|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: What I have noticed about these debates... | |||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Perhaps you could eplain what your definition of macroevolution would be and what measure of information you are referring to.
For instance could the simplification and loss of features seen in parasites be considered to be macroevolution ? Why would that be considered a gain in information ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: quote: Repeatability is very much a part of historical science. When many different scientists all over the world find the same kinds of organisms in the same geologic layers, that is a repeated test of the theory that the geologic column is consistent across the entire Earth. When many different geologists independently date rocks from different parts of the geologic column over and over and over again, and they consistently show consistent dates for the rocks, that is repeatability.
quote: ...only go so far in what endeavor? Logic and evidence has gotten humans to the moon and back, have eliminated small pox, and have made it possible for us to write messages on a keyboard and people anywhere in the world can read them nearly instantly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
jcgirl92 writes: Macroevolution is a gaining of information - correct? In other words, DNA information must be added to add on new characteristics that weren't there before - right? In a word, no. I'm not sure how you're defining macroevolution, but for the sake of discussion let us say that it is evolution from one species to another. Speciation not only isn't defined as a gain of information, it isn't even defined in terms of information in any way. Not only that, but assuming you're using a definition of information from either Gitt or Spetner, your definition of information is completely unrelated to actual information theory. This isn't the right forum to get into an explanation of what information theory really is (perhaps it will come up in another thread), but suffice to say for now that Gitt and Spetner are actually talking about semantic meaning or knowledge, not the mathematical concept of information introduced by Claude Shannon and upon which modern information theory is based. Speciation occurs when a reproductive boundary arises between previously identical or nearly identical populations of organisms. If you compare the number of nucleotides in the genome of the original species with that in the new species you will find that in come cases it increases, in other cases it decreases, and it might even stay the same. Some genes are the same, some are different, some are new, and some no longer are present. The important point is that you can't determine whether there's been species change by comparing genomes (though certainly if the genomes are different enough then assuming different species can be a safe assumption). --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5872 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Hi jcgirl,
Thanks for your reply. Do you have any comment or question on the substance of the "kinds" discussion I presented? As I noted, there are numerous problems with the concept, only one of which I enumerated there. Feel free to ask/argue/comment. As to your question on information gain/loss, I give Percy full marks for his response. The standard Creationist "no new information" argument(s) have even more problems and holes than "kinds" does. This begins with the fundamental conflation of "semantic" vs "algorithmic" vs "structural/attributive" definitions of "information" (enough quotation marks in that sentence for everyone? Good.) This is not, as Percy pointed out, the right thread to get deeply into that particular argument. However, in the context of speciation, I'll just pose to you one question to ponder: Given that speciation is a process that occurs to populations (not individuals), said population consisting of numbers of uniquely varying organisms, how would one go about determining the "information content" of a population in order to decide whether the stochastic changes in the frequency of specific alleles in said population constituted a gain or loss of information? Interestingly, I also have some disagreement about the entire concept of "macroevolution" as somehow qualitatively different (a different "kind" ) from so-called "microevolution". Taken out of context and a very strict definition, the entire idea of two different processes (because of two different names) is highly erroneous and misleading. Again, a topic for a different thread. I look forward to your comments.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
defenderofthefaith Inactive Member |
Hi, jcgirl92. You're doing well at defending the creationist position. I think I already know what JC stands for...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2169 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Hi defender,
I have a reply waiting for you in the Welcome forum regarding horse evolution...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
alicelove Inactive Member |
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed
awaiting to hear from you. This message has been edited by AdminJar, 09-26-2005 04:46 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
alicelove Inactive Member |
I am Alice, I saw your profile today and found you worthy to be mine as some one whom i can lay on his armsas long as love is concern, caring and teassing you all the nightlong, If you are interested in knowing more about and for me to send you some pictures of mine please contact me thus,,,content removed
awaiting to hear from you. You're outta here Alice |
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 228 by Percy, posted 08-30-2003 7:49 PM | Percy has not replied |
Message 234 of 238 (246616)
09-26-2005 5:30 PM |
Reply to: Message 227 by nator 08-30-2003 7:08 PM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 227 by nator, posted 08-30-2003 7:08 PM | nator has not replied |
Message 235 of 238 (246617)
09-26-2005 5:32 PM |
Reply to: Message 151 by crashfrog 08-24-2003 12:05 AM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 151 by crashfrog, posted 08-24-2003 12:05 AM | crashfrog has not replied |
Message 236 of 238 (246619)
09-26-2005 5:33 PM |
Reply to: Message 155 by Asgara 08-24-2003 4:39 AM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 155 by Asgara, posted 08-24-2003 4:39 AM | Asgara has not replied |
Message 237 of 238 (246620)
09-26-2005 5:34 PM |
Reply to: Message 227 by nator 08-30-2003 7:08 PM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 227 by nator, posted 08-30-2003 7:08 PM | nator has not replied |
Message 238 of 238 (246621)
09-26-2005 5:35 PM |
Reply to: Message 229 by Quetzal 09-01-2003 4:20 AM |
|
This message is a reply to: | |||
Message 229 by Quetzal, posted 09-01-2003 4:20 AM | Quetzal has not replied |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024