Posted: Apr 02, 2011 10:45 am
by trubble76
pfrankinstein wrote:
Darwinsbulldog wrote:
Animavore wrote:Ah! I get it!
It's a play on pzombie. Isn't it?

Neh, April fool, no doubt! :)

In order to understand what a fallacy is, one must understand what an argument is. Very briefly, an argument consists of one or more premises and one conclusion. A premise is a statement (a sentence that is either true or false) that is offered in support of the claim being made, which is the conclusion (which is also a sentence that is either true or false).

Statement: The big bang a single beginning denotes a single process, that process = evolution.. = Most basic premise.

Conclusion: If MY 'most basic premise' holds true then 'our' understanding of 'evolution/selection' is lacking and incomplete.

How so lacking? Between the bb and and the emergence of life no type of evolution/selection has been recognised by science.

Previously i have indicated that three types of evolution/selection operate on three different levels explain our universe [>>>].

The three types of selection i outline appear in chronological order in are keeping with the arrow of time, also the movement is in keeping with the rise of literal choosing/waking up.

-0 Smolins 'Cosmological natural selection'.

0, BB.

1, Newtonian 'Primal selection'. Non-conscious.

2, Darwinian 'Natural selection'. Subconscious.

3, 'Cognitive Selection'. Conscious.

[cheek] My Pseudoscience = perfectly reasoned logic.


April Fool's Day was yesterday, you can knock it off now.