Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution is simple. What's to disagree with?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 1 of 13 (464584)
04-27-2008 1:09 PM


Observation (1): no two organisms are identical.
Observation (2): some of the differences are hereditary (genetic, genotype), some are due to environmental effects (affect development, phenotype), and some are acquired by the organisms (behavioral, learned, individual traits, memes).
Observation (3): some (not all) of the difference between organisms enable some (not all) of the organisms to survive and breed more than others.
Observation (4) to affect the population of organisms, traits need to be passed from one generation to the next. Genetic traits are passed by genes, environmental traits are passed by the environment, learned traits are passed by memes.
Conclusion (1): hereditary traits that result in differences that enable some organisms to survive and breed better, will become more common in following generations of those organisms than hereditary traits that don't, or that hinder survival and breeding, and evolution - the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation - will occur.
Conclusion (2): traits due to environmental effects that result in differences that enable some organisms to survive and breed better, will become more common in following generations for those organisms that remain in that environment, compared to environmental traits that don't, or that hinder survival and breeding, and also compared to organisms that leave that environment (or the environment changes).
Conclusion (3): traits that are learned that result in differences that enable some organisms to survive and breed better, will become more common in following generations for those organisms that continue to teach them, compared to acquired traits that don't, or that hinder survival and breeding.
Conclusion (4): hereditary traits, environmental traits, and acquired traits, that don't affect survival or breeding can still spread within breeding populations.
Conclusion (5): isolated populations of originally similar organisms over time will become different from each other. After several generations they will have different distributions of genetic traits, different traits due to environmental factors and different learned behaviors.
Theory: this is sufficient to explain the diversity of life we see in the world today, in historical accounts, in the fossil record and in the genetic evidence.
Note that this is how science operates: take observations, develop conclusions from those observations, formulate a theory based on those conclusions, and then test the theory.
This is NOT how faith operates. Thus science in general, and evolution in particular, are not based on faith, but on observation and logic. Science in particular can be tested and concepts can be invalidated.
In reference to the final posts on "Equating science with faith", this can be used as a basis for discussion of how one can "disagree" with evolution, and provide a basis for "alternative explanations" for those that see things with different eyes.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : added end comments.
Edited by RAZD, : replaced chopped off comments at end

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Admin, posted 04-27-2008 3:13 PM RAZD has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 2 of 13 (464592)
04-27-2008 2:03 PM


Is It Science forum please
This is intended to continue part of the discussion from the "Equating science with faith" to show why it is rather silly to claim one "disagrees" with evolution.

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 4 of 13 (464612)
04-27-2008 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Admin
04-27-2008 3:13 PM


better?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Admin, posted 04-27-2008 3:13 PM Admin has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 6 of 13 (464634)
04-27-2008 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Admin
04-27-2008 5:28 PM


Waiting for AntiLie?
Thank you. Now we wait for the evophobes to comment?
I am particularly interested in AntiLie's reasons for "disagreeing" with evolution.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : subtitle

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Admin, posted 04-27-2008 5:28 PM Admin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 6:48 PM RAZD has replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 9 of 13 (464664)
04-27-2008 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Wumpini
04-27-2008 6:48 PM


Re: Do I qualify as an evophobe?
Welcome to the fray, Wumpini.
I am not sure if I qualify as an evophobe, ...
Only if you are afraid of learning what evolution is really about.
I would not say that I disagree with any of your observations or conclusions with the exception of conclusion number 5 ...
quote:
Conclusion (5): isolated populations of originally similar organisms over time will become different from each other. After several generations they will have different distributions of genetic traits, different traits due to environmental factors and different learned behaviors.
In order to disagree with this conclusion you would need to show that isolated populations can transfer hereditary information, that environmental effects will be transmitted from one population in one environment to another population in another environment, AND that behavioral traits learned in one population can be communicated to the other population, all while they are isolated.
Disagreement is not just refusal to accept evidence, you need a reason to disagree.
... and your theory.
quote:
Theory: this is sufficient to explain the diversity of life we see in the world today, in historical accounts, in the fossil record and in the genetic evidence.
The real question is not whether you agree with the theory or not, but whether you can invalidate it: can you demonstrate an instance where it is not possible to explain the diversity of life by the accumulation of changes in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation?
It appears that all of the other observations and conclusions relate to micro evolution.
Or maybe you can give me a link that would show me the pictures of macro evolution that the science world is using today.
And now we ask the question of what is microevolution and what is macroevolution?
You give no evidence that your observations or conclusions would allow changes to move between species.
Perhaps because that does not happen? What if I said that all evolution occurs within species?
It is not sufficient to show that one species can experience changes. There must be evidence to show that these changes can give rise to new species. I don't know that species is the proper scientific jargon, ...
Species is the correct term, and what you are talking about is conclusion (5) again: daughter populations that become different over time to the point that, when they interact, they do not behave as one species but two, due to accumulated differences. See Asian Greenish Warblers for an example of how little change is needed for this to occur.
One of the questions, though, is how much change is sufficient to demonstrate this?
When I was in school they had these pictures of apes evolving into men. If I understand these forums, then that is no longer the accepted theory. It appears that you are proposing that apes and men evolved from something else. They have a common ancestor.
The currently accepted theory is that apes and man evolved from a common ancestor that would be classified as an ape (as is man, btw). See hominid skulls.
How did an amino acid or a protein with no genetic code turn into an intelligent human being?
Interesting question. Do we know that it did? If it did not happen, would that mean that life can't evolve?
"There is one thing even more vital to science than intelligent methods; and that is, the sincere desire to find out the truth, whatever it may be." - Charles Sanders Pierce
And one of the important questions is how do you test for truth?
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 6:48 PM Wumpini has not replied

RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 12 of 13 (464676)
04-27-2008 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Wumpini
04-27-2008 8:09 PM


looking at the big picture
I still do not understand how the changes can cross the lines of species.
The answer is simple: they don't. If you think this is part of evolution, then you need to revise your thinking.
I know that evolution does not take into account the origin of life, but that needs to be considered also. Without life in the first place, there can be no evolution.
Why? Consider that life was created, but it was simple single cells: what prevents evolution from occurring after this point?
If we are going to attribute supernatural causes to the origin of life, then we need to consider that there could have been supernatural causes throughout the process.
Why? We can even consider that the universe was created in a way that life would develop naturally.
Further, how does this prevent evolution from occurring?
Why are there not abundant transitional forms in the fossil record?
There are. Practically speaking all fossils are transitional, as they all show features intermediate between ancestor species and daughter species.
I agree that small changes can occur over time. I also agree that given enough time these changes could be significant. However, these small changes cannot account for the creation of systems that are extremely complex and have interrelated parts.
Why not? What prevents it? Do you know how many different kinds of eyes exist that show intermediate forms from light sensitive patches of skin to eyes capable of seeing 6 primary colors and focusing on mice from hundreds of feet in the air?
You wanted to see a picture of macroevolution. In one very real sense this is one:
http://biology.unm.edu/...iology_203/Summaries/Phylogeny.htm
quote:
Phylogenetics- a discipline of evolutionary biology which seeks to accurately depict the evolutionary relationships among living and non-living taxa.
Taxa are best classified according to monophyletic groups, or clades. In these monophyletic groups, an ancestor (node) and all descendents are included. For example, “mammals” are a monophyletic group when we include the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) of all known mammals.
Humans are a third chimp
DNA homology suggests that humans are more closely related to living chimps than either are to other living primates.

It also answers your previous question about human evolution. Each branch shown is a speciation event, where two (or more) daughter populations no longer interbreed with each other, and thus are free to evolve separately. Each line after branching represents evolution within each lineage, the change in hereditary traits in populations from generation to generation.
Macroevolution is the divergence of populations after speciation has occurred, they are still related by ancestry to their common ancestor, but the evolution within each daughter population allows them to diverge - sometimes a lot, sometimes a little.
Macroevolution is really nothing more than the structure of life due to common ancestry and the divergence after speciation, with changes caused by microevolution.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Wumpini, posted 04-27-2008 8:09 PM Wumpini 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