Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 121 (8783 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-22-2017 8:24 PM
348 online now:
Coragyps, GDR (2 members, 346 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,780 Year: 21,386/21,208 Month: 1,819/2,326 Week: 274/881 Day: 99/97 Hour: 1/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
5859606162
63
Author Topic:   How do you define the word Evolution?
CRR
Member
Posts: 537
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 931 of 936 (815819)
07-24-2017 6:36 PM


How do you define the word Evolution? ⇒ Reply
Replies to this message:
 Message 932 by RAZD, posted 07-24-2017 9:39 PM CRR has responded
 Message 933 by dwise1, posted 07-25-2017 10:38 AM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 934 by ringo, posted 07-25-2017 11:56 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18867
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 932 of 936 (815829)
07-24-2017 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 931 by CRR
07-24-2017 6:36 PM


Evolution is ...
Message 67

quote:
(1) The process of evolution involves changes in the composition of hereditary traits, and changes to the frequency of their distributions within breeding populations from generation to generation, in response to ecological challenges and opportunities for growth, development, survival and reproductive success in changing or different habitats.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 931 by CRR, posted 07-24-2017 6:36 PM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 935 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 3:55 AM RAZD has responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 2914
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


(2)
Message 933 of 936 (815847)
07-25-2017 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 931 by CRR
07-24-2017 6:36 PM


How do you define the word Evolution? ⇒ Reply

How do you define "evolution" so as to explain your equating it with atheism?

For that matter, how do you define atheism, including how you determine so conclusively whether something is atheistic?

How does Dredge define "evolution" and "atheism"? How does he determine whether something is atheistic? Or satanic as he has done?

How does marc9000 define "evolution" and "atheism"?

The real issue is not how we normals define evolution, nor your stupid creationist definition games. Rather the real issue is how creationists define evolution as they misrepresent it in their dishonest attempts to discredit it. Especially in Dredge's and marc9000's posts, whenever they mention "evolution" they are obviously talking about something far greater and completely different from actual evolution. But a great part of their deliberate creationist deception requires that they generate confusion by never divulging what they are actually talking about.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 931 by CRR, posted 07-24-2017 6:36 PM CRR has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13473
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 934 of 936 (815851)
07-25-2017 11:56 AM
Reply to: Message 931 by CRR
07-24-2017 6:36 PM


CRR writes:

How do you define the word Evolution? Reply


How do you define "internal combustion engine"? Can you do it without mentioning God? If you don't mention God, does that make you an atheist?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 931 by CRR, posted 07-24-2017 6:36 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 537
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 935 of 936 (815963)
07-27-2017 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 932 by RAZD
07-24-2017 9:39 PM


Re: Evolution is ...
RAZD writes:

(1) The process of evolution involves changes in the composition of hereditary traits, and changes to the frequency of their distributions within breeding populations from generation to generation, in response to ecological challenges and opportunities for growth, development, survival and reproductive success in changing or different habitats.


I quite like this as a definition of the word evolution. A bit wordy but adequate. It does however miss neutral theory so I would prefer

[Biological] evolution is heritable change in a population over time.

This is for the Word evolution as opposed to the Theory of Evolution


This message is a reply to:
 Message 932 by RAZD, posted 07-24-2017 9:39 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 936 by RAZD, posted 07-27-2017 12:23 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18867
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 936 of 936 (815986)
07-27-2017 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 935 by CRR
07-27-2017 3:55 AM


Re: Evolution is ... neutral is neutral until ...?
... It does however miss neutral theory so I would prefer

Curiously I don't see it being excluded ...

quote:
The neutral theory of molecular evolution holds that at the molecular level most evolutionary changes and most of the variation within and between species is not caused by natural selection but by genetic drift of mutant alleles that are neutral. A neutral mutation is one that does not affect an organism's ability to survive and reproduce. The neutral theory allows for the possibility that most mutations are deleterious, but holds that because these are rapidly removed by natural selection, they do not make significant contributions to variation within and between species at the molecular level. Mutations that are not deleterious are assumed to be mostly neutral rather than beneficial. In addition to assuming the primacy of neutral mutations, the theory also assumes that the fate of neutral mutations is determined by the sampling processes described by specific models of random genetic drift.[1]

Surviving a stochastic catastrophe does not depend on fitness so much as luck, and I see that falling under challenge to the breeding population, and an opportunity for the survivors for growth, development, survival and reproductive success in changing or different habitats. It also changes the frequency of hereditary trait distribution.

quote:
The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography (here "Unified Theory" or "UNTB") is a hypothesis and the title of a monograph by ecologist Stephen Hubbell.[1] The hypothesis aims to explain the diversity and relative abundance of species in ecological communities, although like other neutral theories of ecology, Hubbell's hypothesis assumes that the differences between members of an ecological community of trophically similar species are "neutral," or irrelevant to their success. This implies that biodiversity arises at random, as each species follows a random walk.[2] The hypothesis has sparked controversy,[3][4][5] and some authors consider it a more complex version of other null models that fit the data better.[6]

Examples would be hair and eye color variations, when not subject to sexual selection or survival fitness, as they could propagate randomly in the breeding population ... ie they are selection neutral.

What I see neutral genetic mutations and selection neutral phenotype traits contributing, is a reserve of increased diversity within the population so that it has a ready arsenal should selection suddenly become an issue, and it also provides a "scaffold/structure" for further mutation, trait alteration, that could be beneficial but that couldn't occur on its own. An example is the e.coli citrate experiment, where the first mutation is neutral, but without it the second one doesn't happen.

A neutral mutation or trait is neutral until it becomes incorporated into a useful or deleterious mutation\trait, and that can depend on ecological and climate changes.

[Biological] evolution is heritable change in a population over time.

While very simple and direct, I find this --and the standard "change in the frequency of alleles" definition -- fail to incorporate the contribution and effect of the ecological habitat, it's at too molecular level for me.

Take an organism and clone it and put them in different habitats and they will evolve differently because the ecological effect will be different. This is how you get branching lineages of descent.

So you could say that my definition is more of an ecological definition of (the word) evolution.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 935 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 3:55 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
5859606162
63
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017