N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
[quote=GaryGaulin,April 24 2016,16:06][/quote]
| Quote | | I earlier showed the illustration for the EES which is clearly another variation of the usual natural selection based paradigm that can make no predictions at all in regards to "intelligence" that the theory I have predicts exists at multiple levels of biology. Having to accommodate the usual generalizations like "selection" and "drift" might work for a fuzzy view of what is happening but creates ambiguous variables that make computer modeling of reality impossible, but I'm sure it will lead to more all show and no go simulations that will at least keep the funding flowing. |
Their whole claim, and the reason Templeton gave them millions of dollars, was that they think that these things ARE NOT solely or primarily due to natural selection and that they have new processes and mechanisms.
Also, selection and drift are precisely defined and well documented processes, not ambiguous variables.
Also as NoName says, your nonsense (which is not a theory) presupposes intelligence at all levels, rather than predicting it. Predictions stem from a theory: if intelligence at all levels is your prediction, then you don't have anything left to constitute a theory.
Also, you are still wrong about "Darwinian theory": look at your own dang list.
|
