Greetings Skeptick,
quote:
Absolutely not the case. The "agreement" that you're talking about is that evolution explains variations. Which brings us back to micro and macro evolution, which few on this forum want to recognize even though evolutionists elsewhere freely admit are reasonable terms.
Yes, variation is part of the ToE - variations arise (e.g. through mutations), then through natural selection beneficial variations increase and detrimemtal variations are weeded out.
Over long periods of time these variations, acted upon by natural selection, lead to new species.
Micro and macro evolution are heavily loaded terms which is why some people try to avoid them. Macro evolution is just micro evolution over longer periods. Unfortunately some people think there is a fundamental difference bettwen the two, which is not correct.
In practice micro-evolution has come to mean evolution that creationists and their ilk can believe in, while macro-evolution has come to mean evolution that they don't believe in.
quote:
A little horse evolving into a big horse is explained by your version of evolution. A frog turning into a human is not.
That is not correct.
My "version of evolution" (i.e. the actual modern ToE) covers the whole gamut from the first living thing up to modern life forms - any textbook will confirm that.
I think what you mean to sat is that YOU don't believe it - which is an entirely different thing.
quote:
It obvious has now been stated, thank you. And it will never explain more than that, to Darwin's frustration.
This statement is so confused (not to mention the faulty grammar and spelling) that its hard to grasp what you mean.
To recap -
Evolution covers how life changed and grew over time - from the first living thing, to modern life. Evolution does NOT cover the very first origins of life, nor did I claim otherwise, not do textbooks or scholars who study evolution.
But, some uninformed people DO think that evolution covers the very first origin of life - a little bit of study should erase that misconception.
Abiogenesis covers how life FIRST started (and it is not as well understood as evolution.)
quote:
But, how do you decide where to start? Identify for me the "origin" of the horse. Then, whatever your answer might be, identify the origin of that. And so on. Do you stop when you get to an amphibian? Of course not, that wouldn't be the ulimate origin.
The evolutionary sequence leading to the modern horse is well understood - although I do not know it by heart myself. With a little bit of study you could follow the evolution of the horse back to very early times.
Your point is not at all clear - of course it is true that not every detail of every species that lead to the horse is known - but the general picture is well known, and many of the recent steps are very well known indeed (e.g. the development of the horses foot from earlier species is well mapped out.)
quote:
But where do you stop? It is unavoidable. The evolution that you're talking about is only part of the big picture.
I am not at all sure what you mean.
There is no "stop". The sequence of evolution of e.g. the horse leads back to the first living thing, even if we do not know EVERY detail of every step.
What is unavoidable? That life started somewhere?
Yes, we know that - this very first origin is referred to as "abiogenesis" although its mechanism is not fully understood yet.
Big picture? What do you mean?
If you want to see the big picture you can follow the evolution of the horse back through many species over billions of years - on this very site I have seen the sequence expressed in some detail.
quote:
You can't discard 1000 pieces from a 5000 piece jigsaw puzzle, then claim that those 1000 pieces aren't part of the puzzle.
What does this mean? Do you mean that we don't know every step of every species' evolution? Yes, that is true - but so what? What exactly are you arguing?
quote:
Abiogensis is the equivalent to spontaneous generation, no matter how much you want to argue terms.
No it isn't - in fact this is basic high-school biology.
Spontaneous generation refers to a primitive theory, long discarded, that argued complex life forms (e.g. maggots) could even now arise spontaneously from dead matter (e.g. rotting meat.)
Abiogenesis covers how the very FIRST, most basic living replicators arose from the primordial soup.
They are not the same thing at all - this statement shows fundamental ignorance of the most basic concepts - I urge you to actually study these subjects to avoid making crude errors like this.
quote:
Are we really willing to stoop that low in this discussion? Had you used the terms archegenesis or archebiosis, you wouldn't have stuck out like such a red flag as you do now. I was starting to think I was debating some knowledgable folks here.
Hmmm...
You show fundamental ignorance of basic concepts and terms, and you accuse me of stooping low? Many of the people on this site are very knowledgeable indeed and spend considerable time and effort educating readers here (thanks guys :-) and you make bizarre attacks like above?
You, sir,
are an uninformed, ignorant, opinionated buffoon.
quote:
I your case, you say evolution to be "one of the greatest success stories in scientific history" but that's nothing more that another proclamation.
Ignorant nonsense, the evidence is overwhelming.
quote:
But since we've shut the door on rational debate, and opened the flood gates for dogmatic proclamations,
Complete and utter rubbish - the level of debate here is quite rational (not counting ignorant fools like you.) Many posters here give considerable detailed information backing up their statements.
You however, proclaim the most childish claptrap without any evidence at all.
quote:
A few of the greatest things that evolution has succeeded in achieving is Hitler's "mein kampf" and the subsequent attempt at Jewish genocide.
Absolute nonsense not supported by any evidence.
quote:
Next is the justification of killing babies before they're born.
Complete and utter rubbish, and nothing to do with evolution.
quote:
And perhaps most brutally, the success of distorting and confusing simple issues to point that countless youths and college kids lost faith in their creator and have been reduced to being content with saying "duh, Idunno where it all started".
Bulldust.
quote:
To declare evolution as something "good" or "great" is like declaring Hitler was a great man because he built the German autobahn. Excuse me while I vomit.
You compare evolution to Hitler?
You are a raving lunatic.
Iasion
™ Version 4.2
