Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Lee Spetner on Evolution

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lee Spetner on Evolution

    From the Amazon blurb of the ''The Evolution Revolution'' (https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Rev...3975679&sr=8-2):

    "Evolutionary theory that relies on randomness has been destroyed by noting that no one has been able to show that the evolutionary events according to the theory have a probability that is anything but so small as to be practically equivalent to zero. Unless the probability of events like Common Descent, and even just speciation, can be shown to be reasonably high, the theory is not a theory. This has never been shown, thus the theory is destroyed."

    For you, does that means that this creationist denies or doubts speciation?

  • #2
    Well, ah . . . it mirrors the Creationist anti-science unethical dishonest argument for the necessity of a Creator God for not only life, but the nature of physical existence to be as it is

    First Evolutionary science does not rely on randomness. Second, the only occurrence of true randomness is in the outcome of individual cause and effect events with the limits of Natural Laws, natural processes and the environment. Third, the science of evolution as well as all sciences is dependent on the consistency and predictability of the theories and hypothesis based on objective verifiable physical evidence. Fourth, if what Lee Spetner proposes is true all of the theories and hypothesis of science would be destroyed, and even Newton would be disproven, of course, nothing is proven in science.

    This blurb is a pasture plop, and draws nothing but flies. After reading this I had to open the windows and ventilate the stench.

    Dr, Spetner is a devoted Creationist.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-29-2020, 09:35 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #3
      Natural selection is not random, and natural selection is a part of evolutionary theory. Hence the book blurb is incorrect because it ignores the non-random effects of natural selection. In short GIGO.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by rossum View Post
        Natural selection is not random, and natural selection is a part of evolutionary theory. Hence the book blurb is incorrect because it ignores the non-random effects of natural selection. In short GIGO.
        But on his pevious book (from 1996, no less!), we read: “Common sense says that the amazing complexity of life cannot arise out of a random process. The neo-Darwinians use clever arguments to show why evolution should work and why common sense is wrong. One after the other of them has explained that although the variability occurs randomly, the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom. . . . if the arguments were solid and correct they should have put the theory on a stable and reliable foundation. The neo-Darwinians would like everyone to believe they have done that.”

        So he does acknowledge the non-random nature of evolutionary theory. So is he contradicting himself?
        Last edited by Seeker; 10-29-2020, 07:23 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Seeker View Post

          But on his pevious book (from 1996, no less!), we read: “Common sense says that the amazing complexity of life cannot arise out of a random process. The neo-Darwinians use clever arguments to show why evolution should work and why common sense is wrong. One after the other of them has explained that although the variability occurs randomly, the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom. . . . if the arguments were solid and correct they should have put the theory on a stable and reliable foundation. The neo-Darwinians would like everyone to believe they have done that.”

          So he does acknowledge the non-random nature of evolutionary theory. So is he contradicting himself?
          Read very carefully, he does say that evolution proposes that the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom, but he rejects this scientific explanation. If you put this citation in a fuller context it would abundantly clear.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            I think I get it now. Thanks, Shuny.

            Comment


            • #7
              It turns out Spetner is not a creationist, he proposes an alternative to neodarwinism that involves epigenetics, horizontal gene transfer, and a role for so-called "junk DNA." So no, he is not denying speciation, he is instead proposing an alternative mechanism.

              Source: Amazon reviewer

              On the contrary to Neo-Darwinism, Dr. Lee Spetner proposes that evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process. To me this makes completely sense. Gradual neo-evolutionists say that it takes many steps of micro-evolution for macro-evolution to occur and result in speciation. They claim that evolution is a gradual process that takes no more or less millions of years and many generations. Time is their key factor of randomness creating order rather than chaos. Spetner on the other hand makes such assumption look more like hilarious irony given the fact that speciation is observed in not so many generations and happens rapidly regardless whether it's allopatric/sympatric. The book cites peer-reviewed articles by evolutionary biologists of evolution taking place rapidly rather than gradually. Even the structural characteristics of Darwin's finches evolved rapidly within 15 or 16 generations as opposed to the popular belief that they evolved gradually over millions of years.

              Source

              © Copyright Original Source



              Blessings,
              Lee
              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

              Comment


              • #8
                At the risk of citing Wikipedia:

                Source: Lee Spetner


                Dr. Lee M. Spetner is an American and Israeli creationist author, mechanical engineer, applied biophysicist, and physicist, known best for his disagreements with the modern synthesis. In spite of his opposition to neo-Darwinism, Spetner accepts a form of non-random evolution outlined in his 1996 book "Not By Chance! Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution".[1]



                Source

                © Copyright Original Source



                It says he is a creationist, but of a unique stripe

                Source: ibid


                Spetner, an avowed theist, has been described as a Jewish Creationist.[14] However, his Non Random Evolutionary Hypothesis is, in fact, agnostic. It makes no claim that scientific evidence proves a supernatural creator.[15] Additionally, Spetner vehemently rejects the teaching of Creation in public schools, asserting that "the subject is best handled in the home or within a religious environment." [16]

                © Copyright Original Source




                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

                  It says he is a creationist, but of a unique stripe

                  Source: ibid


                  Spetner, an avowed theist, has been described as a Jewish Creationist.[14] However, his Non Random Evolutionary Hypothesis is, in fact, agnostic. It makes no claim that scientific evidence proves a supernatural creator.[15] Additionally, Spetner vehemently rejects the teaching of Creation in public schools, asserting that "the subject is best handled in the home or within a religious environment." [16]

                  © Copyright Original Source


                  Well, they're being inconsistent, his theory has nothing to do with creation or the supernatural.

                  Blessings,
                  Lee
                  "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                    Well, they're being inconsistent, his theory has nothing to do with creation or the supernatural.

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    Not at all. They clearly state that while he is a creationist that

                    ...his Non Random Evolutionary Hypothesis is, in fact, agnostic. It makes no claim that scientific evidence proves a supernatural creator


                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      It turns out Spetner is not a creationist, he proposes an alternative to neodarwinism that involves epigenetics, horizontal gene transfer, and a role for so-called "junk DNA." So no, he is not denying speciation, he is instead proposing an alternative mechanism.

                      Source: Amazon reviewer

                      On the contrary to Neo-Darwinism, Dr. Lee Spetner proposes that evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process. To me this makes completely sense. Gradual neo-evolutionists say that it takes many steps of micro-evolution for macro-evolution to occur and result in speciation. They claim that evolution is a gradual process that takes no more or less millions of years and many generations. Time is their key factor of randomness creating order rather than chaos. Spetner on the other hand makes such assumption look more like hilarious irony given the fact that speciation is observed in not so many generations and happens rapidly regardless whether it's allopatric/sympatric. The book cites peer-reviewed articles by evolutionary biologists of evolution taking place rapidly rather than gradually. Even the structural characteristics of Darwin's finches evolved rapidly within 15 or 16 generations as opposed to the popular belief that they evolved gradually over millions of years.

                      Source

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      'Targeted' by what?!?!?!?!!?
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                        Well, they're being inconsistent, his theory has nothing to do with creation or the supernatural.

                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        Well yes, Spetner is a Creationist, and the key in his books is what he believes how evolution must be 'targeted.' Targeted by what?!?!!?

                        It is terribly odd that many consider his amplified statement 'not by chance' as sensational, but in reality it is an empty challenge of what he calls Neo-Darwinism (bad term). The science of evolution is neither Darwinism nor Neo-Darwinism it is the science of evolution. The science of evolution has not considered chance nor randomness a determining factor in evolution nor in the long term outcome of cause and effect events in all of our physical existence.

                        So what is the purpose of Dr. Spetner's 'not by chance' and his believe evolution is a 'targeted process.'
                        Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-01-2020, 10:38 AM.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          So what is the purpose of Dr. Spetner's 'not by chance' and his believe evolution is a 'targeted process.'
                          A quote of Spetner would be helpful, I didn't get the impression that he thought evolution was targeted.

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            A quote of Spetner would be helpful, I didn't get the impression that he thought evolution was targeted.

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            From your reference, "On the contrary to Neo-Darwinism, Dr. Lee Spetner proposes that evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process."

                            Also . . .

                            Source: http://wasdarwinwrong.com/kortho36.htm



                            What kind of creationist?

                            Spetner is a theist. The Judaica Press is religious. Spetner published an online article about the relation between Darwinism and the Torah (13). It is clear that Spetner has a motive, but that does not make him 'guilty'. Calculations cannot be Jewish. Clearly Richard Dawkins, being an atheist, has a motive. But calculations cannot be atheist either. There is no religion in Not By Chance, except in his Epilogue where Spetner discusses the Torah concept of creation. He even claims that his Non Random Evolutionary Hypothesis is derivable from Talmudic sources. That explains his motives behind the NREH. Furthermore his motives also influenced the contents and the nature of his own hypothesis:

                            • The NREH, on the other hand, postulates nonrandom variation. It does not fulfill the neo-Darwinian agenda in that it does not contribute to a natural explanation of the origin of life. (p210) (my emphasis).
                            So he considers his own NREH a non-natural explanation. That makes him a creationist, not a Young Earth Creationist of course. A difference with creationist Phillip Johnson is that Johnson typically attacks Dawkins' atheism, while Spetner typically attacks Dawkins' weasel simulation. Moving religious matters to an Epilogue does prevent mixing science and religion, and is probably the best a creationist can do, but doesn't prevent Spetner from being a Creationist. Further hints of 'design' in his book are:
                            • "The genome were set up for an adaptive change" (p. 183).
                            • "I am suggesting here that organisms have a built-in capability of adapting to their environment". (p.200)
                            The only way to explain an instantaneous adaptive mutation without a trial and error process, is a magic set up of the genome. The crucial question is of course What caused this 'set up'? If it was not a trial and error process, then what was it? A Designer? By the way: if such a 'set up' causes an immediate and correct adaptive response, why do species ever get extinct? Was there an incorrect 'set up' of the genome? If adaptive mutation worked, it would only speed up evolution. If there was a 'correct setup', why did it take billions of years to create reptiles, birds, mammals ? It could be done in a few generations. Of course Spetner's 'set up' idea is a question-begging idea, a skyhook (14).

                            © Copyright Original Source





                            Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-01-2020, 02:48 PM.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              A ''targeted mutation'' would be a mutation that looks like it was designed to accomplish something? Or it would be something more 'metaphysical', as in the Creator directly causing the mutation in the organism? I honestly don't know/have no idea.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by lee_merrill, 11-23-2020, 10:25 PM
                              1 response
                              18 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by rogue06, 11-22-2020, 08:25 AM
                              4 responses
                              56 views
                              3 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by TheLurch, 11-19-2020, 02:11 PM
                              1 response
                              25 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by rogue06, 11-10-2020, 08:50 AM
                              0 responses
                              18 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, 11-09-2020, 06:36 PM
                              2 responses
                              16 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X