The only theories of evolution you tend to hear about are Lamarck's, Haeckel's and Darwin's. Are there any other major theories of evolution? Are any of them remotely viable?
There are also Morgan, Mendel, Miller & Urey, Dawkins, Altman, and many others.
>>7746269
According to the demarcation criterion of pseudoscience originally proposed by Lakatos, a theory is pseudoscientific if it fails to make any novel predictions of previously unknown phenomena, in contrast with scientific theories, which predict novel fact(s).[14] Progressive scientific theories are those which have their novel facts confirmed and degenerate scientific theories are those whose predictions of novel facts are refuted. As he put it:
"A given fact is explained scientifically only if a new fact is predicted with it....The idea of growth and the concept of empirical character are soldered into one." See pages 34–5 of The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, 1978.
Lakatos's own key examples of pseudoscience were Ptolemaic astronomy, Immanuel Velikovsky's planetary cosmogony, Freudian psychoanalysis, 20th century Soviet Marxism,[15] Lysenko's biology, Niels Bohr's Quantum Mechanics post-1924, astrology, psychiatry, sociology, neoclassical economics, and Darwin's theory.
Darwin's theory
In his 1973 LSE Scientific Method Lecture 1[16] he also claimed that "nobody to date has yet found a demarcation criterion according to which Darwin can be described as scientific".
Almost 20 years after Lakatos's 1973 challenge to the scientificity of Darwin, in her 1991 The Ant and the Peacock, LSE lecturer and ex-colleague of Lakatos, Helena Cronin, attempted to establish that Darwinian theory was empirically scientific in respect of at least being supported by evidence of likeness in the diversity of life forms in the world, explained by descent with modification. She wrote that
our usual idea of corroboration as requiring the successful prediction of novel facts...Darwinian theory was not strong on temporally novel predictions. ... however familiar the evidence and whatever role it played in the construction of the theory, it still confirms the theory.[17]
>>7746286
but Darwin actually did novel predictions of previously unknown phenomena
>>7746269
Sauce?
>>7746312
Her friend just stole her panties.
>>7746312
Sauce of the picture of course
>>7746286
Don't forget Hubbard's Theory of Evolution -- man evolved from clams.
>>7746269
There's mine.
You know how when you spin a weight on the end of a string you feel a force called the centrifugal force, but it is not real? The only force at play is the centripetal force – the electromagnetic force of the strings constituent matter.
That is called a false duel: there are two ways to look at the problem, but one of them is not real.
Natural selection is not real. You see, we think of evolution as a ladder, where survival depends on a trait inherent in the species that allows it to navigate the world better than the old way.
But evolution is not a ladder; it is a sieve. It is created by the failure of everyone else – the losers - not the specific success of the winner.
You make a false dual when you look at the survivor, the winner, and not the millions of losers.
This is called statistical evolution. The massively larger population of failure is ignored by the models offered by virtually everyone, and there are a number of problems that cannot be solved looking only at the survivor, such as the continuation of lesser species, and the problem of vestigial traits.
Life is what is left over when the billions of combinations that can happen meet the billions of ways they can fail.
Life is what drops out of the sieve, not what climbs the ladder.
>>7746286
>Niels Bohr's Quantum Mechanics post-1924, psychiatry, sociology, neoclassical economics, and Darwin's theory.
The absolute madman
>>7746269
Story behind pic?
>>7746269
>posting jb on a /sci/ence board
Do mods even come around these parts?
>>7746435
Her friend just stole her panties, and then started running away, and took a picture with her cellphone.
>>7746286
That's one shitty criterion.
>>7746347
>long winded analogy describing the act of passing on genes
yes, it is very complicated. many people have looked at the failures - they die. Look up neutral mutation theory, the rate of 'good-genes', and consider the founder affect as nexi in the disparate ocean of population genomics.
>>7746684
vagina
>>7746347
This becomes obvious when anyone bothers to take time to think about it.
Granted, the majority of the public may not think of this when they consider the word "natural selection", but I'd assume most educated persons, especially in biology, are aware of this.
>>7746759
>>7746684
Pls Post more since you're gonna get bnned anyway
>>7747831
unfortunately this level of degeneracy is not illegal or against any rules, so no ban for them
well, i suppose i shouldn't say it's unfortunate that it's allowed - free expression human rights blah blah blah
it's definitely unfortunate that people make/enjoy it though
>>7747842
I don't get what's degenerate about this. It's just a drawing of women
>>7747880
Goddamn that is one sexy picture but the mirror thing is really tickling my autism
>>7747924
Beautiful
>>7747947
>>7747940
Is there a tag that captures all these excellent art
>>7748102
you're getting banned anyway, post loli
all those pics are disgusting and kitschy
The mods really don't give a shit about this board. Even if OP was reported 20 times in a single minute, nothing would be done. The main problem is the quality of posts though. I don't have a problem with porn. Keep on posting.
>>7748361
>cat ears
nvrmnd ban this shit, mods. yiff in hell OP
What about this one? ( >>7748289 ) I also have evolution of huumans detection lol.
This theory of evolution thing is Tomas Nemcoks "theory"
What the fuck is going on in this thread?
I guess this is Hiroyuki himself.
>>7748447
I don't think Hiroyuki likes anime. Not all Japs like anime.
This is the best science I've seen in quite a long time
>>7748420
I'm lying in bed browsing sci on my phone thinking of sleeping and you had to post that pic
Hhhnnnnng guess I will be awake a few minutes more
This thread was supposed to be about the different theories of evolution. I'm disappointed in you sci.
>>7748474
You can clearly see that the thread increased its fitness and evolved into a thread that's highly resistant to natural death up to physical limits; it's only susceptible to predators such as moderators.
>>7748375
The mods here fucking suck. Deleting the daily putnam threads killed this board.
>muh free will
>philosophy vs. science
>degree/major power rankings
>college advice
>DUDE PSYCHEDELICS LMAO
can we appreciate that someone has taken a total of 5+ hours posting at 3 minute intervals?
his content sure is alot more interesting than /sci/ autism to say the least
>>7746269
I'm confused, why would a girl be bottomless walking on the street and holding her crotch?
Secondly why isn't she also topless?
>>7748601
>why would a girl be bottomless walking on the street and holding her crotch
BECAUSE SHE IS A FREE WOMYN, SHITLORD. OH MY GOD. I CANNOT BELIEVE YOU EVEN ASKED THAT.
I'm impressed
This thread evolved from 2D to 3D
>>7746319
she had them off to be stolen in the first place?
>>7748555
I sure did appreciate it. He posted some great art.
