Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » "Mathematical Challenges to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution"
  1. Results 31 to 60 of 78
  2. Page 2 of 3
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2
  7. 3
  9. Last

Thread: "Mathematical Challenges to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution"

post 1675815793 01-25-2023, 02:42 PM
-
#31
  1. Muzzlrpress
  1. Muzzlrpress
  3. Join Date: Jan 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 104,332
  6. Rep Power: 993953
Cliffs?
I'm back, bitches!
post 1675815903 01-25-2023, 02:44 PM
-
#32
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
OP lmk when they publish in a respected journal of biology. Look forward to seeing this revolutionary new theory. They surely aren't just crackpots trying to recruit support from the media because they lost the debate in the arena of science would they? Who would do that? Gee golly.
Reread the title. Your lack of intelligence, of the most basic kind, is showing again Wincel !!!
post 1675815943 01-25-2023, 02:45 PM
-
#33
  1. Muzzlrpress
  1. Muzzlrpress
  3. Join Date: Jan 2011
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 104,332
  6. Rep Power: 993953
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
Hard to think intelligent design is very likely when you consider childhood leukemia.
What about midgets? Surely they are God's little jokes?
I'm back, bitches!
post 1675816053 01-25-2023, 02:47 PM
-
#34
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By Muzzlrpress⏩
Cliffs?
A couple of philosophers and a computer scientist who have been trying for years to push Intelligent Design into classrooms have made a revolutionary breakthrough in the field of evolutionary biology, which none of them have any expertise in. They would publish their findings, but it's a huge conspiracy to keep them down. Somehow they never pass peer review. But if they get enough support from the media and public, they will surely bring the real truth to light. Now, won't you make a donation?

I'm the same way guys. Please fund my warp drive and my time machine. Trust me guys it really works!
post 1675816063 01-25-2023, 02:47 PM
-
#35
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Muzzlrpress⏩
Cliffs?
Three prominent academics/public intellectuals question the standard model of evolution that is taken as undeniable today in academia/education. They base their argument or doubt on certain mathematical arguments. A lot of miscers don't seem to grasp the title and refuse to watch the video. They also seem to think they are more intelligent then those guys (one is a STEM professor at Yale, another is editor of a science journal, and one left academia to focus on his scientific/religious beliefs in a private setting).
post 1675816123 01-25-2023, 02:49 PM
-
#36
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Anachron⏩
I think you're going crazy here... Who is this wincel you're trying to talk to?

The guy's username is MichaelMcFail.



I see what you did there.
LOL legit spilled some lemonade. Anachron, thanks a lot brah
post 1675816253 01-25-2023, 02:54 PM
-
#37
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Muzzlrpress⏩
What about midgets? Surely they are God's little jokes?
Haha I didn't spill any lemonade this time as I was prepared.
post 1675816573 01-25-2023, 03:02 PM
-
#38
  1. isingmodel
  2. Registered User
  1. isingmodel
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2019
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 11,925
  6. Rep Power: 57442
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
You were outed a few years ago by a couple miscers for frauding an MS in physics. Anyone actually in a doctoral program will know I am in one by our conversations, just like I know they are in one. That is how I knew Fraudhy was lying, and you were lying about the Master's when reading the couple dudes tearing you to pieces. There are things that can't be lied about and experiences and knowledge of those programs that can only come from being in one, or having gone through one.

Like wincel you are a worthless failure and you have to fraud about an education like Fraudhy (and apparently wincel according to some). You have no employment, no education, no possibility of reproducing/marriage/family. Sad
You've only started negging me and talking about my credentials in the past month or two, even though I've been posting on the R/P for years. Which tells us that you are, again, projecting your own fraudulent academic achievements on a dying forum full of equally scientifically illiterate clowns

Nobody anywhere believes you are about to achieve a PhD in anything, retard. You are pathetic, and your parents should be ashamed, ded fkn srs.
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
post 1675816773 01-25-2023, 03:07 PM
-
#39
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
You've only started negging me and talking about my credentials in the past month or two, even though I've been posting on the R/P for years. Which tells us that you are, again, projecting your own fraudulent academic achievements on a dying forum full of equally scientifically illiterate clowns

Nobody anywhere believes you are about to achieve a PhD in anything, retard. You are pathetic, and your parents should be ashamed, ded fkn srs.
You got outed as a fraud, a very typical Misc liberal, as several of you have been caught frauding about education and employment. You are a sad and pathetic creature, I am so sorry for you

I am doing quite well in my program and will be done soon. I am very happy about that. It is a feeling you will never know. Again, I am very sorry about that

You have also been very angry at me for a while, I am not sure why you are acting otherwise? You cuck rage routinely because I am actually a grad student. That can't be healthy for you.
post 1675817203 01-25-2023, 03:16 PM
-
#40
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
You got outed as a fraud, a very typical Misc liberal, as several of you have been caught frauding about education and employment. You are a sad and pathetic creature, I am so sorry for you

I am doing quite well in my program and will be done soon. I am very happy about that. It is a feeling you will never know. Again, I am very sorry about that

You have also been very angry at me for a while, I am not sure why you are acting otherwise? You cuck rage routinely because I am actually a grad student. That can't be healthy for you.
What's your specialization?
post 1675817473 01-25-2023, 03:20 PM
-
#41
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
What's your specialization?
Trying to dox me?
post 1675817673 01-25-2023, 03:23 PM
-
#42
  1. isingmodel
  2. Registered User
  1. isingmodel
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2019
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 11,925
  6. Rep Power: 57442
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
You got outed as a fraud, a very typical Misc liberal, as several of you have been caught frauding about education and employment. You are a sad and pathetic creature, I am so sorry for you

I am doing quite well in my program and will be done soon. I am very happy about that. It is a feeling you will never know. Again, I am very sorry about that

You have also been very angry at me for a while, I am not sure why you are acting otherwise? You cuck rage routinely because I am actually a grad student. That can't be healthy for you.
Again with the projection, when you're the one leaving me multiple long neg comments in the past couple months or so, whenever I call out one of your endless galaxy brained posts, or even at random

Recently you've also added in this bit where you call out my academics, despite me being on the R/P for years and this never coming up in any misc discussion previously, or ever even being mentioned by yourself before you felt inadequate enough about your own failure to do so recently

All things pointing very clearly to you being an inadequate, insecure, lying, projecting fraud. Incredibly sad, but also not unsurprising.
Misc Crypto Crew
BTC to $200k
post 1675817683 01-25-2023, 03:23 PM
-
#43
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Anachron⏩
Modus Operandi of the redditor.
Yup, That's why I have taken many precautions.
post 1675817693 01-25-2023, 03:23 PM
-
#44
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
Trying to dox me?
No. I intend to expose your lack of knowledge in science.
post 1675817743 01-25-2023, 03:24 PM
-
#45
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By isingmodel⏩
Again with the projection, when you're the one leaving me multiple long neg comments in the past couple months or so, whenever I call out one of your endless galaxy brained posts, or even at random

Recently you've also added in this bit where you call out my academics, despite me being on the R/P for years and this never coming up in any misc discussion previously, or ever even being mentioned by yourself before

All things pointing very clearly to you being an inadequate, insecure, lying, projecting fraud. Incredibly sad, but also not unsurprising.
Ok, fraud.
post 1675817803 01-25-2023, 03:25 PM
-
#46
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
No. I intend to expose your lack of knowledge in science.
Watch the video in the op first.
post 1675817873 01-25-2023, 03:26 PM
-
#47
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
Watch the video in the op first.
Why can't they publish it? Show me the peer reviewed technical publication.
post 1675818143 01-25-2023, 03:32 PM
-
#48
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
Why can't they publish it? Show me the peer reviewed technical publication.
You have never read one single academic article in your life. You scan them or read the abstract or just plagiarize the pop article that links to it. Watch the video first and then understand what the whole point of their argument is. You still don't seem to grasp what is happening. Watch it first.

If you want to read the essay that prompted the discussion in the video, it is from Gelenrnter's essay reviewing Meyer's book in Claremont Review of Books, not a technical article but explains what lead to the questioning of the theory:https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/giving-up-darwin/

Try to actually read something for once in your life. Serious.
post 1675818293 01-25-2023, 03:34 PM
-
#49
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Anachron⏩
He's just a pseudointellectual shill who parrots mainstream media talking points.

Also, I think he's one of the groomer defender R&P's, but I might be wrong, and CBA to check.
Yeah, and I think he thinks everyone forgot about him being shredded over his claims of an MS in physics by a couple of miscers a few years ago because they questioned his actual knowledge of physics beyond generic pop physics.
post 1675818383 01-25-2023, 03:35 PM
-
#50
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
You have never read one single academic article in your life. You scan them or read the abstract or just plagiarize the pop article that links to it. Watch the video first and then understand what the whole point of their argument is. You still don't seem to grasp what is happening. Watch it first.

If you want to read the essay that prompted the discussion in the video, it is from Gelenrnter's essay reviewing Meyer's book in Claremont Review of Books, not a technical article but explains what lead to the questioning of the theory:https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/giving-up-darwin/
Not a technical article huh? Why not? Where is the technical paper showing their work? Does it even exist? Half baked ideas are cool and all, but in science, you actually publish your work.

Keep in mind they are attacking a scientific theory with a lot of evidence to support it. It will probably take more than a youtube video to change the minds of biologists, don't you agree?
post 1675818663 01-25-2023, 03:40 PM
-
#51
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
Not a technical article huh? Why not? Where is the technical paper showing their work? Does it even exist? Half baked ideas are cool and all, but in science, you actually publish your work.
Watch the video and read the essay. You are not doing anything else, right?

And stop ignoring Anachron. He is pointing out some important things.
post 1675818723 01-25-2023, 03:41 PM
-
#52
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By Anachron⏩
So can you link us to the technical paper that was published by Dr. Louis Picker that explains how the mRNA vaccines aren't gene therapies?

Or are you holding others to standards you yourself don't feel the need to follow?

Edit : Reps to whoever quotes this post - McFail has decided to flip the chessboard over as soon as he realized I checkmated him (put me on ignore).
Quoted for McFail. No need for reps brah.
post 1675818823 01-25-2023, 03:43 PM
-
#53
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
Not a technical article huh? Why not? Where is the technical paper showing their work? Does it even exist? Half baked ideas are cool and all, but in science, you actually publish your work.

Keep in mind they are attacking a scientific theory with a lot of evidence to support it. It will probably take more than a youtube video to change the minds of biologists, don't you agree?
They are raising some doubts and questioning certain aspects. It is very interesting. I stress--watch it and think about what they are raising, hence the title "Mathematical challenges..."
post 1675819093 01-25-2023, 03:49 PM
-
#54
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By DDSF1⏩
They are raising some doubts and questioning certain aspects. It is very interesting. I stress--watch it and think about what they are raising, hence the title "Mathematical challenges..."
I'll wait for the publication. Please update if this novel work ever is published. Curious to see how this established theory is wrong.
post 1675820273 01-25-2023, 04:08 PM
-
#55
  1. GreatOldOne
  2. Cthulhu fhtagn
  1. GreatOldOne
  2. Cthulhu fhtagn
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Posts: 39,712
  5. Rep Power: 210947
A problem with math based rarity arguments for design is that probability becomes useless.

Everything is designed, not just proteins and people. Where you are sitting right now is designed. Nothing can count as evidence.

However, it's still subject to criticism when you point out disease and frailties. This is my design? Is this really a good design? The best possible design?

Inference to the best explanation suggests...probably not, and if it is then you have no idea how or why. So it doesn't seem predictive and certainly not scientifically usable.

Imo there's no need to think evolution eliminates a God concept. Understanding evolution would be understanding how God works the universe...at least in part.
post 1675820413 01-25-2023, 04:10 PM
-
#56
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  1. MichaelMcFail
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Jan 2023
  4. Posts: 4,454
  5. Rep Power: 0
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
A problem with math based rarity arguments for design is that probability becomes useless.

Everything is designed, not just proteins and people. Where you are sitting right now is designed. Nothing can count as evidence.

However, it's still subject to criticism when you point out disease and frailties. This is my design? Is this really a good design? The best possible design?

Inference to the best explanation suggests...probably not, and if it is then you have no idea how or why. So it doesn't seem predictive and certainly not scientifically usable.

Imo there's no need to think evolution eliminates a God concept. Understanding evolution would be understanding how God works the universe...at least in part.
Math based arguments are perfectly fine. But one can't really formally evaluate them until they are made rigorous and published in a technical paper.
post 1675820663 01-25-2023, 04:14 PM
-
#57
  1. GreatOldOne
  2. Cthulhu fhtagn
  1. GreatOldOne
  2. Cthulhu fhtagn
  3. Join Date: Jan 2013
  4. Posts: 39,712
  5. Rep Power: 210947
Originally Posted By MichaelMcFail⏩
Math based arguments are perfectly fine. But one can't really formally evaluate them until they are made rigorous and published in a technical paper.
No, they're not fine. They're no better than my nose is designed because glasses fit.
post 1675820793 01-25-2023, 04:15 PM
-
#58
  1. ClivesTriceps
  2. Indian troll farm bot
  1. ClivesTriceps
  2. Indian troll farm bot
  3. Join Date: Nov 2019
  4. Posts: 19,776
  5. Rep Power: 330918
Imagine not being intelligent enough to know that scientists use the word theory for something that's been tested and verified multiple times and not know about the word "hypothesis"

Christcels are truly the most dumb and judgemental retards on the planet.
Wort ew in th wold.
post 1675821643 01-25-2023, 04:26 PM
-
#59
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By ClivesTriceps⏩
Imagine not being intelligent enough to know that scientists use the word theory for something that's been tested and verified multiple times and not know about the word "hypothesis"

Christcels are truly the most dumb and judgemental retards on the planet.
Two of the three people being interviewed in the OP are Jewish. One is an atheist and the other is agnostic. You have no idea what you are talking about, watch the video first.
post 1675821763 01-25-2023, 04:29 PM
-
#60
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  1. DDSF1
  2. Better than you
  3. Join Date: Dec 2016
  4. Posts: 27,860
  5. Rep Power: 260144
Originally Posted By GreatOldOne⏩
A problem with math based rarity arguments for design is that probability becomes useless.

Everything is designed, not just proteins and people. Where you are sitting right now is designed. Nothing can count as evidence.

However, it's still subject to criticism when you point out disease and frailties. This is my design? Is this really a good design? The best possible design?

Inference to the best explanation suggests...probably not, and if it is then you have no idea how or why. So it doesn't seem predictive and certainly not scientifically usable.

Imo there's no need to think evolution eliminates a God concept. Understanding evolution would be understanding how God works the universe...at least in part.
I am not a fan of intelligent design either, and I agree that, "Understanding evolution would be understanding how God works the universe...at least in part." However, I do appreciate Berlinski, Gelernter, and Meyer, and I liked their discussion and Gelernter's essay.
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts