Evolution Theory Is Not Necessary For Science | Dr Philip Stott

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 10 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 22

  • @REAVER117
    @REAVER117 5 місяців тому +1

    "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution" - Theodosius Dobzhansky
    So good luck doing any meaningful research in biology without an understanding of Evolution.

    • @FlowDeFlowDrainage
      @FlowDeFlowDrainage 2 місяці тому

      The whole of biology works just fine without evolution. We can observe biology in the field every day, but we can't observe evolution at all. Evolution does not make any predictions about biology as it is believed to be a stochastic and we have no information about how probable mutations are.
      All evolution is good for is inventing untestable stories about how things came to be.

  • @billjohnson9472
    @billjohnson9472 4 місяці тому

    the god part is silly, there is no evidence of any gods or supernatural beings said to swarm around gods. or evidence of "afterlife".

    • @FlowDeFlowDrainage
      @FlowDeFlowDrainage 2 місяці тому

      I hear people say that a lot. What would evidence for god look like to you?

    • @billjohnson9472
      @billjohnson9472 2 місяці тому

      @@FlowDeFlowDrainage any objective and repeatable demonstration of gods, or any of the large number of supernatural beings said to swirl around this god would suffice. for example the ability for any of them to appear before one and interact by request.
      raising a dead and buried person in front of a number of currently living witnesses would be good; according to stories this is possible.
      these gods are said to be omniscient enough to know what would convince us, so if they exist they apparently just choose not to supply such evidence.

    • @FlowDeFlowDrainage
      @FlowDeFlowDrainage 2 місяці тому

      @@billjohnson9472 Why don't you suggest an experimental design for us.

    • @billjohnson9472
      @billjohnson9472 2 місяці тому

      @@FlowDeFlowDrainage
      here is one of many possibilities for an experimental design.
      1. summon any supernatural being to appear in a cemetery.
      2. request being to raise a selected buried person from the dead, having been dead for at least one year.
      3. have currently living relatives verify that the reanimated person is in fact their dead relative via interacting with them.
      4. repeat the experiment a number of times to get a statistical metric of the success rate of the process. then analyse the positive and negative success rate. Any rate above 50% can be deemed a success. This would be quite strong evidence for a supernatural world.
      anonymously authored story books record that this was done a number of times a few thousand years ago, so it should be repeatable now, right?

    • @billjohnson9472
      @billjohnson9472 2 місяці тому

      @@FlowDeFlowDrainage
      1) summon a supernatural being of some nature
      2) select a person in a graveyard buried for at least one year
      3) have supernatural being reanimate person
      4) have living relatives of said person verify identity by interacting with this person.
      repeat > 10 times to get a statistical sampling of the efficacy. over 50% success rate is deemed a successful demonstration of supernatural powers.

  • @PhrontDoor
    @PhrontDoor 5 місяців тому

    Hilarious that his former 'journal' is expressly predicated on evolution. First results in search of the journal shows an article titled :
    "EVOLUTION and the latitudinal diversity gradient: speciation, extinction and biogeography"
    and another article "Latitudinal gradients and geographic ranges of exotic species: implications for biogeography" with the sole writer in the Sax Department of Ecology, EVOLUTION and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA...
    The journal has over 20 more articles with that in their title. HIS journal basically.
    We can dismiss the bible, on the other hand because ZERO of all discoveries ever made were predicated on scripture.