Debate and discussion of any biological questions not pertaining to a particular topic.
physicts not know what
what charge is
science as a concept itself is just an ideological notion anyway
scientists have the same problem with the term "science" as biologists have with the term of "species"
the demarcation between science and non-science does not hold up
the notion of a scientific method has been shown to be wrong by many historians of science- science what ever it is- has no method
you should read colin leslie deans books
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo ... _psych.pdf
The absurdities in psychoanalysis and science that make psychoanalysis a science : reasons sociology, epistemology, ontology and metaphysics why psychoanalysis is a science; meaninglessness
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo ... ience4.pdf
The absurdities or meaninglessness of mathematics and science: paradoxes and contradiction in mathematics and science which makes them meaningless, mathematics and science are examples of mythical thought, case study of the meaninglessness of all views
Yep gamila i couldn't agree with you more, since we don't know what quarks or leptons are, since we can't classify your photon, since we don't understand fully the complexities of the universe we should just step back and go work at the deli - and then we can learn magic and everyone will be happy!! - I mean, whats the point of this thing people call knowledge after all? Why try to find out these little flaws that you speak of? - Yep science is just silly...
Last edited by futurezoologist on Tue Jun 09, 2009 1:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
A wise man once said to me:
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Only the fittest chickens cross the road.
Have you ever seen a raccoon gamila? You have? Well there's no way to tell if that's what it was. Have you ever seen a giraffe gamila? Maybe you did and maybe you didn't because a giraffe is a species so you can't tell what it was. I really hate to be sarcastic gamila but if I use your reasoning then I don't know if I'm a human (homo sapien) because that's meaninglessness. Why don't you try something else that's more helpful or informative.
Hi Colin. Remember me? We've met before. I see you have found another forum to pollute. I came across this forum quite by accident but quickly recognised you. Same old stuff, I see.
A note to the members of this forum: Colin (aka gamila) has been doing this sort of thing for years. He invariably gets banned, then moves on. You're just the latest. The guy's not stupid, just not quite all there, if you get my meaning. You're certainly free to continue with these "discussions" if:
1) you're stupid
2) not quite all there
3) have nothing better to do
4) am having fun
Back to you Colin: I'll be posting this message in all the threads you have started just to make sure that everyone knows what they are dealing with.
Till we meet again.
Have you ever seen a chair gamila? What is it?
This is the problem species. Words, as well as species are a convenient way to carry an idea, but there is more to any individual chair than to the generic concept of chair. So species are a convenient concept, but not really necessary, as bacteriologists know, and getting rid of species to replace the concept with something based on more objective characters (read about OTU) is not going to rock or change anything in the basis of the theory of natural selection.
Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)
with out knowing what species are
you cannot locate the objects of your investigation
thus every time you see a biologist talk about species speciation he in fact is talking meaningless nonsense as colin leslie dean has shown
No, he is talking about change in a population which we choose to define as speciation. As canalon has pointed out, "species" is a term that we created and we are free to define and redefine it as we see fit.
#2 Total Post Count
All those people with philosopher degrees have to make money some how...
Life is an entity which can self replicate and is generally thought to be made of organic materials.
Using this principle, life is definable.
I agree that physicists and chemists explain patterns and label them in a structured manner, but to say that something is something only means that something is defined to be understood in our minds. Another system for understanding the same patterns could be developed by a different race which would contradict some of ours but still explain the phenomena.
Biology is defining a set of rules to govern observed phenomena which we characterize as living.
I spit in the mouth of a god, who whispers in the minds of the children
"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is at all comprehensible" - Albert Einstein.
all you are saying is what life can do ie replicate
not what life is
and it rules of classification ie species phylum
are meaningless as they cant tell you what species
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest