SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Earlier this month, a long kept list of Ph.D. scientists who “dissent from Darwinism” reached a milestone — it crossed the threshold of 1,000 signers.
“There are 1,043 scientists on the ‘A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism’ list. It passed the 1,000 mark this month,” said Sarah Chaffee, a program officer for the Discovery Institute, which maintains the list.
“A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism” is a simple, 32-word statement that reads: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
https://www.thecollegefix.com/more-than-1000-scientists-sign-dissent-from-darwinism-statement/
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
More than 1,000 Scientists have Signed ‘Dissent from Darwinism’ Statement
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 181 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Twenty two thousand days.
Twenty two thousand days.
It's not a lot.
It's all you've got.
Twenty two thousand days.
-- Moody Blues, "Twenty Two Thousand Days"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AndyTheAbsurd on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:16PM (40 children)
Where's the list, so I know which "scientists" I can safely ignore?
Please note my username before responding. You may have been trolled.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:19PM (3 children)
Redirect to PDF: https://www.discovery.org/f/660 [discovery.org]
(Score: 5, Informative) by aristarchus on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:59PM
And then there is this:
Wow, Wikipedia! Look at all those citations!
Further:
Intelligent Design, eh? Paley's Watchmaker argument, still? Again?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @09:21PM (1 child)
Looks like many of them retired, looking forward to meeting their creator. And 1000 is not exactly a large number. Like 6 million PhDs in America alone ... so yeah, scrapping the floor.
Also, the question is dubious. Might as well ask "does Darwin explain how life was created?". And the answer is obviously no. Evolution is a process, not a "42" answer.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @09:23PM
Are we talking 1000 PhDs in Theology?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:30PM (16 children)
So you are going to ignore global warming then? Because one of the signers (David Chapman) wrote this:
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2010EO370001 [wiley.com]
(Score: 5, Informative) by fyngyrz on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:38PM (15 children)
"ignoring a signer of something stupid" != "ignoring an entire area of science"
--
Some drink from the fountain of knowledge. Others gargle.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:20PM (14 children)
Looking at the departments and degrees it looks like almost all of them look like they study global warming.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:32PM (12 children)
More generally, then:
"ignoring 1,000 signers of something stupid" != "ignoring an entire area of science"
--
My friend said he didn't understand cloning.
I said "That makes two of us."
(Score: 3, Touché) by DannyB on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:36PM
"Ignoring 1,000 singers of something stupid" != "ignoring an entire genre of music"
Every performance optimization is a grate wait lifted from my shoulders.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by urza9814 on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:43PM (10 children)
It doesn't seem particularly stupid though. The name certainly sounds like it is, but if the quote in the summary is actually the complete statement then I don't really see the problem. It's not saying evolution is a lie, Darwin is a fraud, and intelligent design is the only valid explanation. It's just saying that there might be a bit more to the story and it would be good to keep looking. If you think that statement alone is enough to disqualify someone's opinion...then that's reason enough for me to disqualify yours. If every scientist in the world said that the evidence we have is enough and there's nothing more to research, THAT would be a much bigger issue. A few hundred scientists who want to keep looking is a few hundred scientists who are doing their job.
I'd also like to know how exactly they're getting these signatures though. A list of scientists who actively sought out an organization opposing Darwinian theory is quite different from a list of scientists who were mailed a letter asking "Would you agree with the following statement...?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:49PM (7 children)
Loonies often claim that they're only asking questions. The thing is that those questions have usually already been answered out in the real world, but to people who were raised in an alt-Christian, anti-science, cult, science is just something those Liberals do.
(Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:56PM (6 children)
Loonies like Galileo right? Everyone knew the bible was the true word of God so it must be right.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:13PM (3 children)
Holy false equivalency! They laughed at the Wright brothers, and they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:22PM (2 children)
It's not a false equivalency, it is meant to teach that this metric being used is worthless.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @11:22PM (1 child)
^^^
I am saddened by the vitriol in this thread. The idea here is that we shouldn't heap scorn on people with different opinions as long as those opinions are not causing any problems for others. The statement signed by 1000+ people is quite vague and they even specifically say they aren't opposed to evolution just that they think there might be something else going on.
I personally wouldn't sign that document, but I have no problem with some scientists being skeptical and promoting a wider viewpoint that might lead to a deeper understanding of evolution.
Remember, there is a disagree mod.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @03:08AM
Fine and well, I have no problem with that, the problem I do see here is that the 'something else' being posited/promoted is the old magic sky fairy (funnily, it always seems to be of the judeo-christian variety...)
These scientists might be honourable men, but the people behind this document?, the religious loons propagating this ID nonsense have a somewhat more medieval outlook, the sort that normally leads to the old 'look, god did it, right, and that's all you need to know, question it and we've a stake and some kindling ready..'
Scientific debate is healthy, this isn't. This is another example of the relidges trying to give their medieval superstitions a degree of scientific credibility, no matter how risible it appears to be. I say it's risible, it is, until you factor in that the sheeple are easily led, all they'll be told by their good shepherds is that 'see! even Scientists think Darwin is wrong' then it becomes somewhat more dangerous.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday February 15 2019, @12:39AM (1 child)
Loonies like Galileo right? Everyone knew the bible was the true word of God so it must be right.
So the science guy provided evidence for his claims and the religious guys provided no evidence but said it was false because god.
Sounds familiar....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @01:05AM
You are still totally ignorant about that time, even though there was just a thread on here about it? Galileo had theory, the church had the evidence.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday February 15 2019, @12:30AM
The AC has it right. This is just a layer of the onion with plenty more layers hiding the ulterior motives that underlie most of the criticism. Consider this. Why do we need to be told that there might be more to the story and it would be good to keep looking? After all, we do have a lot of history with things being more complicated than we first expected in science. It is entirely possible, for example, that aliens may have manipulated Earth or human evolution in a way that we haven't yet detected.
The problem is that this is an argument from ignorance fallacy. Evolution dynamics are quite powerful and can by itself explain all the weird history and traits we see with terrestrial life after its creation (as noted, the genesis of life being a different thing, but something with its own plausible theory). If we are to accept that some sort of non-evolutionary changes happened to Earth life, then we need evidence for those changes, not merely a gap in our knowledge.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday February 15 2019, @02:16AM
Exactly. If no one ever asked Why? or How? or What? or Where? or When? we would still be huddled in caves, depending on the Fire Shaman to keep the fire going so we can cook our greasy mastodon. People tend to forget that those who buck the trends are most responsible for advancements.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:05PM
Yet another reason to ignore this stupid crowd.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:33PM (8 children)
Here's the list. [discovery.org]
Notice how few of them are biologists or in relevant fields.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:53PM (1 child)
Kinda like the 97%
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 18 2019, @04:43AM
I modded you "Touché" because that was the closest thing to "Ouch".
(Score: 2, Interesting) by fakefuck39 on Thursday February 14 2019, @09:19PM (5 children)
I think this here is a case of fox vs cnn, men's rights retards vs feminist retards, etc. The list is almost entirely scientists, and almost entirely in relevant fields - bilology, chemistry, genetics, etc. I'll assume your comment was sarcasm.
The issue is, idiots, like people posting most comments here, are looking to attack creationism and religion, and look for a fight where there is none. First, a thousand scientists is literally nothing - it's a statistical decimal rounding error when looking at all the scientists in the same fields. The statement they sign also does not claim evolution is false. Actually most creationists don't even say evolution is false. Evolution is taken as fact, you know, since we can see it happen and we have dogs and shit. Natural Selection is a possible theory that explains the directions evolution follows.
Nothing here, nor these scientists are saying there is no evolution, or that creationism is correct. They are saying Natural Selection as a theory to explain the fact of evolution, needs to be closer examined for alternatives - and there's nothing wrong with that besides being a waste of time - but not your time. Their time. Here's another theory to explain evolution, which is highly unlikely, and highly funny, but possible. A long time ago, from a galaxy far away, some weird beings came here and liked to watch monkeys fuck. They bred a bunch of smart monkeys together for a while and we got the first dog. I mean man - the first man.
We need to stop putting assumptions in people's mouths so we could say "that's a stupid thing they said" - they're not the ones who said the stupid thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @10:46PM (1 child)
That's not a theory, it's ancient aliens.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @11:27PM
I hear you're looking for a new hairdresser.
Can I interest you in the https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/babylon5/images/2/23/Londo_motfl.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20061004061720 [nocookie.net] ?
(Score: 2) by Weasley on Friday February 15 2019, @03:40PM (2 children)
While you're correct this statement doesn't actually say evolution is wrong, but come on. The signatories know exactly that they're attaching their name to a conservative political entity that pushes intelligent design. They're not making the intellectually honest statement that there could be more to evolution than meets the eye. They're making a statement that God has been influencing the process.
(Score: 0) by fakefuck39 on Saturday February 16 2019, @07:50PM
they are making the statement they made, nothing more. while their beliefs are obvious and the organization is obvious - do you see them making a creationism statement? no. they recognize their view is one of faith not science, and limit their statement to science. they would like to prove god is influencing the process, but they do not call for investigation into proving god, or disproving evolution. they as scientists call for a scientific investigation into natural selection, and as scientists leave the bible out of it. the only one making a statement about god here is you - as was my point.
(Score: 2) by DeVilla on Thursday February 21 2019, @03:08AM
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:54PM (2 children)
Maybe these are the last real scientists. You see, Science is not blind acceptance of the textbooks, it is seeking and challenging the boundaries of our (limited) knowledge. Real science expands those boundaries by questioning, looking at thing a bit differently and coming up with better theories which can then be proved out. Einstein did not finf his theory written up in a textbook. Darwin proposed a THEORY and there has been a lot of manufactured "fact" around that. Evolution is the Redpill of the we-dont-want-to-be-accountable Humanist circle. So it has become a politicized religion (belief system). Good, genuine science says: challenge it, test it, look harder. Nothing bad with that. If you get all frothy over it, maybe it is time to examine how brainwashed you have become, and look at who did it to you and why. Wake up, Neo...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:11PM
Skepticism is welcome, and should be encouraged. We need people who find some flaw somewhere, to help advance science and theories.
But this statement is like kids saying they don't like mushrooms. There's nothing scientific about it.
"I am skeptical that grand canyon exists, because its layers and topography are complex. You can explain it, but I don't like your idea"
As expected, the overwhelming majority of people who signed are from the US, followed pretty far behind by Canada.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @08:23PM
Most of the fossil record shows generally gradual change. We can trace almost every hand bone back to fossils of ancient fish. And we have seen organisms "change" by a relatively minor degree by filtering who reproduces and who doesn't in labs.
While both of these are not perfect evidence of large-scale evolution by natural selection, they certainly point in that direction.
The alternative theory is that a deity winked them into existence. However, we have not seem ANY repeatable small scale winking into existence. Therefore, N.S. remains the best explanation to fit the evidence so far, going by what has been observed and what has been repeatedly observed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:20PM
A larger list of "scientists" who dissent from science would be more instructive. Creationists and Social Constructionists side by side where they belong.
(Score: 5, Informative) by aristarchus on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:26PM
Know your right wing propaganda factories and Ruskie Fronts: From Wikipedia:
Not be confused with the other kind of non-conservative libertarians, or religious conservatives who are not at all libertarian, but just hate science, and what it has done to the rather lucrative scam they had going on.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday February 14 2019, @10:08PM (1 child)
A good first pass would be to ask the scientist if they've ever had to debug software problems/configurations left them by a predecessor. I bet you could even do it as a survey.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @08:12PM
Chaos and complexity are not necessarily the same thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @10:15PM (1 child)
A little over 1000 folks signed. UC Berkeley has around 1700 faculty members. Its a research school so all the faculty does research of some kind or another.
So fewer folk have signed the list then there are researchers at one University.
World wide that will most likely work out to less then .0001% of scientists have signed the list.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday February 15 2019, @10:26AM
That's 1 Scientist in a million. And 1000 Scientists, very proudly, signed. So we have 1000 million Scientists around our World. Otherwise known as a billion. It's too many. Much more than we need. And they're causing many problems. The so-called Climate Change and the everything else. Very bad situation!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @03:18PM
If we only count the people on the list who have a PHD from an accredited university with their degree in Biochemistry, Biology, Neuroscience, and other hard sciences where they could actually be counted as an expert in evolution, how long is the list? Of those, how many are actual practicing scientists?