738 Views
My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM 769 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM 712 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM 866 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 07:02:27 PM 714 Views
Re: My best guess - 07/08/2011 09:09:57 PM 822 Views

Reply to Message