leopold:
well see james, that's the problem.
what he said in science seems to be doing exactly that, denying small accumulating changes.
if this is "natural selection" then he was denying it.
Then I guess you'd better use the time to do some research so you can pick option 2:
"Alternatively, it will also be acceptable if you can find any quote from a published source written by Ayala himself that states that Ayala thinks that evolution by natural selection is false."
Good luck with that. You have a little less than 19 hours left.
whether ayala has creationist views or not is irrelevant.
Then you won't mind agreeing with the statement that he does not, in fact, have creationist views. If that doesn't matter to you. One less thing for you to worry about over the next 19 hours.
the above is the best i can do james.
i am not going to profess what someone believes nor do i have the credentials to call science/lewin liars.
You have not been asked to profess what someone believes. You have been asked to agree to this:
"Ayala gave a talk at the conference that accepted evolution. There is no quote from Ayala in Lewin's
Science article, or anywhere else that I am aware of, saying that Ayala thinks that evolution by natural selection is false, or that he has Creationist views."
In other words, you have been asked to make a statement about
your knowledge, not Ayala's.
You can avoid a ban only if you publically agree with the above statement, or else find a suitable quote from Ayala that supports your contentions (see above).
The best you can do right now is insufficient. You'll have to try harder. Or you will be leaving us.
You need to start being honest. You need to stop your games and your avoidance. Or you can just be banned again. Up to you.
you can believe that if you want to.
put yourself in ayalas place james.
now tell me, "i james r. WOULD NOT contact science about this matter."
Ok.
So I imagine I'm Ayala. I've published extensively about evolution. I've written books and peer-reviewed journal articles about it. I'm an evolutionary biologist (and a Christian, too, as it happens). I take part in a conference at which there are some interesting discussions about the precise mechanisms of evolution. I hear nothing more for a year. Then somebody from NAIG contacts me by email and tells me that Creationists are quoting an article by a guy called Lewin which arguably supports the idea that I said evolution doesn't happen. The NAIG asks for my response.
What do I do, as Ayala?
Answer: I shoot off an email reply to the NAIG guy, telling him that the whole idea that I would say that evolution doesn't happen and that "small changes don't accumulate" is silly, given everything in my background. Besides, how could small changes
not accumulate?
Looks like Lewin misquoted me. Oh well. These things happen from time to time. Clearly, the Creationists are really stretching things to claim that Lewin's article supports the idea that evolution doesn't occur. But I'm a scientist. I'm not worried about what Creationists think about a conference on evolutionary biology. I have better things to do with my time.
Do I kick up a fuss and demand that
Science correct the record? Nah! It's a minor error. These things happen. Besides, that NAIG guy has posted my rebuttal to the creationist claims on a public web page. I have real work to do. I consider this minor matter finished.
honestly?
they were probable trying to figure out a way to tell the public all of this stuff without causing a 4 alarm meltdown.
You don't hold a conference by invitation only to make public announcements. The conference was a scientific meeting to discuss various ideas about evolution among professionals.
What's the risk of a "meltdown" here? This conference wholeheartedly supported the fact of evolution. It was an evolutionary biology conference.
some were probably afraid the creationists would jump all over it and go stupid.
I doubt they were even thinking about creationists. This was a scientific conference, not a conference on fundamentalist religion.
i don't know, and i really don't care, but i DO know this "retraction" nonsense needs to stop.
it WILL be fleshed out.
after all, that's what "peer review" is all about.
You keep using the word "retraction". Nobody has retracted anything. Nor do they need to.
what eldridge said about the record.
What did he say? Quote and citation, please. Come on, leopold. Isn't it time you did some work?
what if such a thing WAS found james?
simple, we will say the earth was folded over to cause the displacement.
no, there needs to be a clear cut experiment that can be proven false, that if true proves evolution.
and there is none.
The thing you keep missing about science in general, and about evolution in particular, is that no scientific idea is ever "proved" and no scientific idea ever stands or falls on one piece of data. Scientific theories are tested in many different ways. The more tests they pass, the more confident we are that they are correct.
Evolution is one of science's glowing success stories. It is a theory supported by oodles of evidence. It has passed every test that might falsify it. There's just no doubt that it occurs.
and science, a respected source, says ayala said what he did.
it doesn't matter james, science never said they got it wrong.
this leaves NAIG in a very uncomfortable position, doesn't it.
It's clear to any idiot that
Science (or, more accurately, Lewin) got this wrong. Ayala has said so.
I have no idea why you imagine that NAIG would be uncomfortable. Or
Science. Or Ayala. Or even Lewin.
i've already told you james, i won't respond to your threats of ban.
you remove the ban threat and i will answer the post.
until then, you can ram it.
I will be ramming it in 19 hours if there is no sudden outbreak of honesty from you before then. Specifically, I will ram the "ban" button next to the name "leopold".
You are not in any position to issue ultimatums here, leopold. "If you remove the ban threat, then I will answer." No. You've had literally
years to answer questions put to you. You have avoided, repeated yourself, refused to read information given to you, and generally been bereft of intellectual integrity. For years.
Now you have 19 hours left to change your ways. Or not.
well, it seems NAIG has been posting an alleged retraction that never appears in science.
What "retraction"? There's that word again. Nobody retracted anything.
Do you have any valid reason to doubt the veracity of Ayala's statement, as published by NAIG? If so, now is the time to post your evidence.
the clipping itself says the houston chronicle.
Did you read the clipping? Look just below the title and author. What does it say?
i've learned to protect my sources james.
You want to protect what you say was
my "favorite atheist website"? Well, that's very nice of you, leopold.
Protect it from what, though?
Are you afraid that the Great Evil Scientific Conspiracy will get to it and wipe out an article that supports the theory of evolution?
i have a bunch of creationist sites bookmarked.
You should delete them all and learn some science.
But that would require some intellectual honesty from you, and a desire to learn. It's all a bit much to ask of you, isn't it?