/lit/ - Literature

>>15572541
>No. They were going to town with that garbage. The general societal pressure to comply with the suggestions of "medical professionals" was absurd regarding the appendix and the tonsils.

Tonsil removal was everywhere, but appendix wasnt as present since its a more compelx operation and I heard some idiot in white coat literally arguing that appendix serves no purpouse since muh evolution. total clown show.

>>15510221
>if they lower the chance of survival, they die out, if they raise the chance of survival, they are replicated. how hard is this to understand? grade schoolers can learn this stuff

Thing is that you DONT TEST for that since you CANT TEST for that and you CANT TEST it because that thesis is UNFALSIFIABLE.

What evolutionists do is that you explain it RETROACTIVELY like mythology does explain history, so its post-hoc instead of pre-hoc explanation. I dont need to point out that this is the exact opposite of the scientific normative that is aimed at predicting. What evolutionary predictions were ever falsified?

>>15512566
>there are lots of useless aspects to the human body

compared to what? you cant test for usefullness unless you have a reference point.

>>14310830
>All the grains, fruits and vegetables you've ever eaten are the products of evolution. Every dog breed out there is a product of evolution.
>These are examples of Man guiding the natural evolutionary processes that exist in nature. True natural selection is based on survival and reproduction, rather than desired outcomes planned in advance by man. The differences from one generation to the next arise through random mutation, and whether or not these mutations are beneficial or a hindrance is dictated ultimately by the environment.

this reads like a religious text, read my post again - CAN IT BE FALSIFIED AND HOW!!!!????

>>13138534
>Circular reasoning??

yeah, or historiosophy. the entire "theory" is based on you being in the end of history position and know what is vestigial and what is "way of the future" to put it that way. anglo-hegelian unfalsifiable circlejerk.

>>13138540
>maladaptations and adaptations

natural selection that also perfectly fits into YEC btw.

>>12267916
>he qualifies that statement by claiming there is no reason to kill peaceful people.

but that is where the circular semantics Ive mentioned comes into place. What are peacefull people? Are Jews peacefull to Palestinians or whites? Are Nazis peacefull to Austrians? Are Muslims peacefull to their own believers?

>>12267933
>and evolution isnt semantics

then tell me NOW what are the vestigial parts of the human body and what new parts will humans gain? Or can you speak about it only once it happens?

also, if some smart poster knows critique of theory of evolution (and general historiosophy) from an epistemiological position (Kant etc), please enlighten me, Im only familiar with newer critiques coming from philosophy of science

>>11193793
not sure, but in the end evolution is a circular and shitty paradigm with zero value in predictability.