Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8796 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-22-2017 3:09 PM
346 online now:
dwise1, Faith, halibut, PaulK, RAZD, ringo (6 members, 340 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: willietern
Happy Birthday: Flyer75
Post Volume:
Total: 821,049 Year: 25,655/21,208 Month: 1,282/2,338 Week: 39/364 Day: 39/57 Hour: 1/6

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2526
27
282930Next
Author Topic:   Evidence for Evolution: Whale evolution
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15962
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 391 of 443 (804648)
04-11-2017 9:49 PM
Reply to: Message 390 by Dredge
04-11-2017 9:17 PM


The only reason I got into this non-discussion with you is because I was bored. It's pointless and off-topic.

It relates to your absurd delusions as to what constitutes "true science". But feel free to be wrong about whale evolution instead: I am sure your ignorance has many facets.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by Dredge, posted 04-11-2017 9:17 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5104
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 392 of 443 (804655)
04-11-2017 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 382 by Dredge
04-11-2017 6:57 PM


Dredge writes:

I asked you for an example of how the belief (or the theory or the fact) that all life evolved from a single-cell organism has "enormous scientific value" and you can't give me even one!

Give you one what? Your demand is absurd.

Do you make the same demand of those that searched for decades for the Higgs boson? Are quarks and new life forms in undersea hot vents not worth discovering? Why are you so concerned about evolution out of all of the natural sciences? Why does it matter so much to you that biology has made this discovery? Why are you not complaining about the recent discovery that memories are duplicated not stored in short term then moved to long term storage in different parts of the brain. Why just this particular bit of science.

Is it simply because it disturbs your personal belief?

Knowledge has it's own value. Knowledge displaces ignorance. We once thought that life was immutable, put in place as we see it now whole and unchangeable. Now we know that to be false. Life is capable of change - species evolve. That's knowledge. That's science. That's information we didn't have. That's worth having simply because it's true. It advances knowledge. In the end mankind is the sum of it's knowledge. We are named Homo sapiens for a reason and the reason is that we reason.

For your bumper sticker, 'reason is what we do'. Well, some of us at least.

Knowing how the world works has to be one of the most important pieces of knowledge mankind can have.

Now shut the fuck up or prove it wrong.

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


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 382 by Dredge, posted 04-11-2017 6:57 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 401 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 7:47 PM Tangle has responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 393 of 443 (804771)
04-13-2017 2:04 AM
Reply to: Message 376 by Tanypteryx
04-10-2017 9:59 PM


Tanypteryx: "You do talk funny."

Ur rite, eye shouda saided  "chose" insteda "choose", or maybee evin "cheese'.

 -----------------------------------

Thanks for the spiel.  If the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism has no practical use, can you tell me why so many people spend so much of their time and effort studying it, why so much emphasis is placed on it, why it is dogmatically rammed down the throat of anyone who wants to study science?  

Since ToE is useless, by not believing in it I am missing out on exactly nothing. One man's treasure is another man's trash.  If space-cadet biology interests you, fine, but please stop claiming it's factual.  I much prefer real biology.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 376 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-10-2017 9:59 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 403 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-13-2017 10:20 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 394 of 443 (804772)
04-13-2017 2:10 AM
Reply to: Message 378 by Percy
04-11-2017 7:45 AM


Thanks for your "walking" analogy.  But I see micro- and macro-evolution like more like this:  
Micro' is observing that human beings are running the 100 meter sprint faster and faster.
Macro' is concluding from the evidence that humans are running the 100 meter sprint faster and faster that humans will keep running faster and faster, until the world record will be less than one second.

The fact of the matter is, the evidence that humans are running the 100 meter sprint faster and faster cannot be used to make any prediction at all about how fast humans will run in the future. The evidence cannot even be used to predict that the current world record will one day be broken, let alone that it will one day be less than one second.

In the same way, the evidence that small changes are observed in organisms cannot be used to predict with certainty that massive changes are possible and inevitable. 

-------------------------------

Ah, the fossil record ... unfortunately most of us have to depend on the opinions of evolution-obsessed paleontologists, as most of us don"t have Ph.d's in paleontology and spent decades studying fossils for ourselves.  This is on top of the fact that paleontology is hardly an exact science and its numerous grey areas allow plenty of room for story telling.

Pierre-P. Grasse: "Assuming that the Darwinian hypothesis (is true, paleontologists then) interpret fossil data according to it .... The error in their method is obvious."


This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by Percy, posted 04-11-2017 7:45 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-13-2017 2:12 AM Dredge has not yet responded
 Message 398 by Percy, posted 04-13-2017 8:20 AM Dredge has responded
 Message 399 by jar, posted 04-13-2017 8:42 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15962
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


Message 395 of 443 (804773)
04-13-2017 2:12 AM
Reply to: Message 394 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:10 AM


But I see micro- and macro-evolution like more like this:

Then you are completely wrong and should stop.

But were you not the one sternly reminding us of the topic? Try being completely wrong about whales.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:10 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 396 of 443 (804779)
04-13-2017 2:27 AM
Reply to: Message 384 by Dr Adequate
04-11-2017 8:10 PM


Actually, I was hoping you could help Tangle out and give me an example of how the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism has "enormous scientific value".
This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-11-2017 8:10 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 397 by Percy, posted 04-13-2017 8:08 AM Dredge has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16036
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 397 of 443 (804791)
04-13-2017 8:08 AM
Reply to: Message 396 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:27 AM


Dredge writes:

Actually, I was hoping you could help Tangle out and give me an example of how the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism has "enormous scientific value".

Evolution is the central organizing principle of biology.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 396 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:27 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 7:37 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16036
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 398 of 443 (804794)
04-13-2017 8:20 AM
Reply to: Message 394 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:10 AM


Dredge writes:

Thanks for your "walking" analogy. But I see micro- and macro-evolution like more like this:
Micro' is observing that human beings are running the 100 meter sprint faster and faster.
Macro' is concluding from the evidence that humans are running the 100 meter sprint faster and faster that humans will keep running faster and faster, until the world record will be less than one second.

Whether this is observation or analogy, it fails. No one in biology views microevolution and macroevolution in anything like this way. Microevolution is a evolution that occurs over a few numbers of generations, while macroevolution is evolution that occurs over a great many generations. There is no limit on evolutionary change, just as there is no limit on walking. One can walk to the end of the street or to the other end of the country, it's all just walking. In the same way, evolution can make a bird have a slightly larger beak, or, over a much longer time period, it can turn a weasel-like creature into a whale.

In the same way, the evidence that small changes are observed in organisms cannot be used to predict with certainty that massive changes are possible and inevitable.

The observation of small changes over small numbers of generations leads directly to the conclusion of large changes over larger numbers of generations. Experiments with short-generation organisms like bacteria prove this is true.
This inevitable accumulation of changes is consistent with the history of change seen in the fossil record, where similar forms follow one after another for millennia, but where the oldest is frequently very different from the youngest.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:10 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 405 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 8:32 PM Percy has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29468
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 399 of 443 (804795)
04-13-2017 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 394 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:10 AM


on evidence
Dredge writes:

In the same way, the evidence that small changes are observed in organisms cannot be used to predict with certainty that massive changes are possible and inevitable.

However the evidence that there have been massive changes in the past is adequate support that massive changes are possible.

No one says massive change is inevitable. In fact there is evidence that if the selective pressures remain the same massive changes may not be seen.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:10 AM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 400 of 443 (804868)
04-13-2017 7:37 PM
Reply to: Message 397 by Percy
04-13-2017 8:08 AM


Percy: "Evolution is the central organising principle of biology".

Firstly, you haven't supplied what I asked for, which is an example of how the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell orgaism is useful. A theory, per se, is not a use, it's just ink on paper.

Secondly, you are wrong: Evolution is not the central organising principle of biology. Evolution is the central organising principle of evolutionary biology, which is a different thing. Biology is more than ToE - a lot more.

Biology doesn't need ToE; rather, biology needs only certain components of ToE. The component of ToE that says all life evolved from a single-cell organism has no applied use in biology; it's an irrelevance and just hot air. Remove ToE from biology and the usefulness of biology won't even notice the diiference; it will progress perfectly unaffected.

Edited by Dredge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by Percy, posted 04-13-2017 8:08 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 402 by Coyote, posted 04-13-2017 9:54 PM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 401 of 443 (804869)
04-13-2017 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Tangle
04-11-2017 10:58 PM


Tangle: "Your demand is absurd."

You're wrong; it's not the least bit absurd.  It's a perfectly reasonable question.

 I asked you to give me an example of how the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism is useful, but all I get from you in response is repetitious and vacuous rhetoric about "enormous scientific value".  You huff and puff and bluff, but you can't give me even one example!  

Don't know about you, but I reckon that's pretty damned funny (but is it as funny as the whale tale?  Yes, I think it is!!)

The truth of the matter is - and sorry to shatter your illusion - you could take take ToE and flush it down the toilet and its absence wouldn't make a scrap of difference to anything tangible and useful in the real world.  Even what is normally flushed down toilets is more useful than that!  
The only place ToE is useful is in the deluded minds of atheists like you.

Only parts of ToE are useful - natural selection, for example, because natural selection is true.  The part of ToE that is useless is the part that says all life evolved from a single-cell organism, so this is the part that is suspect and may be false.  

------------------------------------------------------------------
"This theory (evolution) has helped nothing in the progress of science.  It is useless".

-  (the late) Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, 
later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Tangle: "Now shut the fuck up or prove it wrong."  

It seems to me that you are getting a tad uptight ... and over what? a theory that is useless and amounts to nothing more that biology for space cadets.  How strange.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by Tangle, posted 04-11-2017 10:58 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 404 by Tangle, posted 04-14-2017 4:59 AM Dredge has responded

    
Coyote
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 01-12-2008
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 402 of 443 (804887)
04-13-2017 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 400 by Dredge
04-13-2017 7:37 PM


A theory, per se, is not a use, it's just ink on paper.

A theory in science is the single best explanation for a given set of facts.

As Heinlein noted,

Piling up facts is not science--science is facts-and-theories. Facts alone have limited use and lack meaning: a valid theory organizes them into far greater usefulness. To be valid a theory must be confirmed by all relevant facts.

I suggest that organizing and explaining a large set of facts is useful, even if the results are not what you agree with.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein

In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool

It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers

If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle

If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1

"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 7:37 PM Dredge has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1586
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 403 of 443 (804889)
04-13-2017 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 393 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:04 AM


If the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism has no practical use,

I think the most practical use is watching you get your panties in a bunch about something that you imagine is true.

can you tell me why so many people spend so much of their time and effort studying it, why so much emphasis is placed on it, why it is dogmatically rammed down the throat of anyone who wants to study science?

I think you are mistaken about what they are studying. It is just your delusion that evolutionary theory is dogmatically forced on anyone.

The study of biology is the study of evolution.

Since ToE is useless, by not believing in it I am missing out on exactly nothing.

OK, then, but I have to wonder why you bother putting so much effort ranting about something you consider useless.

If space-cadet biology interests you, fine, but please stop claiming it's factual.

I don't know what "space-cadet biology" is, but assume you meant it to be insulting of anyone who has interests different than yours.

I much prefer real biology.

Well, one of the facts of real biology is that ignorance can be corrected by education, but stupidity can only be corrected by natural selection.


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 393 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:04 AM Dredge has not yet responded

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5104
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 404 of 443 (804923)
04-14-2017 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 401 by Dredge
04-13-2017 7:47 PM


Dredge writes:

I asked you to give me an example of how the belief/theory/"fact" that all life evolved from a single-cell organism is useful, but all I get from you in response is repetitious and vacuous rhetoric about "enormous scientific value". You huff and puff and bluff, but you can't give me even one example!

Repeat....

Message 163 of 179 (804865)
Thursday, 13-04-2017 9:56 PM Reply to: Message 150 by Dredge
Thursday, 13-04-2017 8:02 AM
Re: Evolutions have discovered no new laws.. NONE

This is a dozen years old now but maybe it'll stop you talking anymore nonsense on this particular issue. i draw your attention to point 9 in particular.
quote:
Claim CA215:
The theory of evolution is useless, without practical application.
Response:

1.Evolutionary theory is the framework tying together all of biology. It explains similarities and differences between organisms, fossils, biogeography, drug resistance, extreme features such as the peacock's tail, relative virulence of parasites, and much more besides. Without the theory of evolution, it would still be possible to know much about biology, but not to understand it.

This explanatory framework is useful in a practical sense. First, a unified theory is easier to learn, because the facts connect together rather than being so many isolated bits of trivia. Second, having a theory makes it possible to see gaps in the theory, suggesting productive areas for new research.

2.Evolutionary theory has been put to practical use in several areas (Futuyma 1995; Bull and Wichman 2001). For example:
Bioinformatics, a multi-billion-dollar industry, consists largely of the comparison of genetic sequences. Descent with modification is one of its most basic assumptions.
Diseases and pests evolve resistance to the drugs and pesticides we use against them. Evolutionary theory is used in the field of resistance management in both medicine and agriculture (Bull and Wichman 2001).
Evolutionary theory is used to manage fisheries for greater yields (Conover and Munch 2002).
Artificial selection has been used since prehistory, but it has become much more efficient with the addition of quantitative trait locus mapping.
Knowledge of the evolution of parasite virulence in human populations can help guide public health policy (Galvani 2003).
Sex allocation theory, based on evolution theory, was used to predict conditions under which the highly endangered kakapo bird would produce more female offspring, which retrieved it from the brink of extinction (Sutherland 2002).

Evolutionary theory is being applied to and has potential applications in may other areas, from evaluating the threats of genetically modified crops to human psychology. Additional applications are sure to come.

3.Phylogenetic analysis, which uses the evolutionary principle of common descent, has proven its usefulness:
Tracing genes of known function and comparing how they are related to unknown genes helps one to predict unknown gene function, which is foundational for drug discovery (Branca 2002; Eisen and Wu 2002; Searls 2003).
Phylogenetic analysis is a standard part of epidemiology, since it allows the identification of disease reservoirs and sometimes the tracking of step-by-step transmission of disease. For example, phylogenetic analysis confirmed that a Florida dentist was infecting his patients with HIV, that HIV-1 and HIV-2 were transmitted to humans from chimpanzees and mangabey monkeys in the twentieth century, and, when polio was being eradicated from the Americas, that new cases were not coming from hidden reservoirs (Bull and Wichman 2001). It was used in 2002 to help convict a man of intentionally infecting someone with HIV (Vogel 1998). The same principle can be used to trace the source of bioweapons (Cummings and Relman 2002).
Phylogenetic analysis to track the diversity of a pathogen can be used to select an appropriate vaccine for a particular region (Gaschen et al. 2002).
Ribotyping is a technique for identifying an organism or at least finding its closest known relative by mapping its ribosomal RNA onto the tree of life. It can be used even when the organisms cannot be cultured or recognized by other methods. Ribotyping and other genotyping methods have been used to find previously unknown infectious agents of human disease (Bull and Wichman 2001; Relman 1999).
Phylogenetic analysis helps in determining protein folds, since proteins diverging from a common ancestor tend to conserve their folds (Benner 2001).

4.Directed evolution allows the "breeding" of molecules or molecular pathways to create or enhance products, including:
enzymes (Arnold 2001)
pigments (Arnold 2001)
antibiotics
flavors
biopolymers
bacterial strains to decompose hazardous materials.
Directed evolution can also be used to study the folding and function of natural enzymes (Taylor et al. 2001).

5.The evolutionary principles of natural selection, variation, and recombination are the basis for genetic algorithms, an engineering technique that has many practical applications, including aerospace engineering, architecture, astrophysics, data mining, drug discovery and design, electrical engineering, finance, geophysics, materials engineering, military strategy, pattern recognition, robotics, scheduling, and systems engineering (Marczyk 2004).

6. Tools developed for evolutionary science have been put to other uses. For example:
Many statistical techniques, including analysis of variance and linear regression, were developed by evolutionary biologists, especially Ronald Fisher and Karl Pearson. These statistical techniques have much wider application today.
The same techniques of phylogenetic analysis developed for biology can also trace the history of multiple copies of a manuscript (Barbrook et al. 1998; Howe et al. 2001) and the history of languages (Dunn et al. 2005).

7. Good science need not have any application beyond satisfying curiosity. Much of astronomy, geology, paleontology, natural history, and other sciences have no practical application. For many people, knowledge is a worthy end in itself.

8. Science with little or no application now may find application in the future, especially as the field matures and our knowledge of it becomes more complete. Practical applications are often built upon ideas that did not look applicable originally. Furthermore, advances in one area of science can help illuminate other areas. Evolution provides a framework for biology, a framework which can support other useful biological advances.

9. Anti-evolutionary ideas have been around for millennia and have not yet contributed anything with any practical application.

A few posts ago you also claimed that beneficial mutations are impossible. I gave you the recent example of the Peppered Moth's beneficial gene mutation. Are you now content?


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 401 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 7:47 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 8:34 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 599
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 405 of 443 (804974)
04-14-2017 8:32 PM
Reply to: Message 398 by Percy
04-13-2017 8:20 AM


Contrary to your claim, experiments with short-generation organisms such as bacteria have not proved that large changes over many generations are possible.  This is a ridiculous Darwinist extrapolation that has no basis in fact - just like the rest of your post.  
This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by Percy, posted 04-13-2017 8:20 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Percy, posted 04-15-2017 7:52 AM Dredge has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2526
27
282930Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017