Evolution Again!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey T! :smile:

Tarski wrote:
The details of the evolution of sex and mitosis are open questions as far as I know.


Just the "details" are open questions?
Would it be fair to say that the entire process (from a to z) are open questions?

Did you think there is no more science to work out in evolutionary biology?


No, I think science continues to put enormous effort in as they work in all areas, including evolutionary biology.

Did you think all the details have to be in before we know that evolution occured?


Do I think "all the details have to be in"? - No!

But I would think think that a few of the details ought to be in before a proposed theory is so widely accepted as factual science!

The lesson is that irreducible complexity is just a failure of imagination (I can't see how it was done so it wasn't!).


Imagination!

We agree! :smile:

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Bazooka »

Hey Peeka...

I tried discussing the pro's and con's of sex and mitosis of single celled organisms with my significant other and she thought I was just being fruity.

I woke up this morning with a red and tender hand print on my face that wasn't there prior to my bed time.

I'm blaming you.
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Bret Ripley
_Emeritus
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Bret Ripley »

Ceeboo wrote:Just the "details" are open questions?
Would it be fair to say that the entire process (from a to z) are open questions?
Ceeboo, my friend: in one sense, it is the nature of the scientific process that everything is an open question. Certainty puts blinders on inquiry. This is why theories (including evolutionary theory) are open to being tweaked or overturned entirely.

That said, the amount of evidence indicating that evolution has occurred (and, indeed, continues to occur) is astonishingly huge.

Context: I am a former Creationist. During my senior year of high school I was chosen by fellow Creationists to defend Creationism in a science club debate about evolution. It was while doing research for this debate that I began to realize just how flimsy and (it must be said) dishonest the arguments against evolution truly are, and how impressive the quality and quantity of evidence on the other side. I didn't immediately change my mind about evolution (I really didn't want it to be true!), but over the course of the following few years I came to realize that the evidence for evolution from various branches of science was simply undeniable.
_Ren
_Emeritus
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:34 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ren »

Bret Ripley wrote:but over the course of the following few years I came to realize that the evidence for evolution from various branches of science was simply undeniable

...have you not tried including the words "Raccoon" and "Whale" in many different posts on a message board over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over?!

That seems to work wonders for some people ;)
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey Bret! :smile:
Ceeboo, my friend: in one sense, it is the nature of the scientific process that everything is an open question. Certainty puts blinders on inquiry. This is why theories (including evolutionary theory) are open to being tweaked or overturned entirely.

That said, the amount of evidence indicating that evolution has occurred (and, indeed, continues to occur) is astonishingly huge.


There is no question that evolution is happening! None!
Natural selection and random mutations are surely visible!
That variations in gene pools produce changes in species over time is also clearly a fact!

My suggestion is not that evolution does not occur (it surely does), my suggestion is that it is not even close to being powerful or intelligent enough to create (form) living nature and all it's incredible species and biological systems!

If we were to take an objective look at the amazing collection of fossils over the last 150 years, we would see species with very little or no change over millions of years.

Two examples of many:

Trilobites lived on earth for 250 million years with very little change!
Coelacanth (large fish) first appeared in the fossil record 410 million years ago. Coelacanth still live today with nearly the exact same form!

Many species have fossil representation over 10's and 100's of millions of years. The species themselves show no sign of this evolution.
Okay so then the suggestion is made about "rapid spurts" with long periods of stagnation in between. (Puncuated Equilibrium)

I recently read that it is proposed that only 1 in 1,000 species that have lived on earth have been found as fossils (I think this is suggested because the record doesn't show Darwinian evolution). My question is - How do they know how many have not been found - if they have not been found? How can a number be established for things that have not been found?


Context: I am a former Creationist. During my senior year of high school I was chosen by fellow Creationists to defend Creationism in a science club debate about evolution. It was while doing research for this debate that I began to realize just how flimsy and (it must be said) dishonest the arguments against evolution truly are, and how impressive the quality and quantity of evidence on the other side. I didn't immediately change my mind about evolution (I really didn't want it to be true!), but over the course of the following few years I came to realize that the evidence for evolution from various branches of science was simply undeniable.


Thanks, I appreciate you sharing that, friend! :smile:

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ceeboo »

He Ren! :smile:

Ren wrote:...have you not tried including the words "Raccoon" and "Whale" in many different posts on a message board over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over?!

That seems to work wonders for some people ;)


Still friends?


Peace,
Ceeboo
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ceeboo »

3 things you should never talk about among friends:

Religion
Politics
Darwinian Evolution

:smile:

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Bret Ripley
_Emeritus
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Bret Ripley »

Ceeboo wrote:My suggestion is not that evolution does not occur (it surely does), my suggestion is that it is not even close to being powerful or intelligent...
Intelligent? {scratches head}
...enough to create (form) living nature and all it's incredible species and biological systems!
I'm not sure I'd describe a system in which some 98% of the species that have ever lived have gone extinct as especially intelligent. But be that as it may ...
If we were to take an objective look at the amazing collection of fossils over the last 150 years, we would see species with very little or no change over millions of years.
With all respect, amigo, you are hurling raccoons again. The fact that some species have undergone little or no morphological change is not an argument against evolution. Where little or no selection pressure exists, it shouldn't be at all surprising that there is little or no (noticeable) change. This is entirely consistent with Darwinian theory. There is nothing about evolutionary theory that suggests that populations must undergo X amount of evolution over any given period of time.

Can I still get my magic cereal? :smile:
_Bob Loblaw
_Emeritus
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:26 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Bob Loblaw »

Just remember, it goes germ > fish > mermaid > man. That's all you need to know about evolution.
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS

"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Evolution Again!

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey again, Bret! :smile:

Bret Ripley wrote:I'm not sure I'd describe a system in which some 98% of the species that have ever lived have gone extinct as especially intelligent. But be that as it may ...


Yea, there is that 1 in 1,000 species thing again.

Can I ask you a couple of questions?

How do they know how many have not been found - if they have not been found?

How does one establish these numbers for things that have not been found?

With all respect, amigo, you are hurling raccoons again. The fact that some species have undergone little or no morphological change is not an argument against evolution. Where little or no selection pressure exists, it shouldn't be at all surprising that there is little or no (noticeable) change. This is entirely consistent with Darwinian theory. There is nothing about evolutionary theory that suggests that populations must undergo X amount of evolution over any given period of time.


Okay, so then for 400 million years, there was no "selection pressure" for this fish.

Is that right?

Can I still get my magic cereal? :smile:


You may ideed!

It's on the way.

Peace,
Ceeboo
Post Reply