Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


(1)
Message 316 of 1311 (809945)
05-22-2017 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by Dredge
05-20-2017 6:23 PM


Dredge writes:
I can't, but Chicko could. Or you could ask the creationist scientists at CMI or AIG; I bet they could shed some light. Why not write to them and find out? Seriously.
What is stopping them from presenting that explanation to the scientific community, if they have one?
Why don't you write them and get that explanation?
Besides, you should know that in science a theory is accepted only until a better one comes along. What you consider today to be the "only explanation", might in 1000 years time be considered hopelessly primitive and unenlightened.
Creationism is already considered primitive and unenlightened.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by Dredge, posted 05-20-2017 6:23 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by Dredge, posted 05-22-2017 9:10 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 317 of 1311 (809946)
05-22-2017 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 275 by CRR
05-20-2017 10:54 PM


Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
CRR writes:
Visualize walking from SF to NY, then to London, UK. Microevolution allows you to explore the limits of the available gene pool; but beyond that you need macroevolution. Microevolution + Time Macroevolution.
Then show me a single genetic difference between humans and chimps that could not be produced by microevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by CRR, posted 05-20-2017 10:54 PM CRR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 323 by CRR, posted 05-22-2017 6:45 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 318 of 1311 (809948)
05-22-2017 10:46 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by CRR
05-20-2017 11:20 PM


Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
CRR writes:
No I'm not. If mutation adds statistically significant amounts of functional information then it is macroevolution.
Microevolution does not add statistically significant amounts of functional information.
As the challenge stated above, show me a single genetic difference between humans and chimps that could not be produced by microevolution. Which base substitutions could not be produced by microevolution? Which insertions and deletions could not be produced by microevolution? Which transposon or retrovirus insertions could not be produced by microevolution? Which genetic recombinations could not be produced by microevolution?
Any response?
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by CRR, posted 05-20-2017 11:20 PM CRR has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 319 of 1311 (809949)
05-22-2017 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 314 by Faith
05-22-2017 9:00 AM


Re: Pelycodus and hand waving delugeons
Faith writes:
I'm not "handwaving" anything. I don't address the fossil record in general, but Pelycodus is obviously the result of the Flood.
That's only because your religious beliefs require you to say that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Faith, posted 05-22-2017 9:00 AM Faith has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 320 of 1311 (809959)
05-22-2017 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 311 by Faith
05-22-2017 3:45 AM


Re: Pelycodus and typical evo delusions
But as I said, being right and being recognized as right, are two different things.
If you were right the evidence would be indisputable, but your argument doesn't even agree with the evidence that easy to observe and that anyone can see. And you completely skip over hundreds of fine details that we have pointed out to you over the years.
You always sweep those details under the carpet and say you are only concentrating on the big picture. Like I said earlier, you flame out.
Message 304
quote:
I flame out over stupidity and unfairness. The Flood has been proven over and over.
You are as deluded as Davidjay. We've been here all along and you have never proved anything. You always flame out because your arguments are full of holes.
Edited by Tanypteryx, : spelling

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by Faith, posted 05-22-2017 3:45 AM Faith has not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 321 of 1311 (809977)
05-22-2017 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by CRR
05-20-2017 11:20 PM


Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
CRR writes:
If mutation adds statistically significant amounts of functional information then it is macroevolution.
I would like to see you describe how you would recognize statistically significant amounts of functional information.
Did you make this up yourself or copy it from a creationist site?
CRR writes:
Microevolution does not add statistically significant amounts of functional information.
Not even lots and lots of microevolution? Like maybe, 3.8 billion years worth of microevolution?
Can you show us some published research that concludes your two statements are true and not both just made up, creationist BS?

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie
If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy
The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by CRR, posted 05-20-2017 11:20 PM CRR has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by RAZD, posted 05-22-2017 3:00 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 322 of 1311 (809979)
05-22-2017 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by Tanypteryx
05-22-2017 2:52 PM


Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
CRR writes:
Microevolution does not add statistically significant amounts of functional information.
Not even lots and lots of microevolution? Like maybe, 3.8 billion years worth of microevolution?
There's a hidden admission here that microevolution can add functional information, just that it isn't significant in the population at the time.
This leads us rather inevitably to each generation adding a little functional information, so the question becomes when is it significant?
For evolutionary biologists, traits are accumulated in each generation, and after a while it becomes significantly different enough from the original population to declare a new species by anagenesis.
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 321 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2017 2:52 PM Tanypteryx has seen this message but not replied

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


Message 323 of 1311 (809998)
05-22-2017 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Taq
05-22-2017 10:44 AM


Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
Then show me a single genetic difference between humans and chimps that could not be produced by microevolution.
The Y chromosome. 20% of the genes have no homologue anywhere in the chimp genome.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Taq, posted 05-22-2017 10:44 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by bluegenes, posted 05-22-2017 7:42 PM CRR has replied
 Message 325 by JonF, posted 05-22-2017 7:45 PM CRR has not replied
 Message 368 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 10:33 AM CRR has not replied

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


Message 324 of 1311 (810000)
05-22-2017 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by CRR
05-22-2017 6:45 PM


Micro or macro?
CRR writes:
Taq writes:
Then show me a single genetic difference between humans and chimps that could not be produced by microevolution.
The Y chromosome. 20% of the genes have no homologue anywhere in the chimp genome.
That difference could be achieved by ~40 deletions on the chimp lineage; 40 mutations, one every 150,000yrs. or so. If one deletion can be micro, how many does it take to get macro?
What about the differences on the most divergent human Y-chromosomes in the 180 generations since Noah? There will be a lot more than 40 mutations involved, so micro or macro?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by CRR, posted 05-22-2017 6:45 PM CRR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 360 by CRR, posted 05-23-2017 3:30 AM bluegenes has replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 325 of 1311 (810001)
05-22-2017 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by CRR
05-22-2017 6:45 PM


Re: Re: Useful applications of evolutionary theory and processes
Not what he asked for. Homologs are not required for mutations to accumulate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by CRR, posted 05-22-2017 6:45 PM CRR has not replied

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


Message 326 of 1311 (810006)
05-22-2017 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by New Cat's Eye
05-21-2017 11:08 AM


NewCat'sEye writes:
jerk
That's not a very nice thing to say.
dumbass
That's not a very nice thing to say - nor even remotely accurate - someone who took a mere twelve years to complete seven years of primary school is not a "dumbass" (esp not in Australia Land, where asses don't exist).
I'm not even an atheist.
Scientism = "excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques" - a dictionary definition.
Many Christians suffer from scientism - they're known as theistic evolutionists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-21-2017 11:08 AM New Cat's Eye has not replied

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


Message 327 of 1311 (810007)
05-22-2017 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Tanypteryx
05-17-2017 8:13 PM


Re: a few bones
Tanypteryx writes:
I think this is a lie. Can you document this?
First we need to agree on the definition of "many".
You must have pulled this one right out of your ass.
I'm not in possession of an ass, and as far as I know there are none of these creatures in Australia Land (apparently there was one in Alice Springs in the 1950's, but it died). There are many horses and camels in Australia Land - and even lamas - but there is not one, solitary ass. There are also many rabbits here - from which the ass evolved - but a rabbit is not an ass, so it doesn't count.
Even if I did own an ass, I would have no idea of idea of how to pull a sentence of English-style words out of it. A veterinary surgeon might, but then that would cost too much money.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-17-2017 8:13 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2017 8:55 PM Dredge has not replied

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


Message 328 of 1311 (810011)
05-22-2017 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by RAZD
05-20-2017 7:11 PM


RAZD writes:
Can you define what you think "macroevolution" is?
macroevolution = microevolution + millions of years.
But life on earth is only 5778 years old - not enuf time for macroevolution to occur (assuming it occurs at all).
Microevolution might be compared to a merry-go-round - there is motion and change, but it doesn't actually go anywhere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by RAZD, posted 05-20-2017 7:11 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 334 by Coyote, posted 05-22-2017 9:09 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 347 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-23-2017 12:42 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 361 by RAZD, posted 05-23-2017 5:39 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 369 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 10:35 AM Dredge has not replied

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


Message 329 of 1311 (810012)
05-22-2017 8:49 PM


I've heard that there are no transitionals between invertebrates and vertebrates. Is this true?

Replies to this message:
 Message 332 by herebedragons, posted 05-22-2017 9:01 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 336 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2017 9:13 PM Dredge has not replied
 Message 346 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-23-2017 12:39 AM Dredge has not replied

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


Message 330 of 1311 (810013)
05-22-2017 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by RAZD
05-21-2017 4:27 PM


Re: maybe we should cholera a new vaccine ...
RAZD writes:
evolution is useful in dealing with diseases like flu
I agree - but there's no need to believe in any of that useless stuff about humans and apes having a common ancestor, or whales evolving from a mouse (or was it a rabbit?); great things can be achieved in science by just sticking to the reality of here and now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by RAZD, posted 05-21-2017 4:27 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by Tanypteryx, posted 05-22-2017 9:03 PM Dredge has replied
 Message 372 by Taq, posted 05-23-2017 10:50 AM Dredge has not replied
 Message 392 by RAZD, posted 05-24-2017 8:08 AM 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