How many Darwinists does it take to

  • Thread starter PIT2
  • Start date
In summary: It seems like the author is saying that because the light bulb is screwing itself in, it's evidence that evolution is happening. But then the author goes on to say that because there's a possibility that the bulb could have done it without Darwinism, the theory is still not broken. I don't understand why the author is trying to make both points.
  • #1
PIT2
897
2
I thought this was funny :smile:

How many Darwinists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Charles Darwin: None. But if it could be shown that the bulb entered the socket without a series of clockwise turns, my theory would absolutely break down.

ACLU: None! We have separation of church and state in this country.

Eugenie Scott: None. To say a Darwinist did it is not a scientific explanation.

Panda’s Thumb: None. To say that light bulbs don’t screw themselves in is not a testable proposition. You can’t prove they don’t. That would be an argument from incredulity. You are committing a ‘Darwinist Of The Gaps’ fallacy.

Generic 1: None. Time and chance are sufficient. Eventually it is inevitable that the bulb will be in the socket. Say, in a billion years.

Generic 2: None. The quintessentially non-random process of natural selection is sufficient. Those objects capable of giving off light when screwed into sockets will be in sockets. Those that aren’t will be in the trash.

Richard Dawkins: None. A light bulb that gives off 1% light intensity is very much worth having. A bulb sitting on the shelf at the supermarket gives off a certain amount of light. One in the cupboard at home gives off more. One five feet from the socket gives off more, and one two feet away even more. One in the socket gives off the most of all. It is therefore inevitable that the bulb will reach the socket.

Stephen J. Gould: None. The bulb jumped into the socket when no one was looking. Gradually.


more...

There are more comments on the site.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
That was just lame. :rolleyes:
 
  • #3
Yes, of course, evolution should certainly be compared with screwing a light bulb in. The analogy makes perfect sense and inevitably leads to meaningful conclusions!

- Warren
 
  • #4
I don't get it.
 

FAQ: How many Darwinists does it take to

How many Darwinists does it take to understand evolution?

There is no set number of Darwinists needed to understand evolution. It is a complex and ongoing scientific theory that is constantly being studied and refined. However, having a diverse group of scientists with different perspectives and expertise can contribute to a better understanding of evolution.

How many Darwinists does it take to prove evolution?

Evolution has already been extensively proven through numerous scientific studies, observations, and evidence. It is a widely accepted theory in the scientific community and does not require a specific number of Darwinists to prove its validity.

How many Darwinists does it take to refute creationism?

Darwinism, or the theory of evolution, does not necessarily refute creationism. They are two separate explanations for the origins of life and can coexist. However, many scientists who subscribe to evolution do not believe in creationism and may use evidence from evolution to argue against creationist beliefs.

How many Darwinists does it take to conduct a study on natural selection?

The number of Darwinists needed to conduct a study on natural selection will vary depending on the scope and complexity of the study. It is common for multiple scientists to collaborate on a study, so the number of Darwinists involved could range from a few to dozens.

How many Darwinists does it take to adapt to new evidence?

Darwinists, like all scientists, are constantly adapting to new evidence and incorporating it into their understanding of evolution. This is a crucial aspect of the scientific process and helps to refine and strengthen existing theories.

Back
Top