Evolution, maybe someone can explain?

[Dimi95]

Darwin said that it was an apt description of what he was talking about.

Why do we still even have this conversation after you were shown to be wrong hundreds and hundreds and half a dozen threads ago? How many times for how many years did I correct you et al about this?

Is it possible to just drop it?

Read this , please.

In the Struggle for Survival, the Fittest Win Out at the Expense of Their Rivals – Quote Investigator®

quoteinvestigator.com

 

[YoursTrue]

If certain ones here make claims and then go on to foster errors, why believe anything they say? So--since @Pogo said that Darwin never used the term "survival of the fittest" and has been shown where Darwin DID use it (the 5th edition of his book about Origins) why would someone continue to pronounce or justify the error, among other things. Why believe ANYONE like that about their opinions?

 

[YoursTrue]

Further, @Pogo -- do you continue to say that Darwin "recanted" at his deathbed? Since you said it, what did he recant? It's important to be honest.

 

[YoursTrue]

By the way, thanks to all here who post because from what I have seen, I have seen what I wanted to know when I first came here as to what people believe and moreso, know -- there are those claiming to believe in and know about the theory of evolution will and do say things they cannot back up with certitude. In fact, even when shown where they are wrong, they keep justifying their errors. And then there are the supporters of error by their silence. Hey! Y'all, take care as time moves along.

 

[Hooded_Crow]

...there are those claiming to believe in and know about the theory of evolution will and do say things they cannot back up with certitude. In fact, even when shown where they are wrong, they keep justifying their errors.

You have been presented with numerous examples of evidence (on this and other threads), yet you ignore them, favouring your own perceptions and beliefs. To say that we cannot back up our claims is a lie. Please don't lie.

 

[YoursTrue]

You have been presented with numerous examples of evidence (on this and other threads), yet you ignore them, favouring your own perceptions and beliefs. To say that we cannot back up our claims is a lie. Please don't lie.

Well, let's see -- did Darwin ever use the term "Survival of the Fittest," if you've been following along? Perhaps we can start there and move along after that.

 

[Pogo]

Further, @Pogo -- do you continue to say that Darwin "recanted" at his deathbed? Since you said it, what did he recant? It's important to be honest.

It is another one of the myths about Darwin typically propagated by deniers as if it had some truth or significance.

AI Overview
Learn more


No, Charles Darwin did not recant his theory of evolution on his deathbed. The story that he did is considered an urban myth and has been disputed by Darwin's family and other evolutionists.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion is based on a claim by Lady Hope, who claimed to have visited Darwin in 1881 and witnessed him renounce evolution. However, Darwin's family denied the story, and Francis Darwin wrote to Thomas Huxley in 1887 that the report was "false and without any kind of foundation". Darwin's autobiography, written late in his life, also fully supported evolution.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion has been used by proselytizers and polemicists to discredit Darwin.

 

[Valjean]

I have no problem with fit or fittest, as long as it's used in proper context. It's why I often ask what a poster means by the term.

 

[Valjean]

It is another one of the myths about Darwin typically propagated by deniers as if it had some truth or significance.

AI Overview
Learn more


No, Charles Darwin did not recant his theory of evolution on his deathbed. The story that he did is considered an urban myth and has been disputed by Darwin's family and other evolutionists.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion is based on a claim by Lady Hope, who claimed to have visited Darwin in 1881 and witnessed him renounce evolution. However, Darwin's family denied the story, and Francis Darwin wrote to Thomas Huxley in 1887 that the report was "false and without any kind of foundation". Darwin's autobiography, written late in his life, also fully supported evolution.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion has been used by proselytizers and polemicists to discredit Darwin.

Moreover, the ToE does not rest on Darwin. He may have been the first to widely publicize the idea of natural selection, but the theory stands on its own merit.

 

[cladking]

I'm struck by the way facts and their own errors are turned and twisted to attack heretics. Science can make no errors or be unable to see everything so any confusion, any ignorance, and any bad methodology must be the fault of those who don't believe in Science.

 

[cladking]

Moreover, the ToE does not rest on Darwin. He may have been the first to widely publicize the idea of natural selection, but the theory stands on its own merit.

well, yeah... ...except for that little problem of having no experiment to support gradual change in species or survival of the fittest.

 

[Pogo]

By the way, thanks to all here who post because from what I have seen, I have seen what I wanted to know when I first came here as to what people believe and moreso, know -- there are those claiming to believe in and know about the theory of evolution will and do say things they cannot back up with certitude. In fact, even when shown where they are wrong, they keep justifying their errors. And then there are the supporters of error by their silence. Hey! Y'all, take care as time moves along.

In the struggle for survival, the fittest win out at the expense of their rivals because they succeed in adapting themselves best to their environment.
Supposedly from Origin of Species , but actually from a 1960s textbook, Civilisation past and present*.

 

[Valjean]

well, yeah... ...except for that little problem of having no experiment to support gradual change in species or survival of the fittest.

Hogwash!

 

[YoursTrue]

It is another one of the myths about Darwin typically propagated by deniers as if it had some truth or significance.

AI Overview
Learn more


No, Charles Darwin did not recant his theory of evolution on his deathbed. The story that he did is considered an urban myth and has been disputed by Darwin's family and other evolutionists.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion is based on a claim by Lady Hope, who claimed to have visited Darwin in 1881 and witnessed him renounce evolution. However, Darwin's family denied the story, and Francis Darwin wrote to Thomas Huxley in 1887 that the report was "false and without any kind of foundation". Darwin's autobiography, written late in his life, also fully supported evolution.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion has been used by proselytizers and polemicists to discredit Darwin.

First things first hopefully. You did say earlier in response to another's post that Darwin did not use the term "survival of the fittest." He certainly did use and liked the term although he did not originate the term as noted in the 5th edition of his book about Origins. Let's start there before we move on to your next claims about what Darwin said or didn't say.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is another one of the myths about Darwin typically propagated by deniers as if it had some truth or significance.

AI Overview
Learn more


No, Charles Darwin did not recant his theory of evolution on his deathbed. The story that he did is considered an urban myth and has been disputed by Darwin's family and other evolutionists.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion is based on a claim by Lady Hope, who claimed to have visited Darwin in 1881 and witnessed him renounce evolution. However, Darwin's family denied the story, and Francis Darwin wrote to Thomas Huxley in 1887 that the report was "false and without any kind of foundation". Darwin's autobiography, written late in his life, also fully supported evolution.


The story of Darwin's deathbed conversion has been used by proselytizers and polemicists to discredit Darwin.

You did say earlier about the term "survival of the fittest" that Darwin did not use the term. He did use it but did not coin the term. He liked the term and wrote so accordingly in the 5th edition of his book on Origins.

 

[F1fan]

If certain ones here make claims and then go on to foster errors, why believe anything they say?

That's what the well educated do, correct your errors. But you reject these corrections because you have a strong religious bias, and lack understanding of how nature works.

So--since @Pogo said that Darwin never used the term "survival of the fittest" and has been shown where Darwin DID use it (the 5th edition of his book about Origins) why would someone continue to pronounce or justify the error, among other things. Why believe ANYONE like that about their opinions?

This is what people do when they reject evolution, they pick on poor Darwin who came up with the idea (along with Wallace) back in 1856. It's nothing more than a deflection. The science has evolved since then to such a high degree of precision that no rational mind can reject evolution in the 21st century. You, in essence, hold on to 19th century belief that is obsolete and laughable. Actually it's sad that so many are duped to doubt science, but that is the world of disinformation for you. Our education system really needs to make critical thinking skill the highest priority.

 

[blü 2]

Well just to give a quick example

1 I think there are good reasons to think that the natural world had a begining and a cause..... (It probably started at the big bang)

2 if true then by definition the cause has to be non natural (, otherwise it wouldn't be the cause of the natural world)

Exactly the same reasoning would apply to God, however. There must have been a SuperGod who brought him into existence, and a SuperSuperGod who brought SuperGod into existence, and a SuperSuperSuperGod who ...

And another problem with God is that if by that you mean the present Christian god, well, the universe is something like 14 bn years old but the God of the Tanakh is only some 3,500 years old and the present Christian triune God is only some 1600 years old.

 

[SkepticThinker]

First things first hopefully. You did say earlier in response to another's post that Darwin did not use the term "survival of the fittest." He certainly did use and liked the term although he did not originate the term as noted in the 5th edition of his book about Origins. Let's start there before we move on to your next claims about what Darwin said or didn't say.

Perhaps you could explain why you think this is at all relevant to anything. Darwin died 142 years ago.

 

[cladking]

Hogwash!

If it were hogwash someone would have proved me wrong by simply citing the experiment. You know, the one that showed walking whales slowly turning into swimming ones.

 

[cladking]

"Good enough" species survive.

Then you are suggesting the birds must compete with mountain goats for survival?

Can you list those species that are not "good enough" before they go extinct? Are these species composed only of unfit individuals?

Were passenger pigeons unfit do devotees of Darwin shot them all?

People have such strange ideas and they always seem perfectly plausible and natural to themselves.