• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Darwinism proven/accepted by official Science?

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
With Darwinism I understand that organisms evolve mainly though random variation and natural selection. Given this definition the answer of the OP is no “Darwinism has not been established (nor proven beyond reasonable doubt) by science.

False, random selection is not a part of the definition of evolution nor Darwinism as previously cited.

You won’t find a single paper that concludes that Darwinism is correct beyond reasonable doubt.

That is because individual research papers related to evolution DO NOT make statements concerning the over all 'correctness' of evolution.

You will not find any scientific research papers on evolution that doubt that there is overwhelming acceptance of evolution as the only explanation for the history of life

If you have a different definition for Darwinism then my comments don’t apply,

The definition of evolution accepted by ALL of 'official' science does not include the word 'random.' I have addressed this before. If your 'personal' definition is different it is not 'official.'

Please note that the modern definition of evolution does not include the word 'theory.' It is most often correctly described as the 'science of evolution' or just evolution.

Evolution - Wikipedia
Evolution -
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. These characteristics are the expressions of genes that are passed on from parent to offspring during reproduction.

Darwinism - Wikipedia

Darwinism -
Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.

With non random mutation I mean mutations that are caused by the necessity of the organism…………if an organism would benefit from that specific mutation, such mutation is more likely to occure.

No where in scientific journals nor texts do the propose that 'mutations that are caused by the necessity of the organism. There is no evidence that the ocurrance of a mutation id dependent on 'benefit.
 
Last edited:

leroy

Well-Known Member
False, random selection is not a part of the definition of evolution nor Darwinism as previously cited.


Ok that is why I defined what I mean with Darwinism since my very first post in this thread…………..if using the term Darwinism makes you feel uncomfortable then please let me know which term should I use


Darwin did claimed that variation is random, in fact that is the most importantr difference between Darwin and Lamarck.

Honestly if “random” is not an important part of Darwinism then what is the difference between Darwin and Lamark? From your definitions for evolution and Darwinism it seems to me that Lamarkism would also fit within your vague and generic definitions.





You will not find any scientific research papers on evolution that doubt that there is overwhelming acceptance of evolution as the only explanation for the history of life


Using the definition that I provided for Darwinism you do find papers that conclude that Darwinism is probably wrong


T

No where in scientific journals nor texts do the propose that 'mutations that are caused by the necessity of the organism. There is no evidence that the ocurrance of a mutation id dependent on 'benefit.

Except for the journals that I have provided that shows how genetic variation is not random
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Ok that is why I defined what I mean with Darwinism since my very first post in this thread…………..if using the term Darwinism makes you feel uncomfortable then please let me know which term should I use,
The problem is it is your personal definition, and not recognized by anyone in 'official science.'

If some mutations may be defined as non-random, therefore evolution nor Darwinism can be defined as 'random' by definition.


Darwin did claimed that variation is random, in fact that is the most important difference between Darwin and Lamarck.

No Darwin did not describe variation in this way, and it is not the difference between Darwinism and Lamarck. As proposed in your opening post the topic relates to 'official science,' and the definitions I provided are those of 'official science in recent history.

In evolution variation in the species is a result of the genetic diversity acted on by adaptive natural selection to environmental change.

Honestly if “random” is not an important part of Darwinism then what is the difference between Darwin and Lamark? From your definitions for evolution and Darwinism it seems to me that Lamarkism would also fit within your vague and generic definitions.

The definitions provided are those of official science.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Lam...j0i22i30l2.8251j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Lamarckian -
Lamarckism, also known as Lamarckian inheritance or neo-Lamarckism, is the notion that an organism can pass on to its offspring physical characteristics that the parent organism acquired through use or disuse during its lifetime

Absolutely no relationship to evolution nor Darwinism by definition.

Using the definition that I provided for Darwinism you do find papers that conclude that Darwinism is probably wrong

No, I see no references in anything you have cited that describe Darwinism nor evolution is probably wrong, paericularly, because random is not part of the definition of evolution nor Darwinism.

Except for the journals that I have provided that shows how genetic variation is not random

All the papers you have shown is that 'SOME' mutations may be described as non-random.' As all ready described ALL mutations simply result in the 'raw material' for the genetic diversity regardless of whether they are defined as random nor non-random. They play no role in determining the outcome of evolution due to natural selection, because of the changing environment.
 
Last edited:

ecco

Veteran Member
what does the theory advanced by Darwin claim?

Regarding specifically what? Darwin advanced many ideas. If you want all of them, read his books.

It depends on what you mean by ToE.

Theory of Evolution. That should be clear to you by now.

And since you seem to be using Darwinism and ToE interchangeably I will assume that you are using these terms as synonymous

In some respects they are. In some respects, they are not. "Darwinism" probably should be restricted to what is written in his books. ToE is an ongoing, ever-changing base of knowledge.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
Regarding specifically what? Darwin advanced many ideas. If you want all of them, read his books.



Theory of Evolution. That should be clear to you by now.



In some respects they are. In some respects, they are not. "Darwinism" probably should be restricted to what is written in his books. ToE is an ongoing, ever-changing base of knowledge.
just explain what you mean by ToE and/or darwinism.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
just explain what you mean by ToE and/or darwinism.

I believe @ecco will agree with this:

Please note that the modern definition of evolution does not include the word 'theory.' It is most often correctly described as the 'science of evolution' or just evolution.

Evolution - Wikipedia
Evolution -
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. These characteristics are the expressions of genes that are passed on from parent to offspring during reproduction.

Darwinism - Wikipedia

Darwinism -
Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.
 

leroy

Well-Known Member
I believe @ecco will agree with this:

Please note that the modern definition of evolution does not include the word 'theory.' It is most often correctly described as the 'science of evolution' or just evolution.

Evolution - Wikipedia
Evolution -
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. These characteristics are the expressions of genes that are passed on from parent to offspring during reproduction.

Darwinism - Wikipedia

Darwinism -
Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.
no disagreement from my part.... given those definitions I agree with both evolution a d darwinism.


but I would add that these definitions are too genetic, even a lamarkist or a YEC would agree with evolution

on my opinion definitions in the context of a debate should make emphasis in the points of disagreement
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
no disagreement from my part.... given those definitions I agree with both evolution a d darwinism.


but I would add that these definitions are too genetic, even a lamarkist or a YEC would agree with evolution

on my opinion definitions in the context of a debate should make emphasis in the points of disagreement

I defined Lamarckian, and it in no way can be confused with the definitions of evolution nor Darwinian evolution. Lamarckian concepts are in direct opposition to biological evolution. The definitions I gave are sufficient, but if you read further in this reference it goes into more detail. What are you looking for that is more specific in a definition?

Do you understand that 'randomness' has no part of the scientific definitions of evolution nor Darwinism?

As far as fundamentalist Christians, they would not accept biological evolution nor Darwinism as defined as the relationship of all life on earth including humans through evolution over billions of years whether YEC or OEC forms of Creationism.
 
Last edited:

ecco

Veteran Member
just explain what you mean by ToE and/or darwinism.

ToE - Theory of Evolution. That should be clear to you by now. Why do you keep asking the same silly question?

Darwinism - The ideas advanced by Darwin. That should be clear to you by now. Why do you keep asking the same silly question?

Do you expect me to list all the details of ToE for you in an RF post?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
given those definitions I agree with both evolution a d darwinism.

Well, let's cut to the chase. One thing the ToE and Darwinism, if you must, posits is that humans, whales, cats, and dogs have a common ancestor.

Do you believe that humans, whales, cats, and dogs have a common ancestor? If your answer is NO, then you do not agree with ToE nor Darwinism.

If you don't agree with Toe/Darwinism, then please post your thoughts as to the origin of humans.
 
Top