• 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!

Would discovery of species previously thought to be extinct impact the theory of evolution?

Luchito Prays

Luchito Prays

Member
Policy said:
Timeline of evolutionary theory – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Click to expand...


You can't trust such a time line.

And this is why I can assure you evolutionists are not only wrong but a complete fraud.

Look what the evolutionist page from your link says:

*****

1201-1274
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī (1201-1274) develops a theory of evolution with organisms gaining differences through adapting to their environments. He suggests that organisms which gain beneficial new features quicker have advantages over others and are more variable.

*****

Look from wikipedia what that guy did in reality.

Nasir al-Din al-Tusi - Wikipedia

*****
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi

Biology
In his Akhlaq-i Nasiri, Tusi wrote about several biological topics. He defended a version of Aristotle's scala naturae, in which he placed man above animals, plants, minerals, and the elements. He described "grasses which grow without sowing or cultivation, by the mere mingling of elements,"[51] as closest to minerals. Among plants, he considered the date-palm as the most highly developed, since "it only lacks one thing further to reach (the stage of) an animal: to tear itself loose from the soil and to move away in the quest for nourishment."[51]

The lowest animals "are adjacent to the region of plants: such are those animals which propagate like grass, being incapable of mating [...], e.g. earthworms, and certain insects".[52] The animals "which reach the stage of perfection [...] are distinguished by fully developed weapons", such as antlers, horns, teeth, and claws. Tusi described these organs as adaptations to each species's lifestyle, in a way anticipating natural theology. He continued:

"The noblest of the species is that one whose sagacity and perception is such that it accepts discipline and instruction: thus there accrues to it the perfection not originally created in it. Such are the schooled horse and the trained falcon. The greater this faculty grows in it, the more surpassing its rank, until a point is reached where the (mere) observation of action suffices as instruction: thus, when they see a thing, they perform the like of it by mimicry, without training [...]. This is the utmost of the animal degrees, and the first of the degrees of Man in contiguous therewith."[53]

Thus, in this paragraph, Tusi described different types of learning, recognising observational learning as the most advanced form, and correctly attributing it to certain animals.

Tusi seems to have perceived man as belonging to the animals, since he stated that "the Animal Soul [comprising the faculties of perception and movement ...] is restricted to individuals of the animal species", and that, by possessing a "Human Soul, [...] mankind is distinguished and particularized among other animals."[54]

Some scholars have interpreted Tusi's biological writings as suggesting that he adhered to some kind of evolutionary theory.[55][56] However, Tusi did not state explicitly that he believed species to change over time.

*****

See it?
 
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

Monsters! Monsters from the id! Forbidden Planet
Staff member
Premium Member
Policy said:
That is a nonsensical sentence.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what main doctrines of a theory means. It is just gobbledy gook as far as I can tell.

A theory stands until it is unable to fit all the available observations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

Monsters! Monsters from the id! Forbidden Planet
Staff member
Premium Member
Luchito Prays said:
.


You didn't get the point, I said "you change the doctrines of..."

So, you don't modify and you don't update, but you change the doctrines of a theory, then you are making a new theory with new doctrines.

You can add new doctrines to a theory, but you must preserve the original ones, because the original doctrines are the theory itself.

And yes, if not by philosophy, how the theory of evolution started?

You must know that a theory always have an individual or group of individuals creating it.

I will give you a hand here, this theory of evolution existed long before Darwin.

But, who was the one presenting it as a theory with that name "evolution"?

Come on, you don't have to dig feet underground to take out fossils and provide an answer. Someone is the responsible for that theory. Who was him? What "methodology" was used by him to conclude that species evolve?

My questions are fair.
Click to expand...
None of this makes any sense to me and I question the relevance of the little I can decipher.
 
Dan From Smithville

Dan From Smithville

Monsters! Monsters from the id! Forbidden Planet
Staff member
Premium Member
Luchito Prays said:
You can't trust such a time line.

And this is why I can assure you evolutionists are not only wrong but a complete fraud.

Look what the evolutionist page from your link says:

*****

1201-1274
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī (1201-1274) develops a theory of evolution with organisms gaining differences through adapting to their environments. He suggests that organisms which gain beneficial new features quicker have advantages over others and are more variable.

*****

Look from wikipedia what that guy did in reality.

Nasir al-Din al-Tusi - Wikipedia

*****
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi

Biology
In his Akhlaq-i Nasiri, Tusi wrote about several biological topics. He defended a version of Aristotle's scala naturae, in which he placed man above animals, plants, minerals, and the elements. He described "grasses which grow without sowing or cultivation, by the mere mingling of elements,"[51] as closest to minerals. Among plants, he considered the date-palm as the most highly developed, since "it only lacks one thing further to reach (the stage of) an animal: to tear itself loose from the soil and to move away in the quest for nourishment."[51]

The lowest animals "are adjacent to the region of plants: such are those animals which propagate like grass, being incapable of mating [...], e.g. earthworms, and certain insects".[52] The animals "which reach the stage of perfection [...] are distinguished by fully developed weapons", such as antlers, horns, teeth, and claws. Tusi described these organs as adaptations to each species's lifestyle, in a way anticipating natural theology. He continued:

"The noblest of the species is that one whose sagacity and perception is such that it accepts discipline and instruction: thus there accrues to it the perfection not originally created in it. Such are the schooled horse and the trained falcon. The greater this faculty grows in it, the more surpassing its rank, until a point is reached where the (mere) observation of action suffices as instruction: thus, when they see a thing, they perform the like of it by mimicry, without training [...]. This is the utmost of the animal degrees, and the first of the degrees of Man in contiguous therewith."[53]

Thus, in this paragraph, Tusi described different types of learning, recognising observational learning as the most advanced form, and correctly attributing it to certain animals.

Tusi seems to have perceived man as belonging to the animals, since he stated that "the Animal Soul [comprising the faculties of perception and movement ...] is restricted to individuals of the animal species", and that, by possessing a "Human Soul, [...] mankind is distinguished and particularized among other animals."[54]

Some scholars have interpreted Tusi's biological writings as suggesting that he adhered to some kind of evolutionary theory.[55][56] However, Tusi did not state explicitly that he believed species to change over time.

*****

See it?
Click to expand...
You missed the entire point of that timeline.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Luchito Prays said:
You can't trust such a time line.

And this is why I can assure you evolutionists are not only wrong but a complete fraud.

Look what the evolutionist page from your link says:

*****

1201-1274
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī
Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī (1201-1274) develops a theory of evolution with organisms gaining differences through adapting to their environments. He suggests that organisms which gain beneficial new features quicker have advantages over others and are more variable.

*****

Look from wikipedia what that guy did in reality.

Nasir al-Din al-Tusi - Wikipedia

*****
Nasir al-Din al-Tusi

Biology
In his Akhlaq-i Nasiri, Tusi wrote about several biological topics. He defended a version of Aristotle's scala naturae, in which he placed man above animals, plants, minerals, and the elements. He described "grasses which grow without sowing or cultivation, by the mere mingling of elements,"[51] as closest to minerals. Among plants, he considered the date-palm as the most highly developed, since "it only lacks one thing further to reach (the stage of) an animal: to tear itself loose from the soil and to move away in the quest for nourishment."[51]

The lowest animals "are adjacent to the region of plants: such are those animals which propagate like grass, being incapable of mating [...], e.g. earthworms, and certain insects".[52] The animals "which reach the stage of perfection [...] are distinguished by fully developed weapons", such as antlers, horns, teeth, and claws. Tusi described these organs as adaptations to each species's lifestyle, in a way anticipating natural theology. He continued:

"The noblest of the species is that one whose sagacity and perception is such that it accepts discipline and instruction: thus there accrues to it the perfection not originally created in it. Such are the schooled horse and the trained falcon. The greater this faculty grows in it, the more surpassing its rank, until a point is reached where the (mere) observation of action suffices as instruction: thus, when they see a thing, they perform the like of it by mimicry, without training [...]. This is the utmost of the animal degrees, and the first of the degrees of Man in contiguous therewith."[53]

Thus, in this paragraph, Tusi described different types of learning, recognising observational learning as the most advanced form, and correctly attributing it to certain animals.

Tusi seems to have perceived man as belonging to the animals, since he stated that "the Animal Soul [comprising the faculties of perception and movement ...] is restricted to individuals of the animal species", and that, by possessing a "Human Soul, [...] mankind is distinguished and particularized among other animals."[54]

Some scholars have interpreted Tusi's biological writings as suggesting that he adhered to some kind of evolutionary theory.[55][56] However, Tusi did not state explicitly that he believed species to change over time.

*****

See it?
Click to expand...
Properly speaking those were not theories. Do you know what a theory is? By the way, anyone that ever says "just a theory" has already lost the debate.
 
Luchito Prays

Luchito Prays

Member
Dan From Smithville said:
I have no idea what main doctrines of a theory means. It is just gobbledy gook as far as I can tell.

A theory stands until it is unable to fit all the available observations.
Click to expand...
No, the theory is valid by the explanation given by it, to interpret the observation.

A theory is not valid because predicts something and the observations agree. You are saying biblical prophets predicted and their prediction happened, then biblical prophets belong to science.

No.

A valid theory of science explains how is the process happening when the phenomenon is observed.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Luchito Prays said:
No, the theory is valid by the explanation given by it, to interpret the observation.

A theory is not valid because predicts something and the observations agree. You are saying biblical prophets predicted and their prediction happened, then biblical prophets belong to science.

No.

A valid theory of science explains how is the process happening when the phenomenon is observed.
Click to expand...
Biblical prophecies fail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top