Forum Klix.ba

aurora313 wrote:Po diskusiji vidim da nam treba dogovor koje motocikle treba da voze ateisti.

Ramzess Veliki wrote:

aurora313 wrote:Po diskusiji vidim da nam treba dogovor koje motocikle treba da voze ateisti.

Njemce i japance. Kad njih vozis ne moras se molit' Bogu da ne crknu.

Bloo wrote:Štrajkujem...

arzuhal wrote:Čuj begovice: pometi...

- Zašto ne metlaju?
- Kažu da nemaju hljeba da jedu...
- Zašto onda ne jedu kolače?

MarlboroGold wrote:Štaš, priče o autima i motorima nas zanesu

arzuhal wrote:kada s deseptikonima
zapodjevate kavgu
čuvajte se Rembla
bez obzira na snagu!

Smrcak15 wrote:

arzuhal wrote:kada s deseptikonima
zapodjevate kavgu
čuvajte se Rembla
bez obzira na snagu!

ode nam arzo u pjesnike

Ramzess Veliki wrote:

Hakiz wrote: Da mogu, ja bih MX-5...

Meni je to najljepsi roadster, ali mi rekose da je to LGBT auto.

beni-bu-man wrote:

MarlboroGold wrote:Štaš, priče o autima i motorima nas zanesu

Mozda su nam Autobot-ovi nas kreatori

Genes are often described by biologists using metaphors derived from computational science: they are thought of as carriers of information, as being the equivalent of ‘‘blueprints’’ for the construction of organisms. Likewise, cells are often characterized as ‘‘factories’’ and organisms themselves become analogous to machines. Accordingly, when the human genome project was initially announced, the promise was that we would soon know how a human being is made, just as we know how to make airplanes and buildings. Importantly, modern proponents of Intelligent Design, the latest version of creationism, have exploited biologists’ use of the language of information and blueprints to make their spurious case, based on pseudoscientific concepts such as ‘‘irreducible complexity’’ and on flawed analogies between living cells and mechanical factories. However, the living organism = machine analogy was criticized already by David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. In line with Hume’s criticism, over the past several years a more nuanced and accurate understanding of what genes are and how they operate has emerged, ironically in part from the work of computational scientists who take biology, and in particular developmental biology, more seriously than some biologists seem to do. In this article we connect Hume’s original criticism of the living organism = machine analogy with the modern ID movement, and illustrate how the use of misleading and outdated metaphors in science can play into the hands of pseudoscientists. Thus, we argue that dropping the blueprint and similar metaphors will improve both the science of biology and its understanding by the general public

ExNihilo wrote: