Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Branchial arches or biomechanical flexion folds?
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 28 of 50 (270082)
12-16-2005 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by randman
12-16-2005 2:48 PM


A challenge
That's because my experience with evo claims is they are usually based on overstatements, hoaxes, and unobserved dogma. Asking for sufficient data should not be considered something loathsome, but merely following some semblance of evidentiary logic.
Randman, could I challenge you to a debate?
I would like to show you that many of your creationist beliefs are based on "overstatements, hoaxes, and unobserved dogma". What do you think? Let me know and I will open a thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 2:48 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 3:17 PM Yaro has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 30 of 50 (270092)
12-16-2005 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by randman
12-16-2005 3:17 PM


Re: A challenge
Then....
If you have nothing to replace the ToE, what's the point of deriding it?
Scientists are simply going by what they see. If you don't agree with it, you have to have more than simply "I don't like these conclusions."
I mean, that's fine, you don't have to like the conclusions, or even agree with them. But do you have anything better to propose?
ABE: IOW, how do YOU explain/interpret the data at hand?
This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-16-2005 03:34 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 3:17 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 3:42 PM Yaro has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 33 of 50 (270152)
12-16-2005 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by randman
12-16-2005 3:42 PM


Re: A challenge
Your question illustrates the fundamental difference between evos and myself. I don't have a need for there to be an explanation. I think it's a worthy pursuit, but an answer of we are still working on the problem is sufficient. Making up false data, overstating claims, and all the rest is not necessary and worse, it is not valid science.
But you are incorrect on 2 counts. First, our current models and theories lead to usefull results. They work.
Second, they aren't based on false data. They are based on the data that there is. As creos. are fond of saying, an interpretation of the data. If our 'interpretation' is currently working, it's gonna take more than attacking it to actually change it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 3:42 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 6:44 PM Yaro has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 35 of 50 (270156)
12-16-2005 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by randman
12-16-2005 6:44 PM


Re: A challenge
All of these theories work in that they explain the evidence at hand and lead to usefull results. We can accuratly make predictions and test hypothesis. We can derive technology, medical advances, and greater understanding from all of these things.
If you don't think biology, medicin, embryology, or any other such area of science is usefull, then fine. Have it your way.
Though I am still astounded at your continual claim of 'dishonesty'. It's funny to me that it seems to all be based on a carefully stacked pack of cards you have created.
150 year old scientific errors.
A handfull of errant textbooks.
And a collection of psudo-science sites.
Whatever.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by randman, posted 12-16-2005 6:44 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by randman, posted 12-17-2005 1:54 AM Yaro has replied

  
Yaro
Member (Idle past 6517 days)
Posts: 1797
Joined: 07-12-2003


Message 38 of 50 (270303)
12-17-2005 10:48 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by randman
12-17-2005 1:54 AM


Re: A challenge
Ya know randman, this post is charactaristic of your view on science. You like to cherry pick mistakes and errors and foreget of all the other things it has given you.
If it weren't for genetics and bioinfomatics we wouldn't know which genes cause certain desieses. If it weren't for the knowledge of ToE and the concept of genetic shift, we wouldn't be able to create flu vaccines (or any vaccines at all).
Page not found
ToE and heredity are intrumental in isolating genetic abnormalities, detecting desieses, and reasearching adequate treatment. Infact, ToE is a major factor in modern genetics, without it genetic makes no sense! Do you think genetics is useless?
But here, have fun: CA215: Practical uses of evolution.
With some key points on 'usefullness' at the end:
quote:
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.
This message has been edited by Yaro, 12-17-2005 10:53 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by randman, posted 12-17-2005 1:54 AM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by AdminWounded, posted 12-17-2005 3:11 PM Yaro has not replied
 Message 42 by pink sasquatch, posted 12-19-2005 3:07 PM Yaro has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024