RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (622) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: April 23 2016,10:35   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ April 23 2016,11:10)
Larry Moran wrote a couple of wonderful articles concerning the funding boondoggle that I earlier mentioned.

sandwalk.blogspot.ca/2016/04/templeton-gives-8-million-to-prove-that.html    
Quote
But my real beef is with the outdated view of evolution held by EES proponents. To a large extent they are fighting a strawman version of evolution. They think that the "Modern Synthesis" or "Neo-Darwinism" is the current view of evolutionary theory. They are attacking the old-fashioned view of evolutionary theory that was common in the 1960s but was greatly modified by the incorporation of Neutral Theory and increased emphasis on random genetic drift. The EES proponents all seem to have been asleep when the real revolution occurred.


sandwalk.blogspot.ca/2016/04/proponents-of-extended-evolutionary.html    
Quote
They didn't do their homework. That doesn't inspire confidence in their ability to overthrow modern evolutionary theory.


This is another excellent example of what N.Wells considers to be academic excellence with "a grasp of the fundamentals in the fields you are trying to critique; standard terminology or decent redefinitions, including operational definitions; multiple mutually exclusive hypotheses; logically valid testable, falsifiable predictions; actual relevant evidence; answers for criticisms; ground-truthing for your model; and conclusions that are logically derived from your model as opposed to being ungrounded assertions."

Again, you are parasitizing the words and work of others.
What have you done?
What have you accomplished?

What science has been done based on your work?

All the evidence suggests that if it weren't for the total lack of attention you would be a laughingstock.
That actual research or researchers reach conclusions or make statements that you (and no one else) finds congruent with your fantasies is in no way support for your fantasies.
As N.Wells pointed out, even a stopped clock is correct twice a day.  It's still a stopped clock and useless for telling time.
You should be so lucky as to be only that useless.

  
  18634 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (622) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]