|
Milesnmiles -> RE: Evolution/Creation debate (2/16/2014 7:41:45 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GotSteel
quote:
ORIGINAL: Milesnmiles
And you might be a bit premature in stating; "Insect colonies operate as 'superorganisms', new research finds", since that article say that the finding only suggests that.
;-)
1. Um, that's not my statement, that's me quoting the title of the article. Which is why it was in quotes. Seeing as the quote marks are mine and I put them there because I was quoting you, your saying this is a little misleading don't you think?
quote:
2. It's not only what the new research finds it's also what old research finds, I can easily link to research online going back to 1989:
quote:
Original: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27856005?uid=3739800&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21103386955211
Natural selection has made the colony a vehicle for the survival of genes
And the research actually goes back to at least 1789. If, as you say, scientists have known all about this since 1789, it is interesting the article says;
"The study may also help scientists understand how social systems have arisen through natural selection -- the process by which evolution occurs. The evolution of social systems of insects in particular, where sterile workers live only to help the queen reproduce, has long been a mystery, Gillooly said."
quote:
3. Using words like "suggests" is how scientists tend to talk, you get that right? We're talking about a model ddescribing the facts, no matter how many hundreds of years of evidence there is words like "suggests" may crop up when scientists start talking about the model. However, that in no way negates the underlying evidence.
I know what it means to say suggests, do you?
And yes we are talking about "a model describing the facts". Whereas facts are generally always true, the model used to make sense of those facts can be completely erroneous.
"That in no way negates the underlying evidence." I don't negate the "underlying evidence", in fact I embrace it. I just don't accept the erroneous conclusions that are sometimes drawn from it.
|
|
|
|
