Image not available

640x808

Jean-Baptiste_de_....jpg

🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16619570

Lamarck was right.

Anonymous No. 16619644

>no replies
cope

Anonymous No. 16619648

>>16619570
What he said?

Anonymous No. 16619676

>>16619648
The only difference between Darwin and Lamarck is that Darwin made up a theory about a population and Lamarck made up a theory about an individual. Now here is the thing. in order to work with ''a population'', you need to use statistics. and statistics dont lead to proofs and even less to truths. Darwin's theory is not falsifiable and atheists are gaga about this, even though in public they say falsifiability is awesome. In fact, the atheist concept of a ''a population'' is not even well defined. At best you they come up with a fuzzy definition. So with darwin theory you get no predictive claims and when you try to get numbers out of it, you only get few stats about a population and if the theory fails, the atheists will say the numerical results are just statistical artifacts, no big deal. In fact ''truth'' is not even defined in statistics. So whatever atheists come up with with their stats, they can't say it's the truth.

Anonymous No. 16621415

im listening

Anonymous No. 16621421

>>16619648
Giraffes got long necks because they were always trying to reach the leaves on the tops of trees

Anonymous No. 16621457

>>16619570
Could you perhaps explain how he was right and what he was specifically right about?

Anonymous No. 16621468

>>16619570
Epigenitics are obviously tjrue for some things.
I don’t know if is gut biology or spirts, but if your parents learn some skill this is obviously gained by the offspring

Anonymous No. 16621477

>>16621468
>but if your parents learn some skill this is obviously gained by the offspring
wut?

Anonymous No. 16621489

>>16619648
Proto-Communist egalitarian garbage

Anonymous No. 16622128

>>16621457
uhh epigenetics... hello?

Anonymous No. 16622141

>>16621468
>>16622128
I've been debating a friend about whether epigenetics require a trait to actually be heritable. My position is this definition is deprecated, and changes in protein production or function qualify even in a sub-population of non-germ cells.