Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 153 (8094 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-24-2014 8:20 AM
210 online now:
AZPaul3, Heathen, JonF, Tangle (4 members, 206 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: yudi
Upcoming Birthdays: Bliyaal
Post Volume:
Total: 733,014 Year: 18,855/28,606 Month: 2,126/2,305 Week: 331/671 Day: 6/57 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
56Next
Author Topic:   Evolution doesn't make sense.
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 2021 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 46 of 80 (8081)
04-01-2002 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Lorenzo7
01-16-2002 12:06 PM


quote:
Originally posted by Lorenzo7:
Third, the embryos of fish,
amphibians, birds and mammals look virtually identical in an early stage of development, becoming different only at later stages.
...while the third is
downright false.

I take it that you have never suffered through a semester or even () a year of vertebrate embryology. As someone who has (thankfully long enough ago that much of the tedium has departed from memory ) I can tell you that you are wrong. I think that you are confusing some of Haeckels statements (Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny) with modern embryology (no, Ontgeny does not recapitulate phylogeny, at least not through end terminal addition as Haeckel claimed although molecular biology indicates that earlier stage alterations are far more key). Many aspects of the early stages are very similar, and the differences between the branchpoints are often the focus of intense molecular biology study to understand how mutations lead to the alterations in the molecular pathways taken by the organism. Please wait untill you have sweated through the first part of the course, just trying to tell pig from chicken from human (it is possible, but just barely) in the early stages of development before you make statements like this. At a minimum please look beyond either a high school text book and your local creationist "literature".

------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Lorenzo7, posted 01-16-2002 12:06 PM Lorenzo7 has not yet responded

    
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 2021 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 47 of 80 (8082)
04-01-2002 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by Peter
02-22-2002 7:21 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Peter:
Time doesn't actually exist (try measuring it directly like-for-like).

It is a convenient abtraction that fits with our perception of
reality.


Hey Peter, what do you think of the concept that time, per say, is really only a measure of the increase in the universal entropy. And, just so that there is no confusion, I understand that while entropy may be increasing as a universal measure, it has local flucuations, ie areas of negative entropy, that can partially account for things such as life and evolution. God, that was a long sentance .

Arggghhhh, forgot my signature
"Chance Favors the Prepared Mind" L. Pasteur
Taz

[This message has been edited by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, 04-01-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Peter, posted 02-22-2002 7:21 AM Peter has not yet responded

    
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 2021 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 48 of 80 (8083)
04-01-2002 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by keenanvin
01-17-2002 10:14 PM


quote:
Originally posted by keenanvin:
Evolution is the survival of the fittest. Those who are fit to survive can breed and have offspring which have their traits

Uhhh, not to nit-pick , but you are describing Natural Selection, the mechanism or one of the mechanisms which appear(s) to drive evolution.

------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by keenanvin, posted 01-17-2002 10:14 PM keenanvin has not yet responded

    
Soloone 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1248 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-24-2010


Message 49 of 80 (593068)
11-24-2010 1:34 AM


Of course this () is not an exact science because some production server arrays grow and shrink on a daily basis and some (Aion Gold) test servers are left running all the time. But nevertheless there is a clear trend that shows a continued move of business critical computing to the () cloud. The upshot of all this is that in dollar terms the spending we've(Buy WOW Gold)seen on cloud computing servers has more than ten-folded between June 2009 and June 2010. We are living in interesting times where the way computing is consumed is changing dramatically, whether at the personal WOW Power Leveling with smart phones and iPads or at the server level in the cloud!

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Spamming the spam.


    
Blackroseuk
Junior Member (Idle past 838 days)
Posts: 2
From: United kingdom
Joined: 01-07-2012


Message 50 of 80 (646899)
01-07-2012 8:23 AM


I agree as you say 'something' had to create the first ever living things wether that is bacteria or whatever. But if that something is a someone, say God then, he too had to be created also. The answer God has always been there does not make sense anymore so than someone telling a creationist that evolution does not make sense.
So who or what created God then?

No one will ever know how everything came about in the whole universe. It's not just earth...its everything.


Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Trixie, posted 01-07-2012 8:42 AM Blackroseuk has not yet responded

    
Trixie
Member (Idle past 80 days)
Posts: 1011
From: Edinburgh
Joined: 01-03-2004


Message 51 of 80 (646904)
01-07-2012 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by Blackroseuk
01-07-2012 8:23 AM


Hi Blackroseuk. This thread hasn't had any meaningful dialogue in it for about 10 years. There are probably more active threads that you can peruse.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Blackroseuk, posted 01-07-2012 8:23 AM Blackroseuk has not yet responded

  
Blackroseuk
Junior Member (Idle past 838 days)
Posts: 2
From: United kingdom
Joined: 01-07-2012


Message 52 of 80 (646921)
01-07-2012 9:55 AM


Haha I didn't notice. Ok, thanks
Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by hooah212002, posted 01-07-2012 9:57 AM Blackroseuk has not yet responded

    
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3140
Joined: 08-12-2009
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 53 of 80 (646923)
01-07-2012 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by Blackroseuk
01-07-2012 9:55 AM


Easiest way to find recent topics is to click on the "all topics" link at the top. That way, you can see all of the most recent ones in somewhat of a chronological order, albeit not in order by topic so you need to be careful what you post.

“Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion.” Joseph Campbell

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Blackroseuk, posted 01-07-2012 9:55 AM Blackroseuk has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 2216
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 54 of 80 (647229)
01-08-2012 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Lorenzo7
01-16-2002 12:06 PM


if you're going to quote huge chunks of someone else's writings it's best practice to reference them.

Lorenzo7 writes:


For example, let's look at three claims of evidence for Darwinian evolution often cited by high school textbooks. First, as the use of antibiotics has
become common, mutant strains of resistant bacteria have become more common, threatening public health. Second, darkcolored variants of a
certain moth species evaded predation by birds because their color matched the sooty tree trunks of industrial England. Third, the embryos of fish,
amphibians, birds and mammals look virtually identical in an early stage of development, becoming different only at later stages.

Teach Evolution and Ask Hard Questions

By Michael J. Behe
Michael J. Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University, is author of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution.

For example, let's look at three claims of evidence for Darwinian evolution often cited by high school textbooks. First, as the use of antibiotics has become common, mutant strains of resistant bacteria have become more common, threatening public health. Second, darkcolored variants of a certain moth species evaded predation by birds because their color matched the sooty tree trunks of industrial England. Third, the embryos of fish, amphibians, birds and mammals look virtually identical in an early stage of development, becoming different only at later stages.

http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_ksnytb81399.htm


Life, don't talk to me about life. (Marvin the Paranoid Android)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Lorenzo7, posted 01-16-2002 12:06 PM Lorenzo7 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by amp1022, posted 02-07-2012 12:09 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
amp1022
Junior Member (Idle past 807 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 02-05-2012


Message 55 of 80 (651411)
02-07-2012 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Tangle
01-08-2012 6:38 PM


By Michael J. Behe
Michael J. Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University, is author of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution.

For example, let's look at three claims of evidence for Darwinian evolution often cited by high school textbooks. First, as the use of antibiotics has become common, mutant strains of resistant bacteria have become more common, threatening public health. Second, darkcolored variants of a certain moth species evaded predation by birds because their color matched the sooty tree trunks of industrial England. Third, the embryos of fish, amphibians, birds and mammals look virtually identical in an early stage of development, becoming different only at later stages.

http://www.arn.org/docs/behe/mb_ksnytb81399.htm

I did not read every post in this forum so forgive me if I am a little off subject here. I just wanted to comment on this particular quote. I just noticed that there is not one single reference to a species evolving into a completely different species. I know its an old question but it has yet to be answered. Is there any example anywhere in recorded history of one species mutating into a fully separate species? I am willing to bet I won't get a single straight answer referencing an actual recorded event.


Common sense will answer most questions that science struggles with.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Tangle, posted 01-08-2012 6:38 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by jar, posted 02-07-2012 12:13 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 02-07-2012 12:28 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 58 by hooah212002, posted 02-07-2012 2:31 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 59 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-07-2012 2:41 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 02-11-2012 3:24 PM amp1022 has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 24595
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 56 of 80 (651412)
02-07-2012 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by amp1022
02-07-2012 12:09 PM


There are millions of such examples, many ongoing today.

Lizard Evolution in Action


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by amp1022, posted 02-07-2012 12:09 PM amp1022 has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 57 of 80 (651416)
02-07-2012 12:28 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by amp1022
02-07-2012 12:09 PM


I am willing to bet I won't get a single straight answer referencing an actual recorded event.

You're right that you won't get a single answer, because here is a list of a dozen such records:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

It does, of course, take very many generations for a new species to arise from an old one, so we primarily observe it happening in species that reproduce quite quickly. But we can, of course, see evidence of speciation in both the fossil record and in the genetic code.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by amp1022, posted 02-07-2012 12:09 PM amp1022 has not yet responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3140
Joined: 08-12-2009
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 58 of 80 (651441)
02-07-2012 2:31 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by amp1022
02-07-2012 12:09 PM


First: define species. A common problem in this line of argument with creationists is an inability to agree on commonly agreed upon terms. I could assume that you are using the definition of species accepted by science, but I could be very well wrong because creationists tend to pick and choose what science topics they accept.

“Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion.” Joseph Campbell

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by amp1022, posted 02-07-2012 12:09 PM amp1022 has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 12600
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 59 of 80 (651442)
02-07-2012 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by amp1022
02-07-2012 12:09 PM


I did not read every post in this forum so forgive me if I am a little off subject here. I just wanted to comment on this particular quote. I just noticed that there is not one single reference to a species evolving into a completely different species. I know its an old question but it has yet to be answered. Is there any example anywhere in recorded history of one species mutating into a fully separate species? I am willing to bet I won't get a single straight answer referencing an actual recorded event.

Since examples have been given by other posters, I'd just like to point out a strange inconsistency in creationist rhetoric.

Let's hear it from creation.com, in their list of "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use".

‘No new species have been produced.’ This is not true—new species have been observed to form. In fact, rapid speciation is an important part of the creation model.

So, could you guys sort this out among yourselves?

According to you, new species don't arise, and this is a creationist argument. According to creation.com, new species have been observed to form, and this is "an important part of the creation model".

So some creationists say that this doesn't happen, and some say that it does, but all creationists claim that whatever happens it supports creationism.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by amp1022, posted 02-07-2012 12:09 PM amp1022 has not yet responded

  
amp1022
Junior Member (Idle past 807 days)
Posts: 13
Joined: 02-05-2012


Message 60 of 80 (651513)
02-07-2012 7:50 PM


Ok... not one single example. Even the things you all referenced do not actually have a recorded example of this happening. Can any of you give me the name of an animal that started as one animal, then became a completely different animal. As in catfish becomes seagull, or frog becomes sloth, or termite becomes turtle. Nope, I am very confident that you all will point out the millions of examples, but not actually name a single one. Why? Because the best you can do is find a bunch of similar fossils, or disfigured fossils and line them up so they look like one came from another. I can do the same thing to prove that Beach balls come from peas. Pea, jawbreaker, golf ball, baseball, softball, kickball, basketball, beach ball. All round, each one is larger and more complex than the next, yet no one has ever seen a pea evolve into a jawbreaker. Do not focus on whether or not peas become jawbreakers. DESCRIBE one of the millions of examples of one species evolving into a completely different species. Actually say the names of the animals and the records showing the evolution. Not lined up fossils but an actual recorded incident. I'm debating whether I should even bother checking back for a straight answer. I am sure you will just insult me and remind me of the millions of examples no one wants to actually describe.

You're right that you won't get a single answer, because here is a list of a dozen such records:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

I took a long look at that, its a very long record of people finding variations in species (not one species becoming another) or men producing new species by hybridization, which is not the same as evolution since that breeding would not have occurred in nature.

Edited by amp1022, : No reason given.


Common sense will answer most questions that science struggles with.

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-07-2012 8:08 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 62 by Trixie, posted 02-07-2012 8:09 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 02-07-2012 8:27 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 64 by hooah212002, posted 02-07-2012 8:38 PM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 65 by Warthog, posted 02-08-2012 5:17 AM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 66 by frako, posted 02-08-2012 8:17 AM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 67 by dwise1, posted 02-09-2012 2:50 AM amp1022 has not yet responded
 Message 68 by crashfrog, posted 02-09-2012 9:01 AM amp1022 has not yet responded

  
Prev123
4
56Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014