St. Simian Selection of the Tree Descention
Part 1
Here is a record of scientists speaking in regards to Evolution
and my personal take on all the
Monkey Business!
The concept of natural selection by survival of the fittest is the basic evolutionary mechanism. This concept does not qualify as a scientific principle, since fitness is equivalent to survival. Here we have a case of circular reasoning; According to this idea, organisms have survived because they are better fit, and the way one tells they are better fit is that they survive. A number of evolutionary scholars have labeled the principle of survival of the fittest a tautology. Here, one of them attacks the unfalsifiable nature of the concept and concludes:
If, more especially, we accept that statistical definition of fitness which defines fitness by actual survival, then the survival of the fittest becomes tautological, and irrefutable.
Here a prominent Geneticist evaluates the matter of fecundity. He states:
Natural selection, which was at first considered as though it were a hypothesis that was in need of experimental or observational confirmation, turns out on closer inspection to be a tautology, a statement of inevitable although previously unrecognized relation. It states that the fittest individuals in a population (defined as those which leave most offspring) will leave most offspring.
Well, we certainly can't have all that dizzying circulation going on, can we? Therefor, I've decided that instead of everybody running around and around like a bunch of mangy, flea-bitten mongrels chasing their own tails. That we shall have of a new principle.
The
"Purgative Principle of Previously Postulated,
Pensative Preposterousness"
New Principle ~ (the principle of Evo - Jackass identification)
Discovered by ~ Me
Established ~ Just Now
By the Authority Vested in Me from ~
Anti-Jackass Necessities of Grave Necessitations
This principle of Infinitesimally Indefinite Definitive Definitions,
shall be defined "only" as ~ All those who believe that:
the fittest individuals in a population (defined as those which leave most offspring) will leave most offspring.
Are to be considered, upon the establishment of this principle, (now) a "Jackass".
Made evident by the simple fact that they are a Jackass.
Since the fact is simply that they are a Jackass,
makes it evidentially conclusive that they are a Jackass.
This principle is unquestionably, unanimously universal
and indisputably, intentionally irreversible.
For a Jackass is a Jackass, is a Jackass, is a Jackass.
Proved by the fact that he is a Jackass !
Another problem associated with the untestability of evolutionary theory is that the theory explains too much. As pointed out here, saying that "whatever might at first sight appear as evidence against the theory is assimilated by redefinition into the theory."
Fuck'n Aay Jack!
You got that shit right!
Check it out,
Jackass conducted assimilations, assisted by assenting associates. In assigning an assortment of unrelated items to a unifying assembly of fallaciously assured evidential assets. Astoundingly, they assert that their assessments are not mere assumptions. While anyone assiduously dissenting is assaulted by asinine, Jackass assailants on a mission of assassination.
Evolutionary theory is broad enough to accommodate almost any data that may be applied. Two ecologists emphasize this. They state:
Our theory of evolution has become, as Popper described, one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it. It is thus 'outside of empirical science' but not necessarily false. No one can think of ways in which to test it.
"Can't think of ways to test it"? Oh no no no, I can think of ways!
I can think of wondrously wonderful ways to conduct tremendously effective, top level, tower tossing tests. Tests that would produce torrents of titanic testimonials. As a matter of fact, I just now happened to find one in my toteable "Tester's Bag of Tricks".
The only thing that is required now, is for the supportively sponsoring patrons of "testings". To send me the generously endowed, tantamount to tremendous amounts, of "testing funds". As well as one of those Jackasses that thinks he's on his way to not being a Jackass anymore........someday.
After that, its "tests away", right off the roof of a skyscraper. If it is observed that he failed to mutate his ass some wings on the way down, in accordance with "Punctuated Equilibrium" (since neither we, nor he, have the time to be fooling around with the multi-million year life insurance plan) Thus, resulting in that he merely provided yet another observable instance of "Newtonian Physics" in action. Producing the undeniable, empirical data of his devolutionary descent into a primordial soup-like splatter on the sidewalk.
At that point, it may be assertively concluded that not only was the theory tested. But also that the test subject must have not lit enough candles in honor of St. Simian Selection of the Tree Descention. Thus, causing the theory to fail the test.......fatally!
Afterwards, since I would have successfully completed my rigidly accurate and approvably applaudable application of the "scientific method". During which, it was observably, measurably, and (if you send more Jackasses) also repeatedly proved beyond the shadow of a doubt. That discovered was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.
Showing that the test subject failed to Teenage Mutant Ninja his ass some survival wings. Thus, displaying his inability to morphologically develop the desperately needed, extinction evading, "survivability" fitness. Which was ruthlessly demanded of him, by his drastically changed and rapidly approaching concrete environment.
No matter what is observed, there usually is an appropriate evolutionary explanation for it.
Maybe they can appropriately apply an inappropriately interpreted evolutionary explanation for the survival of most species in most places. However, nobody can appropriately or inappropriately, scientifically or theologically explain how a human organism survives in South Central L.A.
Not even Richard Dawkins can imaginatively think up an explanation that spicy.
Well, maybe, but only if you turn off the camera first!
If an organ or organism develops, it has positive survival value;
It has a Glock and an AR-15 also
If it degenerates, it has negative survival value.
It probably had "Dayton's", just before it stopped surviving
If a complex biological system appears suddenly, it is due to preadaptation.
If a complex appears suddenly, its an apartments one.
Due to premature ejaculation. Not pre-adoption!
"Living fossils" (contemporary representatives of organisms expected to be extinct) survive because the environment did not change.
You ain't lie'n Jack!
Survivors whom everyone expected to get "capped".
Survived although the environment did not change.
But only because "they" changed............their address to another environment.
If the environment changes and an evolutionary lineage survives, it is due to adaptation.
Whether the environment changes or not, and if "anyone" survives, it's due to a "miracle
"If the lineage dies, it is because the environment changed too much, etc.
"Shiiiiiiiiiiit", you Jive Turkey Motherfucker!
If the lineage dies, its cuz "The Man" wanted it that way
Hence the concept cannot be falsified
That's right, you know I ain't jive'n your ass!
Part 1
Here is a record of scientists speaking in regards to Evolution
and my personal take on all the
Monkey Business!
The concept of natural selection by survival of the fittest is the basic evolutionary mechanism. This concept does not qualify as a scientific principle, since fitness is equivalent to survival. Here we have a case of circular reasoning; According to this idea, organisms have survived because they are better fit, and the way one tells they are better fit is that they survive. A number of evolutionary scholars have labeled the principle of survival of the fittest a tautology. Here, one of them attacks the unfalsifiable nature of the concept and concludes:
If, more especially, we accept that statistical definition of fitness which defines fitness by actual survival, then the survival of the fittest becomes tautological, and irrefutable.
Here a prominent Geneticist evaluates the matter of fecundity. He states:
Natural selection, which was at first considered as though it were a hypothesis that was in need of experimental or observational confirmation, turns out on closer inspection to be a tautology, a statement of inevitable although previously unrecognized relation. It states that the fittest individuals in a population (defined as those which leave most offspring) will leave most offspring.
Well, we certainly can't have all that dizzying circulation going on, can we? Therefor, I've decided that instead of everybody running around and around like a bunch of mangy, flea-bitten mongrels chasing their own tails. That we shall have of a new principle.
The
"Purgative Principle of Previously Postulated,
Pensative Preposterousness"
New Principle ~ (the principle of Evo - Jackass identification)
Discovered by ~ Me
Established ~ Just Now
By the Authority Vested in Me from ~
Anti-Jackass Necessities of Grave Necessitations
This principle of Infinitesimally Indefinite Definitive Definitions,
shall be defined "only" as ~ All those who believe that:
the fittest individuals in a population (defined as those which leave most offspring) will leave most offspring.
Are to be considered, upon the establishment of this principle, (now) a "Jackass".
Made evident by the simple fact that they are a Jackass.
Since the fact is simply that they are a Jackass,
makes it evidentially conclusive that they are a Jackass.
This principle is unquestionably, unanimously universal
and indisputably, intentionally irreversible.
For a Jackass is a Jackass, is a Jackass, is a Jackass.
Proved by the fact that he is a Jackass !
Another problem associated with the untestability of evolutionary theory is that the theory explains too much. As pointed out here, saying that "whatever might at first sight appear as evidence against the theory is assimilated by redefinition into the theory."
Fuck'n Aay Jack!
You got that shit right!
Check it out,
Jackass conducted assimilations, assisted by assenting associates. In assigning an assortment of unrelated items to a unifying assembly of fallaciously assured evidential assets. Astoundingly, they assert that their assessments are not mere assumptions. While anyone assiduously dissenting is assaulted by asinine, Jackass assailants on a mission of assassination.
Evolutionary theory is broad enough to accommodate almost any data that may be applied. Two ecologists emphasize this. They state:
Our theory of evolution has become, as Popper described, one which cannot be refuted by any possible observations. Every conceivable observation can be fitted into it. It is thus 'outside of empirical science' but not necessarily false. No one can think of ways in which to test it.
"Can't think of ways to test it"? Oh no no no, I can think of ways!
I can think of wondrously wonderful ways to conduct tremendously effective, top level, tower tossing tests. Tests that would produce torrents of titanic testimonials. As a matter of fact, I just now happened to find one in my toteable "Tester's Bag of Tricks".
The only thing that is required now, is for the supportively sponsoring patrons of "testings". To send me the generously endowed, tantamount to tremendous amounts, of "testing funds". As well as one of those Jackasses that thinks he's on his way to not being a Jackass anymore........someday.
After that, its "tests away", right off the roof of a skyscraper. If it is observed that he failed to mutate his ass some wings on the way down, in accordance with "Punctuated Equilibrium" (since neither we, nor he, have the time to be fooling around with the multi-million year life insurance plan) Thus, resulting in that he merely provided yet another observable instance of "Newtonian Physics" in action. Producing the undeniable, empirical data of his devolutionary descent into a primordial soup-like splatter on the sidewalk.
At that point, it may be assertively concluded that not only was the theory tested. But also that the test subject must have not lit enough candles in honor of St. Simian Selection of the Tree Descention. Thus, causing the theory to fail the test.......fatally!
Afterwards, since I would have successfully completed my rigidly accurate and approvably applaudable application of the "scientific method". During which, it was observably, measurably, and (if you send more Jackasses) also repeatedly proved beyond the shadow of a doubt. That discovered was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.
Showing that the test subject failed to Teenage Mutant Ninja his ass some survival wings. Thus, displaying his inability to morphologically develop the desperately needed, extinction evading, "survivability" fitness. Which was ruthlessly demanded of him, by his drastically changed and rapidly approaching concrete environment.
No matter what is observed, there usually is an appropriate evolutionary explanation for it.
Maybe they can appropriately apply an inappropriately interpreted evolutionary explanation for the survival of most species in most places. However, nobody can appropriately or inappropriately, scientifically or theologically explain how a human organism survives in South Central L.A.
Not even Richard Dawkins can imaginatively think up an explanation that spicy.
Well, maybe, but only if you turn off the camera first!
If an organ or organism develops, it has positive survival value;
It has a Glock and an AR-15 also
If it degenerates, it has negative survival value.
It probably had "Dayton's", just before it stopped surviving
If a complex biological system appears suddenly, it is due to preadaptation.
If a complex appears suddenly, its an apartments one.
Due to premature ejaculation. Not pre-adoption!
"Living fossils" (contemporary representatives of organisms expected to be extinct) survive because the environment did not change.
You ain't lie'n Jack!
Survivors whom everyone expected to get "capped".
Survived although the environment did not change.
But only because "they" changed............their address to another environment.
If the environment changes and an evolutionary lineage survives, it is due to adaptation.
Whether the environment changes or not, and if "anyone" survives, it's due to a "miracle
"If the lineage dies, it is because the environment changed too much, etc.
"Shiiiiiiiiiiit", you Jive Turkey Motherfucker!
If the lineage dies, its cuz "The Man" wanted it that way
Hence the concept cannot be falsified
That's right, you know I ain't jive'n your ass!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment