|
Anonymous
|
Evolution
#1241869 - 01/23/03 04:51 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I had this christian biology teacher in 10th grade who spent a few days showing us why evolution was scientifically and biologically impossible. And for a while, I've considered myself an anti-evolutionist based on the points he presented. But at the same time, I think "come on man, look... evolution definitely happens.. .somehow". Anyway... if someone would like to convert me to evolution, that'd be appreciated...
|
Earth_Droid
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 5,240
Last seen: 17 years, 7 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1241883 - 01/23/03 04:54 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
How the hell can anyone proove it to be impossible, I would love to hear that one. Maybe if I am up to it later, I will attemp to brainwash you into beleiving evolution, but not until later.
|
Andytweed
Andytweed
Registered: 10/14/02
Posts: 97
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1241885 - 01/23/03 04:55 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
There's a 1% difference between Gorilla DNA and Human DNA. How can you not believe in evolution?
-------------------- All Information posted by me is for entertainment purposes only and should not be attempted in real life!!!
|
Anonymous
|
|
Well.... his arguments were based on the idea that random mutations are nearly always fatal or detrimental, and when they're not, they're usually neutral. His argument was that there is no way that random chance beneficial mutations are responsible for the plethora of life on Earth. I mean... species change, yes. Dogs certainly descended from wolves via a genetic mutation. But what about such huge differences as different numbers of chromosomes? It's been a good while since I've had a bio class. Someone please prove my old bio teacher wrong...
|
Adamist
ℚṲℰϟ✞ЇѺℵ ℛ∃Åʟḯ†У
Registered: 11/23/01
Posts: 10,211
Loc: Bloomington, IN
Last seen: 9 years, 20 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1241912 - 01/23/03 05:02 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I think that the concept of evolution is just man's flawed way of labeling something that he cannot comprehend.
-------------------- { { { ṧ◎ηḯ¢ αʟ¢ℌ℮мƴ } } }
|
diggitydankman
No longer aCannabisConnoisseur
Registered: 12/10/02
Posts: 479
Loc: Michgan
Last seen: 20 years, 10 months
|
|
Scientists that are doing the Human Genome project have suggested that almost all DNA may have more to it than previously thought. Ideas speculating about evolutionary codons and sequences that are continuously trying to evolve our DNA have began to become more credible. Also our DNA is thought to have a sequence that can fix bad mutations.
-------------------- "It's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate my course of action I should play GOD." Maynard James Keenan, Tool
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1242143 - 01/23/03 06:21 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Check out these links:
http://www.trueorigin.org//isakrbtl.asp
http://www.trueorigin.org/theobald1a.asp
The debate between trueorigins.org and talkorigins.org is pretty famous on the Internet as far as this topic is concerned. Read the dialectic between them and make up your own mind.
Enjoy!
|
Earth_Droid
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 5,240
Last seen: 17 years, 7 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1242148 - 01/23/03 06:27 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Well.... his arguments were based on the idea that random mutations are nearly always fatal or detrimental, and when they're not, they're usually neutral. His argument was that there is no way that random chance beneficial mutations are responsible for the plethora of life on Earth. I mean... species change, yes. Dogs certainly descended from wolves via a genetic mutation. But what about such huge differences as different numbers of chromosomes? It's been a good while since I've had a bio class. Someone please prove my old bio teacher wrong...
The process of evolution is not random. It is very quick to correct mistakes it makes such as deaths. Do you think it is random chance that we exist? I don't really know what to say about prooving him wrong. This reminds me of a quote though, what the thinker thinks, the proover prooves. The brain will go on and try to create a reality map based on an individuals thoughts. So if someone is stuck in there beleives of christianity and not willing to accept science, it would be very hard to change his mind. Just do some research on evolution, and Timothy Leary. All the information is already available.
|
ribbit
up till dawn
Registered: 10/31/02
Posts: 290
Last seen: 12 years, 4 months
|
|
if you havn't heard by now..
we were created by aliens...
the Raelians say so.
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1243801 - 01/23/03 04:30 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You must be easily persuadable to believe this one person's theroy. Think for yourself, question authority.
-------------------- What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems? What if all the world you think you know, Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection, Is it all you want it to be?
|
shaggy101
Registered: 08/16/00
Posts: 1,816
Loc: ..still waiting for godot
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Adamist]
#1243830 - 01/23/03 04:44 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I think that the concept of evolution is just man's flawed way of labeling something that he cannot comprehend.
that is perfect.. We seem to miss the reason we study history if we truly believe all facets of our own theories.
|
rommstein2001
Rise ye Must!
Registered: 05/10/01
Posts: 3,182
Loc: South GA
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
|
|
Why are only two theories in play??? there has to be another way... evolution is stupid... lots of evidence against and for it.... creation is not much better, although i believe something had to do something to creat life as we know it... any other theories.
--------------------
|
Evolving
Resident Cynic
Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
|
|
It would seem that there is some sort of progression/change/evolution of species. However, current theories appear inadequate to explain just how such changes come about.
-------------------- To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.' Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence. Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains. Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.
|
Earth_Droid
Stranger
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 5,240
Last seen: 17 years, 7 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Adamist]
#1244172 - 01/23/03 07:02 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I think that the concept of evolution is just man's flawed way of labeling something that he cannot comprehend.
Well man has to start somewhere, and I certainly can comprehend the idea of evolution while I am tripping. Some of the yogis can comprehend it normally. We already are starting to learn a lot about DNA, so I think it is good to have a theory on evolution.
|
sirreal
devoid
Registered: 01/11/03
Posts: 1,775
Loc: In the borderlands
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Adamist]
#1244597 - 01/24/03 12:50 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I think that the concept of evolution is just man's flawed way of labeling something that he cannot comprehend.
Yeah.I see what you mean. I see design in all this.How did the first flying creature evolve? It would have taken countless mutations to make that happen! Not very many would have been beneficial. There is no way those mutations could be sustained! I believe in evolution. But I also believe that there is a design to life and order to evolution. I see what you mean as well Earth droid.But we have become biased and exclusive in our "theories". That makes us ignorant!
-------------------- I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest ----------- I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!
Edited by sirreal (01/24/03 12:53 AM)
|
Phluck
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 04/10/99
Posts: 11,394
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 4 months, 25 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: sirreal]
#1244602 - 01/24/03 01:00 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"How did the first flying creature evolve? It would have taken countless mutations to make that happen!"
There's a really good documentary about the steps involved in evolving a lot of different traits.
In one of the installments, they show the progression of bugs whose legs act as paddles to skim on water, to the point where these paddles grew into wings.
"There is no way those mutations could be sustained!"
Why not? Billions upon billions upon billions of mutations are happening now. The majority will just result in insignificant changes, some will be detrimental, but a few are providing an advantage.
If you actually have an understanding of it, you will realize that evolution does a very good job of explaining the origins of life. It is a far more complex subject than I'm sure most of you believe.
Most of the time I see even people who believe in evolution arguing for it, they don't seem to understand how it works.
(By the way, it's called the "theory of evolution", believing in it like it's a religion is an insult to science.)
It's a far better theory than the alternative. A magical man in the sky created us out of nowhere? I think I'll give evolution the benefit of the doubt on this one.
-------------------- "I have no valid complaint against hustlers. No rational bitch. But the act of selling is repulsive to me. I harbor a secret urge to whack a salesman in the face, crack his teeth and put red bumps around his eyes." -Hunter S Thompson http://phluck.is-after.us
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Phluck]
#1244750 - 01/24/03 02:56 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
(By the way, it's called the "theory of evolution", believing in it like it's a religion is an insult to science.)
Word.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1244932 - 01/24/03 04:18 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"Well.... his arguments were based on the idea that random mutations are nearly always fatal or detrimental, and when they're not, they're usually neutral. His argument was that there is no way that random chance beneficial mutations are responsible for the plethora of life on Earth."
The main problem is that, as a Christian, he probably believes the Earth is only 12,000 years old. If that were the case, evolution as we know it couldn't have happened. However, these mutations have been happening for billions of years.
|
sirreal
devoid
Registered: 01/11/03
Posts: 1,775
Loc: In the borderlands
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Phluck]
#1245029 - 01/24/03 05:05 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"some magic man in the sky"? It seems to me that you have a very primitive understanding of creation! That is not what I believe. And evolution is a theory because no one knows how it works. Not even you.I believe that evolution as I understand it is plausible. If an intelligent creative force is factored into the equation!
-------------------- I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest ----------- I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!
|
daussaulit
Forgetful
Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 2,894
Loc: Earth
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1245051 - 01/24/03 05:11 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Just look at cockaroaches. They've survived all these thousands of years through all harsh environments. Today, we use many pesticides against them, but if it doesn't kill them, they'll adapt or evolve to be resistant to it making the previous ones useless. You can see evolution at work in cockaroaches.
|
sirreal
devoid
Registered: 01/11/03
Posts: 1,775
Loc: In the borderlands
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Phluck]
#1245072 - 01/24/03 05:17 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I stand by what I said. I have heard all of the theories .I have heard about the Flying squirrel theory. That is probably one of the better known arguements for this debate. I have discussed this issue with people who are real educated regarding evolution. It just does not make sense to me! All of the mutations necassary would have been meaningless by themselves! I am not saying that it could not have happened that way, But not without intelligence!All of those meaningless mutations could not have added up to something meaningful!
-------------------- I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest ----------- I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1245148 - 01/24/03 05:47 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
We really can't proove the theroy correct until we have studied ourselves for millions of years.
Personally, I don't think we will survive that long. So why not just go with the theroy based on the evidence that it does exist now? Dinosaurs were the best source of prooving this theroy- I mean what evidence can disprove evolution?
I'd like to hear something against evolutionary theroy. Anyone got somethin?
-------------------- What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems? What if all the world you think you know, Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection, Is it all you want it to be?
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1245843 - 01/24/03 10:27 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'd like to hear something against evolutionary theroy. Anyone got somethin?
There are quite a few problems with the theory of evolution... but I'd say the scale is almost completely in favor of it (vs. creationism). Personally, I put alot of weight on the fossile record... I'd say it pretty much knocks out strict creationism (I still leave the door open for compromise though).
If you want some specific arguments against evolution, just search Mr_Mushrooms' posts from last year (I recall him going off on some rant...).
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Xibalba
Stranger
Registered: 05/13/00
Posts: 2,114
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1245896 - 01/24/03 11:04 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I believe evolution itself is an evolvable trait. That is, organisms now are much better at mutating in less-random, more-useful ways than they used to be. Why? Because that gives them a survival advantage. Purely random mutation no longer plays a part in it. It did at first, and that's why we had a billion years of bacteria.
This is why sex evolved- it increased variation. If you bud off clones of yourself your species will get left in the dust by one that is mating. The rapid increase in the rate of change supports this. I can imagine all sorts of other small tricks and optimizations that could have come up to push evolution along.
As I see it, there is an intelligence to the process, but it's not an external intelligence of an old guy sitting on a cloud and pulling strings. It's an internal intelligence in the genome of all life that has been growing over billions of years, and is slowly "waking up."
|
shaggy101
Registered: 08/16/00
Posts: 1,816
Loc: ..still waiting for godot
Last seen: 11 years, 1 day
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1245932 - 01/24/03 11:26 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
http://reluctant-messenger.com/main.htm http://julen.net/cgi-bin/links/jump.cgi?ID=1770
doesnt represent my point of view, and may take a lot of reading but there interesting.. The theory of evolution is what happened AFTER life began , although we have proved that aminos could have been created in earths distant past, The chances of them forming a cell are much,much harder. As for what has happened since then(evolution ) not many people argue that.
|
Adamist
ℚṲℰϟ✞ЇѺℵ ℛ∃Åʟḯ†У
Registered: 11/23/01
Posts: 10,211
Loc: Bloomington, IN
Last seen: 9 years, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
We already are starting to learn a lot about DNA, so I think it is good to have a theory on evolution.
And that is what evolution is. A theory. Most people tend to forget that and accept it as fact, when it obviously doesn't explain everything about the growth of life in the universe. I am not 'bashing' theories here, I am just trying to remind us that there are many questions that this particular theory leaves unanswered.
It's just like alot of people accept the "fact" that dinosaurs died as a result of a meteor impacting the Earth. This isn't a fact, yet people seem to accept it as such. The FACT is, that most things people view as facts are little more than theoretical explanations for something that cannot objectively be proved or disproved, which makes them easily changeable.
-------------------- { { { ṧ◎ηḯ¢ αʟ¢ℌ℮мƴ } } }
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1246447 - 01/24/03 02:52 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
If you want some specific arguments against evolution, just search Mr_Mushrooms' posts from last year (I recall him going off on some rant...).
What? Mr. Mushrooms rants against evolution?
Does that mean that creationism is more logical?
-------------------- What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems? What if all the world you think you know, Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection, Is it all you want it to be?
|
Adamist
ℚṲℰϟ✞ЇѺℵ ℛ∃Åʟḯ†У
Registered: 11/23/01
Posts: 10,211
Loc: Bloomington, IN
Last seen: 9 years, 20 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1246489 - 01/24/03 03:09 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Just because human minds have only come up with Creationism and Evolution as answers doesn't necessarily mean either one is correct. Personally I think both are incorrect.
-------------------- { { { ṧ◎ηḯ¢ αʟ¢ℌ℮мƴ } } }
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Adamist]
#1246628 - 01/24/03 03:50 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Here is THE answer that you have ALL BEEN WAITING FOR!!!!!!!
You HAVE to believe in creationism. Even if you believe in the big bang theory or ANYTHING at all. Because where did it all come from?!
But if "God" created everything. Then who created God? God? pffft
That's the truth
Something created everything, and something created something. ********************* HERE IT IS *********************** There is no "ultimate truth". Only perfect paradoxes. Everything has a good and a bad (yin/yang, up/down, 0/1, being/non-being, whatever, this is how the universe works, you all know the ultimate yes/no thing), and AS such, there is a struggle between the yes and the no sides. No side can ever win, instead, existence is simply the perfect harmonial balance between the two sides. Perfect equilibria that is in constant motion. That is the TRUTH.
If anyone asks to know who first came up with the TRUTH, tell them it was 'Killjoy from the Shroomery'.
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1247400 - 01/25/03 06:06 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What? Mr. Mushrooms rants against evolution? Yes
Does that mean that creationism is more logical? No
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1247996 - 01/25/03 11:49 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Mr. Mushrooms has evolved to the point where he doubts evolution.
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
bert
bodhi
Registered: 10/14/02
Posts: 2,819
Loc: state
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Xibalba]
#1248055 - 01/25/03 12:14 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I think xilbaba's idea of evolvable evolution is pretty amazing. If you think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense. No one stops to think about what evolution is, itself. I read a great book recently called 'Emergence' by Steven Johnson that I think is obviously applicable to evolution. Evolution may have become so complex so as to have developed its own 'intelligence', something that we have mistaken as an outside source (God) is actually the process itself improving on itself.
-------------------- Persons denying the existence of robots may be robots themselves.
|
Andytweed
Andytweed
Registered: 10/14/02
Posts: 97
Loc: Colorado
Last seen: 18 years, 1 month
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1248102 - 01/25/03 12:33 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
We really can't prove the theory correct until we have studied ourselves for millions of years.
Why not? Ever looked at bacteria, one of the fastest growing organisms on our planet. Look at how they evolved when antibiotics were introduced. Natural (more like Unnatural) Selection has created a tougher anti-antibiotic generation of bugs. The theory of evolution doesn't do us any good when thinking pre-earth, but it explains everything pretty logically from the organic soup on. Of course there are flaws in it, but that how everything starts out. We shouldn't throw away a theory just because it's not perfect. We used to think the earth was flat, but then our ideas evolved to the point where we now understand that we live in a spiral galaxy. I think that any creationist who denounces the theory of evolution is afraid that someday their beliefs are going to be proven wrong, but we will get nowhere with this kind of close mindedness.
-------------------- All Information posted by me is for entertainment purposes only and should not be attempted in real life!!!
Edited by Andytweed (01/25/03 12:35 PM)
|
sirreal
devoid
Registered: 01/11/03
Posts: 1,775
Loc: In the borderlands
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
|
|
Why not? Ever looked at bacteria, one of the fastest growing organisms on our planet. Look at how they evolved when antibiotics were introduced.
Adaptation is not the same as transmutation.
-------------------- I may not always tell the truth, but atleast I'm honest ----------- I see what everyone is saying. It is so hard to form an opinion when you see both sides so clearly!
|
Viveka
refutation bias
Registered: 10/21/02
Posts: 4,061
Last seen: 7 years, 5 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Xibalba]
#1248403 - 01/25/03 02:38 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Nicely put man. I never thought about sexual reproduction in that light. Yes, we are mutating purposefully now, even if it is a subconscious mechanism. So much for the "purely random mutations" absolute that so nicely fits natural selection. Sexual reproduction amongst aware beings throws that all out the window.
|
mntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Viveka]
#1248631 - 01/25/03 04:07 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I like the example of the dog. In a few hondred more years wolvs may not exist but dogs will survive because of it's evolving into something usefull to man. Evolution at work.
By the way, can someone tell me where my tail bone comes from? If I never had a tail I should not have a tail bone.
-------------------- Be all and you'll be to end all
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1249673 - 01/26/03 06:59 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Mr. Mushrooms has evolved to the point where he doubts evolution.
Evolution, Revolution, Masterbation, Flagellation
All we are saaaaaaaying, is give peace a chance!
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1250460 - 01/26/03 01:23 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You go sober up now.
-------------------- What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems? What if all the world you think you know, Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection, Is it all you want it to be?
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Murex]
#1250919 - 01/26/03 04:50 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1251904 - 01/27/03 02:44 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I have two things to say:
English Pepper Moth & Industrial Age
That is all!
--------------------
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252071 - 01/27/03 04:12 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
1. The moths you speak of were not used properly as a condiment for the Age. This ruined the entire recipe.
2. My reply is:
a. Orange bits & Crisps
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: ]
#1252185 - 01/27/03 04:59 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
For your enjoyment
--------------------
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252199 - 01/27/03 05:03 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I love you Jackal!
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252244 - 01/27/03 05:23 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Sorry Jackal, but the Pepper Moth story does not show any evolution (genetic change) whatsoever, but the deselection for certain color genes via being eaten.
Yes, there is a population shift / preference for a certain wing color, but absolutely NOTHING is happening to the genetic code on the DNA level.
That is like saying that I have a litter of pure-bred black lab puppies with one white one. If I destroy the white puppy, have labradors ACTUALLY evolved?
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1252258 - 01/27/03 05:34 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Are you trying to say that changing colour to avoid being eaten is not an evolutionary step? Edit: ? Inserted
--------------------
Edited by Jackal (01/27/03 06:09 AM)
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252275 - 01/27/03 05:49 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I am intuiting that you are asking me a question.
This is where you are not understanding. Black moths do NOT morph into white ones nor white ones into black ones. There were always both colors present, just the proportion changed.
Whites in America are more numerous than blacks. If the increasing skin cancer rates in Caucasions decreases the white population, and thus making them a minority, has the human race evolved based on this single statistic?
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1252329 - 01/27/03 06:11 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I understand perfectly. In my and I think every Darwinists view, changing your phenotype in order to increase the likelihood of survival and producing offspring is an example of evolution.
--------------------
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252346 - 01/27/03 06:18 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
But if the tree bark were red instead of light/dark grey, that does not mean that the moths would turn red as the genetic code is not adapting on the cellular level.
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1252356 - 01/27/03 06:21 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Not in as short space of time - No. But in the case of the moth the desirable colour was already present as you pointed out. This causes the "evolutionary change" to appear so quickly. If the desirable colour wasn't immediately present in the phenotype then it would take centuries for the moth to adapt, thats if extinction didn't get it first!
--------------------
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252494 - 01/27/03 07:13 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Swami & Jackal (and everyone else, why not?):
The word evolution is a bit of a misnomer. I hope everyone realizes and understands this.
HOWEVER, the term itself has (through years of improper use) become identified with natural selection. NOTHING evolves. Certain genes just happen to work (ah, pragmatism) better than others at certain times/climates/whatever. Those that work better tend to NOT "die off"... while those that don't work as well DO tend to "die off". It's as simple as that. The genes themselves DO NOT change. The only thing that changes is the proportion of gene X to gene Z (just an example) in a population OVER TIME. Mutation is not the driving force in "evolution", so get it outta yer head!
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1252514 - 01/27/03 07:20 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I disagree, Evolution is a process in which something (not necessarily an organism) gradually changes into a different and more suitable form for its environment. If this is brought about by genes being turned on or off as required then so be it. The "thing" has evolved.
--------------------
Edited by Jackal (01/27/03 07:21 AM)
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1252518 - 01/27/03 07:22 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
So over time, our fish & salamander & frog & rodent & ape genes die off leaving only human genes. And here we are!
As more believer genes die out, the schlorch model of humanity will take over.
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252520 - 01/27/03 07:22 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Well then... you are wrong. Good luck with that.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1252535 - 01/27/03 07:27 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't think I am, can we agree to disagree?
--------------------
|
Anonymous
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1252609 - 01/27/03 07:55 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
As more believer genes die out, the schlorch model of humanity will take over.
That's a terrifying idea.
Great to see everyone playing nice. When I saw a 10 post jump on this thread I nearly had a panic attack!
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1252814 - 01/27/03 08:52 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Jackal: I don't think I am, can we agree to disagree?
We can do that when you educate yourself on evolution. I know from your word usage and lack of terminology that you haven't taken (and passed) a university-level class on evolution. Sometimes academia has alot to offer (*sensing a possible academia knock*).
Swami: So over time, our fish & salamander & frog & rodent & ape genes die off leaving only human genes. And here we are!
I hope no one takes that seriously... I know you don't. The many different kinds of mutations are responsible for the initial genetic diversity... the fit survive (no, that is not a tautology... don't make me have to say why).
As more believer genes die out, the schlorch model of humanity will take over. That "h" just never seems to be absent... hehe Being a "believer" is okay if it's based on the Kierkegaardian concept of faith... as long as there is no dogma in there.
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1252863 - 01/27/03 09:10 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I studied Evolution and Ecology as an Undergrad actually, as part of my Botany degree in which I achieved a 2.1 And anyway, I haven't seen anything in your use of terminology which makes you Richard Dawkins!
OK according to my Oxford Science Dictionary, Evolution is defined thus:
Evolution Changes in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations. The gradual development of more complex organisms from simpler ones.
Funny that, thats what I thought it meant!
--------------------
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Jackal]
#1253114 - 01/27/03 10:23 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Jackal: OK according to my Oxford Science Dictionary, Evolution is defined thus: Evolution- Changes in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations. The gradual development of more complex organisms from simpler ones. Funny that, thats what I thought it meant! Well, Jackal would disagree with you: disagree, Evolution is a process in which something (not necessarily an organism) gradually changes into a different and more suitable form for its environment. If this is brought about by genes being turned on or off as required then so be it. The "thing" has evolved." and changing your phenotype in order to increase the likelihood of survival and producing offspring is an example of evolution. Evolution isn't active... it is passive. Are you trying to say that changing colour to avoid being eaten is not an evolutionary step? Again... your words indicate that evolution is an active process. I studied Evolution and Ecology as an Undergrad actually, as part of my Botany degree in which I achieved a 2.1 Well that's good, but education means nothing without coherence in application...
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
Edited by Sclorch (01/27/03 10:25 AM)
|
Swami
Eggshell Walker
Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1253169 - 01/27/03 10:34 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
As more believer genes die out, the schlorch model of humanity will take over.
That "h" just never seems to be absent... hehe
That is because the "h" gene has not yet left the building, er pool.
Evolution isn't active... it is passive.
Damn, lazy ass evolution! Why don't you make something of your life?
-------------------- The proof is in the pudding.
|
Murex
Reality Hacker
Registered: 07/28/02
Posts: 3,599
Loc: Traped in a shell.
Last seen: 16 years, 6 months
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1254103 - 01/27/03 04:03 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Huh?
-------------------- What if everything around you Isn't quite as it seems? What if all the world you think you know, Is an elaborate dream? And if you look at your reflection, Is it all you want it to be?
|
infidelGOD
illusion
Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Swami]
#1254171 - 01/27/03 04:32 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Sorry Jackal, but the Pepper Moth story does not show any evolution (genetic change) whatsoever, but the deselection for certain color genes via being eaten.
Yes, there is a population shift / preference for a certain wing color, but absolutely NOTHING is happening to the genetic code on the DNA level.
But isn't the genome of the population changing? physical evolution doesn't spontaneously change an individual animal - it only changes the genetic makeup of a group through natural selection. If you sampled the DNA of the moth population before and after the wing color change, you would find that there is a change. Genetic change did take place. Individial genomes being "deselected" caused a change in the population genome.
|
Teragon
Noddy
Registered: 02/20/01
Posts: 36,253
Loc: Lost in the Patterns
|
|
Now this is my type of thread. Awww man where to start and too many places to take it. First off I'd like to point out that while the Peppermoth/Industrial Age example is a good one for evolution, it was falsified...it was a fake. Some asshole used dead moths and painted(or something) them...they've proved it from the old photos. Swami: Sorry Jackal, but the Pepper Moth story does not show any evolution (genetic change) whatsoever, but the deselection for certain color genes via being eaten. That is evolution. infidelGOD has the right idea...but a much better term than natural selection or survival of the fittest is differential reproductive success. Those moths that were eaten couldn't pass their genetic makeup on, altering the population's genotype, effectively changing what the organism looked like (of course it isn't always such a drastic change...hell that one isn't even real). Swami, your example of the puppies doesn't work b/c its only one litter of puppies not a population of dogs. If you killed ALL the white puppies/dogs (or they couldn't survive/pass-on-genes because of differential reproductive success), then yes the dogs would have evolved...there would no longer be any white ones...get it? Sorry, I don't mean to rank on you; your quote was just a good example of what evolution really is.
Now, diggitydankman chimed in with some dank info, "Ideas speculating about evolutionary codons and sequences that are continuously trying to evolve our DNA have began to become more credible. Also our DNA is thought to have a sequence that can fix bad mutations. " This is very true, our cells have countless enzymes that proofread the DNA after replication to ensure a flawless copy. Mutation are fairly rare and they are not the key component of this worlds genetic diversity...but they do make enough variations to have an effect. Interestingly enough, our DNA has long, unused segments called introns. After the DNA is transcribed into RNA, the RNA introns actually catalyze their own excision! (a piece Xibalba's very fascinating theory). Their is so much about DNA that we don't know.
Adamist: It's just like alot of people accept the "fact" that dinosaurs died as a result of a meteor impacting the Earth. This isn't a fact, yet people seem to accept it as such. The FACT is, that most things people view as facts are little more than theoretical explanations for something that cannot objectively be proved or disproved, which makes them easily changeable.
Well there is some evidence behind this...some guy didn't just make it up. Meteors are known to contain a very rare element named Iridium. At the same rock layer that the dinosaur fossils stop they is an huge abundance of this element, which is otherwise rarely/if ever seen on and around earth. That evidence is too coincindental for me to naively brush off.
I'm currently taking AP Biology and my teacher has a doctorate in evolution, so I'm quite educated in this subject. If you read a well-written Biology textbook (like Campbell 6th Edition), the amount of evidence for evolution is overwhelming (so many other points but I've already wasted too much time e.g. Universal Genetic Code, Homologous Structures, and not only did wings "evolve" (I'm starting to hate that term) once, but they did many many times. Insects, birds, bats all separated from common ancestor long ago and developed wings by themselves.)
Just wanted to throw in my thoughts and hope I didn't offend anyone.
-------------------- need that cash to feed them jones.
|
Sclorch
Clyster
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Teragon]
#1258410 - 01/29/03 09:54 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Good post.
BTW, can you provide some sources for your claim that the pepper moth thing was a hoax? (not trying to argue with you... I'm intrigued, I've never heard that it was so... in fact, I know of a few professors that still refer to the moth story. I would love to inform them that it was a hoax.)
-------------------- Note: In desperate need of a cure...
|
Jackal
Well Versed In Etiquette
Registered: 10/16/02
Posts: 4,576
Last seen: 7 months, 23 days
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Teragon]
#1260050 - 01/29/03 08:06 PM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
(like Campbell 6th Edition)
Superb book, I have the 4th Edition from when I was at Uni 6 years ago. It is my Biology Bible
--------------------
|
Teragon
Noddy
Registered: 02/20/01
Posts: 36,253
Loc: Lost in the Patterns
|
Re: Evolution [Re: Sclorch]
#1261026 - 01/30/03 06:45 AM (21 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Sclorch- Thank you. I'll get some documentation ASAP, but I remember it had something to do with a guy going over the old photos in detail and noticing a bunch of signs that hint at death in insects. Like when all insects die, they get a clearish-gray thin layer over their eyes as part of the exoskeleton, which is a tell-tale sign of death.
Jackal- Yeah, Campbell is the man...does a great job of explaining biology.
-------------------- need that cash to feed them jones.
|
|