Post by marie on Oct 4, 2015 23:36:31 GMT
As T.H. Huxley said, “we are all scientists.” A non-scientist man’s mind can work like a scientist’s mind. When man tackles a problem, creates a hypothesis and then determines a conclusion, he is said to be working like a scientist. Kudos to scientists who allow us to be on their level. However, our hypothesis of why the bathroom sink leaks does not compare to a scientist’s research on how a neuron misfires.
There is an abundance of research to corroborate natural selection. Doctors and scientists have provided such an insurmountable amount of evidence and research for centuries that the education system has taught us about science and biology starting at the elementary level. As we move further up the chain, the information becomes more and more elaborate and detailed. Unfortunately, even though we are all being taught the same thing, we manage to interpret the same information differently.
There is such a plethora of scientific information out in the internet world. It’s very easy to “Google it” to find an answer thus satisfying our curious minds. Luckily, scientist publish their research thus allowing us the fortunate of understanding and being informed.
Science is not greedy. Science has discovered how a woman unable to conceive a child could do so. In 1978 the first test tube baby was born, Louise Joy Brown. The research for test tube babies started at least 10 years before it was tested. Today, this process is called in vitro fertilization, IVF, a procedure which is regularly utilized. Where does natural selection come in? Mrs. Brown could not conceive a child so she opted for the IVF procedure in order to have a baby. Her baby, Louise Joy Brown as an adult was able to conceive a child naturally. Thus, natural selection has taken place.
There was a set of fraternal twins named David and Michael. These twins looked nothing alike so through scientific study we can conclude that they were dizygotic, two eggs fertilized by different sperm. When we see a child with Down syndrome, we can understand that this child has an extra chromosome. Conjoined two are the result of a zygote that didn’t fully separate. All of this knowledge and information is the study of science.
We all evolve whether we want to believe it or not. As discussed in Digital Existentialism, “The forbidden fruit is electronic and we have already eaten it.” We give children electronic toys at a young age, at first, it’s to keep them busy but eventually they are grasping for more and more electronics. We give them a computer, ipad, an electronic toy, and a a cell phone. While people claim they can’t afford the basic necessities, I see even a homeless person with a cell phone. Are our priorities skewed? We are evolving whether we want to or realize it.
Why is intelligent design/creationism still popular in America? For those that don’t know what is means, we are left to rely on what we find in the internet or the material at hand. For those that are rebellious, creationism was created. There are those that by nature like to disagree/argue. Frankly, rebels disagree because the can. Their arguments are usually fallacies. They are always on the attack and really can’t explain their position and usually spend their time attacking a person’s premise while they give no proof to substantiate their own belief. Even Tom Floyd acknowledges Wilbur is an exaggerator and a misuser of terms. Floyd seems to mock the expert opinion and would rather hypothesize. Now there is nothing wrong with hypothesizing, however, hypothesize to a scientist is the first step in experimental research. What good is a guess that isn’t acted upon? The common denominator between intellectual design and creationism was that they both tend to deny evolution with no concrete proof how life was formed.
Scientists have such an inquisitive mind. They are always asking the question, “why.” Scientific research alone can persuade anyone, except the rebel. to believe in natural selection. The mere fact scientists can produce endless, voluminous research is enough to persuade anyone capable of critical thinking to believe in natural selections. There is no problem finding information creationism/intellectual design, however, it usually wasn’t much information and an explanation that was not supported by evidence.
There is an abundance of research to corroborate natural selection. Doctors and scientists have provided such an insurmountable amount of evidence and research for centuries that the education system has taught us about science and biology starting at the elementary level. As we move further up the chain, the information becomes more and more elaborate and detailed. Unfortunately, even though we are all being taught the same thing, we manage to interpret the same information differently.
There is such a plethora of scientific information out in the internet world. It’s very easy to “Google it” to find an answer thus satisfying our curious minds. Luckily, scientist publish their research thus allowing us the fortunate of understanding and being informed.
Science is not greedy. Science has discovered how a woman unable to conceive a child could do so. In 1978 the first test tube baby was born, Louise Joy Brown. The research for test tube babies started at least 10 years before it was tested. Today, this process is called in vitro fertilization, IVF, a procedure which is regularly utilized. Where does natural selection come in? Mrs. Brown could not conceive a child so she opted for the IVF procedure in order to have a baby. Her baby, Louise Joy Brown as an adult was able to conceive a child naturally. Thus, natural selection has taken place.
There was a set of fraternal twins named David and Michael. These twins looked nothing alike so through scientific study we can conclude that they were dizygotic, two eggs fertilized by different sperm. When we see a child with Down syndrome, we can understand that this child has an extra chromosome. Conjoined two are the result of a zygote that didn’t fully separate. All of this knowledge and information is the study of science.
We all evolve whether we want to believe it or not. As discussed in Digital Existentialism, “The forbidden fruit is electronic and we have already eaten it.” We give children electronic toys at a young age, at first, it’s to keep them busy but eventually they are grasping for more and more electronics. We give them a computer, ipad, an electronic toy, and a a cell phone. While people claim they can’t afford the basic necessities, I see even a homeless person with a cell phone. Are our priorities skewed? We are evolving whether we want to or realize it.
Why is intelligent design/creationism still popular in America? For those that don’t know what is means, we are left to rely on what we find in the internet or the material at hand. For those that are rebellious, creationism was created. There are those that by nature like to disagree/argue. Frankly, rebels disagree because the can. Their arguments are usually fallacies. They are always on the attack and really can’t explain their position and usually spend their time attacking a person’s premise while they give no proof to substantiate their own belief. Even Tom Floyd acknowledges Wilbur is an exaggerator and a misuser of terms. Floyd seems to mock the expert opinion and would rather hypothesize. Now there is nothing wrong with hypothesizing, however, hypothesize to a scientist is the first step in experimental research. What good is a guess that isn’t acted upon? The common denominator between intellectual design and creationism was that they both tend to deny evolution with no concrete proof how life was formed.
Scientists have such an inquisitive mind. They are always asking the question, “why.” Scientific research alone can persuade anyone, except the rebel. to believe in natural selection. The mere fact scientists can produce endless, voluminous research is enough to persuade anyone capable of critical thinking to believe in natural selections. There is no problem finding information creationism/intellectual design, however, it usually wasn’t much information and an explanation that was not supported by evidence.