Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Key points of Evolution
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 31 of 356 (464070)
04-23-2008 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by 1071
04-23-2008 8:40 AM


quote:
you are saying that fossils, geology, cosmology, microbiology, and biology are not key points of evolution... wow
I don't know what's surprising. For a start they're all too wide to be considered "key points".
The term "evolution" is almost always taken to mean biological evolution (as in "Darwin's theory of..."), unless context makes it obvious that that is not intended. On that basis:
Since all of evolution is contained within biology, it is obviously absurd to call "biology" a key point of evolution. Calling evolution a key point of Biology would make more sense (and even then it ought to refer to the basic idea, not the whole theory)
Microbiology is a subset of biology but essentially the same objections apply.
Cosmology really has nothing to do with evolution at all. Or at least no more than it does with absolutely anything else.
Geology doesn't have much to do with evolution either.
Fossils at least relate to evolution, but even then they are evidence rather than a "key point".
Edited by PaulK, : fix typos

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 8:40 AM 1071 has not replied

Vacate
Member (Idle past 4600 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 32 of 356 (464071)
04-23-2008 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by 1071
04-23-2008 6:56 AM


key points?
antiLIE writes:
So they have to involve these other scientific fields {fossils, geology, cosmology, microbiology, paleontology} in order to have evolution.
(examples added from your post)
This is certainly true if you mean that such fields are utilized for the purpose of furthering evidence for evolution. You can also include chemistry, physics, radioactive decay, dynamo theory and/or paleomagnetism, archaeology, and many others to your list. If you assumed for even one second that the Theory of Evolution where true... how would you suggest furthering our knowledge of its history without using any other field of science?
What field does not utilize other fields? I don't mean just science, I mean anything? You aren't seriously suggesting that each and every one of the scientists involved in these fields has, for decades, been completely fabricating all of its data for the sole purpose of providing manipulated support for another fabricated field (evolution)?
What is your point?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 6:56 AM 1071 has not replied

1071
Member (Idle past 5812 days)
Posts: 61
From: AUSTIN, TX, USA
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 33 of 356 (464075)
04-23-2008 9:37 AM


You tell me...
What are the 'keypoints of evolution'?
we have, One Family Tree unites all of life and
Species change through time and place
what else?

Agent antiLIE of the AGDT
7x153=1071 [ VIII:XXIV]
I klinamaksa exei afypnistei

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 34 of 356 (464076)
04-23-2008 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by 1071
04-23-2008 9:00 AM


antiLIE writes:
You saying that evolution is a fact, is the same as myself saying creation is a fact.
Not really. Biological evolution is a phenomenon that can be observed, as I've pointed out to you on another thread. No-one has ever observed Allah or any other supernatural being creating anything.
You seem to want to deceive yourself about this. Why? Surely being "antiLIE" implies a distaste for lying to yourself, as well as to others.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 9:00 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 9:47 AM bluegenes has replied
 Message 36 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-23-2008 9:47 AM bluegenes has replied
 Message 44 by randman, posted 04-23-2008 1:40 PM bluegenes has not replied

1071
Member (Idle past 5812 days)
Posts: 61
From: AUSTIN, TX, USA
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 35 of 356 (464077)
04-23-2008 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by bluegenes
04-23-2008 9:38 AM


blugenes writes:
Biological evolution is a phenomenon that can be observed,
This is decietful. Only Microevolution can be observed. I do not deny that.

Agent antiLIE of the AGDT
7x153=1071 [ VIII:XXIV]
I klinamaksa exei afypnistei

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by bluegenes, posted 04-23-2008 9:38 AM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by molbiogirl, posted 04-23-2008 2:15 PM 1071 has not replied
 Message 48 by bluegenes, posted 04-23-2008 2:31 PM 1071 has not replied

seekingthetruth
Junior Member (Idle past 5815 days)
Posts: 23
From: Austin, Texas
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 36 of 356 (464078)
04-23-2008 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by bluegenes
04-23-2008 9:38 AM


bluegenes writes:
Not really. Biological evolution is a phenomenon that can be observed, as I've pointed out to you on another thread. No-one has ever observed Allah or any other supernatural being creating anything.
You seem to want to deceive yourself about this. Why? Surely being "antiLIE" implies a distaste for lying to yourself, as well as to others.
Just as no one was there to witness the creation of the universe, or the first lifeforms on the planet. Just because soemthing is not witnessed does not mean it is not there. I would cite gravity and oxygen as examples. We cannot see them but we know they are there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by bluegenes, posted 04-23-2008 9:38 AM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by bluegenes, posted 04-23-2008 4:48 PM seekingthetruth has not replied
 Message 55 by platypus, posted 04-23-2008 8:24 PM seekingthetruth has not replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 37 of 356 (464079)
04-23-2008 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by 1071
04-23-2008 8:40 AM


you are saying that fossils, geology, cosmology, microbiology, and biology are not key points of evolution... wow
That is exactly what I'm saying.
PaulK has done a nice job spelling it out for you in Message 31, but, just for the sake of clarity, here are some examples of what I do consider to be some of the key points of the theory of evolution;
  • Evolution is the change in allele frequency within populations of biological organisms over time.
  • Evolution is driven by random mutation and natural selection.
  • Individuals with beneficial characteristics will be more likely to survive and thus more likely to pass on their genes.
  • Through the gradual accumulation of small changes populations eventually diverge and speciation occurs.
  • All life on Earth is descended from one, or at most a few forms of simpler life.
How am I doing so far?
I just like pointing out the flaws of 'my side' of the argument as well. I see creation when I see the evidence. It is all about how it is presented.
Seriously, that's great. I just think that your posts could do with a little more substance that's all. Just taking pot-shots at Darwinism doesn't really amount to an argument.

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 8:40 AM 1071 has not replied

1071
Member (Idle past 5812 days)
Posts: 61
From: AUSTIN, TX, USA
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 38 of 356 (464082)
04-23-2008 10:17 AM


last post on this thread
I just had an epiphany. I shouldn't even be on this thread. This is why; I do not even agree that evolution is scientifically possible. So I shouldn't be here discussing the key points to the theory... lol
[my last post on this thread]

Agent antiLIE of the AGDT
7x153=1071 [ VIII:XXIV]
I klinamaksa exei afypnistei

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Granny Magda, posted 04-23-2008 10:30 AM 1071 has replied
 Message 41 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-23-2008 11:32 AM 1071 has not replied
 Message 42 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2008 1:31 PM 1071 has not replied
 Message 57 by RAZD, posted 04-23-2008 9:56 PM 1071 has not replied

Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.0


Message 39 of 356 (464086)
04-23-2008 10:30 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by 1071
04-23-2008 10:17 AM


Re: last post on this thread
antiLIE, I am in agreement that this thread is probably not the best suited to your needs. Since you seem to have a problem with so-called "macroevolution", might I be so bold as to suggest that you peruse this thread, which directly addresses that very issue?

Mutate and Survive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 10:17 AM 1071 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 10:35 AM Granny Magda has not replied

1071
Member (Idle past 5812 days)
Posts: 61
From: AUSTIN, TX, USA
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 40 of 356 (464088)
04-23-2008 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Granny Magda
04-23-2008 10:30 AM


Re: last post on this thread
*tips hat*
Thank you

Agent antiLIE of the AGDT
7x153=1071 [ VIII:XXIV]
I klinamaksa exei afypnistei

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Granny Magda, posted 04-23-2008 10:30 AM Granny Magda has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 41 of 356 (464091)
04-23-2008 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by 1071
04-23-2008 10:17 AM


Re: last post on this thread
I just had an epiphany. I shouldn't even be on this thread. This is why; I do not even agree that evolution is scientifically possible. So I shouldn't be here discussing the key points to the theory...
Surely that's exactly why you should be learning how evolution works.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 10:17 AM 1071 has not replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 42 of 356 (464110)
04-23-2008 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by 1071
04-23-2008 10:17 AM


Re: last post on this thread
Hi antiLIE,
antiLIE writes:
I just had an epiphany. I shouldn't even be on this thread.
antiLIE on this site evolution and ToE is equal to biological evolution only. Nothing else is discussed as evolution.
The thread Here will help you to understand how evolution is discussed here.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 10:17 AM 1071 has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 43 of 356 (464115)
04-23-2008 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by platypus
12-11-2006 2:41 AM


Platypus, many of us have tried to debate the topic of evolution under the definitions you mentioned only top be rudely told, no, "evolution" just means heritable change or something along those lines.
Is that the wrong definition of evolution? Alleles shifting in a population and all that....?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by platypus, posted 12-11-2006 2:41 AM platypus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by platypus, posted 04-23-2008 8:21 PM randman has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 44 of 356 (464116)
04-23-2008 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by bluegenes
04-23-2008 9:38 AM


Biological evolution is a phenomenon that can be observed
uh huh?
Which definition of evolution are you referring to?
Platypus's definition that all life stems from a single family tree or merely the fact things change?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by bluegenes, posted 04-23-2008 9:38 AM bluegenes has not replied

molbiogirl
Member (Idle past 2641 days)
Posts: 1909
From: MO
Joined: 06-06-2007


Message 45 of 356 (464126)
04-23-2008 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by 1071
04-23-2008 9:47 AM


Only Microevolution can be observed.
I know this borders on OT, but I can't resist.
In the past 20 years, a bunch of lizards have been observed to have undergone "macro"evolution.
Page not found | ScienceBlogs
The cecal valves are an evolutionary novelty, a brand new feature not present in the ancestral population and newly evolved in these lizards. That's important. This is more than a simple quantitative change, but is actually an observed qualitative change in a population, the appearance of a new morphological structure.
It's easy to see how body part + body part + ... = new critter.
It's hard to see how creos could brush off evolution of a new body part as "micro".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by 1071, posted 04-23-2008 9:47 AM 1071 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by ICANT, posted 04-23-2008 2:27 PM molbiogirl 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