Evolution 150 yrs, Charles Darwin 200
Kassinger
Shades of grey Join Date: 2002-02-20 Member: 229Members, Constellation
Shades of grey Join Date: 2002-02-20 Member: 229Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Celebrating one of science's biggest ideas.</div>This being the forums of NS, I thought it fitting pointing out that this year is the 150th anniversary of <i>On the Origin of Species</i>. Evolution by natural selection has withstood 150 years of scrutiny and adapted to incorporate Mendelian genetics and formed into the current modern synthesis.
To quote a geneticist named Dobzhansky:"Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution."
This is for celebrating our greater knowledge and understanding through the use of the scientific method and our powerful ideas.
To quote a geneticist named Dobzhansky:"Nothing in biology makes sense, except in the light of evolution."
This is for celebrating our greater knowledge and understanding through the use of the scientific method and our powerful ideas.
Comments
Yes, and a big sign saying 'Ignorance is Bliss.'
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00hd5mf" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00hd5mf</a>
I'm actually not a fan of the "tree of life" animation / sequence at the end of the show. Never thought I'd be criticising David Attenborough, but there you go.
It explains the "what" part of evolution very well, but doesn't give any answers as to the "how" and "why". Personally, I know the how and the why, including the chemical evolution at the start, but that's not the point; people who aren't as well versed with the theory will pick up on that and use it as a criticism. I can already see in my mind creationists gearing up their argument. "See! They don't know why this happens, and they just pretend it doesn't matter!" and so on.
From an entertainment point of view, I get it. There's no way you could work an entire explanation into it and keep it as elegant (and eloquent) as it is now, but it still bugged me.
The "Tree of Life" animation can be watched seperately from the main episode (for all the non-UKers):
<center><object width="450" height="356"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H6IrUUDboZo"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H6IrUUDboZo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="450" height="356"></embed></object></center>
LIEK EVERYTING WUZ INTELLIGENTLY DESINGED
If it were some other random scientific theory, a quick overview in a popular programme would be enough for people to accept it as likely. But just as you said, something as mistrusted as evolution needs a more full explanation to avoid criticism based on some misunderstanding.
Cookie Monster is millenia old?
Heh I can see the trailer now...
[black screen with fading text]
Of the old Gods...
Few remain...
But one...
HAS AWAKENED!
<img src="http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff153/hausbak/cookie-monster3.jpg" border="0" class="linked-image" />
He adapted to the demands of a modern audience. EVOLUTION IN ACTION! (not really)
So why care for the discussion about evolution when most people that are against it really dont see much else than a god, and hardly ever has a viewpoint of their own. God put the lie in believe in alot of things. I for one support natural selection.
Only reason you even could argue <i>for</i> creationism is because evolution theory kind of stomps on the feet of creationists, though if evidence doesn't support a belief, there's absolutely positively NO argument there. You can't deny clear evidence to support a theory nor can you disprove a belief. It's like trying to disprove the scientific evidence of the planets revolving around the sun by insisting that the earth is the center of the universe.
With that said, before anyone argues pro-creationism, I strongly suggest you slowly and deliberately pull your fingertips from the keyborad and cease and desist further cerebral thought.
He adapted to the demands of a modern audience. EVOLUTION IN ACTION! (not really)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
cookies are a sometime food ¬_¬
Au contraire. I've come across arguments from creationists that do indeed try to deny clear evidence in the face of all the facts and even twist the facts in flawed, often logically fallacious arguments <i>for</i> creationism. One particular argument painted Science as just another Religion that required <i>Faith</i> of all things. IE, Faith in gravity, faith in the laws of motion etc etc. <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/confused-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="???" border="0" alt="confused-fix.gif" />
Anyway, let us not dwell on such subjects. Yay Darwin! **sets off fireworks**
Oh, and for fun, whenever the cookie monster speaks, throw in your own random meaning for what "Cookie!" can mean as though it were a euphemism. Many lulz to be had.
** moar fireworks **