Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 15 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday February 14 2019, @06:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the scientific-method dept.

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/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:05PM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @07:05PM (#801113)

    Evolution has been not a "hypothesis" but an engineering technique for a number of years already. And still same old non-arguments get reiterated ad nauseum.
    I guess the only way to convince some people, is to actually evolve a biosphere in a simulation.

    And then, some CPU time after, in that simulation, some professors will sign a statement...

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Touché=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by RandomFactor on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:38PM

    by RandomFactor (3682) Subscriber Badge on Thursday February 14 2019, @08:38PM (#801194) Journal

    If you consider that there is but one non-simulation reality, and potentially endless numbers of simulated-realities.

    The chances that we are not living in a simulation don't look very good.

    --
    В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @09:58PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @09:58PM (#801245)

    I'm certain that there are plenty of people who use GPS to drive to meetings where they discuss how general relativity is obviously wrong, so please don't expect viable practical applications of a theory to stop those who say the theory is bullshit.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @11:40PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 14 2019, @11:40PM (#801281)

      Point taken, but you could have used a better GPS example because, to be fair, the general relativistic corrections to GPS aren't big enough to mess up your driving directions, given how large roads are and how far apart they are spaced.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @05:25AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 15 2019, @05:25AM (#801422)

        Without relativistic corrections, ie using only Newtonian physics, GPS co-ordinates would drift by up to 60 miles a day.