"Climate chauffeur: Three principles of baloney detecting need to be understood aforehand:
(1) Couching a fallacy in jargon protects it only from the uninformed.
(2) Publishing folly in a respected journal does not sanctify it.
(3) There’s no safety in numbers.
In Science Magazine no less than 20 evolutionists try to prove that climate drives evolutionary adaptation. But “climate-driven selection” can only drive animals to extinction, not to creativity. There’s nothing about the weather that can force a mutation to occur on cue to produce a coat.
There’s nothing about rain that can produce an umbrella. Only if the animal had embedded code programmed to adapt could that happen. To ascribe this power to Darwinian selection is like saying “climate drives computers to generate new programs by mistake.”
Notice how they couch their belief that chance is creative and goal-driven in obfuscatory language: “Although some species may migrate and undergo range shifts to avoid climate-induced declines and potential extinction, an alternative outcome is adaptive evolution in response to selection imposed by climate.”
Did you catch the personification? Who plays a “key role”? When we think of roles, we think of actors on a stage, or other intelligent agents that have a purpose of working together to accomplish a feat or solve a problem. Remember that chance is the essence of Darwin’s philosophy. Chance applies not just to mutations, but also to natural selection. It also applies to the climate and everything else in the environment: none of it has a goal of coaxing organisms to evolve something adaptive.
In short, everything in their equation reduces to chance. There is no law of nature that can be measured and expressed mathematically here. The 20 authors use Jargonwocky to obscure the fact that they are confabulating in Darwinese to hide their reliance on the Stuff Happens Law, leaving them to prove “adaptation” by assertion, not by demonstration:
The great God that formed all things.....
Proverbs 26:10
(1) Couching a fallacy in jargon protects it only from the uninformed.
(2) Publishing folly in a respected journal does not sanctify it.
(3) There’s no safety in numbers.
There’s nothing about rain that can produce an umbrella. Only if the animal had embedded code programmed to adapt could that happen. To ascribe this power to Darwinian selection is like saying “climate drives computers to generate new programs by mistake.”
Notice how they couch their belief that chance is creative and goal-driven in obfuscatory language: “Although some species may migrate and undergo range shifts to avoid climate-induced declines and potential extinction, an alternative outcome is adaptive evolution in response to selection imposed by climate.”
This language embeds creativity into the phrase “adaptive evolution” – the very thing they need to prove. They are fully aware that extinction is a likely outcome of climate change:
Whether climate-selection coupling will lead to local adaptation and reduce the risk of extinction is difficult to predict because adaptive evolution also depends on genetic variation in the traits under selection. Moreover, if selection is strong relative to existing genetic variation, and if the rate of climate change is rapid, selection might result in population extinction rather than evolutionary rescue through adaptive evolution. Therefore, phenotypic plasticity might also have a key role in promoting population persistence due to climate change.
In short, everything in their equation reduces to chance. There is no law of nature that can be measured and expressed mathematically here. The 20 authors use Jargonwocky to obscure the fact that they are confabulating in Darwinese to hide their reliance on the Stuff Happens Law, leaving them to prove “adaptation” by assertion, not by demonstration:
- climate-selection coupling – complete balderdash, like saying ‘chance-goal coupling’
- local adaptation – embeds the assumption that Darwinism is creative
- adaptive evolution – the problem, not the solution
- selection is strong – most likely, it will strongly favor extinction. Selection is not creative.
- evolutionary rescue – a clear personification fallacy
- phenotypic plasticity – a completely vacuous term in Darwinese, masquerading as some profound truth
The great God that formed all things.....
Proverbs 26:10
