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

  • #16
    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 post #7:
    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

    So it does not look like it was Spetner who said that "evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process," but rather the anonymous "Amazon reviewer" that you quoted.



    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)
    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      From your post #7:

      So it does not look like it was Spetner who said that "evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process," but rather the anonymous "Amazon reviewer" that you quoted.

      I cannot find the complete quote at present, but the hyphenated quote occurs here in quotes by Lee Spetner. I believe it is accurate, but I will keep looking.

      Source: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/7336856.Lee_Spetner



      “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.”

      © Copyright Original Source


      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


      • #18
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        From your post #7:
        So it does not look like it was Spetner who said that "evolution is a non-random, targeted mutation, and rapid process," but rather the anonymous "Amazon reviewer" that you quoted.

        Interesting debate between Lee Spetner and Edward Max, which clearly and specifically demonstrates that Lee Spetner argues for a Intelligent Design Creationist arguement.

        The debate is here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fitness/spetner.html
        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


        • #19
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

          I cannot find the complete quote at present, but the hyphenated quote occurs here in quotes by Lee Spetner. I believe it is accurate, but I will keep looking.

          Source: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/7336856.Lee_Spetner



          “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.”

          © Copyright Original Source

          I have the 2 Spetner books at home with me, and here is the ''full'' quote:

          ''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 another of them has explained that although the variability occurs randomly, the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom. In explaining the role of selection, however, they ignore the main point: Can random changes give natural selection enough of the right genes for evolution to work? Their arguments are of three kings: (1) verbal, (2) mathematical, and (3) experimental evidence. That's a mighty array of power to bring for a theory, and if the arguments were solid and correct they should hav eput the theory on a stable and reliable foundation. The neo-Darwinians would like everyone to believe they have done that''.

          The bold passages represent the missing parts of the quote. It's page 75 of ''Not By Chance'', 1997.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Seeker View Post

            I have the 2 Spetner books at home with me, and here is the ''full'' quote:

            ''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 another of them has explained that although the variability occurs randomly, the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom. In explaining the role of selection, however, they ignore the main point: Can random changes give natural selection enough of the right genes for evolution to work? Their arguments are of three kings: (1) verbal, (2) mathematical, and (3) experimental evidence. That's a mighty array of power to bring for a theory, and if the arguments were solid and correct they should hav eput the theory on a stable and reliable foundation. The neo-Darwinians would like everyone to believe they have done that''.

            The bold passages represent the missing parts of the quote. It's page 75 of ''Not By Chance'', 1997.
            OK, but I consider this citation loaded with sarcasm, not the sarcasm of 'clever arguments.' and unclear when the book, and Spetner rejects the scientific explanation . Science does not propose evolution is a random process. . . and he claims the theory is destroyed. Sort of a Napoleon won the Battle of Waterloo.' Very very confusing.

            Need more than this sarcastic statement to explain Spetner's argument, which is a creationist argument..
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-05-2020, 08:13 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


            • #21
              Originally posted by Seeker View Post

              I have the 2 Spetner books at home with me, and here is the ''full'' quote:

              ''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 another of them has explained that although the variability occurs randomly, the selection process gives it direction and makes it nonrandom. In explaining the role of selection, however, they ignore the main point: Can random changes give natural selection enough of the right genes for evolution to work? Their arguments are of three kinds: (1) verbal, (2) mathematical, and (3) experimental evidence. That's a mighty array of power to bring for a theory, and 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''.

              The bold passages represent the missing parts of the quote. It's page 75 of ''Not By Chance!'', 1997.
              Some mistakes in grammar corrected.
              Last edited by Seeker; 11-05-2020, 09:41 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                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
                That is not necessary for a Creationist argument. He, of course, begins with the title of his book Not by Chance, Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution (1996).

                Source: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/7336856.Lee_Spetner



                “The bradys must hold that, on the average, cumulative selection has to add a little information to the genome at each step. But of all the mutations studied since genetics became a science, not a single one has been found that adds a little information. It is not impossible, in principle, for a mutation to add a little information, but it is improbable.
                The NDT was an attractive theory. Unfortunately, it is based on the false speculation that many small random mutations could build up to large evolutionary changes.”
                ― Lee Spetner

                “To understand Darwin's work, you have to distinguish between his theory of descent and his theory of natural selection. The full name of the first is the theory of descent with modification. Some call it the fact of evolution, and some call it the doctrine of evolution.”

                © Copyright Original Source

                Last edited by shunyadragon; 11-06-2020, 07:50 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


                • #23
                  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.
                  In the OP quote, it sure sounds like he is denying it. Which is silly and/or weird, given that even the most hardcore YEC's (i.e., AiG, CMI) accept speciation.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Seeker View Post

                    In the OP quote, it sure sounds like he is denying it. Which is silly and/or weird, given that even the most hardcore YEC's (i.e., AiG, CMI) accept speciation.
                    A careful reading of Lee Spetner reveals the speciation which he rejects is the same as what Creationists reject and that is macro-evolution
                    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

                    Related Threads

                    Collapse

                    Topics Statistics Last Post
                    Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                    48 responses
                    135 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post Sparko
                    by Sparko
                     
                    Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                    16 responses
                    74 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post shunyadragon  
                    Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                    6 responses
                    48 views
                    0 likes
                    Last Post shunyadragon  
                    Working...
                    X