|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 916,384 Year: 3,641/9,624 Month: 512/974 Week: 125/276 Day: 22/31 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How do you define the word Evolution? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Hey, a lot of creationists claim that scientific laws only came to effect after the so-called Fall. Basically, according to them, scientific laws and explanations only started operating after Eve had a bite of that fruit. Then all of it temporarily got suspended again during some Magic Flood later.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
After all of this, I gathered that the word evolution means change over time.
Not being a biologist, I also gathered that evolutionary theory involves genetic variation coupled with mainly natural selection. Although other forms of selection can also be involved. From what I gathered was that the origin of the Universe or the origin of the earth or the sun of Pluto or the origin of life or the origin of rocks can't be considered part of evolutionary theory. Just the origins of the variety of life we observe today. Being a geo, that makes sense to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Hey, JohnF, that guy mentioned by CRR is a Geographer, not a Geologist. He was trained as a Geographer and alledgedly did his PhD in Geography. Geomorphology. Not Geology.
Anyway, from those sources provided by CRR it seems that he did Geography, then joined some cult, then dropped his job and started working for CMI. Not very impressive. He was not convinced by the evidence, but by his cult. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
This one is just as funny.
CRR writes: You do know that the species problem is a big problem for creationists, don't you? No fixed boundaries between "kinds" and all that...
Like Linnaeus, Darwin was using a morphological species concept rather than Mayr's Biological Species Concept. Darwin wrote in On the Origin of Species: No one definition has satisfied all naturalists; yet every naturalist knows vaguely what he means when he speaks of a species. Generally the term includes the unknown element of a distinct act of creation. Species - Wikipedia Not only can hybrids form between recognised species, they can form cross genera, although as far as I know, only genera within the one family. This actually is consistent with the idea that the kinds from the Ark have subdivided into sub-groups that we have later classified as different genera and species.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
CRR, please don't spread falsehoods about me. I don't appreciate that.
CRR writes: Yes, the word evolution does mean change over time. Like Table Mountain getting lower over the centuries as the top is eroded. @Pressie 377 After all of this, I gathered that the word evolution means change over time. Evolutionary theory is biological and describes the mechanisms involved changing life over time. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Maybe Dredge can provide a better answer than "subjective".
Dredge writes: In order for all life to have evolved from a common ancestor, mutations must produce limitless increases in the information stored in DNA... Hey, Dredge, how do you quantify the information stored in the DNA? How do you know whether genetic information increases or decreases without a way of measuring it? Could you provide the units to measure the amount of genetic information?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Dredge writes: The DNA of an earthworm contains 10.465 infos; the DNA of a human being contains 3,356,298,112.2089 infos. Ah, size of the genome equates to "genetic information", according to you. Then, according to your definition a protozoan, called Amoeba dubia, has more than 670,000,000.0000 "infos". Hey, according to you, personally, a unicellular organism has a hundred times more genetic information than you! And, unlike you, those protozoans don't even pretend to have brains! Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
So, Dredge.
Now that you know something about genome sizes; are you going to answer the following question?
Pressie writes: You don't want to prove yourself to be more brainless that protozoa, do you?
Hey, Dredge, how do you quantify the information stored in the DNA? How do you know whether genetic information increases or decreases without a way of measuring it? Could you provide the units to measure the amount of genetic information?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Dredge writes: Really? How do you measure genetic information to write "more genetic information"? Without a unit of measurement you can't make any such a claim.
Thank you for that very interesting information. But somewhere in the mix a human being contains more genetic information than an amoeba.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Luckily for humanity scientific explanations and definitions are not done by passers-by on the street, but by preople who are knowledgable in that specific field.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined:
|
Thank you for acknowledging that there's no way to determine whether organism A or organism B has more or less genetic information.
I know that you're trying to fool people like yourself and Dredge by using sciencey sounding language; but sciencey sounding language is not science. We're not all too stupid to be fooled by sciencey sounding language, CRR. So, the honourable thing to do by you and Dredge would be to acknowledge that genetic information can't be measured at the moment. And that you can't say whether Organism A or Organism B has "more genetic information".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Actually, I complimented your accomplishments. Your last accomplishment was that your way of measuring "genetic information" lead to the conclusion that some forms of Amoebas have more genetic information than humans. I agree with that when it comes to intelligence. Remember your "infos"?
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Nope. Word salads, again. You don't want to answer the question. Quantify before saying "more". Quantify genetic information before saying "more" or "less".
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
Dredge writes: I'm trying to figure out what you're trying to say. My car is a machine. It's got no inheritable DNA. My car doesn't have kiddies. What's your point?.
....DNA is an instruction manual for building a machine...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
How do you determine the amount of genetic information? Quantify genetic information. That's the point. Word salads won't help you.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024