Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)

  • 152 Replies
  • 19399 Views
*

Bom Tishop

  • 11196
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #60 on: January 25, 2018, 10:37:06 AM »
The further parts of evolution, e.g. humans evolving from a common ancestor with monkeys and all that stuff, are pretty much scientific facts. There is no better rational explanation for a lot of phenomenes, including anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities

When you see something such as "pretty much"...that is not scientific fact or science at all. Could you imagine my company trying to sell a one off proto to a customer for production and they ask if it works I say "pretty much, though I don't have any evidence it does, however, the best conclusion is it does"...I would be laughed out and never called again.

You think the faith of evolution is the best idea of where we came from, I think intelligent design is. You think you have more evidence for your belief, I say there is more evidence for mine. Either way, both still a belief and has no place in actual science and certainly does not deserve the word fact.

So, how much of evolution do you believe? Where are your 'boarders'?

Do you think microevolution is only affecting phenotype, but does not change dna?
Do you believe mutations, icluding those involving insertions are possible?

Any additions so far in tests or real life observation have been destructive to the information. Not one case yet of anything positive.

Kinda like the highrise I live in...you can make improvements to the inside and out...let's say living area or improvements for energy consumption. However, it could never turn into a car or plane...a bit facetious metaphor but it gets the job done.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Rayzor

  • 12111
  • Looking for Occam
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #61 on: January 25, 2018, 02:11:32 PM »
The further parts of evolution, e.g. humans evolving from a common ancestor with monkeys and all that stuff, are pretty much scientific facts. There is no better rational explanation for a lot of phenomenes, including anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities

When you see something such as "pretty much"...that is not scientific fact or science at all. Could you imagine my company trying to sell a one off proto to a customer for production and they ask if it works I say "pretty much, though I don't have any evidence it does, however, the best conclusion is it does"...I would be laughed out and never called again.

You think the faith of evolution is the best idea of where we came from, I think intelligent design is. You think you have more evidence for your belief, I say there is more evidence for mine. Either way, both still a belief and has no place in actual science and certainly does not deserve the word fact.

So, how much of evolution do you believe? Where are your 'boarders'?

Do you think microevolution is only affecting phenotype, but does not change dna?
Do you believe mutations, icluding those involving insertions are possible?

Any additions so far in tests or real life observation have been destructive to the information. Not one case yet of anything positive.

Kinda like the highrise I live in...you can make improvements to the inside and out...let's say living area or improvements for energy consumption. However, it could never turn into a car or plane...a bit facetious metaphor but it gets the job done.

You should read the Blind Watchmaker.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2018, 05:38:59 PM »
Any additions so far in tests or real life observation have been destructive to the information. Not one case yet of anything positive.
How are you defining information? That seems a pretty important part of this discussion. Searching this thread, you seem to have started off with that, but you didn't define it.
Raw genetic information, such as how many chromosomes would be in each cell? The information denoting capability? What actually is it you're basing your argument around?
We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #63 on: January 26, 2018, 01:52:30 AM »
When you see something such as "pretty much"...that is not scientific fact or science at all. Could you imagine my company trying to sell a one off proto to a customer for production and they ask if it works I say "pretty much, though I don't have any evidence it does, however, the best conclusion is it does"...I would be laughed out and never called again. 
Science is probabilities. That's why you have statistics and all the nice stuff like p-values, confidence intervals and so on. I'd even go as far as saying science is basically never 100% certain about something. It's more of a 'proven beyond reasonable doubt' concept. Once something is tested often enough, it might be considered as 'textbook knowledge' and fact.
And that's also why science can be wrong sometimes, and why it's hard to change dogmas in science (e.g. on which part of your tongue you taste certain flavors).
To get back to engineering: It's basically the same, you are are never 100% certain your part will be strong enough for the application, but you can say it is in 99.999% (or something) scenarios strong enough.
 
Same with evolution. All the evidence points towards evolution. But still, there COULD be another explanation; but with current knowledge and evidence I'd say the probably that evolution is not true is diminishingly low.


You think the faith of evolution is the best idea of where we came from, I think intelligent design is. You think you have more evidence for your belief, I say there is more evidence for mine. Either way, both still a belief and has no place in actual science and certainly does not deserve the word fact.
As far as my knowledge goes, there is no evidence towards an intelligent design. If I'm wrong (which might be), please present your evidence.

The only argument I ever see against evolution and pro intelligent design is 'but we don't know how x and y works'.
It obviously would be a logical fallcy to use lack of knowledge as proof for something else or as disprove for the theory.

Also, there's a lot of stuff that would be really strange if an intelligent design was the case. How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?

Any additions so far in tests or real life observation have been destructive to the information. Not one case yet of anything positive.
As I have already pointed out, that's wrong. Scientists regularly genetically engineer new proteins, by adding base pairs to the DNA and then put the DNA back into bacteria. Some of the proteins work as intended.
I think a whole lot of medication is based on the concept of adding information to the dna [Edit: Of course the medication doesn't add new information to the patient's DNA, but the medication is created by adding information to DNA and then expressing the protein in bacteria or other live forms].
Adding information to the DNA literally is a whole industry.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2018, 02:02:00 AM by User324 »
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #64 on: March 04, 2018, 02:15:05 AM »
Following requests/questions still remain open.


Quote from: User324
As far as my knowledge goes, there is no evidence towards an intelligent design. If I'm wrong (which might be), please present your evidence.

Quote from: User324
How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #65 on: March 04, 2018, 12:31:31 PM »
When you see something such as "pretty much"...that is not scientific fact or science at all. Could you imagine my company trying to sell a one off proto to a customer for production and they ask if it works I say "pretty much, though I don't have any evidence it does, however, the best conclusion is it does"...I would be laughed out and never called again. 
Science is probabilities. That's why you have statistics and all the nice stuff like p-values, confidence intervals and so on. I'd even go as far as saying science is basically never 100% certain about something. It's more of a 'proven beyond reasonable doubt' concept. Once something is tested often enough, it might be considered as 'textbook knowledge' and fact.
And that's also why science can be wrong sometimes, and why it's hard to change dogmas in science (e.g. on which part of your tongue you taste certain flavors).
To get back to engineering: It's basically the same, you are are never 100% certain your part will be strong enough for the application, but you can say it is in 99.999% (or something) scenarios strong enough.
 
Same with evolution. All the evidence points towards evolution. But still, there COULD be another explanation; but with current knowledge and evidence I'd say the probably that evolution is not true is diminishingly low.


You think the faith of evolution is the best idea of where we came from, I think intelligent design is. You think you have more evidence for your belief, I say there is more evidence for mine. Either way, both still a belief and has no place in actual science and certainly does not deserve the word fact.
As far as my knowledge goes, there is no evidence towards an intelligent design. If I'm wrong (which might be), please present your evidence.

The only argument I ever see against evolution and pro intelligent design is 'but we don't know how x and y works'.
It obviously would be a logical fallcy to use lack of knowledge as proof for something else or as disprove for the theory.

Also, there's a lot of stuff that would be really strange if an intelligent design was the case. How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?

Any additions so far in tests or real life observation have been destructive to the information. Not one case yet of anything positive.
As I have already pointed out, that's wrong. Scientists regularly genetically engineer new proteins, by adding base pairs to the DNA and then put the DNA back into bacteria. Some of the proteins work as intended.
I think a whole lot of medication is based on the concept of adding information to the dna [Edit: Of course the medication doesn't add new information to the patient's DNA, but the medication is created by adding information to DNA and then expressing the protein in bacteria or other live forms].
Adding information to the DNA literally is a whole industry.

Why cant both be true? I mean we could have evolution, but then we could also have a creator of visiting alien back in the day who visited earth, abducted an ape and spliced his 2nd chromosome which eventually gave rise to humans.

Everything proposed is only a theory. There is no more/less reason to believe my alien theory than any other theory put out. We simply don't have enough information.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

boydster

  • Assistant to the Regional Manager
  • Planar Moderator
  • 17754
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #66 on: March 04, 2018, 12:56:36 PM »
If nature, sans aliens, can accomplish the same thing as aliens, why add aliens to the mix? I mean, if there is some sort of evidence for it fine, but barring that, why add something unnecessary like that?

There are a lot of what-ifs to get to a point where aliens fused an early primate chromosome and kicked off mankind.

Edit to add: also, are you unironically rolling out the "it's only a theory" line, or was that to be funny?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 12:59:31 PM by boydster »

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #67 on: March 04, 2018, 12:59:21 PM »
Shifter:
Apparently you don't know what a theory is in science. You should read about it.


Anyway, of course both could be true. But only for one part (evolution) there is evidence, the other part is unlikely and speculative.

Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Rayzor

  • 12111
  • Looking for Occam
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #68 on: March 04, 2018, 03:52:42 PM »
Shifter:
Apparently you don't know what a theory is in science. You should read about it.


Anyway, of course both could be true. But only for one part (evolution) there is evidence, the other part is unlikely and speculative.

If there was some aspect of evolution that couldn't be explained by natural selection,  then it's perfectly acceptable to hypothesize alien intervention, provided there is some supporting evidence.

Lack of evidence, and lack of need, pretty much rules out the alien intervention idea.  But, it's not impossible.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #69 on: March 05, 2018, 01:10:05 AM »


On a serious note, what about crops? They have undergone quite substantial genetic changes over the last few centuries and even decades (thanks to human intervention in the form of pretty much rapid evolution).
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 02:10:38 AM by Master_Evar »
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11196
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #70 on: March 05, 2018, 11:18:02 AM »
As anyone been able to show a case of any additions that was not detrimental?

The only thing we can prove is adaptation...that is as far as it goes. Everything else is faith.

So yes, I can provide just as much proof for intelligent design as science can provide for evolution.

You could say I have more as there are books through history with people explaining what they saw, experienced etc. However, I will leave that out.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #71 on: March 05, 2018, 11:24:18 AM »
As anyone been able to show a case of any additions that was not detrimental?

The only thing we can prove is adaptation...that is as far as it goes. Everything else is faith.

So yes, I can provide just as much proof for intelligent design as science can provide for evolution.

You could say I have more as there are books through history with people explaining what they saw, experienced etc. However, I will leave that out.
I'd say that (our western "sweet") bananas are pretty damn good compared to their origin.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #72 on: March 05, 2018, 11:26:32 AM »
As anyone been able to show a case of any additions that was not detrimental?

The only thing we can prove is adaptation...that is as far as it goes. Everything else is faith.

So yes, I can provide just as much proof for intelligent design as science can provide for evolution.

You could say I have more as there are books through history with people explaining what they saw, experienced etc. However, I will leave that out.


We should all agree on the definitions of 'additions' and 'adaptation' before we proceed.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11196
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #73 on: March 05, 2018, 11:29:55 AM »
Also, the alien theory solved nothing, just kicks the can down the road. Sure it partially solves ours (still not fully, unless they dropped us off in full form)...but what about them? They are stuck in our 3 dimensional cause and effect reality as well.

We would be stuck with the exact same issue of where they came from...
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #74 on: March 05, 2018, 11:31:06 AM »
As anyone been able to show a case of any additions that was not detrimental?
Hemoglobin is basically the same as myoglobin, except that it's made out of four aminoacid chains and has some additions. That'd be a simple example.

What is also very interesting: There are enzyme (don't remember which ones exactely) that work EXACTELY the same way, but except for the catalytic centre they have TOTALLY differend amino acids used; meaning it's very likely the 'same' enzyme has been created two times by evolution. Why would an intelligent creator do that?

The only thing we can prove is adaptation...that is as far as it goes. Everything else is faith.
Usually adaption is not altering the dna (it depends on which definition you use).  Which one are you talking about? Adaption by altering dna, or adaption by changing gene expression?

So yes, I can provide just as much proof for intelligent design as science can provide for evolution.
Is it correct that your only argument is 'we have no proof for evolution thus an intelligent creator is just as likely'?

The question here still remains open, I'd love to see your answer:
How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 11:32:57 AM by User324 »
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11196
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #75 on: March 05, 2018, 12:22:08 PM »

Hemoglobin is basically the same as myoglobin, except that it's made out of four aminoacid chains and has some additions. That'd be a simple example.

What is also very interesting: There are enzyme (don't remember which ones exactely) that work EXACTELY the same way, but except for the catalytic centre they have TOTALLY differend amino acids used; meaning it's very likely the 'same' enzyme has been created two times by evolution. Why would an intelligent creator do that?

How does something being close to another provide evidence of anything?

Also, asking questions of why an intelligent designer would do something is serious. The thoughts of said designer would be way way out of our pay grade.

Quote
Usually adaption is not altering the dna (it depends on which definition you use).  Which one are you talking about? Adaption by altering dna, or adaption by changing gene expression?

I am talking about adding additional material. We have never recorded such a thing without it being detrimental to the organism. This would be 100 percent mandatory a billion times over for evolution to be accurate. I have heard the statement "evolution isn't happening right now" which is not only convenient (just as a pastor would say God doesn't want to do a miracle right now), it also does not make any sense when the theory is viewed as a whole.

Quote
Is it correct that your only argument is 'we have no proof for evolution thus an intelligent creator is just as likely'?
No, that is not my only argument, it was just fitting at that moment, as well as true.

Quote
The question here still remains open, I'd love to see your answer:
How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?


Why would I need to explain? You could have 20 different types of cars, all similar and shares many parts, but entirely different at the same time. Pretty self explanatory.
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #76 on: March 05, 2018, 12:28:21 PM »
Why would an intelligent creator do that?

What if the creator is not as intelligent as we give him credit for or there is yet some unknown reason why some things are the way they are?

Why are some people naturally immune to things like Ebola or 'The Plague' but most aren't? It helps to have a massive variance within a species to ensure it isn't wiped out by a single event.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

Bom Tishop

  • 11196
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #77 on: March 05, 2018, 12:34:17 PM »

What if the creator is not as intelligent as we give him credit for or there is yet some unknown reason why some things are the way they are?

Why are some people naturally immune to things like Ebola or 'The Plague' but most aren't? It helps to have a massive variance within a species to ensure it isn't wiped out by a single event.

That is the problem with people like user, Rayzor and others like them...they have such a closed mind, think one dimensionally and can't see the forest for the trees. If they don't understand it, then there is no possible way it can be true.

People who actually critically think with open minds can understand thoughts such as these.

Plus, how many times have things been said to be useless on our body yet later on found to have a purpose?
Quote from: Bom Tishop
LordDave is quite alright even for a bleeding heart liberal. Godspeed good sir

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #78 on: March 05, 2018, 12:43:46 PM »
Why would an intelligent creator do that?

What if the creator is not as intelligent as we give him credit for or there is yet some unknown reason why some things are the way they are?

Why are some people naturally immune to things like Ebola or 'The Plague' but most aren't? It helps to have a massive variance within a species to ensure it isn't wiped out by a single event.
Actually, immunity has very specific biological reasons. Some immunities are probably blood type related (thus the uneven distribution of blood types), most have to do with the body's ability to create (or not create) antigenes, and others are for example malaria immunity which is caused by sickle cell anemia etc.
It's mostly very well understood down to molecular level - there is simply no need to add in a creator which just makes the whole thing more difficult, because you have to explain the existance of the creator and how he works, too. Except you go full religous nut and create the dogma that the creator 'just is' and must not be explained for (which is just stupid and unscientific).
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #79 on: March 05, 2018, 12:58:51 PM »

Hemoglobin is basically the same as myoglobin, except that it's made out of four aminoacid chains and has some additions. That'd be a simple example.

What is also very interesting: There are enzyme (don't remember which ones exactely) that work EXACTELY the same way, but except for the catalytic centre they have TOTALLY differend amino acids used; meaning it's very likely the 'same' enzyme has been created two times by evolution. Why would an intelligent creator do that?

How does something being close to another provide evidence of anything?

Also, asking questions of why an intelligent designer would do something is serious. The thoughts of said designer would be way way out of our pay grade.
You asked for an addition example. Hb is literally an mb with some additions.

Saying the creator's thoughs are out of our level is just an excuse, you might aswell admit that it* doesn't make sense with our current knowledge. And I'd say theories should be based on what makes sense using our current knowledge.

Also I find it interesting how many human attributes you give to that creator. What makes you think a creator would have thoughs, intelligence and so on?

*it=an intelligent creator instead of evolution
Quote
Usually adaption is not altering the dna (it depends on which definition you use).  Which one are you talking about? Adaption by altering dna, or adaption by changing gene expression?
I am talking about adding additional material. We have never recorded such a thing without it being detrimental to the organism. This would be 100 percent mandatory a billion times over for evolution to be accurate. I have heard the statement "evolution isn't happening right now" which is not only convenient (just as a pastor would say God doesn't want to do a miracle right now), it also does not make any sense when the theory is viewed as a whole.
You can't really stop evolution, it's happening right now. Anyone saying it doesn't is wrong.
I gave you an example for addition above. I'm also 100% sure that if you'd read into enzymes, how they work and their DNA, you should find a lot of examples where enzymes are literally the same, except for the fact one has a few more amino acids and is a little bit more efficient. I also gave you reasons earlier in the thread why an addition with a positive (not neutral) outcome is not as likely right now in comparison to a long time ago. (that's where you accused me of copy pasting and didn't answer to any of my post)


Quote
Is it correct that your only argument is 'we have no proof for evolution thus an intelligent creator is just as likely'?
No, that is not my only argument, it was just fitting at that moment, as well as true.
Awesome, that's the answer I was hoping for. So please present your evidence that is in favor of an intelligent creator.

Quote
The question here still remains open, I'd love to see your answer:
How do you explain all the anatomical and genetical anomalies and commonalities?

Why would I need to explain? You could have 20 different types of cars, all similar and shares many parts, but entirely different at the same time. Pretty self explanatory.
The thing is, if you have a car designed by an intelligent creator, he wouldn't create an exhaust pipe that goes once around the car, or would he?
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #80 on: March 05, 2018, 01:39:42 PM »
Have you heard of the blue moon butterfly? It seems that the population of these butterflies on the Samoan Islands are infected with a bacteria that killed the male butterflies at birth. In 2001, males made up 1% or the butterfly population, and it seemed that they would go extinct. However, in 2005 it seemed that the population of males stopped declining, and after only ten generations (about a year later) a mutation which granted immunity to the bacteria had spread throughout the population and the ratio of males and females were more equal, about 40% males.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Rayzor

  • 12111
  • Looking for Occam
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #81 on: March 05, 2018, 03:44:00 PM »
People who actually critically think with open minds can understand thoughts such as these.

Have you read the Blind Watchmaker?   I recommend you should.

https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Watchmaker-Evidence-Evolution-Universe/dp/0393351491
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.


*

deadsirius

  • 899
  • Crime Machine
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #83 on: March 06, 2018, 07:54:24 AM »
Evolution is not some magic idea.  It actually follows necessarily from three (maybe two and a half) completely uncontroversial premises:

1.  Heredity (e.g. offspring tend to resemble their parents)

1a.  ...but the resemblance is not exact

2.  Selection pressure (i.e. some traits are more likely to promote reproduction and/or survival than others)

I don't think any serious person would deny any of the above premises, but correct me if I'm wrong.  I'd actually be curious to hear any reasoned argument against them.

Point is, if you accept the above statements, you'll see that evolution can't not happen.  There is no force, no agency, no point and no goal to it.  It's just the inexorable accumulation of traits that promote (or at the very least do not hinder) survival and reproduction, and the disappearance of those that do not.

It's always worth remembering that a given feature of an organism does not necessarily have to make sense, or have an obvious "purpose".  It just has to not impede survival and reproduction.

I think we get stuck a lot of times looking at evolution as an additive process, when really it is more like a "process of elimination".
Suffering from a martyr complex...so you don't have to

*

FalseProphet

  • 3696
  • Life is just a tale
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #84 on: March 06, 2018, 09:32:20 AM »
Evolution is not some magic idea.  It actually follows necessarily from three (maybe two and a half) completely uncontroversial premises:

1.  Heredity (e.g. offspring tend to resemble their parents)

1a.  ...but the resemblance is not exact

2.  Selection pressure (i.e. some traits are more likely to promote reproduction and/or survival than others)

I don't think any serious person would deny any of the above premises, but correct me if I'm wrong.  I'd actually be curious to hear any reasoned argument against them.


3. Mutation. Genetic variance in a population ("the resemblance is not exact") is also due to mere allele crossing. Without mutation selection would have little to work on.

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #85 on: March 06, 2018, 09:47:35 AM »
BHS has the weird attitude that microevolution is a fact, but macroevolution isn't, although macroevolution is just the result of lot's of microevolution...

I guess his problem is that he wants to believe in a higher force/ a god and thus thinks evolution MUST be wrong (although a god/higher force could exist with evolution, big bang etc. all being true).

Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

deadsirius

  • 899
  • Crime Machine
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #86 on: March 06, 2018, 10:57:26 AM »

3. Mutation. Genetic variance in a population ("the resemblance is not exact") is also due to mere allele crossing. Without mutation selection would have little to work on.


That is a fair point.  I considered mentioning it originally but was kind of folding it into my very broad statement that hereditary resemblance is "not exact".  It does probably deserve to be mentioned as its own point though.
Suffering from a martyr complex...so you don't have to

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 12330
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #87 on: March 06, 2018, 12:20:13 PM »
BHS has the weird attitude that microevolution is a fact, but macroevolution isn't, although macroevolution is just the result of lot's of microevolution...
It's a pretty common viewpoint among people that don't believe in evolution, but good luck if you can get a definition for what macroevolution actually is.
Change of species? We observe, with the likes of horses/donkeys/mules that there are grey areas there. No beneficial mutations? What even is strictly beneficial when you deal with multiple environments and energy requirements and settings...

We all know deep in our hearts that Jane is the last face we'll see before we're choked to death!

*

Definitely Not Swedish

  • rutabaga
  • 8309
  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crime
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #88 on: March 06, 2018, 12:26:47 PM »
BHS has the weird attitude that microevolution is a fact, but macroevolution isn't, although macroevolution is just the result of lot's of microevolution...
It's a pretty common viewpoint among people that don't believe in evolution, but good luck if you can get a definition for what macroevolution actually is.
Change of species? We observe, with the likes of horses/donkeys/mules that there are grey areas there. No beneficial mutations? What even is strictly beneficial when you deal with multiple environments and energy requirements and settings...
I think for most people, inculding BHS, macroevolution is if you have one species that divides into two species, which cannot have offspring together while both species themselves have a high enough fitness to survive.
Quote from: croutons, the s.o.w.
You have received a warning for breaking the laws of mathematics.

Member of the BOTD
Sign up here.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Evolution (attempt to avoid derailment)
« Reply #89 on: March 06, 2018, 12:59:32 PM »
Is the theory of evolution a speculation or evidence based

Where is the evidence that we came from a single cell organism floating in the sea? It's a good theory and stacks up based on our current understanding but one point I believe a lot of arguments centre on is there is no evidence for evolution. We have observed adaptations within a species to suit a particular environment, but we have only been observing for but a blink of an eye in the history of Earth.

Does anyone out there have evidence to back the theory up or does it remain a theory

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place