Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do you define the word Evolution?
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 151 of 936 (804805)
04-13-2017 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Dredge
04-13-2017 3:02 AM


Re: Evolutions have discovered no new laws.. NONE
Ah, the PRATTS never die.
Cretinism or Evilution? No. 3: More Out of Context Quotations of French Scientists
quote:
Since the Revised Quote Book stated that "Prof. Bounoure" had served as the "Director of Research" at the "French National Centre of Scientific Research" I wrote the Center [The Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique = The National Center for Scientific Research]. I asked them about the exact origin of the quotation and received the following reply, dated March 3, 1995 (translated by professional French translator, Jacques Benbassat, with some minor editing and paragraphs re-arranged in an easier to follow order):
quote:
Dear Mr. Babinski,
The new director general of the CNRS [i.e., the National Center for Scientific Research in France], Mr. Guy Aubert, has given me your letter of December 6, 1994, in which you requested several points of information concerning the quotations by French scientists, concerning the theory of evolution.
Here is the information I was able to gather:
The beginning of the quotation, "Evolution is a fairy tale for adults" is not from Bounoure but from Jean Rostand, a much more famous French biologist (he was a member of the Academy of Sciences of the French Academy). The precise quotation is as follows: "Transformism is a fairy tale for adults." (Age Nouveau, [a French periodical] February 1959, p. 12). But Rostand has also written that "Transformism may be considered as accepted, and no scientist, no philosopher, no longer discusses [questions - ED.] the fact of evolution." (L'Evolution des Especes [i.e., The Evolution of the Species], Hachette, p. 190). Jean Rostand was ... an atheist.
The [end] of the quotation of Professor Bounoure to which you allude is taken from his book, Determinism and Finality, edited by Flammarion, 1957, p. 79. The precise quotation is the following: "That, by this, evolutionism would appear as a theory without value, is confirmed also pragmatically. A theory must not be required to be true, said Mr. H. Poincare, more or less, it must be required to be useable. Indeed, none of the progress made in biology depends even slightly on a theory, the principles of which [i.e., of how evolution occurs -- ED.] are nevertheless filling every year volumes of books, periodicals, and congresses with their discussions and their disagreements."
As far as we know, Louis Bounoure never served as ["Director" nor was even] a member of the CNRS. He was a professor of biology at the University of Strasbourg. Bounoure was a Christian but did not affirm that Genesis was to be taken to the letter. He expressed his ideas in his work. He is clearly "finalist" and against all contingent visions of evolution. ["Finalism" is a philosophical term related to a belief in ultimate purpose or design behind everything, including, in this case, the evolution of the cosmos and of life. - ED.] He bases his views, among other things, on the existence of elements that are pre-adapted for their future functions.
As far as Paul Lemoine is concerned, he is indeed a "famous French scientist" since he was the director of the National Museum of Natural History. In the Encyclopedie Francaise [French Encyclopedia, circa 1950s], volume 5, he wrote the following: "It results from this explanation that the theory of evolution is not exact ... Evolution is a kind of dogma which its own priests no longer believe, but which they uphold for the people. It is necessary to have the courage to state this if only so that men of a future generation may orient their research into a different direction." And this quotation often circulates among anti-evolutionist groups.
Paul Lemoine was an atheist, and he was against the theory of evolution because he felt it was not a good explanation of the origin of living beings and by showing its limits risked to discredit materialism. Although this point was not very clear we believe that when he spoke of "the theory of evolution" he was actually addressing the explanation of specifically [how] evolution [occurred] and not the [more general idea] of evolution itself.
The problem [of the origin of the quotation] apparently stems from the confusion in the discourse of these three scientists between the fact of evolution and the explanation of this fact. None were creationists but they all felt that the explanations given for the understanding of evolution were insufficient, even totally inexact.
This is the information that I am able to give you. if you would like to have more details, you could write to Jean Staune, Institut de Paleontologie Humaine, 1 rue Rene Panhard - 75013 Paris. This institute is associated with our own: The National Center of Scientific Research.
Very truly yours,
Marie-Antoinette de Lumley


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 3:02 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 7:47 PM JonF has not replied

  
Davidjay 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days)
Posts: 1026
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 152 of 936 (804807)
04-13-2017 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by caffeine
04-12-2017 5:20 PM


Variations are not mutations. Dog breeds vary because of variations and inbreeding, manipulation.
Variation in humans is by the Lord for diversity etc.... it in no way means mutational change.
STOP twisting words, to suit your theory. STOP the double speak.
First there was the useage of the word, INNATE, as if they just happened to come into existence before evolution and now, variation.
Evolutionists are so desperate, but as mentioned are not scientists but double speak linguists, who graduated in liberal arts, very liberal...ready for the world of science fiction literature.

.
The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK.
.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by caffeine, posted 04-12-2017 5:20 PM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-13-2017 10:18 AM Davidjay has not replied
 Message 232 by caffeine, posted 04-16-2017 11:13 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 153 of 936 (804817)
04-13-2017 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 152 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 9:38 AM


If what you were saying was in any way coherent, it would presumably be a stupid lie.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 9:38 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 154 of 936 (804818)
04-13-2017 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:55 AM


Is this an example of (human) evolution?
Obviously, by definition. But not a very interesting one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:55 AM Dredge has not replied

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


Message 155 of 936 (804820)
04-13-2017 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 150 by Dredge
04-13-2017 3:02 AM


Re: Evolutions have discovered no new laws.. NONE
"This theory (evolution) has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless".
- (the late) Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and Director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum,
later Director of Research at the French National Centre of Scientific Research.
"What total crap Louis Bouroune talks" --- lots of other scientists (paraphrased).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 3:02 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 7:57 PM Dr Adequate has replied

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


Message 156 of 936 (804821)
04-13-2017 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 148 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:53 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
It's my understanding that mutations are a result of pure, blind chance. Am I mistaken?
For once you are right about something.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:53 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 11:38 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 167 by Minnemooseus, posted 04-13-2017 11:22 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 157 of 936 (804827)
04-13-2017 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:55 AM


Please consider this scenario: Some aliens want to invade earth and colonise it, but first they need to eradicate all the humans, so they spray a toxin around that's designed to kill humans. All the humans die except for people with red hair - it so happens that redheads have some lucky variation in their genetic make-up that allows them to withstand the toxin, and they survive.
Over time, the redheads multiply in number to the point where the aliens feel the need to re-apply the toxin. But to the aliens dismay, the second application of the toxin has no effect - because the redheads are immune to the toxin. The aliens conclude that the humans have become "resistant" to the toxin, which is a bit of a misnomer because the redheads didn't "become" resistant to the toxin - they were always resistant to the toxin.
Is this an example of (human) evolution?
Individuals don't evolve, populations do.
The frequency of the red-headed alleles in that population changed, so that population evolved - but none of the individuals evolved.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:55 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Faith, posted 04-13-2017 11:37 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

  
Davidjay 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2329 days)
Posts: 1026
From: B.C Canada
Joined: 11-05-2004


Message 158 of 936 (804834)
04-13-2017 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by Dr Adequate
04-13-2017 10:24 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
Yes, agreed, me and evolutionists seem to all agree evolution is by pure luck and chance.
And Yes, the creationist quote, rings true and honest and scientific, Lets repeat it for the advancement of true science..""This theory (evolution) has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless".
- (the late) Professor Louis Bouroune, former President of the Biological Society of Stras.....
IE evolution or luck and chance has not helped the advancement of science one iota, I mean how can unintelligent luck and chance prove beneficial to anything, let alone true science.
Creationism and intelligence wins again.
PS Dr. Adequate, do learn to write more than one liners otherwise your one sentence responses will surely be deemed inadequate.
Just a suggestion
Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.

.
The Lord is the GREAT SCIENTIST as He created SCIENCE and ALL LAWS and ALL MATTER and of course ALL LIFE. God is the Great Architect, Designer and Mathematician. Evolutioon is not mathematical and says there is no DESIGN but that all things came about by sheer LUCK.
.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-13-2017 10:24 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 160 by New Cat's Eye, posted 04-13-2017 11:49 AM Davidjay has not replied
 Message 161 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-13-2017 11:57 AM Davidjay has not replied
 Message 162 by Diomedes, posted 04-13-2017 3:33 PM Davidjay has not replied
 Message 165 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 8:24 PM Davidjay has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 159 of 936 (804837)
04-13-2017 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 12:21 AM


Re: Evolutions have discovered no new laws.. NONE
Davidjay writes:
Name any evolutionists that has discovered any law or new law, or anything that has helped mankind.
The proper question is: Name anybody who has discovered any law who rejects evolution.
Davidjay writes:
Mine were great famous Christian Scientists....
None of whom rejected evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 12:21 AM Davidjay has not replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 160 of 936 (804840)
04-13-2017 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 11:38 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
Creationism and intelligence wins again.
Wins what?
Evolution is winning the science of Biology...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 11:38 AM Davidjay has not replied

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


Message 161 of 936 (804846)
04-13-2017 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 158 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 11:38 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
Yes, agreed, me and evolutionists seem to all agree evolution is by pure luck and chance.
What a stupid drooling retarded lie.
Whom do you hope to deceive by telling it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 11:38 AM Davidjay has not replied

  
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 995
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013


(1)
Message 162 of 936 (804863)
04-13-2017 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 11:38 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
Yes, agreed, me and evolutionists seem to all agree evolution is by pure luck and chance.
Nope. Your definition is more aligned with how a slot machine works.
And Yes, the creationist quote, rings true and honest and scientific, Lets repeat it for the advancement of true science..""This theory (evolution) has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless".
quote:
How evolutionary principles improve the understanding of human health and disease
An appreciation of the fundamental principles of evolutionary biology provides new insights into major diseases and enables an integrated understanding of human biology and medicine.
How evolutionary principles improve the understanding of human health and disease - PMC
IE evolution or luck and chance has not helped the advancement of science one iota, I mean how can unintelligent luck and chance prove beneficial to anything, let alone true science.
See previous link.
Creationism and intelligence wins again.
Nope. Creationism and the nonsensical peddling of it just got owned once more by facts and logic. This calls for another facepalm:

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 11:38 AM Davidjay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 8:54 PM Diomedes has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 163 of 936 (804865)
04-13-2017 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Dredge
04-13-2017 3:02 AM


Re: Evolutions have discovered no new laws.. NONE
This is a dozen years old now but maybe it'll stop you talking anymore nonsense on this particular issue. i draw your attention to point 9 in particular.
quote:
Claim CA215:
The theory of evolution is useless, without practical application.
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.
A few posts ago you also claimed that beneficial mutations are impossible. I gave you the recent example of the Peppered Moth's beneficial gene mutation. Are you now content?

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 3:02 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 7:37 PM Tangle has replied

  
CRR
Member (Idle past 2242 days)
Posts: 579
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016


Message 164 of 936 (804867)
04-13-2017 6:03 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Dredge
04-13-2017 2:55 AM


Dredge, it is an example of microevolution in that it is a change in allele frequency in a population over time. This is quite similar to development of antibiotic resistance that I used as an example earlier.
It also applies to insecticide resistance, Trinidad guppies, Darwin's finches, and many other examples of "evolution".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Dredge, posted 04-13-2017 2:55 AM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Dredge, posted 04-14-2017 7:40 PM CRR has replied

  
Dredge
Member
Posts: 2850
From: Australia
Joined: 09-06-2016


Message 165 of 936 (804879)
04-13-2017 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Davidjay
04-13-2017 11:38 AM


Re: Luck & Chance
Darwinists insist - perhaps in some futile quest for meaning - that evolution is not the result of a series of random accidents, because is it all controlled by natural selection.
If life is to be fashioned from a collection of atoms, it can happen in only two ways - by design or by random accidents. Design requires intelligence, but natural selection doesn't have intelligence so cannot design, therefore there is no element of design in the process of evolution.
This means evolution is purely the result of the only other option - random accidents - sheer, blind, mindless luck, in other words.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Davidjay, posted 04-13-2017 11:38 AM Davidjay has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by jar, posted 04-13-2017 8:28 PM Dredge 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