I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Darwinist snow-job consisting of esoteric high-falutin gobbledygook

An abstract of a scientific paper said,



A scenario for the evolution of a simple spherical multicellular organism from a single eukaryotic cell is proposed. Its evolution is based on environmentally induced alterations in the cell cycle, which then, by the Baldwin effect, become autonomous. Further patterning of this primitive organism--a Blastaea, could again involve environmentally induced signals like contact with the substratum, which could then become autonomous, by, perhaps, cytoplasmic localization and asymmetric cell division. Generating differences between cells based on positional information is probably very primitive, and is well conserved; its relation to asymmetric cell division is still unclear. Differentiation of new cell types can arise from non equivalence and gene duplication. Periodicity also evolved very early on. The origin of gastrulation may be related to mechanisms of feeding. The embryo may be evolutionarily privileged and this may facilitate the evolution of novel forms. Larvae are secondarily derived and direct development is the primitive condition as required by the continuity principle


The problem with critics of evolution theory is that they are too dumb to understand this stuff.

One of the advantages of evolution theory was the elegance of its simplicity --natural selection operating on random mutations. Now it looks like the evolutionary process itself is so complex that it was "intelligently designed" ---so we are back to the idea of ID

4 Comments:

Anonymous Chris P. said...

Your post is laughable. Evolution is about biology. Biology is a very complex subject. Therefore, in-depth examinations of evolution will likely be very complex. Your statement "Now it looks like the evolutionary process itself is so complex that it was "intelligently designed" ---so we are back to the idea of ID" is patently absurd. You're basically saying "I don't understand it, therefore goddidit".

Did you really expect evolutionary theory to remain as relatively simple as it was in Darwin's day? Would it not be reasonable to suppose that as more in-depth examinations of evolution are conducted, that those examinations would become necessarily more detailed and complex the more we learn about it? Look at cells. At first we thought they were relatively simple blobs. Now we know that they are intricate biological entities with many components. The complexity of the language used to describe cells has risen in tandem with the increased level of knowledge we have about them.

Leave the science to the scientists. Your weak attempt to conflate evolutionary theory with ID just because, gee, the words are all hard and stuff, just marks you as a risible dolt. Thanks, this is the funniest thing I've read in a while.

Friday, April 15, 2011 3:42:00 AM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>Leave the science to the scientists.<<<<<<

Bozo, you missed this sarcastic statement in my post --

The problem with critics of evolution theory is that they are too dumb to understand this stuff

If scientists cannot explain evolution theory in terms that laypeople can understand, how can laypeople be blamed for not acccepting it?

You really missed the point here, you stupid fathead--

Scientists' response to criticisms of evolution theory has been to raise the level of complexity of the theory to the point where, ironically, evolution itself appears to be "intelligently designwd."

Friday, April 15, 2011 11:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's an abstract of a scientific paper -- aimed at experts in the field -- and not aimed at laymen.

Friday, April 15, 2011 7:02:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

>>>>>It's an abstract of a scientific paper -- aimed at experts in the field -- and not aimed at laymen.<<<<

Doesn't matter --- it is still worthless crap

And how does this crap help our technological competitiveness?

Friday, April 15, 2011 8:21:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home