Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Darwin- would he have changed his theory?
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 31 of 195 (151548)
10-21-2004 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 8:44 AM


And, more recently, many ancient civilizations are being discovered which account for both the "myths" of Atlantis and Noah's flood.
As the idea of the flood has been destroyed more times that I can remember on this board - if you have something new to add - please let us know what it is.
Can you name those ancient civilizations? If there is enought "meat" we could start a seperate thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 8:44 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:00 AM CK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 32 of 195 (151550)
10-21-2004 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 8:44 AM


quote:
This is untrue, to my knowledge........before Pasteur (who post-dated Darwin's theory, by a bit), it wasn't even known that there WAS microscopic life...
Presumably you mean before Anton Van Leeuwenhoek who died before Darwin was even born ?
Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, Father of Microbiology
Anton Van Leeuwenhoek was the first to see and describe bacteria (1674), yeast plants, the teeming life in a drop of water, and the circulation of blood corpuscles in capillaries

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 8:44 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:02 AM PaulK has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 195 (151551)
10-21-2004 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Loudmouth
06-30-2004 12:57 AM


Darwin did deal with macroscopic complex systems, namely the mammalian eye. He was amazed at the complexity of the organ, but he found that every step of eye evolution was present in living organisms, starting with a photosensitive spot right up to a lensed eye with a retina. He felt that evolution does address complexity, and explains it well in that evolution would add layers to already existing systems, therefore building up complexity over time.
I could see a flukishly complex organ evolving once or twice, but 35 seperate times, as is the number which I've heard quoted? A similar deal with limbs as well.
Not to say that this invalidates Darwin's theory, but it certainly makes it more difficult.........because irreducibly compex systems can't be accounted for entirely by natural selection......it would have to be largely on luck that they evolved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Loudmouth, posted 06-30-2004 12:57 AM Loudmouth has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 195 (151554)
10-21-2004 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by CK
10-21-2004 8:49 AM


As the idea of the flood has been destroyed more times that I can remember on this board - if you have something new to add - please let us know what it is.
The melting of the glaciers at the end of the ice age caused world wide flooding. Some recent discoveries lead some (non-theistic) people to believe that the world's first civilzations existed at that time.
I'll elaborate in a bit, if you like.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by CK, posted 10-21-2004 8:49 AM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by CK, posted 10-21-2004 9:06 AM SirPimpsalot has replied
 Message 67 by AdminNosy, posted 10-21-2004 11:02 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 195 (151555)
10-21-2004 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by PaulK
10-21-2004 8:54 AM


PaulK, I've always been taught that it was Pasteur that had discovered microscopic life, and that the idea of spontaneous generation was common place in Darwin's time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 8:54 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:12 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
CK
Member (Idle past 4127 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 36 of 195 (151556)
10-21-2004 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:00 AM


quote:
The melting of the glaciers at the end of the ice age caused world wide flooding. Some recent discoveries lead some (non-theistic) people to believe that the world's first civilzations existed at that time.
I'll elaborate in a bit, if you like.
please do - if you could point me towards the scientific journals in which this research is reported I would be very interested.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:00 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:15 AM CK has not replied
 Message 41 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:20 AM CK has not replied
 Message 68 by AdminNosy, posted 10-21-2004 11:03 AM CK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 37 of 195 (151557)
10-21-2004 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:02 AM


Well if you were taught that microscopic life was first discovered by Pasteur you were taught incorrectly. The material I quoted is not even obscure knowledge - we are after all talking about the man famous as the inventor of the microscope.
Pasteur's discovery was that microscopic life was the CAUSE of decay and not, as some believed, a product of it. I hope you can understand that the very existence of such a controversy requires the knowledge of microscopic life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:02 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:17 AM PaulK has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 195 (151559)
10-21-2004 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by CK
10-21-2004 9:06 AM


I saw documentaries on them on the Science Channel........I'd have to imagine there's stuff online about it too though. There are speculations that the Jamon people, who were the ancestors of the Japanese, were actually civilized themselves. There's also believed to be an under-water city built in what was once the Indus valley.......but then was later flooded during the glacial melting.
But most convincing of all are the accounts of a man who believes that Atlantis was actually an ancient Meso-American civilization.......that guy had a TON of proof for his claim, such as the fact that it's geographically west of Greece (as Plato claimed), that the Alto-Plano area of South America is the only area in tyhe world that matches Plato's description of Atlantis' geography, Plato names orichalcon (a natural ore of part gold and part copper) as being mined in Atlantis, and the Alto-Plano region is the only area in the world where orichalcon is found, anthropological proof that the boats the Meso-Americans had at the time could have traversed the Atlantis, etc., etc. I'm suprised his theory is even still in debate which as much evidence seems to match up with it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by CK, posted 10-21-2004 9:06 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Mammuthus, posted 10-21-2004 9:35 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 195 (151561)
10-21-2004 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by PaulK
10-21-2004 9:12 AM


PaulK, still, spontaneous generation of life was an assumed fact in Darwin's day, and the level of complexity of microbes was not known.......two points which hurt his theory even today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:12 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:20 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied
 Message 43 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:32 AM SirPimpsalot has replied
 Message 45 by Dr Jack, posted 10-21-2004 9:36 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 195 (151562)
10-21-2004 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:17 AM


Oh, and Charles, the Black Sea was a lake with inhabitants that lived by it before the glacial meltings.......I'm frankly suprised that the idea of glacial meltings being the world wide flood spoken of Biblically hasn't been proposed before, as it's a universally accepted instance of world wide flooding which could have at least been handed down in oral tradition.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:17 AM SirPimpsalot has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 41 of 195 (151563)
10-21-2004 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by CK
10-21-2004 9:06 AM


Actually I recognise this, it's Graham Hancock's latest.
I am afraid that the best that can be said of it is that it is less nutty than the earlier ideas he has put forward.
That there were inhabited areas that were flooded by the end of the Ice Age is well known. That Hancock's civilisation existed there is almost certainly false.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by CK, posted 10-21-2004 9:06 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:23 AM PaulK has replied

  
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 195 (151564)
10-21-2004 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by PaulK
10-21-2004 9:20 AM


Which one's Hancock, the Jamon and Indus Valley guy (who had some interesting, but not overwhelming evidence for his claims) or the Atlantis guy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:20 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by PaulK, posted 10-21-2004 9:37 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 43 of 195 (151565)
10-21-2004 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:17 AM


Darwin's theory speaks against spontaneous generation. It is directly against the older versions which had even mice coming into existence, and even against insects (the latter was disproven by Redi in 1668). Even the idea finally laid to rest by Pasteur had been challenged by Spallanzani in 1799. Nor did Darwin rely on the ideas of spontaneous generation disproven by Pasteur.
Just a moment...
Indeed, Pasteur's discovery did not hurt Darwin's ideas at all - it supported them. Common descent relies on life originating on no more than a few occasions - spontaneous generation strongly denies that. It is creationists who propose numerous seperate origins of life, not evolutionary scientists.
As for the complexity issue that, too does not hurt Darwin's theory significantly. After all, Darwin's theory deals with how life changes over time - not with how the first life came to be. Knowing the complexity of bacteria might have made the view that God created the first simple life appear more plausible at the time - but Darwin did not try to argue against that in On The Origin of Species

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:17 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:39 AM PaulK has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 44 of 195 (151567)
10-21-2004 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:15 AM


quote:
But most convincing of all are the accounts of a man who believes that Atlantis was actually an ancient Meso-American civilization.......that guy had a TON of proof for his claim,
That would be news to the people who study the Greek island of Santorin otherwise known as Thira where the ancient ruins of Akrotiri are. That was supposed to be Atlantis, an active NON-MESO AMERICAN culture, which was destroyed by a tsunami...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:15 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:37 AM Mammuthus has replied

  
Dr Jack
Member
Posts: 3514
From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch
Joined: 07-14-2003
Member Rating: 8.7


Message 45 of 195 (151568)
10-21-2004 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by SirPimpsalot
10-21-2004 9:17 AM


How exactly do you think the complexity of microrganisms hurts Darwin's theory? I believe the nature of complexity found in them strongly supports his theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:17 AM SirPimpsalot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-21-2004 9:41 AM Dr Jack has replied
 Message 79 by SirPimpsalot, posted 10-22-2004 7:05 AM Dr Jack has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024