darryl88

You may be confused. If you think Gert Korthof has anything to do with "creation science" then you have made a terrible mistake and that will probably just turn this thread into a troll zone. Gert Korthof debunks creationism on his website and his website is the only website on the internet which includes all of the updates about recent mechanisms in evolution, Korthof is well qualifed and has spent most of his life researching evolution - all of the mechanisms on his website are natural. Please see his introduction section. I think that you are not aware about the current debate within evolution, reading over his introduction section will make things clear, that is not only "one position" on evolution. Have you seen how many mechanisms there are? http://home.planet.nl/~gkorthof/korthof.htm#C5 See sections "Against natural selection" and "Against gradualism" and "Extensions" As you can see many scientists there with many different views wanting to extend neo-Darwinism and improve evolution.

Neo-darwinism also known as the modern synthesis, or synthetic theory is basically Mendelian genetics and Darwinian selection merged into a theory of evolution. The mechanisms that it proposes are random mutation + natural selection. But it had been discovered that these mechanisms are not as powerful as the neo-Darwinians first thought they were, they added in genetic drift and that is now described as the main mechanism with natural selection. The New synthesis does not deny that any of these mechanisms, but it says they are inadequate to explain the biodiversity of all life on earth, the new synthesis says that neodarwinism is incomplete. The neo-Darwinian framework is limited, many new mechanisms have been discovered which do not fit into such a narrow framework and in some cases contradict neo-Darwinism. Some things which pop into mind are developmental biology (evo-devo), genomics, epigenetics, ecology, symbiosis, hox genes, natural genetic engineering, niche construction, systems biology, horizontal gene transfer, panbiogeography... neolamarckism ... & many others... as mentioned they do not all fit into a narrow neoDarwinian framework. So what is this new synthesis and where is it developing? It is hard to say becuase currently there is no unified new synthesis at present, it just seems to be many new ideas that have been presented by many different scientists. I was recently in a long email debate with 60 scientists! And they were all pretty much arguing over which of the new mechanisms are correct and which ones are wrong... Gert Korthof whos owns the website www.wasdarwinwrong.com talks about how the new synthesis is becoming visible and lists many of these new ideas. Dr. A.P. JHA, Professor of Zoology, who has nearly fifty published papers on genes and evolution to his credit in his book called as 'Genes and Evolution' has a seperate chapter for 'Modification Of Neo-Darwinism: The New Synthesis'

Hello folks. I am a University student and I have an interest in evolution. Over the past few months I have been emailing many scientists (biologists and ecologists etc) as I believe that evolution has moved beyond the neo-Darwinian paradigm. Now this is quite a confusing subject, becuase I have recieved a mixed response from different scientists. Some admit to me that neo-Darwinism is outdated and incomplete whilst some others still represent that view. Eugene V. Koonin in his book 'The Logic of Chance' (The Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution) is critical towards neo-Darwinism or 'Modern Synthesis' as they call it and he sees a totally new paradigm shift developing in evolution. The American biologist James A. Shapiro author of Evolution: A View from the 21st Century has also said the same thing. Some other scientists have also told me by 2020 they see neo-Darwinism as totally dead. What is to be said about this? Any scientists actually in the field here can they confirm any of this? Thanks.

Theres been a list compiled here of over 100 alternatives to the mechanisms of the modern evolution synthesis, dont worry this has nothing to do with creationism. There appears to be some decent alternatives such as the mechanism of molecular drive, or symbiosis driving evolution instead of natural selection. see the list here (and yes theres also some metaphysical ones), what do you think about some of these? Non Darwinian evolution mechanisms and their authors

To those who are open to PSI existing.Which theory do you believe may explain PSI (paranormal phenomena) such astelepathy, clairvoyance, psychokinesis, near-death experiences or apparitionsetc? John Beloff a well known parapsychologist concluded that PSI occurs becuase ofdualism ie the mind and brain are separate. Amit Goswami however in his book“The Self-Aware Universe”, lists some studies on quantum physics that may leadto an explanation of psi that agrees with the theory of a nonphysical andconceptual world. He explains that in quantum physics, objects are not seen asdefinite things. Instead, objects are possibilities, viewed as something called“possibility waves”. Of course his interpretation due to his research inquantum physics has lead him to formulate idealistic monism, that onlyconsciousness exists in the universe and everything is part of it, he arguesagainst dualism and materialism. Others however have disagreed and put forward physical and materialistictheories to try and explain PSI. Michael Persinger claims that much of paranormal phenomena can be explained bylow frequency (ELF) electromagnetic waves. Brian Josephson has claimed that the explanation of PSI may be found in quantumphysics. Gerald Feinberg's concept of a tachyon, a theoretical particle thattravels faster than the speed of light has been advocated by someparapsychologists who claim that it could explain some PSI phenomena. Charles Tart however believes PSI is completey non-physical and does notoperate to material laws. There are many theories which try and explain PSI. Which one do you advocateand why? If any?