Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8803 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 11-24-2017 3:09 PM
434 online now:
Modulous (AdminModulous), PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (4 members, 430 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 822,948 Year: 27,554/21,208 Month: 1,467/1,714 Week: 310/365 Day: 37/42 Hour: 0/4

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
567Next
Author Topic:   How do you define the Theory of Evolution?
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1836
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 46 of 93 (812997)
06-22-2017 3:53 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by CRR
06-21-2017 10:10 AM


Re: Evolution: The WORD vs the THEORY
CRR writes:

...Darwin took a whole book to discuss his theory and ague his case but many people (e.g. Kerkut, Coyne, Gould, Weintraub) have given definitions of one paragraph or less....

I had a look at what your first source (in the brackets) actually wrote. He never defined the ToE. What he defined were the 'Special Theory of Evolution' and also the 'General Theory of Evolution'. Didn't even bother to check the rest of your sources after you not telling the truth about what your first source actually wrote.

From what Kerkut wrote in 1960.

Kerkut writes:

There is a theory which states that many living animals can be observed over the course of time to undergo changes so that new species are formed. This can be called the ‘Special Theory of Evolution’ and can be demonstrated in certain cases by experiments. On the other hand, there is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the ‘General Theory of Evolution’ and the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis.

His book is free to download. http://webmindset.net/...9/implications-of-the-evolution.pdf. He didn't define the ToE.

And also remember that the book was published in 1960; years before any organism's DNA was fully sequenced (1977) and the first organism's RNA could only fully be sequenced years after that.

Edited by Pressie, : Double "be" in last sentence.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by CRR, posted 06-21-2017 10:10 AM CRR has not yet responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1836
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 47 of 93 (812998)
06-22-2017 4:38 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by CRR
06-21-2017 8:03 AM


Re: Theory of Evolution
CRR writes:

...Note Darwin says "into a few forms or into one"...

And that was waaaaay before the oldest fossils ever, in the forms of Pokaryotes in rocks in SA, WA and Greenland were discovered.

His general deductions were normally spot-on, even though he did make quite a few mistakes in the finer details. Darwin and other contemporaries were brilliant with the limited information they had available.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by CRR, posted 06-21-2017 8:03 AM CRR has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 13889
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 48 of 93 (813058)
06-22-2017 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by CRR
06-13-2017 3:22 AM


Re: Theory of Evolution
CRR writes:

What good is a theory of origin of species that doesn't explain the origin of the first species?


What good is a road map that doesn't show you the end of the road? Of course most road maps don't and yet they continue to be useful.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by CRR, posted 06-13-2017 3:22 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 49 of 93 (813259)
06-25-2017 6:46 AM


ToE
RAZD has posted some interesting references from Universities of Michigan and Berkley on the subject at Message 64.

And see my reply at Message 66

To summarise RAZD's sources;

From Michigan we get
Universal Common Ancestry, “Far enough back in time, any pair of organisms shares a common ancestor.”
Abiogenesis, “Life has evolved from non-life, and complex organisms from simpler forms.” This is an assumption prior to rather part of the process of evolution.
Microevolution, “Definition 1: Changes in the genetic composition of a population with the passage of each generation. … [this] “definition emphasizes genetic change. It commonly is referred to as microevolution.”
Macroevolution, “Definition 2: The gradual change of living things from one form into another over the course of time, the origin of species and lineages by descent of living forms from ancestral forms, and the generation of diversity. … [this] “emphasizes the appearance of new, physically distinct life forms that can be grouped with similar appearing life forms in a taxonomic hierarchy. It commonly is referred to as macroevolution.”

Similarly from Berkley
Universal Common Ancestry, “Through the process of descent with modification, the common ancestor of life on Earth gave rise to the fantastic diversity that we see documented in the fossil record and around us today. Evolution means that we're all distant cousins: humans and oak trees, hummingbirds and whales.”
Abiogenesis, they include as an event in “Important events in the history of life”, “Unicellular life evolves. So according to Berkley and Michigan all life evolved from a common microbial ancestor that arose naturally from non-living matter.
Microevolution, is evolution on a small scale — within a single population. That means narrowing our focus to one branch of the tree of life. Biologists who study evolution at this level define evolution as a change in gene frequency within a population.
Macroevolution, generally refers to evolution above the species level.

So both sources appear to agree with what is included in the theory of evolution.

Edited by CRR, : Summary added


Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-28-2017 10:52 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 50 of 93 (813397)
06-27-2017 7:41 AM


Jerry Coyne's Definition
As a working definition for discussion purposes I would be prepared to accept the one Jerry Coyne gives in his book "Why Evolution is True"

quote:
"Life on earth evolved gradually beginning with one primitive species—perhaps a self-replicating molecule—that lived more than 3.5 billion years ago; it then branched out over time, throwing off many new and diverse species; and the mechanism for most (but not all) of evolutionary change is natural selection." [Jerry Coyne, 2009]

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Pressie, posted 06-27-2017 8:10 AM CRR has responded
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 06-27-2017 11:12 AM CRR has responded
 Message 57 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-28-2017 10:46 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1836
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 51 of 93 (813402)
06-27-2017 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by CRR
06-27-2017 7:41 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
And ignore Kerkut's working definitions? Why?

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 7:41 AM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 9:44 PM Pressie has responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7263
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 52 of 93 (813412)
06-27-2017 11:12 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by CRR
06-27-2017 7:41 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
CRR writes:

As a working definition for discussion purposes I would be prepared to accept the one Jerry Coyne gives in his book "Why Evolution is True"

There isn't a single sentence in existence that covers all of evolution. We are using the theory of evolution which is a complex and broad theory that can't be condensed down into one sentence or one paragraph.

For example, molecular biologists and population geneticists would argue that the mechanism producing the most change in the genome is neutral drift, not natural selection. That's just one criticism of many.

What you really need to ask yourself is why you think such a complex and broad theory should be oversimplified.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 7:41 AM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 9:46 PM Taq has responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 53 of 93 (813471)
06-27-2017 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Pressie
06-27-2017 8:10 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
And ignore Kerkut's working definitions? Why?

Which do you think is better?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Pressie, posted 06-27-2017 8:10 AM Pressie has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Pressie, posted 06-28-2017 4:03 AM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 56 by Pressie, posted 06-28-2017 4:36 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 54 of 93 (813472)
06-27-2017 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Taq
06-27-2017 11:12 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
There isn't a single sentence in existence that covers all of evolution.

How much space do you need? Two paragraphs? Three? Take as much as you think is necessary.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 06-27-2017 11:12 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Taq, posted 06-28-2017 10:47 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1836
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 55 of 93 (813492)
06-28-2017 4:03 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by CRR
06-27-2017 9:44 PM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
No, I'm asking you why you prefer the definition of one person over the definitions of the others. Why?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 9:44 PM CRR has not yet responded

    
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1836
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 56 of 93 (813493)
06-28-2017 4:36 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by CRR
06-27-2017 9:44 PM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
Duplicate post

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 9:44 PM CRR has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15972
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 57 of 93 (813532)
06-28-2017 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by CRR
06-27-2017 7:41 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
As a working definition for discussion purposes I would be prepared to accept the one Jerry Coyne gives in his book "Why Evolution is True"

Can you quote the preceding sentence, please? I want to see if it says: "The following is the definition of the Theory of Evolution" or whether by some whilom chance it says something completely different.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 7:41 AM CRR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by dwise1, posted 06-28-2017 11:24 AM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7263
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 58 of 93 (813533)
06-28-2017 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by CRR
06-27-2017 9:46 PM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
CRR writes:

How much space do you need? Two paragraphs? Three?

You need the entire compilation of peer reviewed work done over the last 150 years on evolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by CRR, posted 06-27-2017 9:46 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15972
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 59 of 93 (813534)
06-28-2017 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by CRR
06-25-2017 6:46 AM


Re: ToE
So both sources appear to agree with what is included in the theory of evolution.

None of those quotations includes the phrase "theory of evolution" and so they cannot conceivably shed any light whatsoever on what the sources think it includes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by CRR, posted 06-25-2017 6:46 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 3002
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 60 of 93 (813535)
06-28-2017 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Dr Adequate
06-28-2017 10:46 AM


Re: Jerry Coyne's Definition
CRR writes:

As a working definition for discussion purposes I would be prepared to accept the one Jerry Coyne gives in his book "Why Evolution is True"

Can you quote the preceding sentence, please? I want to see if it says: "The following is the definition of the Theory of Evolution" or whether by some whilom chance it says something completely different.

Since CRR is on a defining-words tear, you should state your request more carefully.

That should read: "Can you cite the preceding sentence, please?"

Your wording would allow him to dodge by insisting that he had already quoted it, as indeed he had. Instead, what we need is some kind of proper bibliographical citation to tell us where to go to find the original. Just saying that it was in this particular book is of no help, because we would need to do a linear search, potentially through hundreds of pages, to find it. If we ever could find it. In my experience of tracking down creationists' quote-mining, I have sometimes encountered incidents in which the supposed quote did not even exist in the "quoted" article (such a misquoting of George Wald comes immediately to mind).

So, CRR, we need to know which page in "Why Evolution is True" that quote came from. Or at least which chapter, since page numbers can vary from one edition to the next.

Dr. Adequate, did you smell that? It smells like he had lifted that from a creationist source, not from Coyne's book, so he wouldn't have any clue where in that book it's supposed to be from.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-28-2017 10:46 AM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-28-2017 2:46 PM dwise1 has responded

    
Prev123
4
567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017