It is not always the magnitude of the differences observed between species that must determine specific distinctions, but the constant preservation of those differences in reproduction.
Jean-Baptiste LamarckTag: science biology evolution natural-selection reproduction species
What I should have said is that he thinks that there is a conflict between evolutionary biology and theism. Dennett thinks that evolutionary theory shows that it is irrational to believe that God exists; he thinks that the theory has this consequence because he thinks that the Design Argument was the only remotely plausible argument for God’s existence and evolutionary theory destroyed that argument.
Elliott SoberTag: science evolution design evolutionary-biology daniel-dennett design-argument design-argument-debunked
It is essential for genetic material to be able to make exact copies of itself; otherwise growth would produce disorder, life could not originate, and favourable forms would not be perpetuated by natural selection.
Maurice WilkinsTag: science evolution natural-selection nobel-laureate dna origin-of-life genetic-material
Permanence of instinct must go with permanence of form...The history of the present must teach us the history of the past.
[Referring to studying fossil remains of the weevil, largely unchanged to the present day.]
Tag: science past biology history evolution instinct fossil form
Not only had I got rid of the theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution.
Andrew CarnegieTag: science truth atheism atheist evolution theology supernatural
I simply would not accede to being forced into this, and would frequently be kept out of classes because of irreverent comments and mocking this religious stuff. Frankly, it stayed with me to this day. In fact, don't get me going. I'm almost as bad as Richard Dawkins on this issue.
Richard E. LeakeyTag: science biology atheism atheist evolution anthropology richard-dawkins dawkins paleontology irreverent mocking-religion
I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially to the extent to which it has been applied, will be one of the greatest jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity it has.
Malcolm MuggeridgeTag: evolution joke credulity gullibility darwin posterity neo-darwinism closed-mindedness theory-of-evolution
Of the many species that have existed on earth--estimates run as high as fifty billion--more than ninety-nine per cent have disappeared. In the light of this, it is sometimes joked that all of life today amounts to little more than a rounding error.
more than a rounding error.
Who gave the decisive deathblow to the argument from design on the basis of biological complexity? Both philosophers and biologists are divided on this point (Oppy 1996; Dawkins 1986; Sober 2008). Some have claimed that the biological design argument did not falter until Darwin provided a proper naturalistic explanation for adaptive complexity; others maintain that David Hume had already shattered the argument to pieces by sheer logical force several decades earlier, in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (Hume 2007 [1779]). Elliott Sober has been among the philosophers who maintain that, as Hume was not in a position to offer a serious alternative explanation of adaptive complexity, it is hardly surprising that 'intelligent people strongly favored the design hypothesis' (Sober 2000, 36). In his most recent book, however, Sober (2008) carefully develops what he thinks is the most charitable reconstruction of the design argument, and proceeds to show why it is defective for intrinsic reasons (for earlier version of this argument, see Sober 1999, 2002). Sober argues that the design argument can be rejected even without the need to consider alternative explanations for adaptive complexity (Sober 2008, 126): 'To see why the design argument is defective, there is no need to have a view as to whether Darwin’s theory of evolution is true' (Sober 2008, 154).
Maarten BoudryTag: science biology atheism complexity evolution charles-darwin darwin richard-dawkins dawkins david-hume biological-complexity graham-oppy theory-of-evolution argument-for-atheism argument-from-design-refuted atheistic-argument deathblow design-argument-refuted elliott-sober intelligent-design-refuted
Man is a product of nature, a part of the Universe. The Universe is operated under exact natural laws. Man is a product of millions of years of evolution. He adapts himself to the laws of nature or he perishes.
James Hervey JohnsonTag: science man biology humanity nature universe struggle evolution naturalism materialism laws-of-nature adaptation laws natural-laws
« prima precedente
Pagina 44 di 47.
prossimo ultimo »
Data privacy
Imprint
Contact
Diese Website verwendet Cookies, um Ihnen die bestmögliche Funktionalität bieten zu können.