"Darwin is dead, and we have killed him!"

Mathematical challenges to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, with #DavidBerlinski, #StephenMeyer, and #DavidGelernter

Based on new #evidence and #knowledge that functioning #proteins are extremely rare, should #Darwin’s theory of evolution be dismissed, dissected, developed or replaced with a theory of intelligent design?

Has #Darwinism really failed? #PeterRobinson discusses it with David #Berlinski, David #Gelernter, and Stephen #Meyer, who have raised #doubts about Darwin’s #theory in their two books and essay, respectively #TheDeniableDarwin, #DarwinsDoubt, and “Giving Up Darwin” (published in the Claremont Review of Books).

#Robinson asks them to convince him that the term “species” has not been defined by the authors to Darwin’s disadvantage. Gelernter replies to this and explains, as he expressed in his essay, that he sees Darwin’s theory as #beautiful (which made it difficult for him to give it up): “Beauty is often a telltale sign of #truth. Beauty is our guide to the intellectual #universe—walking beside us through the uncharted wilderness, pointing us in the right direction, keeping us on track—most of the time.” Gelernter notes that there’s no reason to doubt that Darwin successfully explained the small adjustments by which an #organism #adapts to local circumstances: changes to fur density or wing style or beak shape. Yet there are many reasons to doubt whether Darwin can answer the hard questions and explain the big picture—not the fine-tuning of #existing #species but the #emergence of new ones. Meyer explains Darwinism as a comprehensive #synthesis, which gained #popularity for its #appeal. Meyer also mentions that one cannot disregard that Darwin’s book was based on the facts present in the 19th century.

Robinson then asks the panel whether Darwin’s theory of gradual evolution is contradicted by the explosion of fossil records in the #Cambrian period, when there was a sudden occurrence of many species over the span of approximately seventy million years (Meyer’s noted that the date range for the Cambrian period is actually narrowing). Meyer replies that even #population #genetics, the mathematical branch of Darwinian theory, has not been able to support the explosion of fossil records during the Cambrian period, biologically or geologically.

Robinson than asks about Darwin’s main problem, #molecular #biology, to which Meyer explains, comparing it to digital world, that building a new biological function is similar to building a new #code, which Darwin could not understand in his era. Berlinski does not second this and states that the cell represents very complex machinery, with complexities increasing over time, which is difficult to explain by a theory. Gelernter throws light on this by giving an example of a necklace on which the positioning of different beads can lead to different #permutations and #combinations; it is really tough to choose the best possible combination, more difficult than finding a needle in a haystack. He seconds Meyer’s statement that it was impossible for Darwin to understand that in his era, since the math is…

#science #biology #mathematics #maths #bio #research #evidence #empiricism
@Theaitetos (テアイテトス) The article is utter crap. Dismissed a hundred times before.

The first line says that:

"Based on new evidence and knowledge that functioning proteins are extremely rare"

And this question has been asked and dismissed. Prteins are complex, so are chrystals, they simply exist, because they can. That the way of the world. Everybody can see it. Its not a tornado hitting a pool of amino acids and build a jumbo jet, its just evolution in the physical world combined with time, billions of years of time.

Things and we exist by chance, because there actually is the chance.
@Mudflap Darwins theories are no "church", they are simple presentations of evidence. No need to hold any "service".
Mudflap diaspora
missed the point again.

enjoy the sound of one hand clapping.
@MudflapYou dont even search for a point, you simply believe, what you are programmed to believe.
BR 549 diaspora
well of course he is, he'd be 210 years old. but 'we' did not kill him.

"intelligent design" is the philosophical equivalent of dismissing centuries of physics and geography and mapping the earth onto a square board balanced on the back of a giant turtle.

Darwin's observations are still correct, just as Galileo's observations are correct physics. And in very much the way physics has been improved with Newton's mathematics, and then Einstein and Dirac and the quantum dudes, evolutionary theory has been improved and revised since it was first published.
The amount of "missing the point" is unfathomable. It's almost as if these guys haven't learned how to read & write.
tzafrir diaspora
That's amazing! Those folks managed to kill someone who has been dead for over 125 years!

Basically a bunch of fellows of the Discovery Institute (Creationists). And sure enough, they manage to poke some holes in Darwin's theories. Oh well, Biology has moved on since. We don't think something is correct just because it was written in the book "The Origin of Species".
Biology has moved on since
Darwin wasn't real biology

BR 549 diaspora
if you want a lot of horseshit, just follow some horses around.

this debate among philosophers who are obviously unacquainted with life sciences, is hard to watch.

for one small example, they fail to understand how the genetic code builds on what has already been built. the "Cambrian Explosion" probably had a lot to do with 2 things: sexual reproduction, and Hox genes. Nature doesn't have to reinvent cellular respiration for every new species, and most of our DNA does not code for proteins. It is sequences that control whole galaxies of other genes.

(that guy on the right was almost killed by Ted Kacszynski . . . )
since evolution has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Abiogenesis and the origin of life, this entire argument is a strawman

something from nothing and life from non living...

it all makes perfect sense now.
puff diaspora
This is not very useful as it has no useful references to their writing. So one can learn what they are saying and the quality of their arguments.
arf diaspora
life begets life. That’s amazing! Those folks managed to kill someone who has been dead for over 125 years!
Glad you're not one of those n00bs who completely failed to understand the famous quote referenced in the headline. Oh wait…! xD