From usenet thread:

asdf Edit

{{{ On Jan 4, 5:30 pm, backspace <> wrote: > On Jan 4, 4:52 pm, Free Lunch <> wrote: > > > On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 03:06:40 -0800 (PST), backspace > > <> wrote in > > > >p.18 > > >".....But it , too, helps propel the genes of the successful into the > > >future generations. ......" > > > >Question: > > >Other than noting the genes were propelled into future generations how > > >was their successfulness independently measured? > > > Other than noting the winner of the race how was success of the runners > > independently measured? > > Are you truly incapable of thinking?

> What was the real reason the runner won the race drugs, lung > capacity ? > > The winner of the race was successful is a tautology.

> The observation is: He won the race > Why did he win the race? Because he was successful which doesn't tell > us anything we don't already know and is a tautology. The real > reason (drugs, stronger, lung capacity) needs to be derived > independently elsewhere. A tautology merely reformulates the > observation without giving us the actual reason for the observation. }}}

Lets presume there were a specific thousand athletic races ran over a period of 100 years from America to Europe. Per definition "race" means somebody competing against others reached a pre-determined goal of crossing the finish line first. We want to know for each instance what was the actual reason the athlete won. There could be various reasons: 1) He bribed the stronger athlete to let him win. 2) He had bigger lung capacity than the others. 3) He was using drugs. 4) The others only had one leg each while he had two.

A tautology is a way of formulating the observation so that the actual reason the athlete won in each and every instance can't be independently derived from the tautological formulation. It doesn't tell us anything we don't already know: He won the race. But why did he win the race? Lets presume we have no idea and insist on an answer say from PZ Myers or John Wilkins. They discuss it among themselves as to the actual reason for each and every instance but like everybody else weren't there and have no additional information.

asdf Edit

{{{ On Jan 4, 1:06 pm, backspace <> wrote: > p.18 > ".....But it , too, helps propel the genes of the successful into the > future generations. ......" > > Question: > Other than noting the genes were propelled into future generations how > was their successfulness independently measured?

Formulating an observation such as the existence of genes in a tautological manner is a way of disguising that a you have no answer for the phenomena. The sentence just like the Wikipedia definition of natural selection is a reformulation of observation: 1) Genes are in existence because of something we call life but we can't define what it is within our materialist premises. -

Thus it follows the following steps: STep1: Genes are in existence - Truism

2: Reformulate the truism tautologically in order to obscure the truism: Those genes that are in existence were propelled from previous generations into the future and thus there are successful. - Tautology.

And this is done in a deceitful attempt to blow smoke and obscure the fact that real question is : How did "life" bring genes into existence. And we have no idea within our materialist assumptions and thus we will deceive people by stating tautologies until such a time if ever we manage to get an answer within our atheist premises.


Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.