M-Cluster (Mixed Group of Critics & Friends)

Posted on August 19, 2011 by Dr. Michael Bisconti

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this page.

Visit The New L. F. Nexus Website and Portal
Major Satellite WebsitesAtheists: Asinine Atheists (asinineatheists.com).
Homosexuality: The "Gay Is Not" Website (gayisnot.com).
Technology: Bisconti Technologies, Inc. (btechy.com).
Technology: SQL Server Solutions (sqlserversolutions.com).
Mental Health: UPAX, the United States Psychiatric Association (upax.us).
Evolution: EON Super Nexus (eon.supernexus.com).
L.F. Nexus Supercomputer: Collosus (collosus.supernexus.com).
The Bible (The Holy Scriptures): Biblical Textual Calculus (biblicaltc.com).

It turns out we have an M-Cluster instead of a C-Cluster (group of critics). Okay, here we go. Keep in mind that I have to sort of guess at the context. Also, I may simply repeat a response.

NoWoo4Me @mbisconti my guess
is that it is because evolutionary theory is based on observed evidence. …and
that “refute”=/=”disprove”

Dr. Bisconti: “We do not argue against the THEORY of evolution based on religion. We argue against the THEORY of evolution based on science. Simply put, the THEORY of evolution can be tolerated but only as a HYPOTHESIS (see our XEGP ”The Hypothesis Proof“). Evolutionary HYPOTHESIS is beautiful in its structure and symmetry but can never be a predictive engine. More important, HYPOTHESES may never be taught as established science in science classes.”

drg1985 @mbisconti You’ve
refuted nothing – for someone so insecure they wear their (questionable) degree
on your sleeve, basic research would help

Dr. Bisconti: “First, ‘credentials attacks’ are the mark of a person with a weak argument. Second, in any event, the first college professors never went to college.”

Dr. Bisconti: “We do not argue against the THEORY of evolution based on religion. We argue against the THEORY of evolution based on science. Simply put, the THEORY of evolution can be tolerated but only as a HYPOTHESIS (see our XEGP “The Hypothesis Proof“). Evolutionary HYPOTHESIS is beautiful in its structure and symmetry but can never be a predictive engine. More important, HYPOTHESES may never be taught as established science in science classes.”

seaseattlewa @mbisconti @CommonDescent Has anybody called
Poe on this yet?

Dr. Bisconti: ”First, the only Poe I know is Edgar Allan Poe. All kidding aside, an earlier generation of my website was called a “POE” by someone but I never found out what “POE” meant.”

Nerdista @mbisconti It’s
still being taught in science class because it is SCIENCE. Believing in a
fantasy won’t progress the world.

Nerdista @mbisconti Refute
all you want, you’re WRONG. Science is different from religion,

Dr. Bisconti: “We do not argue against the THEORY of evolution based on religion. We argue against the THEORY of evolution based on science. Simply put, the THEORY of evolution can be tolerated but only as a HYPOTHESIS (see our XEGP “The Hypothesis Proof“). Evolutionary HYPOTHESIS is beautiful in its structure and symmetry but can never be a predictive engine. More important, HYPOTHESES may never be taught as established science in science classes.”

jeremymprince @mbisconti // I
doubt that very much chief.

Dr. Bisconti: “We do not argue against the THEORY of evolution based on religion. We argue against the THEORY of evolution based on science. Simply put, the THEORY of evolution can be tolerated but only as a HYPOTHESIS (see our XEGP “The Hypothesis Proof“). Evolutionary HYPOTHESIS is beautiful in its structure and symmetry but can never be a predictive engine. More important, HYPOTHESES may never be taught as established science in science classes.”