Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
68 online now:
dwise1, kjsimons, Tangle, Tanypteryx (4 members, 64 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,157 Year: 4,269/6,534 Month: 483/900 Week: 7/182 Day: 7/28 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution - recent examples?
RRoman
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 39 (120952)
07-01-2004 7:23 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by coffee_addict
07-01-2004 5:39 PM


Depression
quote:
To the creationists, those little creatures are the same thing as all other microscopic organisms. This is the reason why I have been depressed for the last 3 weeks or so, knowing that there are people that chose to go down the path of ignorance rather than the path of enlightenment.

Same here. It's very saddening that there are people out there like these, or people who believe that the earth is the center of the solar system


"Knowledge is Power" - Francis Bacon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by coffee_addict, posted 07-01-2004 5:39 PM coffee_addict has taken no action

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 15 days)
Posts: 3642
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 32 of 39 (120967)
07-01-2004 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Loudmouth
07-01-2004 5:51 PM


Re: Thanks
True. Sometimes I wish I could ship them all off to some desolate island or planet somewhere where they can preach their ignorance all they want.

Loudmouth writes:

I am relieved that creationists make up such a small minority of practicing scientists.


Unfortunately, I once saw a survey that says that about 70 percent of Americans believe in creationism. Don't know if that is accurate, but I believe it since this country is rediculously religious and conservative.


The Laminator


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Loudmouth, posted 07-01-2004 5:51 PM Loudmouth has taken no action

  
mitigo
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 39 (169851)
12-19-2004 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by coffee_addict
06-24-2004 10:58 PM


Lam, how do we know the tetraploidy rat (Tympanoctomys barrerae) recently arose, as claimed:
quote:

Some believe that the rat came about because of an error in meiosis during reproduction of a normal rat probably 2 decades ago or so.

One of your other references concerning the Tympanoctomys barrerae:

quote:
And finally, I have pointed out that studies have been done on the tetraploidy rat and they've shown that the species only came about the last few decades or so

http://www.kluweronline.com/article.asp?PIPS=302144&PDF=1

"It is notable that, based respectively on the slower or faster rates, the tetraploid Tympanoctomys barrerae must have diverged from its sister-taxon Octomys mimax [sim]10 or 6.5 myr ago."

Yes, we recently found a tetraploid mammal, but that dosen't mean it "recently" arose.

This message has been edited by mitigo, 12-19-2004 03:52 AM

This message has been edited by mitigo, 12-19-2004 04:00 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by coffee_addict, posted 06-24-2004 10:58 PM coffee_addict has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by coffee_addict, posted 12-31-2004 2:02 AM mitigo has taken no action

  
Cicada
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 39 (170286)
12-20-2004 8:45 PM


The Creationist bashing at the end of this topic is hilarious, I can't believe you've all beeen made so depressed by it.

One of the greatest things about the "theory of evolution" is that its arguments have evolved considerably thanks to the pressure of the creationists. If the creationists didn't work as such a great force in debugging our arguments (predating it), evolution would not have evolved so fast into such an air-tight argument.

This message has been edited by Cicada, 12-20-2004 09:11 PM


Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Quetzal, posted 12-20-2004 9:12 PM Cicada has taken no action
 Message 36 by NosyNed, posted 12-20-2004 9:58 PM Cicada has taken no action
 Message 37 by crashfrog, posted 12-20-2004 11:49 PM Cicada has taken no action

  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5106 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002


Message 35 of 39 (170292)
12-20-2004 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Cicada
12-20-2004 8:45 PM


Hee hee. Something about this post just tickled me. I never thought of it that way. I suppose that explains why Darwin dinked around for 20 years before Wallace's imminent publication forced him to publish his theory. The creos have been bashing away at it ever since.

OTOH, you might have a hard time showing how the great advances in evolutionary theory by the likes of Wright, Fisher, Dobzhansky, Mayr, Wilson, MacArthur, Gould, Eldredge, Lewontin, or even Margulis etc etc were pushed or prodded in any way by creationists. Don't they collectively serve more as brakes than accelerators?

edited to add: Oh, and by the way, welcome to the forum!

This message has been edited by Quetzal, 12-20-2004 09:13 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Cicada, posted 12-20-2004 8:45 PM Cicada has taken no action

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8968
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 36 of 39 (170297)
12-20-2004 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Cicada
12-20-2004 8:45 PM


Creationist pushing...
Wouldn't it be nice if they actually critised the theory in any way that helped?

Do you think you could find one example of this?

It seems to me that they simply shoot at strawmen and their own false ideas of what it is about. At best we could say that they help force researchers to make things clearer to the GUM (great unwashed masses) but I'd be very surprised if there are 3 cases in a century of them actually helping them advance the science.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Cicada, posted 12-20-2004 8:45 PM Cicada has taken no action

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 700 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 37 of 39 (170315)
12-20-2004 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Cicada
12-20-2004 8:45 PM


One of the greatest things about the "theory of evolution" is that its arguments have evolved considerably thanks to the pressure of the creationists.

The scientific arguments haven't changed; not really.

What has improved as a result of creationist opposition have been the arguments we use in these casual debates. Which really makes sense, since creationist arguments are generally so impotent that they never draw the attention of the scientific community.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Cicada, posted 12-20-2004 8:45 PM Cicada has taken no action

  
Steen
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 39 (172444)
12-31-2004 12:27 AM


More examples
The nylon bacteria is a great example (linked earlier). It digests only nylon, a compound that didn't exist 100 years ago:
http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm

And this link at the bottom of that page, leading to "Examples of Beneficial Mutations and Natural Selection"
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoMutations.html

And then, there are lifeforms in extreme environments:
http://www.astrobiology.com/extreme.html


  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 15 days)
Posts: 3642
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 39 of 39 (172459)
12-31-2004 2:02 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by mitigo
12-19-2004 3:51 AM


mitigo writes:

Lam, how do we know the tetraploidy rat (Tympanoctomys barrerae) recently arose, as claimed:


I wrote that a long time ago and can't remember where I read it from or what's presented in it. At this point, I really don't feel like going around fishing for it again. If it makes you happy, consider that statement by me retracted :) Your question is about a year too late.

This message has been edited by Lam, 12-31-2004 02:03 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by mitigo, posted 12-19-2004 3:51 AM mitigo has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022