|
Author
|
Topic: How do you define the word Evolution?
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
|
Message 616 of 936 (807589)
05-04-2017 7:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 615 by Dredge
05-04-2017 6:57 AM
|
|
Re: If Not, What?
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.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 615 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 6:57 AM | | Dredge has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 625 by CRR, posted 05-04-2017 9:50 PM | | Pressie has not replied | | | Message 633 by Dredge, posted 05-05-2017 6:14 AM | | Pressie has replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
(2)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 617 of 936 (807597)
05-04-2017 9:08 AM
|
Reply to: Message 615 by Dredge
05-04-2017 6:57 AM
|
|
Re: If Not, What?
All living organisms are biological machines. DNA provides the instructions for building biological machines. What has more information: a royal straight flush? a hand without even a pair? Or is the " information" only in the eye of the beholder? Enjoy
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 615 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 6:57 AM | | Dredge has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 632 by Dredge, posted 05-05-2017 6:11 AM | | RAZD has replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 618 of 936 (807603)
05-04-2017 9:36 AM
|
Reply to: Message 604 by Dredge
05-04-2017 3:12 AM
|
|
Re: Where are we now?
Actually, you're right; so I'll go back to something like my original definition of evolution. In biology, the word, "evolution" can't be separated from Darwin's theory, which obviously has common descent at it's core. The gratuitous, ubiquitous and misleading use of the word, "evolution" in the biological sciences is always an allusion to Darwinism, which I reject as false, useless and irrelevant. So to hell with ToE, just give me biology and I'll be happy. As Danno used to say, "Just the facts, ma'am." (Danno would have made an excellent biologist ... but a lousy evolutionist.) When I become King of Australia I'll ban the teaching of ToE at all levels of education, thereby draining the swamp that the once-noble science of biology has become, liberating and cleansing it from the mendacious theology of atheist cultism. Evolution = Biology + the atheist cult of Darwinism I can find little meaning in this fatuous stew of nonsense, but it seems like you are pretending that "evolution" always alludes to common descent. As you know, this is untrue.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 604 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 3:12 AM | | Dredge has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 638 by Dredge, posted 05-05-2017 6:30 AM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
|
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: 07-20-2006
|
|
|
Message 619 of 936 (807604)
05-04-2017 9:38 AM
|
Reply to: Message 610 by Dredge
05-04-2017 6:14 AM
|
|
Re: If Not, What?
I can make such a claim and I just did. DNA is an instruction manual for building a machine. A human machine is much more complex than an amoeba machine, therefore much more information is needed in the human's instruction manual. What makes you suppose that the amount of information needed is the same as the amount of information present?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 610 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 6:14 AM | | Dredge has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 432 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 620 of 936 (807630)
05-04-2017 12:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 615 by Dredge
05-04-2017 6:57 AM
|
|
Re: If Not, What?
Dredge writes: DNA provides the instructions for building biological machines.
How are those "instructions" written on the DNA molecule? What is the ink?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 615 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 6:57 AM | | Dredge has not replied |
|
Tangle
Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: 10-07-2011 Member Rating: 4.7
|
|
|
Message 621 of 936 (807665)
05-04-2017 3:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 604 by Dredge
05-04-2017 3:12 AM
|
|
Re: Where are we now?
Dredge writes: And you are pathetically, ludicrously wrong. Actually, you're right; so I'll go back to something like my original definition of evolution. In biology, the word, "evolution" can't be separated from Darwin's theory, which obviously has common descent at it's core. The gratuitous, ubiquitous and misleading use of the word, "evolution" in the biological sciences is always an allusion to Darwinism, which I reject as false, useless and irrelevant. So to hell with ToE, just give me biology and I'll be happy. As Danno used to say, "Just the facts, ma'am." (Danno would have made an excellent biologist ... but a lousy evolutionist.) When I become King of Australia I'll ban the teaching of ToE at all levels of education, thereby draining the swamp that the once-noble science of biology has become, liberating and cleansing it from the mendacious theology of atheist cultism. Evolution = Biology + the atheist cult of Darwinism Idiocy. That's all really, just 100% stupid. Congratulations.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 604 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 3:12 AM | | Dredge has replied |
|
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1425 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: 03-14-2004
|
|
|
Message 622 of 936 (807668)
05-04-2017 4:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 621 by Tangle
05-04-2017 3:29 PM
|
|
Re: Where are we now?
Idiocy. That's all really, just 100% stupid. Congratulations. Actually it's Cognitive Dissonance and the Backfire Effect plus a little Dunning—Kruger effect added for you to Enjoy
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 621 by Tangle, posted 05-04-2017 3:29 PM | | Tangle has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 623 by Tangle, posted 05-04-2017 4:31 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
|
Tangle
Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: 10-07-2011 Member Rating: 4.7
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 623 of 936 (807673)
05-04-2017 4:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 622 by RAZD
05-04-2017 4:05 PM
|
|
Re: Where are we now?
RAZD writes: Actually it's Cognitive Dissonance and the Backfire Effect plus a little Dunning—Kruger effect added for you to Sometimes simple is best.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 622 by RAZD, posted 05-04-2017 4:05 PM | | RAZD has seen this message but not replied |
|
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1524 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: 02-19-2004
|
|
|
Message 624 of 936 (807674)
05-04-2017 4:56 PM
|
Reply to: Message 604 by Dredge
05-04-2017 3:12 AM
|
|
Re: Where are we now?
"You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 604 by Dredge, posted 05-04-2017 3:12 AM | | Dredge has not replied |
|
CRR
Member (Idle past 2263 days) Posts: 579 From: Australia Joined: 10-19-2016
|
|
|
Message 625 of 936 (807690)
05-04-2017 9:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 616 by Pressie
05-04-2017 7:58 AM
|
|
Re: If Not, What?
In a 2007 PNAS paper, Robert Hazen and colleagues, including Szostak, mathematically defined functional information as follows: I(Ex) = -log2[M(Ex)/N] Equation (1) where, N = total number of possible configurations or sequences (both functional and non-functional), M(Ex) = total number of configurations or sequences that satisfy the functional requirements, I(Ex) = functional information (the number of bits necessary and sufficient to specify a given function). Entropy = Information Mistake Kirk Durston gives examples in the linked article.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 616 by Pressie, posted 05-04-2017 7:58 AM | | Pressie has not replied |
|
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2497 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: 01-24-2007
|
|
|
Message 626 of 936 (807702)
05-05-2017 2:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 625 by CRR
05-04-2017 9:50 PM
|
|
Increase in information thread?
CRR writes: In a 2007 PNAS paper, Robert Hazen and colleagues, including Szostak, mathematically defined functional information..... "Functional" is why I mentioned the enormous Amoeba genome in Message 572, and pointed out that size alone is easily achieved by duplication. In Message 593, I suggested a new thread to Dredge, as he seemed to be implying by this:
Dredge writes: Message 522 In order for all life to have evolved from a common ancestor, mutations must produce limitless increases in the information stored in DNA. But genetics science cannot demonstrate that mutations produce limitless increases in the information stored in DNA. that "genetics science" cannot demonstrate that mutations produce enough increase in functional information for the life we see around us, although his use of "limitless" is presumably not to be taken literally. Perhaps you agree with him. As there's plenty of evidence for past increases in "information" (in the sense of added coding genes) via mutation and selection, I find this kind of claim odd, and think it should be supported.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 625 by CRR, posted 05-04-2017 9:50 PM | | CRR has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 627 by Pressie, posted 05-05-2017 4:45 AM | | bluegenes has not replied |
|
Pressie
Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: 06-18-2010
|
Re: Increase in information thread?
I agree with you, bluegenes. A new thread like that would be helpful. It is rather amusing to me that these creationists distinguish between functional information and non-functional information. Coding and non-coding (non-coding basically is known as junk DNA to the man in the street, which creationists oppose so vehemently)! I notice that the link CRR posted didn't give any examples in applying any of their formulas. It would be nice and funny to have a thread about it as applying those formulas through their vague definitions to real life examples lead to the Swedish Elk having "more genetic information" than humans. Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 626 by bluegenes, posted 05-05-2017 2:41 AM | | bluegenes has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 642 by CRR, posted 05-05-2017 8:11 AM | | Pressie has replied |
|
Dredge
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: 09-06-2016
|
|
|
Message 628 of 936 (807712)
05-05-2017 5:57 AM
|
Reply to: Message 598 by Taq
05-03-2017 11:09 AM
|
|
Re: Reality strikes again
Taq writes: The theory of evolution explains why we see this pattern of shared derived features. Yes of course it does ... and there is no other possible explanation, right? Stephen Jay Gould said that the fossil record is characterised by "sudden appearance" and "stasis", which he attributed to Punctuated Equilibrium. However, sudden appearance and stasis can also be attributed to creation.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 598 by Taq, posted 05-03-2017 11:09 AM | | Taq has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 644 by Coyote, posted 05-05-2017 9:21 AM | | Dredge has not replied |
|
Dredge
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: 09-06-2016
|
|
|
Message 629 of 936 (807713)
05-05-2017 6:00 AM
|
Reply to: Message 596 by RAZD
05-03-2017 8:13 AM
|
|
Re: Reality strikes again
Yes, yes, thank you for this. I had forgotten some of it, as it's been a long time since we covered this stuff in Grade 5 of primary school. There are factual points (microevolution) mixed in with some evo-speculation by atheist paleontologists (who, of course, can always be relied on to tell the truth). More Darwinism masquerading as science ... y-a-w-n.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 596 by RAZD, posted 05-03-2017 8:13 AM | | RAZD has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 640 by RAZD, posted 05-05-2017 6:45 AM | | Dredge has not replied |
|
Dredge
Member (Idle past 94 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: 09-06-2016
|
|
|
Message 630 of 936 (807714)
05-05-2017 6:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 607 by CRR
05-04-2017 5:42 AM
|
|
Re: Genome sizes
CRR writes: the lack of correlation between phenotype complexity and genone size is known as the C-Value Paradox Thanks, cobber. Well, no wonder it called a "Paradox" because it pretty bloody weird and counter-intuitive! My fragile, egg-shell mind is still reeling form this revelation! Chicko advised to take two Bex and have a good lay down, but I think the C-Value Paradox has caused me irreparable brain damage. Biology is freakin' dangerous! I'm wearing a helmet from now on.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 607 by CRR, posted 05-04-2017 5:42 AM | | CRR has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2