Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,597 Year: 4,854/9,624 Month: 202/427 Week: 12/103 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1486 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 241 of 2073 (733625)
07-19-2014 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by mram10
07-19-2014 12:13 PM


complexity is not an issue (yawn)
Complexity in any engineering area generally requires a complex design
Four things:
(1) "generally" does not mean "always" and for your logic to work it has to be "always" :: logical fail,
(2) I am a designer by profession, and I KNOW that complex systems can be built by the application of a small number of very simple rules ... and I also KNOW that design willingly borrows ideas from other lines of development, something NOT seen in life on earth as we know it,
(3) Complex biological systems have actually been observed evolving from simpler systems, and
(4) a math\logic evaluation of the overall pattern of biological life, where any species can evolve to be (a) more complex, (b) remain the same degree of complexity, or (c) become less complex -- run over millions of generations -- and there will be a distribution of different levels of complexity in a skewed pattern (life can't become too simple to live and remain in the picture) and this will predict that most life forms are simple single cell organisms, and that increasingly complex organisms will be increasingly rare. Curiously that is what we see.
Taken together, the existence of complexity is not a surprise, rather it is expected.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯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 238 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 12:13 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2187 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 242 of 2073 (733634)
07-19-2014 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by mram10
07-19-2014 12:13 PM


Complexity in any engineering area generally requires a complex design. To see a simple organism and knowing what it required for it to "live" would point to more than a "miracle."
The following lecture should be of interest to you--if you will even watch it, which I doubt.
Making Genetic Networks Operate Robustly: Unintelligent Non-design Suffices, by Professor Garrett Odell (online lecture):

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 12:13 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 366 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 243 of 2073 (733636)
07-19-2014 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by mram10
07-19-2014 12:02 PM


Re: redirections
As would I, my friend You somehow think that a cell was formed by pure accident, by elements that just so happened to show up from a singularity.
How about I tell you what I think, and you concentrate on telling us what you think. That way you'll lie less often.
I would point you to the human genome project for information on the above. Please see for yourself and research the number of dna bases for humans and for chimps or orangatuns. I would hate to "make up" anything
Then I have some bad news for you ...
I would hope you could see past my quick typing and see the message behind But, that obviously goes against your agenda.
It is obvious you are a brainwashed individual that is not interested in science. You are more interested in making irrational comments.
Again I would urge you not to lie to me about what I'm thinking. If moral considerations don't dissuade you from doing so, consider the fact that you are certain to get caught.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 12:02 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 366 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 244 of 2073 (733637)
07-19-2014 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by mram10
07-19-2014 12:13 PM


Complexity in any engineering area generally requires a complex design.
Whereas complexity in biology apparently doesn't. For example, a sycamore tree is complex, and is produced by two other sycamore trees reproducing: no design takes place, no intelligence is applied.
To see a simple organism and knowing what it required for it to "live" would point to more than a "miracle."
This is another of those sentences you might want to have another run at.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 12:13 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 245 of 2073 (733652)
07-19-2014 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by mram10
07-19-2014 12:13 PM


Complexity in any engineering area generally requires a complex design.
Here is one problem with your argument. Evolution describes a process within which new complexity can arise and thrive without any intelligent intervention.
Your counter examples all involve objects which cannot reproduce, cannot of themselves introduce new complexity, and which have no means of testing and rejecting any unsuccessful designs without human intervention. So one might be hugely skeptical about attempts to extend engineering notions into the realm of biology where life forms and nature do indeed posses exactly those properties and abilities.
In fact, your formulation of ID is simply a statement that you do not believe in evolution. That is, your argument is assertion and nothing more.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 12:13 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
mram10
Member (Idle past 3584 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-07-2012


Message 246 of 2073 (733660)
07-19-2014 8:05 PM


(3) Complex biological systems have actually been observed evolving from simpler systems
Please explain. What time frame? How much of a change? Thanks

Replies to this message:
 Message 247 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-19-2014 8:14 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 249 by RAZD, posted 07-21-2014 7:20 AM mram10 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 366 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 247 of 2073 (733662)
07-19-2014 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 246 by mram10
07-19-2014 8:05 PM


Well, this, for example. It happens on a short enough scale for us to observe, and involves the production of a new metabolic function by the evolution of a new operon.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 246 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 8:05 PM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 693 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 248 of 2073 (733667)
07-19-2014 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by mram10
07-19-2014 11:40 AM


quote:
So, we agree All possible choices need to be present. As for chimpanzee v human dna, why don't you have questions about this "theory" based on the number of chromosome difference as well as the 600mil base pairs difference from chimps to humans.
WHy, there were questions about that, and , guess what, those questions were answers. There is evidence of a fusion event where two chromosomes fused to become one chromosome.
Chromosome fusion
And guess what.. it could happen again!. It has.. there is a man in in china with 44 chromosomes instead of 46
Ask a Geneticist | The Tech Interactive

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 11:40 AM mram10 has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1486 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 249 of 2073 (733777)
07-21-2014 7:20 AM
Reply to: Message 246 by mram10
07-19-2014 8:05 PM


(3) Complex biological systems have actually been observed evolving from simpler systems
Please explain. ...
Actual observational science experiments in several cases have shown development of biological systems that were more complex.
... What time frame? ...
Irrelevant to the issue, but it was observed to occur over generations.
... How much of a change? ...
Also irrelevant to the issue, but you can read the link Dr.A. provided or the one I provided before (Irreducible Complexity, Information Loss and Barry Hall's experiments, where an "IC" system evolved) ... and there are others, nylon eating bacteria for instance (see nylon eating bacteria and ... creationism/ID (failed) responses
These are all OLD news ...
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯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 246 by mram10, posted 07-19-2014 8:05 PM mram10 has not replied

  
mram10
Member (Idle past 3584 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-07-2012


Message 250 of 2073 (734159)
07-26-2014 11:24 AM


My above question was asking about the chromosome difference as well as the 600 million base pair difference. The difference in base pairs is the big one. I am very interested to hear how that discrepancy has been accounted for.

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by RAZD, posted 07-26-2014 3:37 PM mram10 has not replied
 Message 252 by Theodoric, posted 07-26-2014 6:59 PM mram10 has not replied
 Message 253 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-27-2014 3:23 PM mram10 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1486 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 251 of 2073 (734180)
07-26-2014 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by mram10
07-26-2014 11:24 AM


chromosome 2 v 2a & 2b and bp
My above question was asking about the chromosome difference ...
The chromosome difference is fairly well documented on the web (ie in many places).
This is actually a test of evolution, that if we had a common ancestor then we should have similar chromosome structures, however chimps have 24 chromosome pairs while humans have 23 pairs. Therefore there should be evidence of this change in the DNA patterns, and there is: when you look at human chromosome 2 there are remnants of telemeres (end sequences) and a second centromere (middle sequence) that has been disabled. If we compare this chromosome to chimp chromosomes 2a and 2b we see that they match.
Chromosome 2 - Wikipedia
quote:
Chromosome 2 is one of the 23 pairs of chromosomes in humans. People normally have two copies of this chromosome. Chromosome 2 is the second largest human chromosome, spanning more than 243 million base pairs [1] (the building material of DNA) and representing almost 8% of the total DNA in cells.
All members of Hominidae except humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have 24 pairs of chromosomes.[3] Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.[4][5]
The evidence for this includes:
  • The correspondence of chromosome 2 to two ape chromosomes. The closest human relative, the chimpanzee, has near-identical DNA sequences to human chromosome 2, but they are found in two separate chromosomes. The same is true of the more distant gorilla and orangutan.[6][7]
  • The presence of a vestigial centromere. Normally a chromosome has just one centromere, but in chromosome 2 there are remnants of a second centromere.[8]
  • The presence of vestigial telomeres. These are normally found only at the ends of a chromosome, but in chromosome 2 there are additional telomere sequences in the middle.[9]
Fusion of ancestral chromosomes left distinctive
remnants of telomeres, and a vestigial centromere
Chromosome 2 presents very strong evidence in favour of the common descent of humans and other apes. According to researcher J. W. IJdo, "We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2." [9]
There are other sources of this information.
... as well as the 600 million base pair difference.
Can you provide a source of this tidbit so that we can see what specifically they are talking about (there are a number of different ways that have been used to look at the data).
For instance
Sandwalk: What's the Difference Between a Human and Chimpanzee?
quote:
What's the Difference Between a Human and Chimpanzee?
The number of differences between the human and chimpanzee genomes is consistent with Neutral Theory and fixation by random genetic drift.
How Many Differences?
You can estimate the total number of single nucleotide differences by measuring the rate of hybridization of human and chimpanzee DNA in a technique developed by Dave Kohne and Roy Britten over forty years ago. This technique was applied to human and chimp DNA and the results indicated that the two genomes differed by about 1.5% (reviewed in Britton, 2002). That corresponds to 45 million bp in a genome of 3 billion bp.
This value of 1.5%, rounded up to 2%, gave rise to the widely quoted statement that humans and chimps are 98% identical. Britton (2002) challenged that number by pointing out that humans and chimp genomes differed by a large number of insertions and deletions (indels) that could not have been detected in hybridization studies. He claimed that there was an addition 3.4% of the genome that differed due to indels. That means the the real difference between humans and chimps is closer to 5% and we are only 95% identical!
That would correspond to ~150 base pairs.
The difference between 150 million and 600 million out of 3 billion is still not a big deal, imho, however creationists have also been known to inflate the numbers by misrepresenting some of the data, so give us your source in order to provide you with a better answer, eh?
Enjoy.
ps (edit)
Proposed New Topics, Why Did Homo Erectus Not Retain a Tail?, Message 1:
quote:
A tail would be incredibly helpful for balance (tripod example), productivity, etc. I read that it could have been the climate change from forest to desert that could have been the reasoning.
What is the best current explanation? (other than natural selection/god just did it)
First, note that chimps, orangutans and gorillas are also tailless apes, tail loss occurred well before the human lineage split off the common ancestral branch.
Second, evolution doesn't occur just to provide something that would be useful.
I read that it could have been the climate change from forest to desert that could have been the reasoning.
This is known as the "Savannah Hypothesis" that was proposed as an environmental change that led to the adaptation for full upright walking, however current evidence points to this bipedal adaptation occurring before this time period, while there were still trees, but in an open woodland ecology.
(/edit)
Edited by RAZD, : format
Edited by RAZD, : added ps
Edited by RAZD, : =

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯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 250 by mram10, posted 07-26-2014 11:24 AM mram10 has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9277
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.7


(1)
Message 252 of 2073 (734206)
07-26-2014 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by mram10
07-26-2014 11:24 AM


I am very interested to hear how that discrepancy has been accounted for.
No you're not.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by mram10, posted 07-26-2014 11:24 AM mram10 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 366 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 253 of 2073 (734259)
07-27-2014 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 250 by mram10
07-26-2014 11:24 AM


My above question was asking about the chromosome difference as well as the 600 million base pair difference. The difference in base pairs is the big one.
Different species have different genes. Otherwise they'd be the same species. This is caused by a process called "mutation" which you would doubtless have heard of if you had been paying attention in science class.
I am very interested to hear how that discrepancy has been accounted for.
You might want to stop using the word "discrepancy" until you find out what it means.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by mram10, posted 07-26-2014 11:24 AM mram10 has not replied

  
PaulGL
Member (Idle past 3469 days)
Posts: 92
Joined: 04-06-2012


Message 254 of 2073 (737709)
09-28-2014 5:52 PM


Genesis is an evolutionary account
I. The Bible is unique
There is no comparison with any other works of mankind. No other books had anywhere near the number of contributors (39+), nor have any been written over such a long span of time (1,600 years). Yet it is profoundly cohesive in all of its contents.
II. The Bible is God's word
In addition to the infinite profundity of the whole, it contains prophecies of many events that are still future in terms of time. These are given with adequate and specific details to be able to unmistakably predict in advance the events recorded.
It is not possible that it is merely human in origin because many of its ramifications are beyond human capabilities.
III. Creationism aka 'Intelligent Design' are not scientific disciplines and therefore should not be taught as such in schools.
"The scientific view of the Universe is such as to admit only those phenomena that can, in one way or another, be observed in a fashion accessible to all, and to admit those generalizations (which we call laws of nature) that can be induced from those observations."
Any explanation of observed phenomena, that invokes to any extent supernatural influence such as divine motivation, is thus inherently self-disqualified from being a scientific discipline.
IV. Evolution is valid
Evolution, however, is the only valid scientific theory which adequately explains the known data. And it has been verified by the correlation of the relevant data corresponding to its testable conclusions.
Dear reader: please lay aside any and all traditional, biased schools of thought within the realm of prideful, puffed-up knowledge. Objectively consider that God may have used evolution to create man. Do not disregard so doing due to bias, dogmatism, or love of argumentation.
amessageforethehuman.org

Replies to this message:
 Message 255 by Larni, posted 09-28-2014 5:55 PM PaulGL has not replied
 Message 256 by jar, posted 09-28-2014 6:17 PM PaulGL has not replied
 Message 257 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-28-2014 8:54 PM PaulGL has not replied
 Message 258 by dwise1, posted 09-29-2014 12:30 AM PaulGL has not replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 255 of 2073 (737710)
09-28-2014 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 254 by PaulGL
09-28-2014 5:52 PM


Re: Genesis is an evolutionary account
The Bible is God's word
No it isn't.
So, where do we go from here?

The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53
The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286
Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by PaulGL, posted 09-28-2014 5:52 PM PaulGL 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